Correct me if I'm wrong, but this "topic" has only been in the paper 1 time. At most twice. Granted the TD doesn't cover a lot of important news in the Shoals, but they love trashing cops so if there was truly a story here -- the TD would be all over it. If anything does come of it -- they will be all over it then -- until then, anything else that is said about this is only opinion and speculation and is utterly forgettable. I just want to see if you can really back up your threat of taking this to a higher level but I'm definitely not holding my breath on that one considering the ABI has been on this situation from day 1 -- and they haven't pressed charges against the officers. Time will tell.
It's been in the paper twice and the local TV news once....
This was from the June 2 publication:
"The chief did say the arresting officers were not involved in the investigation. Evans also declined to identify who made the report, but did say it was not filed by the man who was arrested.He said the man who was arrested was not injured and did not require medical attention."
And to quote you, Southern Guy, you said "It now appears that there is more to this than some expected or wanted us to believe."
Really???? From the article that was published in June 2, it just sounded like the case was turned over to another agency (standard procedure in a situation like this) and that a lawyer recused himself due to conflict of interest. WOW. BIG NEWS THERE. ?? lol C'mon.... Southern Guy, I don't understand why you're chomping at the bit over this story.. OHHHH yeah. That grudge and resentment thing again. Good luck with that.
"The chief did say the arresting officers were not involved in the investigation. Evans also declined to identify who made the report, but did say it was not filed by the man who was arrested.He said the man who was arrested was not injured and did not require medical attention."
And to quote you, Southern Guy, you said "It now appears that there is more to this than some expected or wanted us to believe."
Really???? From the article that was published in June 2, it just sounded like the case was turned over to another agency (standard procedure in a situation like this) and that a lawyer recused himself due to conflict of interest. WOW. BIG NEWS THERE. ?? lol C'mon.... Southern Guy, I don't understand why you're chomping at the bit over this story.. OHHHH yeah. That grudge and resentment thing again. Good luck with that.
Like I said, twice in the TD at most -- I don't recall the news thing so obviously it wasn't on all of the news stations. If this was as much a hot topic as you want it to be -- we would be seeing something on it constantly from the news sources. Again, wait and see.
Just my two cents worth: Any person that thinks a subject becomes compliant, cooperative and can't injure an officer while handcuffed, obviously has NO LEO experience what so ever.
I have no idea what happened in this situation, but for one to think that a handcuffed subject can't hurt you or themselves is completely unrealistic! I have personally seen it happen many times.
I have no idea what happened in this situation, but for one to think that a handcuffed subject can't hurt you or themselves is completely unrealistic! I have personally seen it happen many times.
IJS,
HUH? How many statements were given stating exactly what I've been posting? I think it's quite obvious that there's more to the story than what's been posted. How far has the internal investigation gone? How many officers are involved with MSPD "internal affairs? If the arrested individual has not filed a formal complaint, is it safe to assume another officer did? When the video is released, what will it show? When the audio is played, what will be heard?
Do you not think all of this will come out in the civil suit?
HUH? How many statements were given stating exactly what I've been posting? I think it's quite obvious that there's more to the story than what's been posted. How far has the internal investigation gone? How many officers are involved with MSPD "internal affairs? If the arrested individual has not filed a formal complaint, is it safe to assume another officer did? When the video is released, what will it show? When the audio is played, what will be heard?
Do you not think all of this will come out in the civil suit?
quote:Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
Do you not think all of this will come out in the civil suit?
I'm sorry SG, I missed where the civil suit has been filed. Enlighten me on this new development. It is surprising that after the incident occurred, the man not only failed to file a complaint, but had no injuries. (Strange since it has been portrayed as this man being "beaten")
And as far as the video/audio... have you seen & heard it yet? If not, I guess you will have to wait just like the rest of us to see what it shows. Which is exactly what Eastside and I have been saying the last 2 pages of posts....WE WILL WAIT AND SEE.
Oh, and SG, you aren't the only one who can put some questions out there:
I wonder if these officers who are under fire are now regretting stepping up and "assisting" the officer that was initially supposed to handle this call?
I wonder if the officer who was sitting across the street in his patrol car, not attempting to assist in this situation is pleased with himself?
I wonder if all the changed stories, alterations of the facts (that HAVE been documented) will be covered up to benefit certain people?
You may think you know every detail about this case, Southern Guy, but I can assure you, you don't. Neither do I; however, the things I *do* know, contradict your assumptions.
For the millionth time, we will just have to see how it all plays out, won't we?
I wonder if these officers who are under fire are now regretting stepping up and "assisting" the officer that was initially supposed to handle this call?
I wonder if the officer who was sitting across the street in his patrol car, not attempting to assist in this situation is pleased with himself?
I wonder if all the changed stories, alterations of the facts (that HAVE been documented) will be covered up to benefit certain people?
You may think you know every detail about this case, Southern Guy, but I can assure you, you don't. Neither do I; however, the things I *do* know, contradict your assumptions.
For the millionth time, we will just have to see how it all plays out, won't we?
It's my understanding that the "suspect" has retained counsel.
quote:Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
It's my understanding that the "suspect" has retained counsel.
Don't most facing a criminal trial if they can afford it?
Yes and also those filing civil suit
LOL @ Southern Guy.... you so remind me of my elderly mother who at 94 yrs old can look out her window and if she sees a strange vehicle in her neighbor's driveway, she's on the phone with everybody she knows -- its quite humorous at her age how she is so paranoid and suspicious of anything and jumps to conclusions without knowing all the facts. She has an excuse - you don't.
Again - I sure hope you aren't disappointed in the outcome of this. You've worked too hard these last 17 pages not to feel YOU haven't had some justice. (again, not sure why this is such a personal matter to you)
I will be looking for the lawsuit to be announced, as you claim, since it'll be public record and all. I'm sure there is some irony in a particular name.
Again - I sure hope you aren't disappointed in the outcome of this. You've worked too hard these last 17 pages not to feel YOU haven't had some justice. (again, not sure why this is such a personal matter to you)
I will be looking for the lawsuit to be announced, as you claim, since it'll be public record and all. I'm sure there is some irony in a particular name.
quote:Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
Yes and also those filing civil suit
Do you think you're going to get a piece of the pie or something? Or are you the "counsel" that was retained? I'm trying to figure out why it is so important to you to discuss something that is not an issue. Do you really just not have a life outside of this thread?
How is it not an issue? It seems to be quite relevant.
Eastside... my thoughts exactly. SG can't even wait until the investigation is over before mentioning civil suit. LOL
The suspect/victim doesn't have to wait until the investigation is completed to file a civil suit. Has he been to court yet on his initial charges..and if so, what was the outcome and why?
What happened with the last incident involving an officer? Has that suit been filed yet?
What happened with the last incident involving an officer? Has that suit been filed yet?
So why hasn't the suspect's civil suit been a headline since this is such a huge deal? (or is it just huge to YOU?)
I haven't heard about the other cases you mentioned, you seem to only be preoccupied with this one. You seem to be the one with all the questions - why don't you spend less time here on this forum stirring the pot and more time finding answers to your own questions.
I haven't heard about the other cases you mentioned, you seem to only be preoccupied with this one. You seem to be the one with all the questions - why don't you spend less time here on this forum stirring the pot and more time finding answers to your own questions.
I ask you questions because you seem to be privy to information that many are not.
I didn't say that the suspect/victim had initiated a civil suit yet. It does appear to be his intentions. The other officer involved incident that I mentioned was in the Times Daily a few months ago.
"You seem to be the one with all the questions - why don't you spend less time here on this forum stirring the pot and more time finding answers to your own questions."
What pot is being stirred? Shall we all bury our heads in the sand, click our heels, and pretend that this isn't a legitimate safety concern of the public? You act as if I'm making a big deal about this. I haven't called CNN, Fox News, Cops Gone Wild, the ACLU, NAACP, AC/DC, or anyone else to get this story out. I'm expressing my concerns on a small town newspaper forum. You act as if a lack of public outcry is a benefit to these officers. Most people don't even know about this forum. However, I will say....over 10,000 views is impressive! Your response will probably be that I have all day to run that number up. Well, I don't....however, if anyone DOES have more free time all of a sudden...feel free to visit often.
I didn't say that the suspect/victim had initiated a civil suit yet. It does appear to be his intentions. The other officer involved incident that I mentioned was in the Times Daily a few months ago.
"You seem to be the one with all the questions - why don't you spend less time here on this forum stirring the pot and more time finding answers to your own questions."
What pot is being stirred? Shall we all bury our heads in the sand, click our heels, and pretend that this isn't a legitimate safety concern of the public? You act as if I'm making a big deal about this. I haven't called CNN, Fox News, Cops Gone Wild, the ACLU, NAACP, AC/DC, or anyone else to get this story out. I'm expressing my concerns on a small town newspaper forum. You act as if a lack of public outcry is a benefit to these officers. Most people don't even know about this forum. However, I will say....over 10,000 views is impressive! Your response will probably be that I have all day to run that number up. Well, I don't....however, if anyone DOES have more free time all of a sudden...feel free to visit often.
SG:
I've already told you (geeze.. must I repeat EVERYTHING to you?) that I'm not at liberty to divulge every detail I might be privy to. I believe I stated that in the early pages of this post. I am not going to change my mind even if this redundant thread makes it up the triple numbers in pages. I can't stress enough to you... we will have to wait and see how this plays out. You are bringing in other instances that have no relevance to THIS situation. (involving different officers) Stick to the topic, please- or start another thread about it.
I only mentioned stirring the pot because this thread will be either at the bottom of the page, and has been several pages over at one point, then viola!!!! Southern Guy has posted: So, anyone hear anything?? LOL ( not word for word, but might as well be)
As far as the safety of the public, I felt safe knowing this repeat drunk driver was off the street. If he fought the officers and got sprayed and kicked in the process -- oh well. Should have been obeying the law and that won't happen. I've never been in handcuffs, therefore I don't have to worry about any possible "police brutality". Get it???
Making a big deal?? Uhm, weren't you the one guaranteeing this was going beyond a state level and that there would be fireworks? Nice dramatic touch. You get an A- for that.
I'm not saying anything about a lack of public outcry.. Does it bother you that nobody really seems to be as on fire (no pun intended)about this as you? You are the one with the attitude of "I won't rest until I see justice, even if it means some fireworks!" LOL I am saying, "I don't think they need to be fired, but let's just wait and see what happens" You seem to be making it more of a big deal and over concerning yourself with it, as if it affects you directly somehow. As for me.. sure I know one of the officers in question and while I hope he doesn't lose his job over this - IF he does, he'll be able to get another job. It won't make national headlines. It might not even make local headlines... I mean, we didn't really hear much about the Sheffield cop that got in trouble for taking pictures of a female prisoner with his "badge-cam", did we??
I don't need permission by you to come here, SG, but thanks for the invitation. You're a sweetheart.
I've already told you (geeze.. must I repeat EVERYTHING to you?) that I'm not at liberty to divulge every detail I might be privy to. I believe I stated that in the early pages of this post. I am not going to change my mind even if this redundant thread makes it up the triple numbers in pages. I can't stress enough to you... we will have to wait and see how this plays out. You are bringing in other instances that have no relevance to THIS situation. (involving different officers) Stick to the topic, please- or start another thread about it.
I only mentioned stirring the pot because this thread will be either at the bottom of the page, and has been several pages over at one point, then viola!!!! Southern Guy has posted: So, anyone hear anything?? LOL ( not word for word, but might as well be)
As far as the safety of the public, I felt safe knowing this repeat drunk driver was off the street. If he fought the officers and got sprayed and kicked in the process -- oh well. Should have been obeying the law and that won't happen. I've never been in handcuffs, therefore I don't have to worry about any possible "police brutality". Get it???
Making a big deal?? Uhm, weren't you the one guaranteeing this was going beyond a state level and that there would be fireworks? Nice dramatic touch. You get an A- for that.
I'm not saying anything about a lack of public outcry.. Does it bother you that nobody really seems to be as on fire (no pun intended)about this as you? You are the one with the attitude of "I won't rest until I see justice, even if it means some fireworks!" LOL I am saying, "I don't think they need to be fired, but let's just wait and see what happens" You seem to be making it more of a big deal and over concerning yourself with it, as if it affects you directly somehow. As for me.. sure I know one of the officers in question and while I hope he doesn't lose his job over this - IF he does, he'll be able to get another job. It won't make national headlines. It might not even make local headlines... I mean, we didn't really hear much about the Sheffield cop that got in trouble for taking pictures of a female prisoner with his "badge-cam", did we??
I don't need permission by you to come here, SG, but thanks for the invitation. You're a sweetheart.
Now there's a topic for discussion. You have to start a thread about the Sheffield incident. I promise to play with you in there as well as here. However, if you think he was wrong in his actions...I will agree with you and that takes the fun out of it.
Is the end of the world upon us???? Southern Guy and I agree on something!!!!! YAY!!!! ***cheering and applause*** Forgive me, but debating with you on ONE subject is enough. LOL
"There is a basic right and a basic wrong. It's a choice and sometimes a poor choice comes at a high price."
"Police officers should be held to a higher standard, and when this doesn't occur, it is a sad day for everyone involved."
These quotes are from Chief Robert Evans of the MSPD. They were printed in a newspaper article published March 11, 2010 regarding the alleged misconduct of a patrolman.
I wonder if this applies to all...or a select few.
"Police officers should be held to a higher standard, and when this doesn't occur, it is a sad day for everyone involved."
These quotes are from Chief Robert Evans of the MSPD. They were printed in a newspaper article published March 11, 2010 regarding the alleged misconduct of a patrolman.
I wonder if this applies to all...or a select few.
quote:Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
"There is a basic right and a basic wrong. It's a choice and sometimes a poor choice comes at a high price."
"Police officers should be held to a higher standard, and when this doesn't occur, it is a sad day for everyone involved."
These quotes are from Chief Robert Evans of the MSPD. They were printed in a newspaper article published March 11, 2010 regarding the alleged misconduct of a patrolman.
I wonder if this applies to all...or a select few.
Great question, Southern Guy.... I wonder if the following incidents would be considered right or wrong:
*taking a monetary bribe in exchange of getting out of a speeding ticket.
*making personal visits to females, while on duty
*walking around in a crowded place of business,while off duty, sporting his weapon at his side, unconcealed. (I haven't spent the time to research if this is legal or not- it just looked "out of place" for this officer to be walking around with his gun in plain sight - in jeans and a Tshirt)
*convincing people making reports to lessen the complaint in order to reduce paperwork.
*abusing their power by running redlights/stop signs simply because they are policeman. (this was actually admitted to me)
*if you are on the "good side" of certain supervisors, then mistreatment of suspects is overlooked.
I wonder how all of the above is looked at by Evans? All of these situations I mentioned concerned different officers, in different departments - but all local. That being said - there ARE still some great LEO's out there and thankfully the above incidents aren't every day occurrences.
OMG! I think the world is coming to an end! LOLOL...
quote:Originally posted by Southern_Guy:
It's my understanding that the "suspect" has retained counsel.
Sure he has....just as soon as he was told he was "beaten." I'm J S, maybe Southern Guy told him that he had been.
LOL Beadcutter... you're probably right!
Now that's just wrong..I haven't talked to him...yet
These officers will not be the first to be sued. And they won't be the last. If indeed SG knows what he is talking about. I'm leaning towards not. You can sue a ham sandwich. That doesn't mean you are right. I bet it doesn't pass summary judgement.
Who knows....but I'm thinking that the video and statements from other officers and/or other employees may be a little damaging.
If its so damaging, why haven't we seen it yet? ohhh... that's right, because its STILL under investigation. And I'm sure the officers in questions have just as many damaging things so say about what really goes on up there.... maybe it will all come out too.
I knew you couldn't stay away from me long IJS.
Let's sing, all together now...."All around the mulberry bush, the monkey chased the weasel".....
LOL Beadcutter...... which am I?
And don't flatter yourself, SG --
And don't flatter yourself, SG --
I'm thinking that you're the monkey and I'm the uh...weasel. Good thing weasels are cute.
LOL I'm! I think you are the monkey cause remember what happens to the weasel at the end! Hahahaha....
SG... aren't weasels sort of symbolic of lawyers? And also, remember, beauty is the eye of the beholder. LOL
Was my prediction true? Has this moved higher?
Is this on the radar any where else, or is this just a TD Forum topic??
It seems like we are in the "ignore it and it will go away" phase. With today's technology and resources it does not take this long to investigate.
It seems like we are in the "ignore it and it will go away" phase. With today's technology and resources it does not take this long to investigate.
It wouldn't surprise me if it's in the hands of the Feds by now.
It definitely doesn't take this long to complete an internal investigation of this nature.
It definitely doesn't take this long to complete an internal investigation of this nature.
This was going to the DA for Grand Jury. Not sure if they have met and "no billed" or if the DA decided there was nothing to prosecute. Shel, I think you are right -- this is just forum fodder.
Add Reply
Sign In To Reply