In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
quote:Originally posted by dano
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by dano
quote:Originally posted by ontherocks
quote:Originally posted by MVP
quote:Originally posted by ontherocks
quote:Originally posted by dano
I swear, some of you act like you're living in a bubble where it never rains. [:X]
and some jerks think nazi practices by the american government and its hands are ok, defensible even.
How does Nazi practices against innocent people equate to cops thumping on an out of control idiot who tried to kill a policeman in the line of duty?
Some of you guys can really stretch it.
you have a perception problem.
where does the law allow for cops to beat suspects? what happens when the suspect has been wrongly accused?
you as a gunowner I assume, shock the hell out of me. do you not yet realize that if you give them an inch they will take a mile?
I will flat out say that the initial suspect aforementioned more than likely needs to be fed his teeth, but not by the cops of all people! damnit don't you get it???????
As a newbie, you don't have a clue about me or how I approach life.
And....gun ownership has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.
And....not once did I say I condoned the actions of the police. What I did infer, is that people are people and not scripted machines. Emotions, both good and bad, will always hamper human nature to some degree.
Doesn't matter what you do for a living. You mess up....you pay. Only the degree of severity is variable. [;)]
Problem is, police have and do cover for each other, falsify documents and lie. I feel that if their are more severe consequences for injuring, lying to, or interferring with a police officer, then there should be more severe consequences if they commit assault or murder in the line of duty. What say you?
quote:Originally posted by scottm21166
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
Justified in opinion, why did he run?? Respect the law. They should have turned the camera off.
Defending the 2nd amendment is ok...but the rest of them are trash eh?
EH
Sure is good to know what kind of thugs they are putting behind a badge these days. It is the reason I am forced to tell my kids that cops really are not your friends any more.
how is it that cops in general are not your friend? If you teach your kids to respect and obey the law, they will NEVER have an issue with police. Half the problem we have in our country is people just don't respect the law. They know the chances of getting caught committing a crime is like 1-100 the chance of being charged 1-200 the chance of being convicted by a trial is 1-1000. People get away with everything.
You're tired of cops beating suspects? I'm tired of gang-banging thugs beating and raping innocent children, destroying property, stealing cars and driving on sidewalks.
I am tired of thugs shooting each other causing jeopardy to our treasured RTKBA.
I'm tired of punk * doing drug deals in the parks, having gang wars that fill the nightly news, kids kidnapped lives ruined with the flick of a safety. I see white kids with their pants down below their buts hat sideways, bandannas. they respect the thugs more than police. These cops were wrong and they got fired for their actions, they will probably go to jail and they should...but something has to be done before our society is completely ruined...
I remember a time when I left my home with my doors unlocked, keys in the car while I went into the store. Now I'm afraid to leave a CD on the seat cuz some punk will break a window to take willie nelsons greatest hits.
SO, be mad at these few bad cops for losing their cool in a moment of extreme anxiety, but remember they do not all act this way.
How many lose control like that? 10%? 20%? You willing to take those odds when dealing with the life of your kids? Just curious...
This little diddy happened when I lived in the Ft Worth area
Peter Gorman FORT WORTH, Texas -- The fake-drug scandal that led to the arrest of more than 50 innocent people during the past two years on drug charges continues to rock the Dallas Police Department. During the past three months, lawsuits against the department have been filed, the FBI has begun its own investigation, the two primary officers involved claim they were duped by drug dealers, and a likely source of the fake drugs has come to light.
The scandal, which first made news in December 2001, involved Enrique Martinez Alonso, an informant who worked for years for two Dallas narcotics cops, 10-year veteran Cpl. Mark Delapaz and Officer Eddie Herrera. During the last two years, Alonso's tips and the drugs he allegedly bought from those charged--mostly Mexicans and many illegal--were the primary evidence in over 70 drug cases that have since been dismissed because little or no drugs ever existed. Lab tests have shown that the dozens of kilos of "cocaine" and "methamphetamine" turned in by Alonso are nothing more than gypsum.
The fake drugs were first discovered in the fall of 2001, when defense attorneys asked that lab tests be performed on the evidence. By then, more than 10 people--whose lawyers had not requested the tests--had been jailed, others were awaiting trial, and more than two dozen had been deported to Mexico.
Since the scandal broke, Alonso, who was paid nearly $250,000 by the Dallas police for his work during the last two years, has claimed he was duped by drug dealers who substituted crushed Sheetrock for the real drugs, after field tests were done to assure quality. Delapaz and Herrera agree with Alonso, claiming they, along with Alonso and the other informants they used, never meant to rack up arrests with fake drugs.
During March, however, one of those other informants, Reyes Roberto Rodriguez, told FBI investigators that the gypsum claimed to be drugs actually came from pool-hall chalk purchased by Alonso's brother. Though Alonso claimed he had no idea how the alleged drugs turned out to be gypsum, the FBI, following Rodriguez's lead, discovered that 80 kilos of the chalk had been purchased in August from a pool-hall supplier just outside of Dallas, by a man whose name and car matched Alonso's brother. The man said he was planning to open a pool hall in Mexico. The FBI admits that in early April it confiscated large quantities of the chalk from the home of one of the informants in the case.
How so many of the busts occurred without arousing the suspicion of either Cpl. Delapaz, Officer Herrera or their supervisor, Lieutenant Bill Turnage--who was promoted to deputy chief in September 2001--remains a mystery. In many cases, Alonso simply appeared with alleged drugs and claimed he'd bought them from people he'd evidently never even met. On other occasions he hired Mexican day workers to deliver cars for him, and when the workers arrived with the cars they were arrested with several kilos of alleged coke or meth in the trunk.
The first sign of things not being quite right occurred in August 2001, when a defendant's attorney asked that the "coke" be lab-tested. The tests came back negative. Alonso was questioned by his handlers and subsequently passed a polygraph, and the detectives were given permission by Lt. Turnage to continue working with him.
A civil-rights lawsuit against Delapaz and Herrera was recently filed on behalf of Erubiel Cruz--who spent five months in jail as a result of a fake drug bust--and others by attorney Don Tuttle. In their April response to the suit, both Delapaz and Herrera claimed that Alonso may have been duped by drug dealers into accepting fake drugs but that they had acted in good faith, and had never planted drugs, fake or otherwise, on anyone.
The city of Dallas, also named in the suit, responded by claiming the gypsum may have "been substituted by drug dealers without the informant's knowledge." It contends that "Officer Delapaz had reason to believe that the informant was credible because he had provided information in the past resulting in many valid drug arrests and seizures of... controlled substances."
Enrique Alonso, who has a criminal record, faces trial on unrelated fraud and immigration charges. Delapaz and Herrera were put on paid leave in January. Both claim that the seized drugs in all the cases dismissed to date tested positive in the field, and that they cannot explain how the substitution of the fake drugs occurred.
quote:Originally posted by MVP
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
Maybe you should start a "I love jack booted thug cops" group. If I was on the cops' jury, I would convict them of every charge brought against them. Maybe that would help keep other cops in line.
quote:Originally posted by MVP
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
And if I were on the jury, I would want assault with a deadly weapon and conspiracy to twart an investigation charges filed.
how is it that cops in general are not your friend? If you teach your kids to respect and obey the law, they will NEVER have an issue with police. Half the problem we have in our country is people just don't respect the law.
quote:Originally posted by P228
quote:Originally posted by MVP
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
Maybe you should start a "I love jack booted thug cops" group. If I was on the cops' jury, I would convict them of every charge brought against them. Maybe that would help keep other cops in line.
Just curious...do you feel that the 14th amendment should be abolished like Germany did in 1924? Obviously you do.
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
And you obviously do not understand the 14th amendment.
When a POS like that one is down but not dead for sure, bayoneting him is only appropriate. That way we don't have to deal with him again, and more of the police, and the public, will have a better chance of staying alive. When asshats declare war on anybody, like this one did on everybody, they should remember that war is Hell.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
i didn,t read any where that any one didn,t think this man should have been shot when he was putting anyone,s life in danger, but the defend the police at any cost crowd think the beating was justified. eastbank.
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
When a POS like that one is down but not dead for sure, bayoneting him is only appropriate. That way we don't have to deal with him again, and more of the police, and the public, will have a better chance of staying alive. When asshats declare war on anybody, like this one did on everybody, they should remember that war is Hell.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
quote:Originally posted by redhead71
to bad the van did not crush the peice of crap! could have saved the tax payers a lot of money!
Agreed, but that does not excuse the officers from their actions. Police Officers need to remember that their job is to enforce the law by bringing suspects to a court for prosecution. It is never their job to punish criminals. Street justice is not for police to dispense, it only tars the profession when crap like this happens.
Sure adrenaline pumps and tempers flare during a pursuit-especially when the violators tries to run down a fellow officer, but if you are not able to control yourself in these situations you need to find a new line of work.
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
When a POS like that one is down but not dead for sure, bayoneting him is only appropriate. That way we don't have to deal with him again, and more of the police, and the public, will have a better chance of staying alive. When asshats declare war on anybody, like this one did on everybody, they should remember that war is Hell.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
What happened is not war, it is police work. And in this country, cops are not allowed to "bayonet" someone when he is down. You might want to move somewhere like Myanmar where stuff like that is allowed, of course over there it might just happen to you.
All rights are forfeited in the context of committing a felony, especially those people who attempt a homicide. If someone wants to make the cops their 'Huckleberry', they understand the risks they're taking. Any expectation that they will be safely taken into custody if their attempt at murder fails, is Bull. And it should be. Trying to kill someone and then hiding behind lawyers within seconds of the act, is despicable. Where's you nads?
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
And you obviously do not understand the 14th amendment.
[?]
Please point out for us that portion of the 14th Amendment which gives jurors the ability to request certain charges be filed because they already believe the defendant is guilty.
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
All rights are forfeited in the context of committing a felony, especially those people who attempt a homicide. If someone wants to make the cops their 'Huckleberry', they understand the risks they're taking. Any expectation that they will be safely taken into custody if their attempt at murder fails, is Bull. And it should be. Trying to kill someone and then hiding behind lawyers within seconds of the act, is despicable. Where's you nads?
So the 4th and 5th amendments to not apply to people accused of a crime...right?
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
All rights are forfeited in the context of committing a felony, especially those people who attempt a homicide. If someone wants to make the cops their 'Huckleberry', they understand the risks they're taking. Any expectation that they will be safely taken into custody if their attempt at murder fails, is Bull. And it should be. Trying to kill someone and then hiding behind lawyers within seconds of the act, is despicable. Where's you nads?
You really need to read up on our legal system works. You are clueless on it. Hope you are not a cop.
Here on my planet if we want crime we have to import it from elsewhere. First we had Yankees come down and bring their hoodlum progeny along to steal and vandalize. Lately we have been blessed with an influx of various hispanic people who like to deal drugs and shoot each other. I'm not sure what that is all about since they deal drugs to other hispanics. Couldn't they have just all stayed home and done it all there? Anyway, since we now have actual crimes I have noticed a change in the police and the way they treat civilians. They approach a car with a hand on their pistol. They yell and act real pushy when a quiet firm voice and some manners would work a lot better. I guess as the job gets more dangerous the police get a little more on edge. Some guys can't handle the ebb and flow of adrenaline without loosing perspective and self-control. When you feel that constant pinch on the shoulders it is time to look for another line of work before you screw up. These guys long passed that point from what the video shows. Loosing control for one guy should have brought about restraint from his fellow officers, but they joined in and escalated the violence. The worst aspect to me is that the guy runs to his car to turn off the tape as if it has happened enough times before so that they had a routine to follow when beatings took place. Not everyone is cut out to be in law enforcement. Ain't no shame in admitting to being a vindictive, violence prone prick, but you should go into government where those traits are sought after and hang up the badge first.
While the Letter of the Law, including the Amendments, presumes innocence, it goes to never-never land when someone publicly mangles a cop or sticks a gun in a store clerk's face. What happens next depends on what the Huckleberrys opt for. If some dirtbag gets a .45 slug in the face instead of getting the contents of the till, or even if he gets one in the rectum on the way out, who would get excited about his 'rights' being violated? The 'right' thing would have happened. But it may not have been strictly the legal thing, if the Law says the citizens have no right to pull a .45 on a snotball's .38.
The disagreement is whether the cops in question did the Legal thing with the successfully-vicious buttwipe, or got closer to doing the Right thing.
If anybody comes up with a video of cops beating up an old lady who wrecked her car during a siezure, maybe there will be something for the rest of us to get excited about.
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
While the Letter of the Law, including the Amendments, presumes innocence, it goes to never-never land when someone publicly mangles a cop or sticks a gun in a store clerk's face. What happens next depends on what the Huckleberrys opt for. If some dirtbag gets a .45 slug in the face instead of getting the contents of the till, or even if he gets one in the rectum on the way out, who would get excited about his 'rights' being violated? The 'right' thing would have happened. But it may not have been strictly the legal thing, if the Law says the citizens have no right to pull a .45 on a snotball's .38.
The disagreement is whether the cops in question did the Legal thing with the successfully-vicious buttwipe, or got closer to doing the Right thing.
If anybody comes up with a video of cops beating up an old lady who wrecked her car during a siezure, maybe there will be something for the rest of us to get excited about.
So a violation of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments is ok if the cops determine that they feel they should beat a presumed innocent man...or should these amendments be repealed and enforced at the whim of the officers?
A person cannot be presumed innocent by those who witnessed his crimes, or who were his face-to-face victim. The Constitution is designed more to protect us from wrongful accusations, than from the consequences of being caught 'red-handed', and especially from our stupidity of antagonizing all others by our conduct.
When it involves an attempted homicide in public, cops and bystanders alike all being subject to their human characteristics, all bets are off. Cops are never hired because they are superhuman, although some people expect them to be of test-tube perfection. The same goes for bystanders, which has led to lynchings of certain criminals caught red-handed, in defiance of all Constitutional Amendments and protections. Some things are more than most people can take.
Cops are actually much better trained in restraint than most other people, and when they can't take it, reasonable limits have assuredly been passed. The perpetrator is a lot luckier than if he had been caught by the family of the cop he ran down.
In a perfect world, no crime exists, and therefore, no anger in response to it. But in this world, pushing the crime envelope with an attempted homicide, and then expecting a response only from a meter-maid with a ticket book, won't cut it. And so is expecting the responding cops to act like Supreme Court Justices.
Technically, the cops did wrong. And technically, Luke Short should have been arrested for shooting a Dodge City policeman three times, and in front of Bat Masterson, to boot. But sometimes and in some circumstances, the legal and Constitutional technicalities are the weakest part of the argument.
well i guess being professions, that we hear about from the police just went out the window, the offices and higher ups who covered it up are a black eye to all compitent officers. there is no defence for this beating, the perp was out cold. or maybe these officers like beating people who can,t fight back(old ladies,kids and blind people) and are no real danger to them. eastbank.
quote:Originally posted by eastbank
well i guess being professions, that we hear about from the police just went out the window, the offices and higher ups who covered it up are a black eye to all compitent officers. there is no defence for this beating, the perp was out cold. or maybe these officers like beating people who can,t fight back(old ladies,kids and blind people) and are no real danger to them. eastbank.
They knew they did wrong...notice the Ghestapo agent rushing to shut off the dash cam?
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
In this case, yep.
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
In this case, yep.
Then we need to make it permanant. The socialist concept of situational ethics is the concept used by the left all the time.
That first amendment p!sses me off a lot. The Babtist church needs to GO.
quote:Originally posted by machine gun moran
A person cannot be presumed innocent by those who witnessed his crimes, or who were his face-to-face victim. The Constitution is designed more to protect us from wrongful accusations, than from the consequences of being caught 'red-handed', and especially from our stupidity of antagonizing all others by our conduct.
When it involves an attempted homicide in public, cops and bystanders alike all being subject to their human characteristics, all bets are off. Cops are never hired because they are superhuman, although some people expect them to be of test-tube perfection. The same goes for bystanders, which has led to lynchings of certain criminals caught red-handed, in defiance of all Constitutional Amendments and protections. Some things are more than most people can take.
Cops are actually much better trained in restraint than most other people, and when they can't take it, reasonable limits have assuredly been passed. The perpetrator is a lot luckier than if he had been caught by the family of the cop he ran down.
In a perfect world, no crime exists, and therefore, no anger in response to it. But in this world, pushing the crime envelope with an attempted homicide, and then expecting a response only from a meter-maid with a ticket book, won't cut it. And so is expecting the responding cops to act like Supreme Court Justices.
Technically, the cops did wrong. And technically, Luke Short should have been arrested for shooting a Dodge City policeman three times, and in front of Bat Masterson, to boot. But sometimes and in some circumstances, the legal and Constitutional technicalities are the weakest part of the argument.
What you supporters are purposely denying is, this perp was out cold. The crime he is guilty of, was allready over with. The cops did NOT stop him in the process of committing a crime. The act was OVER. Deadly/excessive force was unwarrented at the time the perp hit the concrete, unconcious.
The very fact the cops turned off a camera, show they PREMEDITATED a crime. Kinda like any other criminal that goes out and PREPARES to commit a crime.
And your "techincally" comment kills me. Dress it anyway you want, TECHNICALLY these people ARE criminals.
Let us also not forget, if this criminal had been sentenced 5 TIMES, why are you folk expecting COPS to be judge, jury and executioner? FIX the damn justice SYSTEM! Stand around and * because some 5 time loser is on the loose, but don't work on FIXING the PROBLEM....... Sounds about the line of thinking of the LIBERAL tards. [V]
Comments
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by dano
quote:Originally posted by ontherocks
quote:Originally posted by MVP
quote:Originally posted by ontherocks
quote:Originally posted by dano
I swear, some of you act like you're living in a bubble where it never rains. [:X]
and some jerks think nazi practices by the american government and its hands are ok, defensible even.
How does Nazi practices against innocent people equate to cops thumping on an out of control idiot who tried to kill a policeman in the line of duty?
Some of you guys can really stretch it.
you have a perception problem.
where does the law allow for cops to beat suspects? what happens when the suspect has been wrongly accused?
you as a gunowner I assume, shock the hell out of me. do you not yet realize that if you give them an inch they will take a mile?
I will flat out say that the initial suspect aforementioned more than likely needs to be fed his teeth, but not by the cops of all people! damnit don't you get it???????
As a newbie, you don't have a clue about me or how I approach life.
And....gun ownership has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.
And....not once did I say I condoned the actions of the police. What I did infer, is that people are people and not scripted machines. Emotions, both good and bad, will always hamper human nature to some degree.
Doesn't matter what you do for a living. You mess up....you pay. Only the degree of severity is variable. [;)]
Problem is, police have and do cover for each other, falsify documents and lie. I feel that if their are more severe consequences for injuring, lying to, or interferring with a police officer, then there should be more severe consequences if they commit assault or murder in the line of duty. What say you?
I can't help but think you're a pud. [}:)]
I am sure you do.
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
Justified in opinion, why did he run?? Respect the law. They should have turned the camera off.
Defending the 2nd amendment is ok...but the rest of them are trash eh?
EH
Sure is good to know what kind of thugs they are putting behind a badge these days. It is the reason I am forced to tell my kids that cops really are not your friends any more.
how is it that cops in general are not your friend? If you teach your kids to respect and obey the law, they will NEVER have an issue with police. Half the problem we have in our country is people just don't respect the law. They know the chances of getting caught committing a crime is like 1-100 the chance of being charged 1-200 the chance of being convicted by a trial is 1-1000. People get away with everything.
You're tired of cops beating suspects? I'm tired of gang-banging thugs beating and raping innocent children, destroying property, stealing cars and driving on sidewalks.
I am tired of thugs shooting each other causing jeopardy to our treasured RTKBA.
I'm tired of punk * doing drug deals in the parks, having gang wars that fill the nightly news, kids kidnapped lives ruined with the flick of a safety. I see white kids with their pants down below their buts hat sideways, bandannas. they respect the thugs more than police. These cops were wrong and they got fired for their actions, they will probably go to jail and they should...but something has to be done before our society is completely ruined...
I remember a time when I left my home with my doors unlocked, keys in the car while I went into the store. Now I'm afraid to leave a CD on the seat cuz some punk will break a window to take willie nelsons greatest hits.
SO, be mad at these few bad cops for losing their cool in a moment of extreme anxiety, but remember they do not all act this way.
How many lose control like that? 10%? 20%? You willing to take those odds when dealing with the life of your kids? Just curious...
This little diddy happened when I lived in the Ft Worth area
Peter Gorman FORT WORTH, Texas -- The fake-drug scandal that led to the arrest of more than 50 innocent people during the past two years on drug charges continues to rock the Dallas Police Department. During the past three months, lawsuits against the department have been filed, the FBI has begun its own investigation, the two primary officers involved claim they were duped by drug dealers, and a likely source of the fake drugs has come to light.
The scandal, which first made news in December 2001, involved Enrique Martinez Alonso, an informant who worked for years for two Dallas narcotics cops, 10-year veteran Cpl. Mark Delapaz and Officer Eddie Herrera. During the last two years, Alonso's tips and the drugs he allegedly bought from those charged--mostly Mexicans and many illegal--were the primary evidence in over 70 drug cases that have since been dismissed because little or no drugs ever existed. Lab tests have shown that the dozens of kilos of "cocaine" and "methamphetamine" turned in by Alonso are nothing more than gypsum.
The fake drugs were first discovered in the fall of 2001, when defense attorneys asked that lab tests be performed on the evidence. By then, more than 10 people--whose lawyers had not requested the tests--had been jailed, others were awaiting trial, and more than two dozen had been deported to Mexico.
Since the scandal broke, Alonso, who was paid nearly $250,000 by the Dallas police for his work during the last two years, has claimed he was duped by drug dealers who substituted crushed Sheetrock for the real drugs, after field tests were done to assure quality. Delapaz and Herrera agree with Alonso, claiming they, along with Alonso and the other informants they used, never meant to rack up arrests with fake drugs.
During March, however, one of those other informants, Reyes Roberto Rodriguez, told FBI investigators that the gypsum claimed to be drugs actually came from pool-hall chalk purchased by Alonso's brother. Though Alonso claimed he had no idea how the alleged drugs turned out to be gypsum, the FBI, following Rodriguez's lead, discovered that 80 kilos of the chalk had been purchased in August from a pool-hall supplier just outside of Dallas, by a man whose name and car matched Alonso's brother. The man said he was planning to open a pool hall in Mexico. The FBI admits that in early April it confiscated large quantities of the chalk from the home of one of the informants in the case.
How so many of the busts occurred without arousing the suspicion of either Cpl. Delapaz, Officer Herrera or their supervisor, Lieutenant Bill Turnage--who was promoted to deputy chief in September 2001--remains a mystery. In many cases, Alonso simply appeared with alleged drugs and claimed he'd bought them from people he'd evidently never even met. On other occasions he hired Mexican day workers to deliver cars for him, and when the workers arrived with the cars they were arrested with several kilos of alleged coke or meth in the trunk.
The first sign of things not being quite right occurred in August 2001, when a defendant's attorney asked that the "coke" be lab-tested. The tests came back negative. Alonso was questioned by his handlers and subsequently passed a polygraph, and the detectives were given permission by Lt. Turnage to continue working with him.
A civil-rights lawsuit against Delapaz and Herrera was recently filed on behalf of Erubiel Cruz--who spent five months in jail as a result of a fake drug bust--and others by attorney Don Tuttle. In their April response to the suit, both Delapaz and Herrera claimed that Alonso may have been duped by drug dealers into accepting fake drugs but that they had acted in good faith, and had never planted drugs, fake or otherwise, on anyone.
The city of Dallas, also named in the suit, responded by claiming the gypsum may have "been substituted by drug dealers without the informant's knowledge." It contends that "Officer Delapaz had reason to believe that the informant was credible because he had provided information in the past resulting in many valid drug arrests and seizures of... controlled substances."
Enrique Alonso, who has a criminal record, faces trial on unrelated fraud and immigration charges. Delapaz and Herrera were put on paid leave in January. Both claim that the seized drugs in all the cases dismissed to date tested positive in the field, and that they cannot explain how the substitution of the fake drugs occurred.
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
Maybe you should start a "I love jack booted thug cops" group. If I was on the cops' jury, I would convict them of every charge brought against them. Maybe that would help keep other cops in line.
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
And if I were on the jury, I would want assault with a deadly weapon and conspiracy to twart an investigation charges filed.
how is it that cops in general are not your friend? If you teach your kids to respect and obey the law, they will NEVER have an issue with police. Half the problem we have in our country is people just don't respect the law.
Collateral damage?
quote:A Jacksonville traffic cop was speeding after a vehicle with excessive window tint when the officer plowed into a pickup truck, killing an 86-year-old man last month, the Florida Highway Patrol said Tuesday night.
http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/crime/2009-02-25/story/fhp_officer_was_chasing_tinted_window_car_before_fatal_crash
quote:SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) -
The attorney for a former Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer accused of murdering an unarmed man on New Year's Day asked for the district attorney to be removed from the case.
http://www.examiner.com/a-1987048~Lawyers_for_ex_BART_cop_murder_case_want_DA_ousted.html
Two examples of many.
You live in a dream world.
NRA Lifetime Benefactor Member.
quote:Originally posted by MVP
p228
Maybe you should start your own chapter of hug a thug and beat the cops to the idiot in the van and offer him a hug and teddy bear for all that he just went through.
Life is about choices and concequences come from choices made. Make stupid choices and you might get your butt whooped or your head thumped.
Now I agree 100% that if these cops pulled an innocent person from the car who did nothing wrong and thumped him for the fun of it, they should be fired. The big picture from the video would lead me to acquiting the cops if I were on the jury.
Maybe you should start a "I love jack booted thug cops" group. If I was on the cops' jury, I would convict them of every charge brought against them. Maybe that would help keep other cops in line.
Just curious...do you feel that the 14th amendment should be abolished like Germany did in 1924? Obviously you do.
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
And you obviously do not understand the 14th amendment.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
When a POS like that one is down but not dead for sure, bayoneting him is only appropriate. That way we don't have to deal with him again, and more of the police, and the public, will have a better chance of staying alive. When asshats declare war on anybody, like this one did on everybody, they should remember that war is Hell.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
Should we repeal the 14th amendment?
to bad the van did not crush the peice of crap! could have saved the tax payers a lot of money!
Agreed, but that does not excuse the officers from their actions. Police Officers need to remember that their job is to enforce the law by bringing suspects to a court for prosecution. It is never their job to punish criminals. Street justice is not for police to dispense, it only tars the profession when crap like this happens.
Sure adrenaline pumps and tempers flare during a pursuit-especially when the violators tries to run down a fellow officer, but if you are not able to control yourself in these situations you need to find a new line of work.
When a POS like that one is down but not dead for sure, bayoneting him is only appropriate. That way we don't have to deal with him again, and more of the police, and the public, will have a better chance of staying alive. When asshats declare war on anybody, like this one did on everybody, they should remember that war is Hell.
But tears are flowing and knees are jerking for him.
What happened is not war, it is police work. And in this country, cops are not allowed to "bayonet" someone when he is down. You might want to move somewhere like Myanmar where stuff like that is allowed, of course over there it might just happen to you.
If the POS doesn't apply the Constitution to me, I don't apply it to him.
So you do advocate repealing the 14th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments?
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
And if I were on the jury, I would want....Apparently you're unaware that in the U.S. jurors have no say whatsoever in what charges are filed.
And you obviously do not understand the 14th amendment.
[?]
Please point out for us that portion of the 14th Amendment which gives jurors the ability to request certain charges be filed because they already believe the defendant is guilty.
All rights are forfeited in the context of committing a felony, especially those people who attempt a homicide. If someone wants to make the cops their 'Huckleberry', they understand the risks they're taking. Any expectation that they will be safely taken into custody if their attempt at murder fails, is Bull. And it should be. Trying to kill someone and then hiding behind lawyers within seconds of the act, is despicable. Where's you nads?
So the 4th and 5th amendments to not apply to people accused of a crime...right?
All rights are forfeited in the context of committing a felony, especially those people who attempt a homicide. If someone wants to make the cops their 'Huckleberry', they understand the risks they're taking. Any expectation that they will be safely taken into custody if their attempt at murder fails, is Bull. And it should be. Trying to kill someone and then hiding behind lawyers within seconds of the act, is despicable. Where's you nads?
You really need to read up on our legal system works. You are clueless on it. Hope you are not a cop.
The disagreement is whether the cops in question did the Legal thing with the successfully-vicious buttwipe, or got closer to doing the Right thing.
If anybody comes up with a video of cops beating up an old lady who wrecked her car during a siezure, maybe there will be something for the rest of us to get excited about.
While the Letter of the Law, including the Amendments, presumes innocence, it goes to never-never land when someone publicly mangles a cop or sticks a gun in a store clerk's face. What happens next depends on what the Huckleberrys opt for. If some dirtbag gets a .45 slug in the face instead of getting the contents of the till, or even if he gets one in the rectum on the way out, who would get excited about his 'rights' being violated? The 'right' thing would have happened. But it may not have been strictly the legal thing, if the Law says the citizens have no right to pull a .45 on a snotball's .38.
The disagreement is whether the cops in question did the Legal thing with the successfully-vicious buttwipe, or got closer to doing the Right thing.
If anybody comes up with a video of cops beating up an old lady who wrecked her car during a siezure, maybe there will be something for the rest of us to get excited about.
So a violation of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments is ok if the cops determine that they feel they should beat a presumed innocent man...or should these amendments be repealed and enforced at the whim of the officers?
The disagreement is whether the cops in question did the Legal thing with the successfully-vicious buttwipe, or got closer to doing the Right thing.
I'm willing to bet that you are a very old man with you faculties barely intact.
NRA Lifetime Benefactor Member.
When it involves an attempted homicide in public, cops and bystanders alike all being subject to their human characteristics, all bets are off. Cops are never hired because they are superhuman, although some people expect them to be of test-tube perfection. The same goes for bystanders, which has led to lynchings of certain criminals caught red-handed, in defiance of all Constitutional Amendments and protections. Some things are more than most people can take.
Cops are actually much better trained in restraint than most other people, and when they can't take it, reasonable limits have assuredly been passed. The perpetrator is a lot luckier than if he had been caught by the family of the cop he ran down.
In a perfect world, no crime exists, and therefore, no anger in response to it. But in this world, pushing the crime envelope with an attempted homicide, and then expecting a response only from a meter-maid with a ticket book, won't cut it. And so is expecting the responding cops to act like Supreme Court Justices.
Technically, the cops did wrong. And technically, Luke Short should have been arrested for shooting a Dodge City policeman three times, and in front of Bat Masterson, to boot. But sometimes and in some circumstances, the legal and Constitutional technicalities are the weakest part of the argument.
well i guess being professions, that we hear about from the police just went out the window, the offices and higher ups who covered it up are a black eye to all compitent officers. there is no defence for this beating, the perp was out cold. or maybe these officers like beating people who can,t fight back(old ladies,kids and blind people) and are no real danger to them. eastbank.
They knew they did wrong...notice the Ghestapo agent rushing to shut off the dash cam?
SELF DEFENSE, HE COULD HAVE HAD A GUN!!!
Yeah...those unconsious victims have been known to shoot back from a comatose state.
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
In this case, yep.
quote:Originally posted by Survivalist86
quote:Originally posted by MFinn
And they had time to to figure it out, I doubt it. He has been in the prison 5 times already, he got what was coming to him. One that does not see this is a *.
Do you think that the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments should be overturned?
In this case, yep.
Then we need to make it permanant. The socialist concept of situational ethics is the concept used by the left all the time.
That first amendment p!sses me off a lot. The Babtist church needs to GO.
A person cannot be presumed innocent by those who witnessed his crimes, or who were his face-to-face victim. The Constitution is designed more to protect us from wrongful accusations, than from the consequences of being caught 'red-handed', and especially from our stupidity of antagonizing all others by our conduct.
When it involves an attempted homicide in public, cops and bystanders alike all being subject to their human characteristics, all bets are off. Cops are never hired because they are superhuman, although some people expect them to be of test-tube perfection. The same goes for bystanders, which has led to lynchings of certain criminals caught red-handed, in defiance of all Constitutional Amendments and protections. Some things are more than most people can take.
Cops are actually much better trained in restraint than most other people, and when they can't take it, reasonable limits have assuredly been passed. The perpetrator is a lot luckier than if he had been caught by the family of the cop he ran down.
In a perfect world, no crime exists, and therefore, no anger in response to it. But in this world, pushing the crime envelope with an attempted homicide, and then expecting a response only from a meter-maid with a ticket book, won't cut it. And so is expecting the responding cops to act like Supreme Court Justices.
Technically, the cops did wrong. And technically, Luke Short should have been arrested for shooting a Dodge City policeman three times, and in front of Bat Masterson, to boot. But sometimes and in some circumstances, the legal and Constitutional technicalities are the weakest part of the argument.
What you supporters are purposely denying is, this perp was out cold. The crime he is guilty of, was allready over with. The cops did NOT stop him in the process of committing a crime. The act was OVER. Deadly/excessive force was unwarrented at the time the perp hit the concrete, unconcious.
The very fact the cops turned off a camera, show they PREMEDITATED a crime. Kinda like any other criminal that goes out and PREPARES to commit a crime.
And your "techincally" comment kills me. Dress it anyway you want, TECHNICALLY these people ARE criminals.
Let us also not forget, if this criminal had been sentenced 5 TIMES, why are you folk expecting COPS to be judge, jury and executioner? FIX the damn justice SYSTEM! Stand around and * because some 5 time loser is on the loose, but don't work on FIXING the PROBLEM....... Sounds about the line of thinking of the LIBERAL tards. [V]