Woman calls 911, assaulted by police

[dross]

LOL Rule #1. Never trust a defense attorney. He's being paid to get his client off the hook at any cost. Rule #2. Never trust a defense attorney trying to sell a book. While crooked cops should indeed bear the full brunt of the legal system, I don't think doubling the sentence would be appropriate.

Okay, I won't trust a defense attorney, or an defense attorney selling a book. Should I trust a cop who has been accused of wrongdoing by a citizen? How about a cop backing up the testimony of a brother cop?

Now that we've gotten past who to trust, and who not to trust, is there any truth, in your experience, to the substance of what was in the defense attorney's book? Even a liar tells the truth sometimes, or does that not apply to defense attorneys?

 

[public servant]

Okay, I won't trust a defense attorney, or an defense attorney selling a book. Should I trust a cop who has been accused of wrongdoing by a citizen? How about a cop backing up the testimony of a brother cop?

Now that we've gotten past who to trust, and who not to trust, is there any truth, in your experience, to the substance of what was in the defense attorney's book? Even a liar tells the truth sometimes, or does that not apply to defense attorneys?

Having not read the book...I couldn't coment. But of course that doesn't seem to stop many people around here from speaking about which they know little of, does it?

 

[public servant]

Why does an LEO's word matter more than mine? That is the 5 dollar question that I want answered first.

Your word personally? It doesn't. Now if we're talking about the word of a LEO against the word of someone charged with a crime....to me it means a lot more. Unless I personally know the LEO is lying, then he's no better than the crook. Pretty simple...the same as you would take the word of a family member or a life long friend over that of a stranger. You could still be wrong about the word of that family member or friend....but it would make more sense to me to bet the paycheck on those you were more inclined to believe.

 

[SavageEagle]

Your word personally? It doesn't. Now if we're talking about the word of a LEO against the word of someone charged with a crime....to me it means a lot more. Unless I personally know the LEO is lying, then he's no better than the crook. Pretty simple...the same as you would take the word of a family member or a life long friend over that of a stranger. You could still be wrong about the word of that family member or friend....but it would make more sense to me to bet the paycheck on those you were more inclined to believe.

My question is pretty simple. Why do LEO's seem to think of every criminal as dirt? Just because I speed doesn't make me a bad person, but yet when you get pulled over for speeding, you all of a sudden become just as low as a murderer. Hows that work? My word is just as good as anyone else's but yet the police officer holds more weight in his word than mine? SOME LEOs are just as crooked as criminals, but yet we are suppose to treat every LEO's word as gospel. Unless another LEO personally knows they are lying and calls them on it, we must believe them is pretty much what you just advocated there.

I mean if I'm wrong there or I misunderstood, I'm sorry, but that's how I understand your feelings on this.

No we couldn't see all the tapes. But instead of forcibly stripping this woman, they could have put her in that cell, posted a guard, let her calm down, then give her another chance to change clothes. If they were just asking her to change clothes. They didn't have to forcibly restrain and stip her down UNLESS they were doing a strip search. It truly is that simple.

 

[public servant]

My question is pretty simple. Why do LEO's seem to think of every criminal as dirt? Just because I speed doesn't make me a bad person, but yet when you get pulled over for speeding, you all of a sudden become just as low as a murderer. Hows that work? My word is just as good as anyone else's but yet the police officer holds more weight in his word than mine? SOME LEOs are just as crooked as criminals, but yet we are suppose to treat every LEO's word as gospel. Unless another LEO personally knows they are lying and calls them on it, we must believe them is pretty much what you just advocated there.

I mean if I'm wrong there or I misunderstood, I'm sorry, but that's how I understand your feelings on this.

No we couldn't see all the tapes. But instead of forcibly stripping this woman, they could have put her in that cell, posted a guard, let her calm down, then give her another chance to change clothes. If they were just asking her to change clothes. They didn't have to forcibly restrain and stip her down UNLESS they were doing a strip search. It truly is that simple.

I'm advocating what I would do and my feelings....that there are at least two sides to every story....and I'll believe a cop over someone charged with a crime unless I know differently. Plain and simple. What you do....I couldn't care less and won't lose any sleep over.

 

[dross]

....and I'll believe a cop over someone charged with a crime unless I know differently.

And so would I. Partially because odds are the cop is telling the truth, but mainly from principle. We need to be able to believe them. We hire people to do, as you say, an ugly job, and they deserve our trust. We should hire honorable people. When they abuse their power, we should come down on them like a ton of bricks.

When a cop is caught lying, I wonder how many people were treated unjustly because that cop is a liar.

We'll never truly understand what it's like on your side of the badge. Try not to forget what it's like on ours.

 

[public servant]

Looks like a pattern to me.

Pattern? If by that you mean all cops are bad or behave badly....nope. Are there some that do? Sure there are. The same as in every other cross section of society. All I said is get every side of the story before coming to a conclusion. And given the choice between believing a cop over a third party that's charged with committing a crime....I'll believe a cop unless there is evidence proving otherwise. It's just my opinion....nothing more.

 

[jeremy]

Your word personally? It doesn't. Now if we're talking about the word of a LEO against the word of someone charged with a crime....to me it means a lot more. Unless I personally know the LEO is lying, then he's no better than the crook. Pretty simple...the same as you would take the word of a family member or a life long friend over that of a stranger. You could still be wrong about the word of that family member or friend....but it would make more sense to me to bet the paycheck on those you were more inclined to believe.

My next question what happened to innocent until proven guilty. Just because a person is charged with a crime does not mean that they are either guilty or liars.

And just for the record I way the word of a stranger as the same as I would of family member. I am old fashioned like that, a man's word is his bond.

 

[public servant]

My next question what happened to innocent until proven guilty. Just because a person is charged with a crime does not mean that they are either guilty or liars.

And just for the record I way the word of a stranger as the same as I would of family member. I am old fashioned like that, a man's word is his bond.

John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dauhmer all claimed to be innocent. Criminals are like that. Very few confess in the beginning. You are correct though that until they were found guilty in a court of law they were technically innocent....but I'd tend to believe the cops that testified at their trials. You'd really believe a stranger over a family member? wow.... Well....I guess I have a couple of family members I'd believe the stranger over them as well....but they are in prison right now. One is a murderer and the other a drug dealer.....come to think of it....they claimed innocence as well....go figure.....you can't trust a crook....

 

[SavageEagle]

I believe BloodEclipse meant with that paticular department there was a pattern, not all LEOs. I could be wrong, but I believe thats what he meant.

Also, a person charged of a crime IS innocent until proven guilty. But for some reason they don't get treated that way. Its one thing when a person is caught red handed, or confesses. Barring those two things, treating someone as a criminal because they are ACCUSED is BS and you know it.

I accuse you of murdering my friend, public servant. Boom, you get arrested. Now, under your standards, we all get to treat you like crap, violate your rights, your body, your mind, treat you like a liar, and ruin your reputation. Now you tell me how in the world that is right.

 

[BloodEclipse]

I believe BloodEclipse meant with that paticular department there was a pattern, not all LEOs. I could be wrong, but I believe thats what he meant.

Yes SE that is exactly what I meant.
The prosecutors for the GJ never took the testimony of the VICTIM because she wanted to have her lawyer present during questioning. It appears the police were allowed to have their lawyers present during questioning so it no wonder the GJ didn't indict. They only had one side of the story and with that video that was from a non working camera not available they got off.
It also didn't allow the victim to have all evidence available at her trial.
public servant if you would have watched and read the links in that post you would know I'm referring to the Stark County LE. But that don't matter to you because the cops said they didn't do anything wrong it has to be true.

 

[public servant]

Yes SE that is exactly what I meant.
The prosecutors for the GJ never took the testimony of the VICTIM because she wanted to have her lawyer present during questioning. It appears the police were allowed to have their lawyers present during questioning so it no wonder the GJ didn't indict. They only had one side of the story and with that video that was from a non working camera not available they got off.
It also didn't allow the victim to have all evidence available at her trial.
public servant if you would have watched and read the links in that post you would know I'm referring to the Stark County LE. But that don't matter to you because the cops said they didn't do anything wrong it has to be true.

Sorry for the misunderstanding on my part...I thought you were blaming all cops again. My fault. You can't blame the police because the defendant was or was not allowed to have her attorney there or not. The prosecutor said it was their usual way of doing business. Standard operating procedure I suppose. Again, I'm not a prosecutor or a defense attorney, so my commenting would hold no value except my personal opinion, not based on factual information on my part. And where in the video did it say the deputies were allowed to have their counsel present? I believe it said they prosecutor could not answer that question.

Again, I'm sorry if my way of thinking upsets you. It's just my personal feelings. Don't take offense...it wasn't intended like that. Really....all I'm saying is that I would take the word of the police over someone charged with a crime involving that incident unless it can be proven otherwise. A lot of people....the difference between them being a law abiding citizen and a criminal is two about paychecks. Normal everyday people occassionally do bad things. And most times they will lie through their teeth when caught. Very seldom will they openly confess or admit responsibility. Do cops lie? I'm sure more than one has I suppose....there are good and bad in all walks of life. But unless I have proof that they are, I'll take their word. It seems only logical to me. But that's just me. And without all the facts (and I don't consider a couple of news media clips or internet pastings of news articles all the facts) I can't make an educated evaluation if a defendant is telling the truth or not. In this case then, I'd have to assume she was not.

 

[finity]

Really....all I'm saying is that I would take the word of the victim over a cop charged with abuse of power involving that incident unless it can be proven otherwise. A lot of cops....the difference between them being a law abiding LEO and a criminal is two about paychecks. Normal everyday cops occassionally do bad things. And most times they will lie through their teeth when caught. Very seldom will they openly confess or admit responsibility. Do cops lie? I'm sure more than a bunch have I suppose....there are good and bad in all walks of life. But unless I have overwhelming, 100% proof that they are, I'll take their word. It seems only logical to me.

Fixed.

Ahh, the 'thin blue line' in action again.

There is nothing magical about cops. They can be criminals just like everybody else. When you give them extraordinary power over people without extraordinary oversight then you get a police state.

 

[Robert Richardson]

You're leaving out the fact that all this went to a grand jury and no indictments were handed down as a result of that investigation. And there were a couple of other posters that brought this point up....not just me. I would be willing to bet more video was produced for that investigation. The lady (or however you want to refer to her as) was found guilty in a court of law of the crimes she was charged with. You figure it out. Do you really think the conspiracy went that deep? LEO, jail employees, grand jury, prosecutor, judge, jury....all for a RLE and DOC charge??? Come on.... Or is your point that you just can't trust the po-po? Some people it appears have their tin-foil hat on sideways.

Do you mean like what happened at Ruby Ridge?

 

[Robert Richardson]

Fixed.

Ahh, the 'thin blue line' in action again.

There is nothing magical about cops. They can be criminals just like everybody else. When you give them extraordinary power over people without extraordinary oversight then you get a police state.

At times I think we already have it.They do what they want.How many bad Badges did we have at IMPD last year?

 

[jeremy]

Just remember that justice is not always legal. Honor and Shame are very important ideals to a lot of people still. I do not know what I would do if this was my wife. But I do know that my honor and integrity are important to me and mine.

 

[dburkhead]

Something to think about: if the scene shown in the video is "normal procedure" as "public servant" says it is, then the procedure is, to put it bluntly, wrong.

Look, last time I looked into the numbers about 40% of all people arrested have charges dropped. And of those that go to trial, about 30-60 percent (depending on charge) are acquitted (and that's for felonies--conviction rates on misdemeanors was much lower).

That means that between 58 and 64% of people in jail are, legally speaking not guilty*. Yet they all get the same abuse from the system. Likewise there's little attention paid to the seriousness of the charges. A woman whose "crime" amounts to panicking when the police, whom she called as the victim, suddenly start treating her as the criminal is given the same treatment as Bloodgnark, the serial axe murderer.

*"Legally speaking" of course. Unfortunately I and others have run into the attitude of some** LEO's that for charges to be dropped or an acquittal to happen, it never means the person was innocent but that they "got away with it." Oh sure, they'll generally not admit to "never" but if you try to find a specific instance where they'll admit the person was innocent, you'll wait a long time. There's the ironic saying that "there are no guilty people in prison" has its converse: "the police never arrest the wrong person." I certainly hope that attitude isn't shared by anyone here.

**And before anybody starts complaining about stereotyping "all" police officers, I said "some" and I meant "some."

 

[dross]

Something to think about: if the scene shown in the video is "normal procedure" as "public servant" says it is, then the procedure is, to put it bluntly, wrong.

Look, last time I looked into the numbers about 40% of all people arrested have charges dropped. And of those that go to trial, about 30-60 percent (depending on charge) are acquitted (and that's for felonies--conviction rates on misdemeanors was much lower).

That means that between 58 and 64% of people in jail are, legally speaking not guilty*. Yet they all get the same abuse from the system. Likewise there's little attention paid to the seriousness of the charges. A woman whose "crime" amounts to panicking when the police, whom she called as the victim, suddenly start treating her as the criminal is given the same treatment as Bloodgnark, the serial axe murderer.

*"Legally speaking" of course. Unfortunately I and others have run into the attitude of some** LEO's that for charges to be dropped or an acquittal to happen, it never means the person was innocent but that they "got away with it." Oh sure, they'll generally not admit to "never" but if you try to find a specific instance where they'll admit the person was innocent, you'll wait a long time. There's the ironic saying that "there are no guilty people in prison" has its converse: "the police never arrest the wrong person." I certainly hope that attitude isn't shared by anyone here.

**And before anybody starts complaining about stereotyping "all" police officers, I said "some" and I meant "some."

Repped.

 

[SavageEagle]

Do you mean like what happened at Ruby Ridge?

Just remember that justice is not always legal. Honor and Shame are very important ideals to a lot of people still. I do not know what I would do if this was my wife. But I do know that my honor and integrity are important to me and mine.

Something to think about: if the scene shown in the video is "normal procedure" as "public servant" says it is, then the procedure is, to put it bluntly, wrong.

Look, last time I looked into the numbers about 40% of all people arrested have charges dropped. And of those that go to trial, about 30-60 percent (depending on charge) are acquitted (and that's for felonies--conviction rates on misdemeanors was much lower).

That means that between 58 and 64% of people in jail are, legally speaking not guilty*. Yet they all get the same abuse from the system. Likewise there's little attention paid to the seriousness of the charges. A woman whose "crime" amounts to panicking when the police, whom she called as the victim, suddenly start treating her as the criminal is given the same treatment as Bloodgnark, the serial axe murderer.

*"Legally speaking" of course. Unfortunately I and others have run into the attitude of some** LEO's that for charges to be dropped or an acquittal to happen, it never means the person was innocent but that they "got away with it." Oh sure, they'll generally not admit to "never" but if you try to find a specific instance where they'll admit the person was innocent, you'll wait a long time. There's the ironic saying that "there are no guilty people in prison" has its converse: "the police never arrest the wrong person." I certainly hope that attitude isn't shared by anyone here.

**And before anybody starts complaining about stereotyping "all" police officers, I said "some" and I meant "some."

Repped.

YOU ARE ALL COP HATERS!!!! Neg Rep for all of you!