Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 278
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163220
Yssup Rider60907
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48645
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42560
CryptKicker37215
The_Waco_Kid36977
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-10-2015, 12:57 PM   #46
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway View Post
Ok..you can continue to call it the "Maryland Case".... And when you call it the "Maryland Case", .....
You and the media call it what you wish so you all aren't confused ...

.. I will follow the lead of the SCOTUS .... and call it ...

.. Maryland vs. "6 Baltimore PD oficers"

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.a...les/12-207.htm

OCTOBER TERM, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
MARYLAND v. KING
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
No. 12–207. Argued February 26, 2013—Decided June 3, 2013

In the meantime you all figure out what you're gonna call the case when a another prosecutor (special prosecutor?) takes it over while Little Prosecutor sits on the bench.....and then you all can decide if "she" doesn't get a conviction, since you all say it is "her case" ... will the next State's Attorney of the City of Baltimore who replaces her be able to file his or her "own charges" against the 6 pd officers and prosecute them .... since it is "her case" and therefore wouldn't be barred by double jeopardy!!! Whereas if it were the State's case it would be.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 01:11 PM   #47
IIFFOFRDB
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 19, 2011
Location: Dixie Land
Posts: 22,098
Default

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFRzla2ZNgw
IIFFOFRDB is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 01:47 PM   #48
DSK
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 8,050
Encounters: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Is there an allegation that others "cheered on" the driver?
I would consider that if a reasonable officer were seated in the cab with the black officer driving the van transporting the prisoner, and he was aware of the mistreatment and did nothing, he is criminally culpable. I added the "cheer him on" comment as a supposition, unsupported by any known facts, as a reasonable possibility. I do not know if he has clean hands or not. My mistake - sorry.

I believe the criminal culpability of the arresting officers who correctly ascertained the illegal nature of the knife should be zero culpability based upon both the facts and the law you stated earlier.
DSK is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:11 PM   #49
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSK View Post
I would consider that if a reasonable officer were seated in the cab with the black officer driving the van transporting the prisoner, and he was aware of the mistreatment and did nothing, he is criminally culpable.
I would agree with that scenario using the term "mistreatment" based on intentional actions by the driver.

The portion of the "Rodney King" tape, which was generally not seen, and was not circulated by the media, was the first part in which he was arrested and handcuffed by a female state trooper, during which he was cooperative. At the request of the other officers, who were not state troopers AND HAD NO SUPERVISOR STATUS OVER HER, she uncuffed King and allowed them to "take charge of him," which resulted in the beating seen widely on the news.

As far as I am aware she was never even disciplined, and certainly was not charged. She should have been fired and charged. King was her prisoner and she turned him over to them. She was at least a co-conspirator in the Federal civil rights case.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:18 PM   #50
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Who is "they"?

But in the meantime she has INTENTIONALLY crapped up the lives of five other officers, who, like Wilson, will be UNEMPLOYABLE as police officers.
They, would the officers, dumbass. I keep forgetting that I have to explain everything to you, as if you were a child. How do you know she intentionally did anything? That is complete conjecture and opinion on your part. You have no way of knowing that.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:28 PM   #51
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombRaider View Post
They, would the officers, dumbass. I keep forgetting that I have to explain everything to you, as if you were a child. How do you know she intentionally did anything? That is complete conjecture and opinion on your part. You have no way of knowing that.
Everything you post is ..

...complete conjecture and opinion on your part, AND You have no way of knowing ANY OF IT.

Which is why you ...

.... are STUPID.


Explain to me? You can't even explain why you keep showing how ...

... STUPID YOU ARE.

If the arrest is lawful ... because THEY had probable cause to arrest .... then..

... what are the "charges" for which THEY will be prosecuted ... ????

And identify who THEY ARE BY NAME!!!!! Or are you too STUPID to do that?

Quit acting like a snotty little whiny baby. Answer the fucking question.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:30 PM   #52
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
I would agree with that scenario using the term "mistreatment" based on intentional actions by the driver.

The portion of the "Rodney King" tape, which was generally not seen, and was not circulated by the media, was the first part in which he was arrested and handcuffed by a female state trooper, during which he was cooperative. At the request of the other officers, who were not state troopers AND HAD NO SUPERVISOR STATUS OVER HER, she uncuffed King and allowed them to "take charge of him," which resulted in the beating seen widely on the news.

As far as I am aware she was never even disciplined, and certainly was not charged. She should have been fired and charged. King was her prisoner and she turned him over to them. She was at least a co-conspirator in the Federal civil rights case.
This is simply not true. Firstly, California doesn't have 'state troopers'. They have California Highway Patrol. He wasn't cooperative. He was acting bizarre and at one point, the female CHP officer thought he had a gun. She ordered him to the ground, and at that point, the ranking LAPD officer on the scene took control of the arrest. A CHP officer never cuffed him. At the time, LAPD were taught not to approach a subject with their guns drawn, for fear of having it taken away and used against them. The CHP did not employ this tactic and this is why Koon said he took tactical control of the situation. It's ironic that you mention the portion not usually seen in the Holliday video, because it was that portion that actually helped in acquitting the officers.

When I told you I wanted the truth, that's what I meant. I don't care who it looks bad for.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:33 PM   #53
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Everything you post is ..

...complete conjecture and opinion on your part, AND You have no way of knowing ANY OF IT.

Which is why you ...

.... are STUPID.


Explain to me? You can't even explain why you keep showing how ...

... STUPID YOU ARE.

If the arrest is lawful ... because THEY had probable cause to arrest .... then..

... what are the "charges" for which THEY will be prosecuted ..
. ????

And identify who THEY ARE BY NAME!!!!! Or are you too STUPID to do that?

Quit acting like a snotty little whiny baby. Answer the fucking question.
If the arrest is lawful, what charges will they face? So as long as the arrest is lawful, the police officers can beat the shit out of you and it's ok? A man died in custody and you've got your goddamn panties in a twist over whether the arrest was lawful. Talk about missing the forest for the trees. It doesn't matter whether it was lawful or not. Someone has to take responsibility for the death of a person in custody.

I don't take orders from you, dipshit. You know who they are.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 03:51 PM   #54
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Where you at LL? Do you deny that you lied about the Rodney King situation. Your facts were incorrect. I'm sure you're scouring the internet as we speak, for some random assertion to back your incorrect play. Read up on these two links. They back up my assertions.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/project...pdaccount.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 05:13 PM   #55
Whirlaway
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
Encounters: 28
Default

By your standards, even the legal reporter for the NY Times gets it wrong when they call it the Freddy Gray Case..........and when everyone was calling it the Kenneth Starr case (against Clinton), they were all wrong.

Me thinks you are operating in your own world of reality.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/us...ture.html?_r=0

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
You and the media call it what you wish so you all aren't confused ...

.. I will follow the lead of the SCOTUS .... and call it ...

.. Maryland vs. "6 Baltimore PD oficers"

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.a...les/12-207.htm

OCTOBER TERM, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
MARYLAND v. KING
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
No. 12–207. Argued February 26, 2013—Decided June 3, 2013

In the meantime you all figure out what you're gonna call the case when a another prosecutor (special prosecutor?) takes it over while Little Prosecutor sits on the bench.....and then you all can decide if "she" doesn't get a conviction, since you all say it is "her case" ... will the next State's Attorney of the City of Baltimore who replaces her be able to file his or her "own charges" against the 6 pd officers and prosecute them .... since it is "her case" and therefore wouldn't be barred by double jeopardy!!! Whereas if it were the State's case it would be.
Whirlaway is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 05:39 PM   #56
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway View Post
By your standards, even the legal reporter for the NY Times gets it wrong when they call it the Freddy Gray Case..........and when everyone was calling it the Kenneth Starr case (against Clinton), they were all wrong.

Me thinks you are operating in your own world of reality.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/us...ture.html?_r=0
He's always in his own world. Why do you think he so rarely makes sense. He's trying to get the officers off on a technicality with the knife possibly being illegal. Like that negates anything that came afterwards. Let's say the knife was illegal and the arrest was called for. Was the death of the young man called for?

He came on, called me a stupid liar and then proceeds to just flat out lie about the Rodney King case. If you're going to lie, don't make it about something that can be easily proven wrong. Speaking of his own world and conjecture; he wants to prosecute a female CHP officer who never cuffed the guy and ceded tactical control to a superior officer. He's nuts.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 07:07 PM   #57
shanm
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 13, 2014
Location: houston
Posts: 1,954
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Everything you post is ..

...complete conjecture and opinion on your part, AND You have no way of knowing ANY OF IT.

Which is why you ...

.... are STUPID.


Explain to me? You can't even explain why you keep showing how ...

... STUPID YOU ARE.



And identify who THEY ARE BY NAME!!!!! Or are you too STUPID to do that?

Quit acting like a snotty little whiny baby. Answer the fucking question.

LLMoron calm down! I know your ass is being ripped in half but please! Control your meltdown.
shanm is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 07:21 PM   #58
DSK
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 8,050
Encounters: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombRaider View Post
If the arrest is lawful, what charges will they face? So as long as the arrest is lawful, the police officers can beat the shit out of you and it's ok? A man died in custody and you've got your goddamn panties in a twist over whether the arrest was lawful. Talk about missing the forest for the trees. It doesn't matter whether it was lawful or not. Someone has to take responsibility for the death of a person in custody. (right, the driver of the van and those who put him there unlawfully)

I don't take orders from you, dipshit. You know who they are.
It matters greatly to the arresting officers who did not transport the prisoner, but arrested him and turned him over to other lawful authorities who then became the responsible parties. The arresting officers set everything in motion - if the arrest was unlawful, they are in trouble. If it wasn't, they haven't done anything wrong, and shouldn't have their lives ruined by an overzealous prosecutor looking for glory anymore than Mr. Gray shouldn't have been killed by the black cop driving the van. Her rush to judgement is making her look like a ridiculously unqualified political hack with idiots working for her.

You want to make it simple to fit your narrative but the law is there to protect the rights of the accused, including police officers who have an increasingly complicated job to do in this multicultural la-la land we live in these days.
DSK is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 07:53 PM   #59
WombRaider
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 7, 2015
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 8,487
Encounters: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSK View Post
It matters greatly to the arresting officers who did not transport the prisoner, but arrested him and turned him over to other lawful authorities who then became the responsible parties. The arresting officers set everything in motion - if the arrest was unlawful, they are in trouble. If it wasn't, they haven't done anything wrong, and shouldn't have their lives ruined by an overzealous prosecutor looking for glory anymore than Mr. Gray shouldn't have been killed by the black cop driving the van. Her rush to judgement is making her look like a ridiculously unqualified political hack with idiots working for her.

You want to make it simple to fit your narrative but the law is there to protect the rights of the accused, including police officers who have an increasingly complicated job to do in this multicultural la-la land we live in these days.
I don't want to make it anything. I simply want the truth. Whatever that is. If the arrest was lawful, they won't be in trouble. If it was, they should be partly responsible. You say I am a racist, then you make a comment like your last sentence. Fucking hypocrite.
WombRaider is offline   Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 09:17 PM   #60
DSK
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 8,050
Encounters: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WombRaider View Post
I don't want to make it anything. I simply want the truth. Whatever that is. If the arrest was lawful, they won't be in trouble. If it was, they should be partly responsible. You say I am a racist, then you make a comment like your last sentence. Fucking hypocrite.
I stand behind my statement that you are a racist.
DSK is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved