Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
Junto

More video released of Black Indiana man getting mauled by police dog (WARNING: GRAPHIC)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Junto
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

That's exactly what I would do. You know, EXACTLY because you pulled that ridiculous nonsense out of your pocket. I went recently to a call of an 84 year old woman that was known to keep a 357 Magnum in her walker, I brought a dog, a rocket launcher and full plate mail to that call so I could disarm her without putting myself at risk. In the end no one was hurt and the lady though slightly old and a bit out of it was not a danger to herself nor anyone else. But yes holy crap I would have put that dog on her.

Do you really have any sort of reality you check in with?

Did you watch the video Tag? Did at any time this man fight with the cops?  Like fight, fight?  Or did he hold his hands on his handle bar and keep saying 'he didn't do anything'?  In that tense moment, do you think this man was capable of realizing that these officers were going to literally hold his arms out, and his body down and let a dog rip his neck apart because he didn't want to let go of the steering wheel because someone accused him of committing a crime?

I'm not a BLM supporter, but ignorant comments from cops like you certainly help feed the negative sentiment held by many towards cops.  It only makes the jobs of other cops worse and more dangerous.  The only reason that dog was released instead of using any of the other training and techniques at their disposal was because *they* could release the dog.

Forgetting your BS reply above, what if this had been an 80yr old lady on the moped not letting go.  Would you be ok releasing the dog on her neck while you held her arms out?  Yes or No?

 

Edited by Junto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
6 minutes ago, Junto said:

Tag the man, sure.  Tag the cop - stay safe out there with that attitude.

Go on a patrol, step out with me when I am called to the routine scene of a 911 ring back call. Where it can be a 12 year old playing with Mom's phone, a 65 year old trying to unlock a phone, or someone laying in wait to attack me when I arrive at the random location I have been sent to. I went to one last night in a town that was silent, to an abandoned warehouse. I walked the entire perimeter of that warehouse alone. No one there. That could have been a planned attack or someone just being an idiot. You don't know until you know. In this case nothing, nobody, no phone, just locked doors, and silence.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
1 minute ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Go on a patrol, step out with me when I am called to the routine scene of a 911 ring back call. Where it can be a 12 year old playing with Mom's phone, a 65 year old trying to unlock a phone, or someone laying in wait to attack me when I arrive at the random location I have been sent to. I went to one last night in a town that was silent, to an abandoned warehouse. I walked the entire perimeter of that warehouse alone. No one there. That could have been a planned attack or someone just being an idiot. You don't know until you know. In this case nothing, nobody, no phone, just locked doors, and silence.

Maybe you have PTSD to the point you shouldn't be on patrol any more.  Ever consider that?  We send our troops into combat zones and their ROE don't let them do half the things cops here are allowed to do.  We have militarized our police forces and then given them carte blanche in many cases or scenarios to execute justice how they see fit.

If every time you (any officer) pull over someone you are literally fearing for your life and on edge so much you are ready to just start blasting - it is time to hang up your belt.  I realize that this has been brought on by decades of allowing punishment of offenders that would do terrible things at traffic stops get away lightly punished, etc. but it cannot be SOP to release dogs on citizens for relatively mild crimes or suspicions.

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
3 minutes ago, Junto said:

Did you watch the video Tag? Did at any time this man fight with the cops?  Like fight, fight?  Or did he hold his hands on his handle bar and keep saying 'he didn't do anything'?  In that tense moment, do you think this man was capable of realizing that these officers were going to literally hold his arms out, and his body down and let a dog rip his neck apart because he didn't want to let go of the steering wheel because someone accused him of committing a crime?

I'm not a BLM supporter, but ignorant comments from cops like you certainly help feed the negative sentiment held by many towards cops.  It only makes the jobs of other cops worse and more dangerous.  The only reason that dog was released instead of using any of the other training and techniques at their disposal was because *they* could release the dog.

Forgetting your BS reply above, what if this had been an 80yr old lady on the moped not letting go.  Would you be ok releasing the dog on her neck while you held her arms out?  Yes or No?

 

Does the man have to fight fight to be forced to comply with the orders of a cop? You are talking out of your butt at this point. When did you turn into T_G? I won't answer your idiot hypothetical because you are just acting like an emotional child. You weren't there, you don't know what the cops knew at the time and all you got is the inflammatory video. And No I refuse to watch these edited video's that show "excessive" use of force.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
1 minute ago, Junto said:

Maybe you have PTSD to the point you shouldn't be on patrol any more.  Ever consider that?  We send our troops into combat zones and their ROE don't let them do half the things cops here are allowed to do.  We have militarized our police forces and then given them carte blanche in many cases or scenarios to execute justice how they see fit.

If every time you (any officer) pull over someone you are literally fearing for your life and on edge so much you are ready to just start blasting - it is time to hang up your belt.  I realize that this has been brought on by decades of allowing punishment of offenders that would do terrible things at traffic stops get away lightly punished, etc. but it cannot be SOP to release dogs on citizens for relatively mild crimes or suspicions.

Maybe you don't know what you are talking about?

  • Best Post (+1) 3
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Does the man have to fight fight to be forced to comply with the orders of a cop? You are talking out of your butt at this point. When did you turn into T_G? I won't answer your idiot hypothetical because you are just acting like an emotional child. You weren't there, you don't know what the cops knew at the time and all you got is the inflammatory video. And No I refuse to watch these edited video's that show "excessive" use of force.

You train for hypothetical situations all the time.  Your training is based on that and obviously you and these cops *think* nothing of holding a man down for not letting go of a handle bar and letting a dog chomp on his neck until he is in a coma.  The obvious answer is that if it was an 80 year old lady you/they would have wrestled her into cuffs - as a million other interactions with cops end up that way per year too - when there isn't a dog there and the slightest reason to release it for sport.

Edited by Junto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
2 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Maybe you don't know what you are talking about?

Maybe.  Maybe you and/or your attitude is part of the problem?

  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
Just now, Junto said:

You train for hypothetical situations all the time.  Your training is based on that and obviously you and these cops thing nothing of holding a man down for not letting go of a handle bar and letting a dog chomp on his neck until he is in a coma.  The obvious answer is that if it was an 80 year old lady you/they would have wrestled her into cuffs - as a million other interactions with cops end up that way per year too - when there isn't a dog there and the slightest reason to release it for sport.

No I don't train for hypothetical's. We train to follow our Procedural Guidelines. I am not going down your rabbit hole of insanity. What is next? Zombie apocalypse?

  • Haha (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
Just now, Junto said:

Maybe.  Maybe you and/or your attitude is part of the problem?

Let me see I have been a LEO since 2015. Want to guess the number of complaints I have received? That would be zero. How about you? Have you arrested anyone for any reason? Or did you stay at a holiday inn express and thus your skills are obvious?

  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
1 minute ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Let me see I have been a LEO since 2015. Want to guess the number of complaints I have received? That would be zero. How about you? Have you arrested anyone for any reason? Or did you stay at a holiday inn express and thus your skills are obvious?

You work for us Tag, don't forget it.  Justify your sick feelings towards the perps (all the rest of us non-LEOs) all you want.  I have half as many cop friends & family as you - you don't have some moral or knowledgeable high ground.

  • Disagree (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
firecoco
1 minute ago, Junto said:

Maybe.  Maybe you and/or your attitude is part of the problem?

Why do you want to go to every battle?...Tag is right...You should go out on patrol a few nights with these guys and see the sh!t they have to put up with

  • Agree (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger
1 minute ago, Junto said:

You work for us Tag, don't forget it.  Justify your sick feelings towards the perps (all the rest of us non-LEOs) all you want.  I have half as many cop friends & family as you - you don't have some moral or knowledgeable high ground.

Sorry, but you're wrong about Taggart.

  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
1 minute ago, firecoco said:

Why do you want to go to every battle?...Tag is right...You should go out on patrol a few nights with these guys and see the sh!t they have to put up with

I am not discussing or debating every battle or what they go through.  This post and my attitude is precisely with ONE tool police use - in my opinion - terribly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
1 minute ago, Rock N' Roll Right Winger said:

Sorry, but you're wrong about Taggart.

Maybe, but Tag jumped on my post to comment how he had no problem letting dogs rip people's necks apart (or in other posts ripping genitalia apart) for extremely mild incidents.  I'll argue all day that he is wrong and sick for thinking that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Junto said:

Maybe, but Tag jumped on my post to comment how he had no problem letting dogs rip people's necks apart (or in other posts ripping genitalia apart) for extremely mild incidents.  I'll argue all day that he is wrong and sick for thinking that way. 

Come on now. He did not say it like that?

He said he'd use a dog for a non compliance to surrender, but not to rip their neck or genitalia and that an old person is just as capable of killing an officer as anyone else.

Edited by Rock N' Roll Right Winger
  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
Just now, Junto said:

You work for us Tag, don't forget it.  Justify your sick feelings towards the perps (all the rest of us non-LEOs) all you want.  I have half as many cop friends & family as you - you don't have some moral or knowledgeable high ground.

I don't work for you. I work for the Sheriff of my department, and the tax payers of my county. You roll into my county looking to start crap and you will get arrested.

Just because you know a cop don't make you qualified to determine the situation that occurred. That use of force will be reviewed not only by the department, but also by the lead agency outside the department as well as the local DA / Prosecutor. You think that cops run around with a badge and gun and kick the crap out of anyone they want. You are wrong, our actions are scrutinized to the Nth Degree, by people that actually KNOW the law. Unlike you. We don't use force willy nilly, but we are also not required to execute some ninja force skill just because someone like you perceives we should know it.

I have said it 1000 times here. You see a cut of a video. Most calls last 10-15 minutes, or longer depending on the situation, you see a 30 second - 2 minute bit about the situation presented as the cop exceeded his duty and suddenly YOU are the judge, jury and executioner, because you "know" what happened. You have no context, you seen nothing, and you especially know nothing about dogs. I work with a department that has 8 dogs, 4 drug / enforcement and 4 blood hounds, yet I know next to nothing about them as well. I do know one thing though. The handler does not choose where the dog bites. I call a dog a fuzzy missile for a reason. They go where they want and they bite what they want. Want to avoid getting bitten by a dog? Then when a guy with a dog says do what I say or you will get bitten. Do what they say.

Oh and a guy saying " I didn't do nuffin", means he's innocent right? Do you know the definition of Reasonable Suspicion? Probably not. That's the level of information I have to have in order to detain someone. It means I must be able to articulate to another person that there is something more than a hunch that someone is breaking the law. It must be articulatable. For instance the guy standing at a fire scene and he's watching, but he's got signs of burns on his body and clothes. If he says to me "I didn't do nuffin" I am required  to say Oh yeah well never mind then.... 

That's what they were working off of. If you didn't do it then comply, the butt you save may be your own.

  • Best Post (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
5 minutes ago, Junto said:

Maybe, but Tag jumped on my post to comment how he had no problem letting dogs rip people's necks apart (or in other posts ripping genitalia apart) for extremely mild incidents.  I'll argue all day that he is wrong and sick for thinking that way. 

Those are you words, not mind. I never said that this guy was justified as a chew toy. I just refuse to condemn that which I don't know about.

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
1 hour ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

So cops are required to wrestle a person now? Let me check my use of force training. Nope, no wrestling. In fact when you bring a gun to a fight you try and avoid wrestling. As far as the dog goes, did they warn him about it? Did he choose not to comply? Every time someone chooses to not comply with a lawful order we get the "he was a victim" chorus. Sorry the only victim here is his decision making skills. Comply and no issues. Pulled over a nice young black male yesterday for driving without headlights. Probably a bit of MJ in his system or so that would indicate, in his case he just didn't know how to turn the lights on. Yes with young people this does happen and they choose to drive. Just showed him where the lights were and he was on his way. That's compliance, no arguments no crap just yes and no Sir, on both sides of the discussion and he was on his way. He didn't become a doggy chew toy. It's not a cops fault you make dumb decisions.

Nope I didn't say that at all. I am just tired of the chorus of excessive force. I am almost 100% sure that every dog handler has been accused of excessive use of force as well. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki
47 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Then again, we shall see won't we? This is just another excuse to attempt to cash in. Notice this was a MAY use of force, that suddenly in this political climate becomes an issue now. If a cop is driving down the road and someone takes off running, does the officer then gain reasonable suspicion to actually investigate this?

 

    They threatened and they used.  Question is did him simply not complying and at most resisting arrest warrant getting his neck bit up to the point he required in patient hospitalization?  Was the officers or bystanders safety in danger to a point to justify use of a K9?  Then the Dog going after the mans neck?  I thought K9's weren't suppose to do that. 

One thing that bothers me is once he was on the ground they didn't stop the Dog, that Dog was still tearing into his neck after he was face down.  As far as someone fleeing an officer on sight that warrants suspicion to investigate, but, would it warrant use of force and to what level?  Excuse to attempt to cash in?  Maybe, to an extent at least.   Had the perp been white?  No story or little.  But, in this political climate you bet it's a story.  There are numerous cases where the Perp/Suspect was white and bit up by a Dog and not a word from the usual crowd.

 

 

 

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

Lets talk about perspective while we are at it. We have a Democrat-Panic turned into the wholesale destruction of the American peoples rights, we have doctors who treat patients being silenced by online platforms, as well as doctors being threatened by their medical boards for telling the truth. Sounds a lot like china don't it? Instead of having someone weld you into your home we got states like Michigan denying you the right to do anything other than sit in your home.

Yet we are all up in arms at the latest shiny thing about some clown that failed to comply with lawful orders of a police officer back in MAY. The courts will fix that problem if the force was excessive. Why don't we keep our eye on the ball. States violating the actual civil rights of the masses instead of some boogey man known as "excessive use of force by police". There are 1 million interactions with cops a day, yet you are all over something that happened in May, what does that say about the narrative?

I had 4 interactions last night, no tasing, no biting, no screaming, no complaints or abuse. Must be my PTSD kicking in? 1 a driver no lights (verbal warning), a woman that popped 40 pills to commit "suicide" (she went to BMU) , a traffic stop that garnered a marijuana pipe and grinder (tossed them and let him go), 911 ring back call with no one at the abandoned building. Yet no one was hurt! Wow what a crazy night!

  • Best Post (+1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Junto
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

I don't work for you. I work for the Sheriff of my department, and the tax payers of my county. You roll into my county looking to start crap and you will get arrested.

Just because you know a cop don't make you qualified to determine the situation that occurred. That use of force will be reviewed not only by the department, but also by the lead agency outside the department as well as the local DA / Prosecutor. You think that cops run around with a badge and gun and kick the crap out of anyone they want. You are wrong, our actions are scrutinized to the Nth Degree, by people that actually KNOW the law. Unlike you. We don't use force willy nilly, but we are also not required to execute some ninja force skill just because someone like you perceives we should know it.

I have said it 1000 times here. You see a cut of a video. Most calls last 10-15 minutes, or longer depending on the situation, you see a 30 second - 2 minute bit about the situation presented as the cop exceeded his duty and suddenly YOU are the judge, jury and executioner, because you "know" what happened. You have no context, you seen nothing, and you especially know nothing about dogs. I work with a department that has 8 dogs, 4 drug / enforcement and 4 blood hounds, yet I know next to nothing about them as well. I do know one thing though. The handler does not choose where the dog bites. I call a dog a fuzzy missile for a reason. They go where they want and they bite what they want. Want to avoid getting bitten by a dog? Then when a guy with a dog says do what I say or you will get bitten. Do what they say.

Oh and a guy saying " I didn't do nuffin", means he's innocent right? Do you know the definition of Reasonable Suspicion? Probably not. That's the level of information I have to have in order to detain someone. It means I must be able to articulate to another person that there is something more than a hunch that someone is breaking the law. It must be articulatable. For instance the guy standing at a fire scene and he's watching, but he's got signs of burns on his body and clothes. If he says to me "I didn't do nuffin" I am required  to say Oh yeah well never mind then.... 

That's what they were working off of. If you didn't do it then comply, the butt you save may be your own.

You know what I meant when I said you work for me/us (taxpayers of your jurisdiction.

My knowing cops has nothing to do with any of this other than to say you being a cop doesn't make your opinion right or virtuous.  That thin blue line does a lot of protecting of bad cops every single day. Your badge is not automatically a mark of your virtue.

No, you and others assume my issue with police use of k9's to attack also translates to my lack of support for all the other crap they go through.  My issue isn't whether or not other cops and lawyers like or approve dogs attacking citizens for traffic stops, it is that most people who ultimately make the laws or the citizens who vote them in do not realize this goes on like how it does in this video and would not be ok if they knew.  No one is going to support the use of dogs on suspects held down and both their arms held out and that should not be legal - this is my problem.

That guy is likely guilty of bad things, most of the time when cops aren't making up reasons for traffic stops (and probably most of the time even when they do that too) they are dealing with people for good reason.  I don't interact with police hardly ever - because I am never being arrested for domestic violence, DUI, etc.  But there will always be those interactions. 

These cops are working off of a call about domestic violence - not domestic terrorism. You know for a fact you wouldn't sic a dog on a frail 80 year old lady and you would tase her/wrestle her if you had to.  Three cops should be able to subdue this guy minus superhuman strength or a healthy dose of PCP - between tasers, night sticks, superior strength and training.  If your point is that cops don't have to use tasers, night sticks, mace or training - then why even give them those tool.  Put a K9 in every car and let them F everybody up.

 

Edited by Junto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki
23 minutes ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Let me see I have been a LEO since 2015. Want to guess the number of complaints I have received? That would be zero. How about you? Have you arrested anyone for any reason? Or did you stay at a holiday inn express and thus your skills are obvious?

 

   Five years and no complaints?  How in the hell is that possible?  I mean this in a sincere and respectful way as didn do nuffins, lawyers and activists have a corner on the market. 

 

 

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
2 minutes ago, oki said:

 

    They threatened and they used.  Question is did him simply not complying and at most resisting arrest warrant getting his neck bit up to the point he required in patient hospitalization?  Was the officers or bystanders safety in danger to a point to justify use of a K9?  Then the Dog going after the mans neck?  I thought K9's weren't suppose to do that. 

One thing that bothers me is once he was on the ground they didn't stop the Dog, that Dog was still tearing into his neck after he was face down.  As far as someone fleeing an officer on sight that warrants suspicion to investigate, but, would it warrant use of force and to what level?  Excuse to attempt to cash in?  Maybe, to an extent at least.   Had the perp been white?  No story or little.  But, in this political climate you bet it's a story.  There are numerous cases where the Perp/Suspect was white and bit up by a Dog and not a word from the usual crowd.

 

 

 

That's not the question, and that's not the requirement. For that you will have to look at their use of force policy. Which NONE OF US HAVE. Want to know why the video was released? 2 reasons, 1 the defense is trying to gain some position in negotiations with the DA regarding the charges that were filed, or 2 the department released it for political reasons unknown to us. Body cam footage is not supposed to be released without consent of the department. IT is leaked during discovery sometimes and that would be about this timing. Since they want to undermine the charges. Thus I am ignoring it simply because the cut this video down from it's full context to the amount if time needed to make it inflammatory. The only ones that know the true extent are the officers on scene, the dude that got bit, and the lawyers from both parties.

What you should always as is what is the motivation for the release.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Junto said:

You know what I meant when I said you work for me/us (taxpayers of your jurisdiction.

My knowing cops has nothing to do with any of this other than to say you being a cop doesn't make your opinion right or virtuous.  That thin blue line does a lot of protecting of bad cops every single day. Your badge is not automatically a mark of your virtue.

No, you and others assume my issue with police use of k9's to attack also translates to my lack of support for all the other crap they go through.  My issue isn't whether or not other cops and lawyers like or approve dogs attacking citizens for traffic stops, it is that most people who ultimately make the laws or the citizens who vote them in do not realize this goes on like how it does in this video and would not be ok if they knew.  No one is going to support the use of dogs on suspects held down and both their arms held out and that should not be legal - this is my problem.

That guy is likely guilty of bad things, most of the time when cops aren't making up reasons for traffic stops (and probably most of the time they do that too) they are dealing with people for good reason.  I don't interact with police hardly ever - because I am never being arrested for domestic violence, DUI, etc.  But there will always be those interactions. 

These cops are working off of a call about domestic violence - not domestic terrorism. You know for a fact you wouldn't sic a dog on a frail 80 year old lady and you would tase her/wrestle her if you had to.  Three cops should be able to subdue this guy minus superhuman strength or a healthy dose of PCP - between tasers, night sticks, superior strength and training.  If your point is that cops don't have to use tasers, night sticks, mace or training - then why even give them those tool.  Put a K9 in every car and let them F everybody up.

 

No I took you at your literal presentation of the information, simply because you are also apparently a qualified clinical psychologist capable of determining that I a combat vet am suffering from PTSD. Simply because I have a tactical mindset.

Yeah? We do a lot of protecting bad cops? Define a bad cop? It is a guy that shot a "gentle giant"? Someone that made a determination in a split second that someone was a threat only to find out that the gun he was carrying was a toy? The cop that reacted too late and saw someone die, because of it? Or maybe it's like a politician, a guy that receives bags of money daily. You really have no point of reference as to what a "bad cop" is. You watched too many movies, and don't really know what we do or how we do it.

I have stated time and time again, instead of watching these inflammatory video's go out and do it with us once, or keep your opinion to yourself and let the courts deal with it. 1 Millions stops per day, yet we are looking at something released from MAY. Yeah there are tons of bad cops out there, so many of them we are being inundated by the same videos over and over.

Incidentally, I am not here to prove guilt and innocence. That's up to the courts. I am required to stop criminal activity. Then once the arrest occurs I am required to articulate the probable cause that brought me to the determination that a crime occurred or was occurring at the time of the arrest. I tell the person that I transport, "me arresting you is not 100% proof that you are guilty of the crime I am charging you with, I merely had enough probable cause to make an arrest, you will have your day in court and are presumed innocent until proven guilty."

They had reasonable suspicion to make the stop, they were developing probable cause and he decided to resist their attempts at investigating. That's what got him bit.

Ahh yes Domestic violence cases. You know apparently the husband has a right to tune up his wife when he feels like it. Did you know that most DV cases the guy after kicking the crap out of his wife will bail the scene. Do you know why? It's misdemeanor charges for the most part and if they are not at the scene then the cop cannot do the warrant for the arrest. It is left to the wife. The male then convinces the wife not to file the warrant and the case goes nowhere. Most DV cases have the male tuning up the female 10-15 times before anything happens. Meaning it gets to the point of felony level injuries of she's dead. So we like to catch the male at the scene so WE can effect the arrest at the time. Thus the zeal to make an arrest here. If the officer makes the arrest then the charges are out of her hands and he will be prosecuted.

Edited by Taggart Transcontinental
  • Best Post (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
10 minutes ago, oki said:

 

   Five years and no complaints?  How in the hell is that possible?  I mean this in a sincere and respectful way as didn do nuffins, lawyers and activists have a corner on the market. 

 

 

I am that good, I don't act the fool, and I treat people with respect until they choose to do otherwise. We also roll heavy, when we believe the suspect to be willing to put up a fight, I have been on scene with 9 other deputies before to deal with a truly unruly individual, it takes the fight out of them when you swoop like that. And there is also luck.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...