Page 38 of 48 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 475

Thread: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer[W:173:381]

  1. #371
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Cont. from above.

    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    What was the purpose of tasing Kelly multiple times in a row when he was already pinned down by several rogue cops to the ground if not simply for torturing him to death? Taser is mainly used for non-lethal self defense in order to neutralize a potential threat. The taser also render a person being tased to drop to the ground and thus enables the officer to subdue him for the arrest. But, in both situation Kelly posed no threat to the officers and he was already pinned to the ground.
    What was the point?
    You do not seem to understand what being pinned down actually is, or what continuing to resist actually means.
    He was continuing to resist. That is why. They could not get him subdued, that is why. Kelly was also a threat to their safety by resisting.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Also, don't you know that a taser can carry anywhere from 50,000 to 300,000 volts of electricity? The discharge of taser electric current into the body can cause involuntary muscle contractions and impairment of motor skills. By tasing Kelly multiple times in quick successions the rogue cops were actually causing him to involuntarily thrashed about in involuntary movement and rendered him unable to comply due to the impairment of motor function.
    Meaningless drivel and spin, as Kelly was still resisting after multiple taserings.
    There were no rouge cops.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Not to mention that he was cringing in severe pain the moment he was struck on both knees by the brutal force of the batons followed by severe beating, tasing, head and face pummeling, rib breaking crushing and the whole enchilada of tortures and beat down.
    You are speaking of that which you do not know. This is nothing more than an assumption on your part, much like your whole position on this case. Nothing but assumption.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Why don't you let me club you on both your knees and see if you can just lay there relaxed and comply to my command without me even jumping on top of you and beating and tasing you to a pulp? I bet you'd be thrashing about in pain just as you would if you were to knock your shin into a furniture. By thrashing in pain are you then resisting?
    Matters not. He was resisting and continued to resist. His resistance brought about his death.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    You claimed that "every take down and resistance, is different in each and every case." Yeah, so what? The difference in the videos I linked to clearly showed that those being arrested by the lone officers had put up fierce fight and resistance and yet the lone officers were bale to subdue and handcuffed down without beating or tasing them to death. So, instead of acknowledging that the six rogue cops should be able to subdue and handcuff Kelly without having to brutally beat and tase him to death as shown by other harmless police take down shown in other video, you are coping out with an attempt at engaging in illogical argument.
    Just more bs.
    If you have to ask "So what?", you are not being objective. The videos are meaningless to this case. Trying to use them as you are is illogical.
    Calling them rouge cops is also a sign of your lack of objectivity.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    And as always, your debate tactic is to deny against clear and undenaible fact at all cost with a straight face. Officer Garcia in the video clearly tackled the man onto the ground and wrestled with him. He was pinned down and pretty much subdued and asked the man question as regard the gun before a civilian came on board to lend a hand.
    You speak of your debate tactic, that is all. Just as you were wrong about Zimmerman, you are again wrong here. Both Jury verdicts say that.

    Being on the ground does not mean being pinned down. He wasn't pinned down. Had he been, an arrest would have been affected. His continued resistance says he wasn't pinned.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    And like I said before, the facts don't agree with you. ONLY your twist and willful contortion of the facts agree with you. And still have the gall to deny that with a straight face.
    iLOL You are hilarious. You are the only one attempting to twist here.
    It is the facts that do not agree with you and actually fly in the face of what you say.
    The facts, as well as the Jury decision on those facts, makes that abundantly clear.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  2. #372
    Professor
    sKiTzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    OC California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,213

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    What are you talking about?
    Link?



    Edit

    Is this what you are talking about? I hope not.


    The anonymous informant on the Kelly Thomas beating called back into the John and Ken show on KFI today.

    Notable claims made by the informant:


    [...]

    The police reports were ordered to be rewritten many times because management did not like the way the reports were written.

    [...]

    The Return of the Informant


    If this is what you are referring to, thank you again for showing you do not know of what you speak.
    It does not say falsified.
    It does not say the Officers falsified and then were allowed to change their reports.
    Hell, apparently it isn't even true as it surely did not come up at trial, did it?
    An anonymous source! iLOL D'oh! Duh!


    And you guess what and answer the following.
    1. Why would I call out something that I am not aware of?
    2. And why in the hell would I call out the Officers based on an anonymous radio show caller's bs?
    I did not base it on the anonymous caller, but I could have because he was telling the truth. The following link is what I based it on - I just couldn't find it at the time, and I wasn't going to waste any more time to find it just for you to pretend it doesn't exist. I just happened to stumble across it a few minutes ago. At 3:15 in the video, we have the internal affairs investigator, stuttering and appearing quite troubled, telling us all about it. You're right, it did not come up at trial - that's why we're calling foul. Click on the link and eat the following words:

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    An anonymous source! iLOL D'oh! Duh!
    Special Kelly Thomas report faults police and ex chief : The Orange County Register

  3. #373
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Those minutes reading, the above were, the longest minutes of my life that I can never use for something as useful as say......Sizing a tray of mis-matched ball bearings or picking lint out of my navel......

    Remember that SCOTUS says cops are allowed to using whatever force is objectively reasonable, given the totality of the circumstances - and it doesn't even have to be necessary force (actually shoot some dumb**** with a toy gun, as an example).

    Now, would you guys advocate that officers deviate from mandated policy in using force? Would you advocate that police agencies disobey the mandates of elected officials?

    Remember that we are not talking about harming the innocent. We are discussing using batons/tasers. etc to subdue an aggressive and resisting EDP
    There is not one second that he was physically aggressive towards anyone or any police officer. The only physical aggression was at him. verbal threat of violence. Physical act of violence. Nor did he resist arrest. He resisted being crushed into concrete.

  4. #374
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    I did not base it on the anonymous caller, but I could have because he was telling the truth. The following link is what I based it on - I just couldn't find it at the time, and I wasn't going to waste any more time to find it just for you to pretend it doesn't exist. I just happened to stumble across it a few minutes ago. At 3:15 in the video, we have the internal affairs investigator, stuttering and appearing quite troubled, telling us all about it. You're right, it did not come up at trial - that's why we're calling foul. Click on the link and eat the following words:



    Special Kelly Thomas report faults police and ex chief : The Orange County Register

    More absurdity. What words do you think I need to eat?
    My saying I hope that isn't what you used? Or perhaps it is me saying that what you allege is false?

    Well you are wrong again. This does not support the accusations you have made. What you allege is false. So the words are yours to eat.

    As I previously stated, there is nothing alleging a falsifying of any report, which is what you allege. So get eating your words.
    As stated. That was nothing other than your own biased imagination.


    Secondly. The trainer is the expert, not the terminating authority, or a investigative authority.
    Their opinions matter not to the court proceedings. Only the trainers, as he is the expert as to whether or not their actions were within the training they received.
    Maybe you do not understand the Jury process, but they are to base their decision on the evidence. Not on conclusion others drew from the evidence.
    Their conclusions are not evidence.
    But the trainers opinion on what falls within what is trained, is evidence.


    And no, this is not why folks are crying foul. Most folks are going on emotion and drawing ridiculously absurd conclusions in their imagination like you have done.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #375
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    There is not one second that he was physically aggressive towards anyone or any police officer. The only physical aggression was at him. verbal threat of violence. Physical act of violence. Nor did he resist arrest. He resisted being crushed into concrete.
    You are wrong joko, and you know you are wrong.
    He laid hands on the Officer. That is aggressive behavior.
    And yes he did resist.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  6. #376
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    There is not one second that he was physically aggressive towards anyone or any police officer. The only physical aggression was at him. verbal threat of violence. Physical act of violence. Nor did he resist arrest. He resisted being crushed into concrete.
    ...and police work is like sausage; everybody likes the end result, but nobody wants to see it being made.

    Who do you think imposes, *the use of force policies* to their officers? Its the command staff at the direction and mandate of City Council

  7. #377
    Professor
    sKiTzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    OC California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,213

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post

    More absurdity. What words do you think I need to eat?
    My saying I hope that isn't what you used? Or perhaps it is me saying that what you allege is false?

    Well you are wrong again. This does not support the accusations you have made. What you allege is false. So the words are yours to eat.

    As I previously stated, there is nothing alleging a falsifying of any report, which is what you allege. So get eating your words.
    As stated. That was nothing other than your own biased imagination.


    Secondly. The trainer is the expert, not the terminating authority, or a investigative authority.
    Their opinions matter not to the court proceedings. Only the trainers, as he is the expert as to whether or not their actions were within the training they received.
    Maybe you do not understand the Jury process, but they are to base their decision on the evidence. Not on conclusion others drew from the evidence.
    Their conclusions are not evidence.
    But the trainers opinion on what falls within what is trained, is evidence.


    And no, this is not why folks are crying foul. Most folks are going on emotion and drawing ridiculously absurd conclusions in their imagination like you have done.
    1. I alleged the police were allowed to rewrite their reports. You don't rewrite something unless you are changing the information. If you are changing the information, it means one of the reports, either the first one or the new one, is FALSIFIED.

    2. I've posted a video that shows a press conference where the internal affairs investigator confirms this.

    3. You can't have any better evidence than full admission by the internal affairs investigator, so the ONLY choice of response for you is an acknowledgement.

    4. Instead of acknowledgement, and, exactly as I said you would, you pretend that this 100% irrefutable rock solid evidence doesn't exist. Truth is, you didn't even click on the link.

    5. You are therefore, exposed. I don't know what the DP policy is regarding paid shills, but I'm reporting you so I guess we'll find out. You not only make a mockery of the forum, but of justice as a whole.

  8. #378
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    1. I alleged the police were allowed to rewrite their reports. You don't rewrite something unless you are changing the information. If you are changing the information, it means one of the reports, either the first one or the new one, is FALSIFIED.

    2. I've posted a video that shows a press conference where the internal affairs investigator confirms this.

    3. You can't have any better evidence than full admission by the internal affairs investigator, so the ONLY choice of response for you is an acknowledgement.

    4. Instead of acknowledgement, and, exactly as I said you would, you pretend that this 100% irrefutable rock solid evidence doesn't exist. Truth is, you didn't even click on the link.

    5. You are therefore, exposed. I don't know what the DP policy is regarding paid shills, but I'm reporting you so I guess we'll find out. You not only make a mockery of the forum, but of justice as a whole.
    The jury completely accepted all rational evidence/facts and as a result found a NOT GUILTY decision

    This is what YOU must acknowledge

  9. #379
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    1. I alleged the police were allowed to rewrite their reports.
    You alleged falsification. That is not apparent.
    So you were wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    You don't rewrite something unless you are changing the information. If you are changing the information, it means one of the reports, either the first one or the new one, is FALSIFIED.
    Wrong. You have no clue what needed rewriting or further explanation in the reports. So stop assuming retarded imaginative bs.

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    2. I've posted a video that shows a press conference where the internal affairs investigator confirms this.
    And?
    It is meaningless to your claim of falsification, as they do not allege such.

    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    3. You can't have any better evidence than full admission by the internal affairs investigator, so the ONLY choice of response for you is an acknowledgement.
    Admission?
    Admission to what? Not to what you have alleged.

    This person spoke of their conclusions, not admissions. There conclusions are not evidence. Do you really not know that?


    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    4. Instead of acknowledgement, and, exactly as I said you would, you pretend that this 100% irrefutable rock solid evidence doesn't exist. Truth is, you didn't even click on the link.
    iLOL Acknowledgement of what?
    What Rock solid evidence?
    You have none.
    Your claim that there was falsification has not come to fruition. The claim is nothing more than the product of an over active imagination.


    Quote Originally Posted by sKiTzo View Post
    5. You are therefore, exposed. I don't know what the DP policy is regarding paid shills, but I'm reporting you so I guess we'll find out. You not only make a mockery of the forum, but of justice as a whole.
    Exposed. The only thing exposed is your false claim.
    You made a claim of falsification and there is no such evidence that there was.
    Paid shill? That is hilarious. Just because you can't get the facts straight and choose to make false claims, in no way makes me a paid shill.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #380
    Professor
    sKiTzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    OC California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,213

    Re: Police not guilty in Kelly Thomas death; DA won't try 3rd officer

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You alleged falsification. That is not apparent.
    So you were wrong.

    Wrong. You have no clue what needed rewriting or further explanation in the reports. So stop assuming retarded imaginative bs.

    And?
    It is meaningless to your claim of falsification, as they do not allege such.

    Admission?
    Admission to what? Not to what you have alleged.

    This person spoke of their conclusions, not admissions. There conclusions are not evidence. Do you really not know that?


    iLOL Acknowledgement of what?
    What Rock solid evidence?
    You have none.
    Your claim that there was falsification has not come to fruition. The claim is nothing more than the product of an over active imagination.


    Exposed. The only thing exposed is your false claim.
    You made a claim of falsification and there is no such evidence that there was.
    Paid shill? That is hilarious. Just because you can't get the facts straight and choose to make false claims, in no way makes me a paid shill.
    Your bias is so extreme that it interferes with your perception of reality. You are saying then, that the report rendered at this city council meeting by the office of internal affairs is not to be taken as fact? You're not being very realistic. In your world, it may not be fact, but in the public domain this is evidence admissible in a court of law. That it wasn't admitted serves to prove my point, not yours.

Page 38 of 48 FirstFirst ... 283637383940 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •