Page 42 of 48 FirstFirst ... 324041424344 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 475

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

  1. #411
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

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

    I sense a "The Police can do no wrong" shill...
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  2. #412
    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 dolphinocean View Post
    I see you're resorting to your usual tools of the trade by simply dismissing any argument you can't handle as "meaningless" and "matters not". That's not the way to argue, Excon. At least not in a mature and logical debate.
    You have no clue as to debate.
    Your bringing meaningless bs to a debate shows that. That your failure.
    Dismissing your meaningless assertions is all that is needed.
    Sorry you do not understand what is and isn't meaningful, but that again, is your failure.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Let me say this again. Kelly was clubbed by Wolfe and Ramos without cause on each side of his knee as he backed away from their vicious attack. Now you called that resisting?
    You can say that as many times as you want, and any way you want to, but you are still wrong.
    He was told to get on the ground.
    He refused to do as ordered and then attempted to flee.
    He was resisting arrest. Or do you really not understand that fleeing is resisting?


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    And when he was clubbed down to the ground following a short chase and was then pinned to the ground with crushing weights to the point of fractured ribs and suffocation on top of being tased multiple times and pummeled senseless into a pulp, you called his instinctive reaction to pain and preservation of life as resisting?
    There is a lot of assumption and spin in what you just said.
    Clubbed to the ground? Assumption and spin.
    Pummeled senseless? Assumption and spin.
    There is a reason for what happened to Kelly.
    I know what it is and the Jury knows what it is.
    You might want to learn why.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Of course, any human being in that circumstances is going to resist being beaten and crushed to death. Even if, that's a big IF, he resisted, would resisting arrest justify being crushed and pummeled senseless in the head and face to a pulp until comatose and subsequent death? Wouldn't you also have resisted under such circumstance to save your soul from such vicious attack?
    Meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting and was in the wrong for resisting.
    Next.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Or do you think you would just lay there completely relaxed trusting they would not harm you while they had already relentlessly rained down blows after blows into your body, your head and face and tased you repeatedly in quick succession without giving you so much as a chance to even comply? And you expect Kelly or any person in that circumstance not be terrorized?
    More meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting and was in the wrong for resisting.
    Next.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Any reasonable person viewing the tape would come to the conclusion that Ramos was there to harass and humilate Kelly with intent to stir up trouble. For a Mexican/Hispanic person to taunt Kelly, who was a White American, for not able to understand English and repeatedly asking to know what languages he spoke, if that's not an attempt to belittle and harass him, what is?
    More meaningless and false drivel.
    Ramos and Wolfe were there as a response to a call. No there to harass or humiliate anybody.
    Kelly was playing a game pretending not to understand. That is clear form the video.
    Had Kelly cooperated from the get none of this would have happened. But he didn't, and wanted to play instead.
    Kelly's playing dictated how this encounter went.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    You said responding to a report on Kelly is not harassing him. But, you are wrong on your fact. The caller did not specifically state it was Kelly.
    Your tortures logic is irrelevant as usual.
    Kelly was the guy that was called upon. Which is the call that Ramos and Wolfe responded to. It didn't have to be by name.
    What an utterly absurd thing to assert.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Ramos and Wolfe did not even go to contact the caller at the restaurant where the call was made and thus nobody had even identified or pointed a finger at Kelly on the scene.
    They didn't have to. What do you not understand about that?
    They found property that didn't belong to him in his back pack. It is clearly stated in the video who it belonged to and that it was suspicion of a 496.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Ramos and White also didn't get any info regarding which cars were involved where the car doors who jiggled. If they had conducted their investigation properly instead of harassing a homeless man for no reason, they would have dusted the car doors for finger prints so as to match out with whoever was accused. But, they didn't.
    Tortured logic again. Pay attention. They did not have to.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Instead, they went straight to Kelly whom they knew from their past dealings and acted like they had no idea who Kelly was. And then they started to harass him for a long time without just cause while Kelly was put through unreasonable commands meted out just to humiliate him which he tried to comply as best as he could until Ramos put on his gloves and threatened to f**k him up.
    Wrong on all counts. This is nothing more than more tortured logic.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    It was Ramos who initiated the confrontation by putting his hand on Kelly's left arm as shown in the video while Kelly was still seated in a non-threatening way on the curb with his legs extended and hands on the knees as he was told to do.
    Wrong.
    Doesn't work that way.
    Ramos pushed his arm in the direction that he wanted him to comply. This is allowed.
    Kelly was detained and it was his responsibility to do as directed. Instead, he chose to play his game.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    So, don't you think Ramos' so-called investigation had already started with a conduct unbecoming of a police officer?
    WTF?
    Try learning how to quote specifically what you are responding to.
    And Just how do you think this plays into their not being guilty of criminality? Cause I am going top tell you right now, it matters not one bit. It is as meaningless as the rest of the irrelevant bs you brought up.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    But, we also know that Kelly had many previous run-ins with Ramos in which Ramos was tired of Kelly coming back sleeping at the bus depot despite being harassed by Ramos repeatedly. At one point Ramos threw away Kelly's belonging and even prevented him to go back to find his clothing and ordered him to go away in the reverse direction. With such unreasonable action on Ramos' part, Kelly didn't even reacted violently towards Ramos for his mistreatment.

    No, what we have here is your tortured logic calling prior interaction harassment, when there is nothing to suggest it was anything other than an Officer doing his job in a normal manner.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    So, in this incident we can see that Ramos was itching to stir up something in order to justify his unlawful beating of Kelly that would put him out of commission, into a nursing home and away from the bus depot once and for all for good. But, the beat down was beyond his control and Kelly ended up beaten to death.
    More tortured logic with biased assertions. Figures.
    There was no "itching" to start anything.
    There was no unlawful beating.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    No matter how much you try to dismiss all these and my video links showing proper police tactics as meaningless, you are not going to get away with defending the savagery of the rogue cops who crush, tased and pummeled Kelly to his death, in particular Ramos, Cicinelli and Wolfe.
    OMG the savagery of rouge Cops.
    Oh noes, what ever will we do?
    I will tell you what I will do. Dismiss your absurd, biased, tortured logic, false claims.
    There were no rouge cops.
    The videos you provided are meaningless to what happened here.

    Besides me, a Jury decision says you are wrong.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #413
    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 dolphinocean View Post
    Seriously, how do you expect a person to relax and not move when you persistently rain down blow after blow and tasing after tasing without letting off for even a second while being crushed to the point of suffocation?
    See. More absurdity.
    I am more than sure you can go find some video exemplifying a suspect stopping their resistance after he is hit multiple times. Duh!
    Next.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    How can you keep insisting that the involuntary movement due to pain and the instinctive effort to prevent being suffocated and crushed to death as resisting?
    Oh? Now it is involuntary movement huh?
    iLOL
    More absurd assumptions.
    Maybe you do not realize it. But Officers are allowed to continue until the person is subdued. And directed aggression against them is different from involuntary movements like spasms.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    The officers kept beating him and torturing him every time he instinctively reacted to being tased and pummeled to a pulp while being suffocated by the crushing weights. It's a vicious cycle. There were plenty of occasion the rogue cops were able to grab his hands and legs and cuffed him but they chose to beat him and tased him senseless.
    Wrong. Nothing but more biased false absurdity based on tortured logic.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    So, let me see if I tased you multiple times do you think you would just calmly lay there and not move at all at each tasing?
    It happens all the time, a tasering stops an individual from resisting. I am sure you can find videos of that also, if you bother.

    Next.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Like I said, until you have been subjected to the brutal beating, relentless tasing and the fatal crushing of the chest and still can remain calm and still without movement, your dismissal as "matters not" simply rings hollow.
    Like you said?
    What you have said is meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting. End of story.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Haven't you heard that jury decision often times sent innocent men to prison or death sentence for crimes they did not commit and exonerate true criminals to be out to the streets only to commit more murders. Check out the case in the innocence project of innocent men being convicted and sent to prisons for decades for crimes they did not commit, courtesy of the jury decisions.
    iLOL

    And the evidence says that is not what happened in this case.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    All these go to show how unreasonable and relentless your belligerence and out of touch to reality are with your debate tactics.

    No. That is what it shows about you.
    It is why you are wrong at every step.
    It is why you resort to absurd and biased assumptions.
    It is why you were wrong in Zimmerman's case.
    These things are not going to change.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    The only time a police officer doesn't tell you you're under arrest is that there is a warrant already out there for your arrest or if you are caught committing a crime and are fleeing or you try to assault the officer when being questioned.
    Wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Otherwise, if Ramos did not tell Kelly he was under arrest, Kelly had the right to walk away from Ramos and not answer any more question. Furthermore, earlier in the video Ramos had repeatedly told Kelly he was not going to arrest him. So, what right did Ramos had to put his hand on Kelly when he was merely seated on the curb and clubbed his knees when he tried to avoid the attack?
    Telling him he wasn't going to arrest him at specific moment is meaningless to the moment where he gave him orders and Kelly failed to comply.
    When the police have detained you and then have told you to get on the ground, you are not free to leave at that moment.
    It is absurd to even suggest such.
    Failing to comply, and fleeing at that point, is resisting.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    Do you even know the law and your right, Excon?
    iLOL

    Obviously I know that law and these specific rights far better than you do.

    Kelly was detained. Under suspicion of a 496 and had no right to just walk away at that point.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #414
    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
    Thank you. By ANY definition ANYwhere, crushing a chest is excessive force.
    Wrong.
    If they were purposely crushing his chest to crush it. You would have a point.
    But their weight crushing it unintentionally while trying to subdue him, is not.
    Officers use their weight all the time to try and pin someone down who is resisting. It is not excessive force.





    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    I sense a "The Police can do no wrong" shill...
    I sense someone is shilling that which they do not know, didn't bother to check, and are just assuming.
    Want to bet I am right?
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #415
    Professor
    sKiTzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    OC California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 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
    Wrong.
    If they were purposely crushing his chest to crush it. You would have a point.
    But their weight crushing it unintentionally while trying to subdue him, is not.
    Officers use their weight all the time to try and pin someone down who is resisting. It is not excessive force.
    By your definition, then, it leaves no room for "excessive force" to even exist because all that is required is for the cops to say they "weren't trying" to crush his chest. Unfortunately for you and your one-way-street opinion, that is not how the real world gauges it. Here (in reality), we consider the force required to "crush" the chest of a human body to be excessive.

  6. #416
    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
    By your definition, then, it leaves no room for "excessive force" to even exist because all that is required is for the cops to say they "weren't trying" to crush his chest. Unfortunately for you and your one-way-street opinion, that is not how the real world gauges it. Here (in reality), we consider the force required to "crush" the chest of a human body to be excessive.
    You are wrong on both counts.
    As I already stated. Purposely trying to crush his chest would be excessive. Did you not understand the word "purposely"?

    But as to the way it happened, no, it wasn't. It was unintentional. They meant to subdue him, not crush his chest.
    Here in the real world, you know, that which is called reality, they were not found guilty of using excessive force.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  7. #417
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Volunteer State
    Last Seen
    10-17-16 @ 03:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,138
    Blog Entries
    7

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    See. More absurdity.
    I am more than sure you can go find some video exemplifying a suspect stopping their resistance after he is hit multiple times. Duh!
    Next.


    Oh? Now it is involuntary movement huh?
    iLOL
    More absurd assumptions.
    Maybe you do not realize it. But Officers are allowed to continue until the person is subdued. And directed aggression against them is different from involuntary movements like spasms.


    Wrong. Nothing but more biased false absurdity based on tortured logic.


    It happens all the time, a tasering stops an individual from resisting. I am sure you can find videos of that also, if you bother.

    Next.


    Like you said?
    What you have said is meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting. End of story.



    iLOL

    And the evidence says that is not what happened in this case.



    No. That is what it shows about you.
    It is why you are wrong at every step.
    It is why you resort to absurd and biased assumptions.
    It is why you were wrong in Zimmerman's case.
    These things are not going to change.


    Wrong.



    Telling him he wasn't going to arrest him at specific moment is meaningless to the moment where he gave him orders and Kelly failed to comply.
    When the police have detained you and then have told you to get on the ground, you are not free to leave at that moment.
    It is absurd to even suggest such.
    Failing to comply, and fleeing at that point, is resisting.



    iLOL

    Obviously I know that law and these specific rights far better than you do.

    Kelly was detained. Under suspicion of a 496 and had no right to just walk away at that point.
    Kelly wasn't detained by any means. He was just being questioned and in so doing was insulted and harassed. So, stop making stuff up, Excon.


    Kelly had every right to walk away unless Ramos had told him he was under arrest for some crime. But, kelly didn't just walked away. He was sitting there with legs extended and hands on knees until Ramos put his groves on and then made verbal threat of violence with his fist in Kelly's face followed with execution of his threat by laying hand on the still seated and complying Kelly. Kelly only instinctively stood up and backed off when Wolfe and Ramos each took turn to swing their batons at his knees without just cause.

    Kelly did as best as he could to comply to Ramos' unreasonable and humiliating commands. Most suspect or criminals would not put up with that for a second.

    Whether you want to call instinctual avoidance from being hit by batons as fleeing or not, Kelly had every right to react instinctively to preserve his life from fatal harm when he was clearly facing cops who were demonstrating such unreasonable, violent and rogue behavior.


    If you can't even acknowledge these simple facts without resorting to contortion then it is pointless to even carrying on any meaningful debate with you.


    Sure, caller didn't need to know or give police suspect's name. But, they then have to point out who the alleged perpetrator is in a public place such as the bus depot parking lot. Otherwise, how did the police know who was the perpetrator?


    But, Ramos had his agenda finalized culminating from his past numerous attempt to drive Kelly away. So, he went straight to Kelly for the harassment instead of contacting the caller and dusting finger prints from car doors which were alleged to be handled.

    What Ramos and Wolfe did that night wasn't about investigating the caller's allegation but to use that as an excuse to get rid of Kelly with serious bodily harm that would put him permanently wheelchair bound or bed bound in a nursing home. Of course, this latter part is my personal take on the whole incident based on the video, Ramos' complete lack of caller contact and investigation and the info about their history. So, you don't need to jump all over me on that.


    Regarding your accusation of Kelly being suspected of 496, where is the evidence to support that claim? Wolfe was calling it in to the dispatch to check on the mails found in Kelly's backpack addressed to someone other than Kelly. Why didn't Ramos wait for the result inseat of jumping the gun by physically assaulting Kelly without any probable cause?
    Having someone's mail is not automatically a crime.


    The mails might belong to Kelly's relatives or found in the trash. People might have thrown away their old mails in the thrash can and Kelly simply retrieved them for some purpose. I know because I was once homeless myself. Apparently you don't know that papers can be folded into cones to form a cup to hold water or drinks. They can also be used as pots for boiling water if you know how to fold them into shape. They also can be used as paper plates to hold foods when needed.

    Obviously letter papers contained in mail envelops are much cleaner than those exposed to other garbage. Alo, certain soft papers are good for toilet papers when one is homeless without a permanent shelter. Not only that, papers are much conveniently to carry in the backpack than cups, pots and plates. They are also very easy to acquire than cups, pots and plates. For the homeless people, that's the only viable and feasible solution for survival needs.


    To even suggest Kelly would go around the parking lot jiggling car doors just to retrieve some valueless mails is just absurd. But, what the heck do I know when you are already being absurd to begin with.


    Also, previously in another thread about this case, I had posted a link to you regarding a posthumous investigating result that found Kelly innocent of any wrong doing with regards the accusation.

    Here's the link and quote again:

    Kelly Thomas is Officially Innocent, Says Fullerton PD, A Year After Killing Him


    Dan Hughes, Fullerton's acting chief of police, delivered a statement last night to the city council, effectively clearing mentally ill homeless Kelly Thomas of wrongdoing before cops beat him to death on July 5, 2011.


    "There is no evidence, of which the Fullerton Police Department is now aware that Kelly Thomas actually tried to steal anything from any of the vehicles in the lot," Hughes told the council.


    Therefore, your claim that under suspicion of a 496 Kelly had no right to just walk away at that point is just nonsense. Not to mention that Kelly didn't just decided to walk away, he was being assaulted and attacked without any just cause that forced him to retreat in the face of fatal harm to preserve his life from the patently rogue cops.

  8. #418
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Volunteer State
    Last Seen
    10-17-16 @ 03:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,138
    Blog Entries
    7

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You have no clue as to debate.
    Your bringing meaningless bs to a debate shows that. That your failure.
    Dismissing your meaningless assertions is all that is needed.
    Sorry you do not understand what is and isn't meaningful, but that again, is your failure.


    You can say that as many times as you want, and any way you want to, but you are still wrong.
    He was told to get on the ground.
    He refused to do as ordered and then attempted to flee.
    He was resisting arrest. Or do you really not understand that fleeing is resisting?


    There is a lot of assumption and spin in what you just said.
    Clubbed to the ground? Assumption and spin.
    Pummeled senseless? Assumption and spin.
    There is a reason for what happened to Kelly.
    I know what it is and the Jury knows what it is.
    You might want to learn why.


    Meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting and was in the wrong for resisting.
    Next.


    More meaningless drivel.
    He was resisting and was in the wrong for resisting.
    Next.


    More meaningless and false drivel.
    Ramos and Wolfe were there as a response to a call. No there to harass or humiliate anybody.
    Kelly was playing a game pretending not to understand. That is clear form the video.
    Had Kelly cooperated from the get none of this would have happened. But he didn't, and wanted to play instead.
    Kelly's playing dictated how this encounter went.


    Your tortures logic is irrelevant as usual.
    Kelly was the guy that was called upon. Which is the call that Ramos and Wolfe responded to. It didn't have to be by name.
    What an utterly absurd thing to assert.


    They didn't have to. What do you not understand about that?
    They found property that didn't belong to him in his back pack. It is clearly stated in the video who it belonged to and that it was suspicion of a 496.


    Tortured logic again. Pay attention. They did not have to.


    Wrong on all counts. This is nothing more than more tortured logic.


    Wrong.
    Doesn't work that way.
    Ramos pushed his arm in the direction that he wanted him to comply. This is allowed.
    Kelly was detained and it was his responsibility to do as directed. Instead, he chose to play his game.


    WTF?
    Try learning how to quote specifically what you are responding to.
    And Just how do you think this plays into their not being guilty of criminality? Cause I am going top tell you right now, it matters not one bit. It is as meaningless as the rest of the irrelevant bs you brought up.



    No, what we have here is your tortured logic calling prior interaction harassment, when there is nothing to suggest it was anything other than an Officer doing his job in a normal manner.


    More tortured logic with biased assertions. Figures.
    There was no "itching" to start anything.
    There was no unlawful beating.


    OMG the savagery of rouge Cops.
    Oh noes, what ever will we do?
    I will tell you what I will do. Dismiss your absurd, biased, tortured logic, false claims.
    There were no rouge cops.
    The videos you provided are meaningless to what happened here.

    Besides me, a Jury decision says you are wrong.
    Playing possum again to the obvious of the video evidence and reasoning, I see.

    Ramos knew Kelly very well in their numerous past encounters. So, what does Ramos' pretending of not knowing Kelly's name, then subsequently blurted out his full name to which Kelly acknowledged, only shortly later to hammer Kelly for his name again and again repeatedly by claiming he just forgot his name, serve any purpose if not for pure insult and harassment?

    What does Ramos' asking Kelly if he understood English and repeatedly asking him to tell him what languages he spoke serve any purpose if not to insult Kelly given they had numerous encounters in the past and it was quite obvious Kelly was an American?

    What does Ramos' commanding Kelly to sit down on the curb while swinging the baton in his sight at the very onset of their encounter as if he was going to beat him down any second and then demanding him to extend his legs and put his hands on his knees repeatedly when Kelly wasn't even doing anything wrong nor acting in any way threatening serve any purpose if not for humiliating and confusing him?

    The only person who acted in a threatening manner throughout the encounter that night without cause was Ramos himself,

    Even so, do you now still think that what Ramos did was legitimate police work and not an attempt to insult, harrass and confuse a homeless guy with history of mental illness? Ramos must have known by now that Kelly had mental illness from past encounters.

    You are enaging in purposeful mindless rhetoric-in-contra just to force your unconvincing and baseless opinion. You are the one doing all the spinning, contorting and dismissing any evidence contrary to your interest. And yet you have the audacity to turn the table and accuse not just me but everyone else here who had expose your absurdity.

    Get a clue, people here are getting tired of your willful display of infantile debate tactics and are avoiding you like a plague. Afterall. what's a plague good for if not rendering one nauseated, violently ill and then die?

    In another thread about the same Kelly Thomas case I had enough of your same old same old absurd argument and had thus let you had the last words. But, you insisted to engage me here even though I was responding to someone else and not you. I could have just ignore you but I took pity on the lonely you when everybody else had enough of your senseless diabtribe and ran away from you to every direction.

    For now I'm just baby sitting you for a while until I have enough. I'm like a cat and you're like a mouse caught between my paws. I'm slapping you left and right, back and forth till you're half dead and you still have no idea what's going on. And you thought you're the king of the hill. ROFLOL!
    Last edited by dolphinocean; 01-25-14 at 05:37 PM.

  9. #419
    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 dolphinocean View Post
    In another thread about the same Kelly Thomas case I had enough of your same old same old absurd argument and had thus let you had the last words. But, you insisted to engage me here even though I was responding to someone else and not you. I could have just ignore you but I took pity on the lonely you when everybody else had enough of your senseless diabtribe and ran away from you to every direction.

    For now I'm just baby sitting you for a while until I have enough. I'm like a cat and you're like a mouse caught between my paws. I'm slapping you left and right, back and forth till you're half dead and you still have no idea what's going on. And you thought you're the king of the hill.
    Still speaking nonsense I see.
    Figures.
    And I have already answered your bs. You are doing nothing but going in circles.


    You are in the wrong.
    Every damn thing you have said is wrong, twisted, irrelevant and convoluted.
    The Jury did not find the Officers guilty. Their actions were not criminal.
    End of story.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #420
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Volunteer State
    Last Seen
    10-17-16 @ 03:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,138
    Blog Entries
    7

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Still speaking nonsense I see.
    Figures.
    And I have already answered your bs. You are doing nothing but going in circles.


    You are in the wrong.
    Every damn thing you have said is wrong, twisted, irrelevant and convoluted.
    The Jury did not find the Officers guilty. Their actions were not criminal.
    End of story.
    The only end of story is the end of your twisted story. Most people here and everywhere in the world find your twist and denial disturbing and appalling. Your appeal to jury verdict is a fallacy of authority without regard to the fact that often times jury got their verdict wrong and they convicted innocent people of crimes they did not commit while exonerating criminals who were guilty as hell and thus letting them out to go on to commit more crimes.

    Give it up already, Excon.

Page 42 of 48 FirstFirst ... 324041424344 ... 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
  •