Page 43 of 48 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 475

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

  1. #421
    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
    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.
    A reality check....and true End of Story

    The very old rule still stands...you do what the LEO tells you to do when you are told to do it, or you'll force the officer to decide where you'll be spending the night...

    You have 4 choices

    1 Home (thats good)

    2 Jail (not too good)

    3 Hospital (thats bad)

    4 Autopsy (thats beyond bad)

  2. #422
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    A reality check....and true End of Story

    The very old rule still stands...you do what the LEO tells you to do when you are told to do it, or you'll force the officer to decide where you'll be spending the night...

    You have 4 choices

    1 Home (thats good)

    2 Jail (not too good)

    3 Hospital (thats bad)

    4 Autopsy (thats beyond bad)
    It appears that what many are suggesting here is that the individual in question (Kelly?) did not resist until he started getting beaten even though he wasn't resisting.

    Basically, I'm saying that, although I do not know whether it applies here or not.....your list does not take into account what you should do if you don't resist yet the police officer decides to beat the crap out of you anyway.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  3. #423
    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
    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.
    iLOL
    This is nothing but you engaged in another fallacy. You have no idea what "most" think.
    That is hilarious.

    You have been shown to be wrong every step of the way. That isn't going to change.
    What you have provided and argued is nonsense and irrelevant. That isn't going to change.
    All you are doing now is going in circles. It is pointless. You and your reasoning and logic have already been shown to be wrong. That isn't going to change.



    The Jury's decision was finale.
    It is not a fallacy in this debate as they are the only authority on the subject that matters at this point.
    And most importantly, it is a decision that is based on far more information that either you or I have.
    And you do not seem to understand that their decision, as long as it is based upon the law and the known evidence, not something outside of the evidence, is not wrong. They have the authority to determine what matters and what doesn't. Do you really not know that?
    Your coming back with the innocence project was laughable. And you do not even understand why. You are in way over your head here, especially with the available logic you employ.
    The innocence project delivers new evidence which is then considered. New evidence by way of DNA testing.
    Do you not understand what "new evidence" means? That is evidence that was not available to the originally Jury to make their decision on.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #424
    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
    iLOL
    This is nothing but you engaged in another fallacy. You have no idea what "most" think.
    That is hilarious.

    You have been shown to be wrong every step of the way. That isn't going to change.
    What you have provided and argued is nonsense and irrelevant. That isn't going to change.
    All you are doing now is going in circles. It is pointless. You and your reasoning and logic have already been shown to be wrong. That isn't going to change.



    The Jury's decision was finale.
    It is not a fallacy in this debate as they are the only authority on the subject that matters at this point.
    And most importantly, it is a decision that is based on far more information that either you or I have.
    And you do not seem to understand that their decision, as long as it is based upon the law and the known evidence, not something outside of the evidence, is not wrong. They have the authority to determine what matters and what doesn't. Do you really not know that?
    Your coming back with the innocence project was laughable. And you do not even understand why. You are in way over your head here, especially with the available logic you employ.
    The innocence project delivers new evidence which is then considered. New evidence by way of DNA testing.
    Do you not understand what "new evidence" means? That is evidence that was not available to the originally Jury to make their decision on.
    Didn't you read all the posts from posters in this thread and another thread giving you their piece of mind before they threw up the towel on you? That's what they think, duh.

    In this country the jury can be tampered with during the jury selection and their selection can be stacked against whichever side if either side played the game well. That's why in this day and age we have trial and jury consultant business. Also, evidence against the accused cops were excluded so jury didn't get to hear the whole truth and the murdered became the main focus of defense character assassination that had absolutely nothing to do with the night of event. So, our jury system is not about getting to the bottom of the truth but about how well either side can play the system to win the case.

    But, here we are in the debate seeking for the truth based on all the evidence we can find and exclude none. So, your persistent attempt at hanging onto the jury verdict is just an exercise in futility based on logical fallacy.

  5. #425
    Professor
    sKiTzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    OC California
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 01:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,208

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    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.
    What you are saying then is that there is NEVER a scenario that can be deemed excessive force, because, by your definition of excessive force, they have to have purposelyintended to crush his chest, but no cop is ever going to say he "purposely" intended to do it. Therefore, it is not up to the cop to decide whether excessive force was used, so what they "intended" is irrelevant.

  6. #426
    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 The Mark View Post
    It appears that what many are suggesting here is that the individual in question (Kelly?) did not resist until he started getting beaten even though he wasn't resisting.

    Basically, I'm saying that, although I do not know whether it applies here or not.....your list does not take into account what you should do if you don't resist yet the police officer decides to beat the crap out of you anyway.
    Being polite and not resisting helps a lot in avoiding an ass whippin'

    An old and true educational video


  7. #427
    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
    What you are saying then is that there is NEVER a scenario that can be deemed excessive force, because, by your definition of excessive force, they have to have purposelyintended to crush his chest, but no cop is ever going to say he "purposely" intended to do it. Therefore, it is not up to the cop to decide whether excessive force was used, so what they "intended" is irrelevant.
    Using your body weight to subdue a person is not excessive no matter how much you want it to be.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  8. #428
    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 ric27 View Post
    Being polite and not resisting helps a lot in avoiding an ass whippin'

    An old and true educational video

    Sorry to burst your bubble, ric. Kelly did not violate any one of the pointers shown in your video.

  9. #429
    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
    Didn't you read all the posts from posters in this thread and another thread giving you their piece of mind before they threw up the towel on you? That's what they think, duh.
    More logical fallacy from you huh? Figures.
    You said, "Most people here and everywhere in the world". You have no idea what "most" people here or everywhere in the world think.
    And I can basically guarantee you that "most" in this forum that may disagree with me, do not hold, or would make the same convoluted assertions you have made.


    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    In this country the jury can be tampered with during the jury selection and their selection can be stacked against whichever side if either side played the game well. That's why in this day and age we have trial and jury consultant business. Also, evidence against the accused cops were excluded so jury didn't get to hear the whole truth and the murdered became the main focus of defense character assassination that had absolutely nothing to do with the night of event. So, our jury system is not about getting to the bottom of the truth but about how well either side can play the system to win the case.
    Meaningless drivel. Our system is what our system is.
    Excluded evidence?
    iLOL

    So, what evidence do you think was excluded?



    Quote Originally Posted by dolphinocean View Post
    But, here we are in the debate seeking for the truth based on all the evidence we can find and exclude none. So, your persistent attempt at hanging onto the jury verdict is just an exercise in futility based on logical fallacy.
    The Jury is and was the final arbiter.
    Their decision is the only one that matters. And their decision can not be wrong as long as long as it is based upon the law and within the evidence.
    That is what you do not seem to understand. It can't be wrong. They are the final arbiter.

    And while I point that out that the Jury's verdict is the finale analysis which you can not contend with, I have shown your assertions to be wrong on their own.
    So try to focus.
    Those are two separate things.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #430
    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
    More logical fallacy from you huh? Figures.
    You said, "Most people here and everywhere in the world". You have no idea what "most" people here or everywhere in the world think.
    And I can basically guarantee you that "most" in this forum that may disagree with me, do not hold, or would make the same convoluted assertions you have made.


    Meaningless drivel. Our system is what our system is.
    Excluded evidence?
    iLOL

    So, what evidence do you think was excluded?



    The Jury is and was the final arbiter.
    Their decision is the only one that matters. And their decision can not be wrong as long as long as it is based upon the law and within the evidence.
    That is what you do not seem to understand. It can't be wrong. They are the final arbiter.

    And while I point that out that the Jury's verdict is the finale analysis which you can not contend with, I have shown your assertions to be wrong on their own.
    So try to focus.
    Those are two separate things.
    So, do you have any more debatable and logical point other than ranting on your lost cause that had been beaten to death many times over? Learn how to concede error when you are clearly wrong, Excon.

Page 43 of 48 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... 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
  •