• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Victory for the 99%: Police Refuse to Evict 103 Year Old Woman

WhistleBlower

New member
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
28
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
A Victory for the 99%: Police Refuse to Evict 103 Year Old Woman (VIDEO) | Addicting Info

A Victory for the 99%: Police Refuse to Evict 103 Year Old Woman (VIDEO)
November 30, 2011
By Mitchell S. Gilbert

In these difficult economic times, it’s certainly not news to hear of banks evicting people who can’t pay their mortgages. But Deutsche Bank in Atlanta never imagined that the local police and the mover they hired would ever refuse to honor one of their eviction notices.

Yesterday, when police arrived at the home of 103 year old Vita Lee and her 83-year-old daughter, they took one look at the elderly women and simply said, “no way.” Unfortunately, just the sight of the police and movers was a bit too much for Vita’s daughter who was rushed to the hospital.


As the police prepared to leave her home of 53 years, Vita declared: “Please don’t come in and disturb me no more. When I’m gone you all can come back and do whatever they want to.”

Here’s the video:

[video]http://bcove.me/z1nszes1[/video]
 
time to celebrate? :3

 
Let it not be said that policemen do not have a heart.
 
Lets celebrate that property rights just got violated by the police! I got the keg!
 
This is a vicotry for OWS? This is absolutely some of the worst political garbage I've ever seen. Trying to link a normal eviction to OWS is just plain stupidity. There's no proof that they had any influence.
It's just that the police was kind.
 
This is a vicotry for OWS? This is absolutely some of the worst political garbage I've ever seen. Trying to link a normal eviction to OWS is just plain stupidity. There's no proof that they had any influence.
It's just that the police was kind.

The title says 99%, not OWS, I don't think they are synonymous.

Anyway, it's good to see that that policeman has made a good personal judgement, sometimes some order and law just can't good when implemented, and I don't think it will set any precedent as regard to personal property rights, but if Deutsche Bank decides to complain, the policeman could face consequences. Hopefully Deutsche Bank is smart enough not to.
 
Does this mean every eviction that is carried through is a victory for the 1%? Seems to me they're kickin' arse.
 
She's had the house for 53 years and its not paid off yet?
 
Do you normally engage in wishful thinking?

Sometimes. However, I also work for an electric utility company and I know what would happen to any Meter Worker Associate who went to a home and refused to turn off a service without reasonable cause to do so. The age of the customer is not any of those reasonable causes.
 
The title says 99%, not OWS, I don't think they are synonymous.

Anyway, it's good to see that that policeman has made a good personal judgement, sometimes some order and law just can't good when implemented, and I don't think it will set any precedent as regard to personal property rights, but if Deutsche Bank decides to complain, the policeman could face consequences. Hopefully Deutsche Bank is smart enough not to.

99% is synonymous for OWS. You can ask anyone what the 99% is, 99% will link that label to the OWS movement.
 
The title says 99%, not OWS, I don't think they are synonymous.

Anyway, it's good to see that that policeman has made a good personal judgement, sometimes some order and law just can't good when implemented, and I don't think it will set any precedent as regard to personal property rights, but if Deutsche Bank decides to complain, the policeman could face consequences. Hopefully Deutsche Bank is smart enough not to.

We are the 99% are part of the occupy movement.

We Are the 99 Percent - "Brought to you by the people who occupy wall street. Why will YOU occupy?"

We are the 99 per cent | Mark Ruffalo | Comment is free | The Guardian
 
Where are the hadn-wringers and why aren't they already paying her bills, so she doesn't get evicted?

I guess that would involve spending their own money.
 
She's had the house for 53 years and its not paid off yet?
I was thinking the same thing xD. I feel for the woman and everything but I have to question whether or not theres more to this story.
 
A Victory for the 99%: Police Refuse to Evict 103 Year Old Woman (VIDEO) | Addicting Info

A Victory for the 99%: Police Refuse to Evict 103 Year Old Woman (VIDEO)
November 30, 2011
By Mitchell S. Gilbert

In these difficult economic times, it’s certainly not news to hear of banks evicting people who can’t pay their mortgages. But Deutsche Bank in Atlanta never imagined that the local police and the mover they hired would ever refuse to honor one of their eviction notices.

Yesterday, when police arrived at the home of 103 year old Vita Lee and her 83-year-old daughter, they took one look at the elderly women and simply said, “no way.” Unfortunately, just the sight of the police and movers was a bit too much for Vita’s daughter who was rushed to the hospital.


As the police prepared to leave her home of 53 years, Vita declared: “Please don’t come in and disturb me no more. When I’m gone you all can come back and do whatever they want to.”

Here’s the video:

[video]http://bcove.me/z1nszes1[/video]

How exactly is this a victory for the 99%? So the police didn't evict a 103-year-old woman. And...?
 
The woman does not look like she will be alive for much longer. It's fair that she said to the banks that once she's dead they can do whatever they want with her home.

In this case, I don't see why the banks can't wait a bit longer.
 
I was thinking the same thing xD. I feel for the woman and everything but I have to question whether or not theres more to this story.

Multiple home equity mortgages taken out on the assessed value of the home over the years. More than likely she'd paid for the house many times over, but those second and third mortgages will kill you.


The woman does not look like she will be alive for much longer. It's fair that she said to the banks that once she's dead they can do whatever they want with her home.

In this case, I don't see why the banks can't wait a bit longer.

Ok, then where does it stop? I ask because we had a horrible tragedy in New Hampshire last year where we turned the POWER off to a home and ended up killing a woman on a ventilator. They hadn't paid ANYTHING in more than six months and also had not renewed the "medical account" listing for their home with us. At what point does NOT PAYING YOUR BILLS lead to actual CONSEQUENCES so far as you are concerned.
 
Of course cops have hearts...but sometimes duty and orders over ride feelings...thats a part of what makes being a cop so friggin stressful...going against conscience can wreak havoc on your emotionally.
 
Of course cops have hearts...but sometimes duty and orders over ride feelings...thats a part of what makes being a cop so friggin stressful...going against conscience can wreak havoc on your emotionally.

True, but it's generally much better for the paycheck than refusing to do your duty over some silly emotional crap.
 
Lets celebrate that property rights just got violated by the police! I got the keg!

Absolute stances on an economic property rights principle can also equate to amorality.

The police did NOT violate the property rights" of anyone. That is factually false. Let's at least get the amoral platitude of absolute property rights accurate. The police has no obiligation of any kind to the property owner NOR can police enforce civil property rights - ever. The ONLY obligation and duty of the police was to the court, not the property owner.

Certain Police officers refused to act on a civil court order concerning real estate when doing so likely would have resulted in the imminent death of a 103 year old woman. Since it was not a death warrant, their actions (or rather inaction) was legally correct.

To be technically accurate, the police officers refused to execute a civil court order. The only offense they committed, if any, was against the court, not the property owner. Thus it is for the civil court to decide if the officers were in contempt of the court. If the officers legitimately believed executing the eviction order would have killed the woman, their doing so would have exceeded the order of the court, given the court had not ordered the woman's death.

NOW, though absolute platitudes are the favorites of the radical left and the radical right, the reality is that the police go to the judge explaining the situation. The judge then advises the property owner that due to the likelihood of death of the inhabitant the court is delaying the eviction until the appropriate social services can take steps for alternative housing. That's how it actually works and that is how is should work.
 
Last edited:
Even without the OWS protests, I would bet LE would have done the same. Not thrown her out. It has nothing to to with the 99%, but doing what was right for that situation.
 
Multiple home equity mortgages taken out on the assessed value of the home over the years. More than likely she'd paid for the house many times over, but those second and third mortgages will kill you.




Ok, then where does it stop? I ask because we had a horrible tragedy in New Hampshire last year where we turned the POWER off to a home and ended up killing a woman on a ventilator. They hadn't paid ANYTHING in more than six months and also had not renewed the "medical account" listing for their home with us. At what point does NOT PAYING YOUR BILLS lead to actual CONSEQUENCES so far as you are concerned.

Guess it stops at the point we dismantle capitalism, if that's the best capitalism can do.

The complaints that socialism doesn't value human life goal ring hollow.
 
Last edited:
Guess it stops at the point we dismantle capitalism, if that's the best capitalism can do. The complaints that socialism doesn't value human life goal ring hollow.

The problem is that there are certain things that people have come to think of as RIGHTS (a home, food, electricity, cable tv, etc....) that never were and never should have become RIGHTS. When you deal with these things you find yourself often caught between a rock and a hard place. Nobody ever WANTS to have to turn someone's power OFF, but there comes a point where it's the only option left to get a response from the people. We have rules and the state has rules about who we can't turn off for certain reasons. People will greatly take advantage of those policies when they can. To the point of passing babies out open windows between apartments in order to claim there's an infant (less than 1 year old) living there so we don't turn them off.
 
Lets celebrate that property rights just got violated by the police! I got the keg!


Just use mine. We had a party to celebrate all the BofA illegal foreclosures... You know, foreclosing on people who had never missed a payment.
 
Back
Top Bottom