posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 12:54 AM
reply to post by 281011
The whole point is that the operator didn't respond with "I don't give a #."
The woman never heard the operator say that because the operator didn't say that to the woman. The woman was told
the operator said that by
The worse part was what Sheila had not heard. The worst part was what the 911 call taker said after Sheila hung up the phone.
Sheila: "I'm scared to even leave out my f***ing house."
911: "OK, ma'am, I updated the call. We'll get somebody there as soon as possible."
Sheila: [Hangs up.]
911: "I really just don't give a s**t what happens to you."
This story, as I have already said, is cheap, sentationalised and biased. Nowhere does it say what was happening elsewhere in town that day. Nowhere
does it say how many calls had been answered that day.
Nowhere does it detail police operating procedures.
So where was the officer? NewsChannel 5's investigation discovered he was out helping another officer on a traffic stop.
"That's so ugly," Sheila said bursting into tears when she heard that bit of information for the first time.
Again, Sheila hears something for the first time and bursts into tears. I tell you what "Chief Investigative Reporter"Phil Williams knows how to
manipulate a subject, that's for sure. God I hope his ratings are good.
Tell us, Phil, do you know why two cops were at a traffic stop?
I wonder, how many cops have died in the line of duty in this jurisdiction? How many have been killed during traffic stops? How about in all of
Tennessee? The US?
How many times has "Chief Investigative Reporter" Phil Williams covered those stories? Shown the viewers the cop's distraught widow and kids on the
day of the funeral?
This story is an exploitative beat-up from beginning to end.
If NewsChannel 5 is proud of its "Chief Investigative Reporter", one Phil Williams, then NewsChannel 5 is the bottom of the barrel.
This report is crap.
This reporter is nasty.
This story is bull#.
This station is low-rent.