It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police Arrest Woman For Videotaping Them From Her Front Yard: (Wait till you see this tape!)

page: 37
143
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
Because I am not immediately pro-police and used that as an example.


Oh well hoo f***ing ray for you! Defending yourself against an attack I never leveled at you or anyone else in this thread? That makes sense and seems honest.




See above


So you do want a cookie?



One step backwards each time


You sure about that? How do you know how far back she moved considering I just told you that she actually moved because, you know, you said she didn't at all?


Yup no personal responsibility on her part for her being in the situation she is in now.

What a lame buzzword to whip out. Really. That pregnant woman that lost her baby to the coked up drunk cop on the expressway out in Greece should really take personal responsibility for being pregnant and in a car when a drunk and coked up cop ran into her.




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SFA437
 


What exactly was the "crime"?

A traffic stop is not a crime in the normal sense of the word. Since the driver was released, there never was a crime.

And the "three guys" bit was false: the video clearly showed only one person in the car and area. Had there been three, they all would have been cuffed and in view. The cop perjured himself, most likely writing the report before the stop, and that's why he felt unsafe with the video: he knew it would cause him difficulties later.

As long as we're playing the what if, coulda been game...what if he intended to kill the guy? Coulda been the cop works as an assassin part-time. After all, cops HAVE been convicted of working for organized crime and have gone to jail for being part-time hitmen.

The FACTS as we can determine from the video, however, just show an overbearing arrogant cop abusing his power.

Some of you guys undoubtedly would defend torture as a tool for law enforcement if the law allowed it. The ethics or morality of just simply wouldn't enter your heads so long as it was "legal". I'm pretty sure XCathdra would if there was a law that allowed it, and be just as sanctimoniously smug in explaining to us all how we don't understand how it works, and therefore shouldn't have an opinion about it.

Come to think of it..weren't those Abu Ghraib guys cops back home when they weren't torturing prisoners in Iraq?


edit on 24-6-2011 by apacheman because: sp

edit on 24-6-2011 by apacheman because: sp



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
None of which involved her property. Show me the report that claims her property was part of a crime scene or put that back in the sack where you took it from.


Show me one that states it wasn't... if if if if


Originally posted by Kitilani
He was made uncomfortable because he was being watched. Too bad. There is no law about that in Rochester. You get to watch the cops here.


Ahhhh... so you know the officer personally! Cool!!! Any inside info you can give since you have spoken with him and he has told you why, exactly, he became uncomfortable at the scene??



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


Forgot who said it, but, they said they did arrest one guy and they let the other 2 or 3 go. Not sure.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
Well I was using the following statements made by you earlier in this thread:


No you were not. You replied to someone else with someone else' quote, not mine. Why don't you just watch the video.



Were you lying then or lying now? Just want to clear that up before proceeding....


If you were actually going off of that statement, then you must have read it. Since you are going to talk about reading comprehension, I am going to have to assume you understood it. Now tell me that I have to explain to you the difference between discussing how many people were involved and when I was discussing how many people the police reported interacting with.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
Show me one that states it wasn't... if if if if


There is no if about it. There was a police report filed. Go get it. No one claimed her property was part of a crime scene and the traffic stop suspects were released. The burden is on your to prove her yard was part of a crime scene because there is no if. This all actually happened.


Ahhhh... so you know the officer personally! Cool!!! Any inside info you can give since you have spoken with him and he has told you why, exactly, he became uncomfortable at the scene??


Seriously?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manhater

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


Forgot who said it, but, they said they did arrest one guy and they let the other 2 or 3 go. Not sure.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)


Nope. No one said that anywhere on any page in this thread. Not once. No one even hinted at it.

Just again to highlight, the only people defending this man are all resorting to "imagining" things that happened or were said in order to justify said defense. It ain't floatin'.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


What exactly was the "crime"?

A traffic stop is not a crime in the normal sense of the word. Since the driver was released, there never was a crime.

And the "three guys" bit was false: the video clearly showed only one person in the car and area. Had there been three, they all would have been cuffed and in view. The cop perjured himself, most likely writing the report before the stop, and that's why he flet unsafe with the video: he knew it would cause him difficulties later.

As long as we're plying the what if, coulda been game...what if he intended to kill the guy? Coulda been the cop works as an assassin part-time. After all, cops HAVE been convicted of working for organized crime and have gone to jail for being part-time hitmen.

The FACTS as we can determine from the video, however, just show an overbearing arrogant cop abusing his power.

Some of you guys undoubtedly would defend torture as a tool for law enforcement if the law allowed it. The ethics or morality of just simply wouldn't enter your heads so long as it was "legal". I'm pretty sure XCathdra would if there was a law that allowed it, and be just as sanctimoniously smug in explaining to us all how we don't understand how it works, and therefore shouldn't have an opinion about it.

Come to think of it..weren't those Abu Ghraib guys cops back home when they weren't torturing prisoners in Iraq?


edit on 24-6-2011 by apacheman because: sp


Upon serving a search warrant the premises to be searched become a de facto crime scene. Whether or not evidence of a crime being committed is found or not, while the officers are executing that warrant one is not free to come and go as one pleases within the boundaries specified in the warrant.

I do not know why the traffic stop was initiated. What I did see was the driver being Terry frisked and handcuffed. This is not the usual course of action to issue a citation for a brake light being out or an illegal left turn.

What if the woman is really an alien sent here to discredit law enforcement?
(Sorry couldn't resist)

The video shows very little actually. It does not show what the woman's hands were doing, her stance, her facial expressions, what was said prior to the recording starting... Again I wouldn't have taken his course of action based on what was on the video but nobody other than those present knew what precipitated it. There was obviously some negative interaction prior to the tapings beginning.

As for Abu Ghraib the answer is no.

Several were career Army (LTC and above). A few were corrections officers, one was a mechanic and another a histology instructor at LabCorp, one worked at a chicken processing plant... none were sworn officers.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
simply fact of the matter is she interfered with a police investigation, she was videotaping a lawful traffic stop and search where the officers did nothing wrong. She was warned several times to go inside, they NEVER asked her to stop recording!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
Seriously?


Seriously. YOU stated you knew why the officer felt threatened- not me. Here's a refresher...


Originally posted by Kitilani
He was made uncomfortable because he was being watched. Too bad.


I have said the opposite all along- that I have zero clue as to what happened before the recording started or why the officer felt uncomfortable. You stated that you know- that comes from personal association and interaction with the officer.
edit on 24-6-2011 by SFA437 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
oh and yea was her comment in the begging of its my right really necessaary? the officer didnt ask her what her right was, just asked what she was doing



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
These days you have to explain your rights to leo's all the time. So I think that it was necessary.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by Kitilani
Seriously?


Seriously. YOU stated you knew why the officer felt threatened- not me. Here's a refresher...


Originally posted by Kitilani
He was made uncomfortable because he was being watched. Too bad.


I have said the opposite all along- that I have zero clue as to what happened before the recording started or why the officer felt uncomfortable. You stated that you know- that comes from personal association and interaction with the officer.
edit on 24-6-2011 by SFA437 because: (no reason given)


Seriously I did not state as a fact that I knew why he was uncomfortable where you have gone on about people being shot in her house and search warrants being served and that she never backed up, then she did not back up enough, you have no idea how many people were pulled over, arrested, involved, on the video, etc. So yeah if you can make up all kinds of crap about murder scenes and search warrants, I can take a casual guess as to why he felt uncomfy.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
These days you have to explain your rights to leo's all the time. So I think that it was necessary.


LEO's know what you're rights are. By her saying that all she does is show a defiant attitude when it wasn't necessary



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by Manhater

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


Forgot who said it, but, they said they did arrest one guy and they let the other 2 or 3 go. Not sure.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)


Nope. No one said that anywhere on any page in this thread. Not once. No one even hinted at it.

Just again to highlight, the only people defending this man are all resorting to "imagining" things that happened or were said in order to justify said defense. It ain't floatin'.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)


Nope nobody ever said it.......


Originally posted by Kitilani
They pulled over "3" people. They arrested a 4th person and they let one suspect go. Tell me what is missing.



Originally posted by Kitilani
Since the woman who was arrested was not one of the three men pulled over, I would guess that makes her that 4th person.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ABWarrior58
oh and yea was her comment in the begging of its my right really necessaary? the officer didnt ask her what her right was, just asked what she was doing


If it were against the law to say more than you should in Rochester the streets would be empty and even many of the officers I would call good cops would be in jail as well. Maybe she should not have said it. Maybe in America people should not be arrested for saying things though. Just a thought.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
Seriously I did not state as a fact that I knew why he was uncomfortable


Do you even read your OWN posts.... once again:


Originally posted by Kitilani
He was made uncomfortable because he was being watched. Too bad.


You did not say he most likely was, nor did you say you felt like he was... you stated, unequivocally that


Originally posted by Kitilani
He was made uncomfortable because he was being watched.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by Manhater

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


Forgot who said it, but, they said they did arrest one guy and they let the other 2 or 3 go. Not sure.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)


Nope. No one said that anywhere on any page in this thread. Not once. No one even hinted at it.

Just again to highlight, the only people defending this man are all resorting to "imagining" things that happened or were said in order to justify said defense. It ain't floatin'.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)


Nope nobody ever said it.......


Originally posted by Kitilani
They pulled over "3" people. They arrested a 4th person and they let one suspect go. Tell me what is missing.



Originally posted by Kitilani
Since the woman who was arrested was not one of the three men pulled over, I would guess that makes her that 4th person.





Can you read at all? Read what you just quoted as many times as it takes. I never said any of the three men that were pulled over were arrested. I specifically said a 4th person, not involved in the stop, was arrested - that being the woman. There is no way you are really this bad at reading English.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
You did not say he most likely was, nor did you say you felt like he was... you stated, unequivocally that


Every bit as much as your murder in the home and search warrants. Thank you!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by Manhater

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by SFA437
 


Forgot who said it, but, they said they did arrest one guy and they let the other 2 or 3 go. Not sure.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)


Nope. No one said that anywhere on any page in this thread. Not once. No one even hinted at it.

Just again to highlight, the only people defending this man are all resorting to "imagining" things that happened or were said in order to justify said defense. It ain't floatin'.
edit on 24-6-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)


Nope nobody ever said it.......


Originally posted by Kitilani
They pulled over "3" people. They arrested a 4th person and they let one suspect go. Tell me what is missing.



Originally posted by Kitilani
Since the woman who was arrested was not one of the three men pulled over, I would guess that makes her that 4th person.





Can you read at all? Read what you just quoted as many times as it takes. I never said any of the three men that were pulled over were arrested. I specifically said a 4th person, not involved in the stop, was arrested - that being the woman. There is no way you are really this bad at reading English.


Three men were pulled over but were somehow not in the vehicle?? Jesus H Christ make some sense for once!



new topics

top topics



 
143
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join