We Killed Your Daughter; You're Under Arrest

Swearengin, the killer, was taken to the hospital and wasn’t compelled to undergo drug or alcohol screening

From the OP's link. This part really gets me. Anyone who ever drove a company vehicle knows you get tested after any crash, even a fender bender. Why are the police not mandated also? Especially involving a death? I think they need some policy revisions, across the whole country if this is the case.

Here is a Situation that happened in Indianapolis a couple years ago. This shows how the police protect their own and could care less about civilians, just like in the op's post.

Police Botch investigation of intoxicated Police officer who killed motorcyclist.

Their are several links there about the story.

As far as I know, it's been two years and he is not in jail. I do know the charges for "drinking and driving" were withdrawn since the test was taken at the hospital 3 hours after the accident. (no they did not give him a breathalyzer)

Originally they had concocted a story saying "He was in a high speed pursuit" but come to find out he was on his way to work, and was intoxicated.

Yet the IPD still tried to cover for him, and he had been in several accidents.

If you are in charge of enforcing the laws, and you break them yourself, the punishment should be much greater than anyone not charged with law enforcing. Great Power, takes Great Responsibility. Break that Responsibility, you should get Great Punishment.

I'm beginning to wonder if they really are above the law. They sure act it in my town.

Originally posted by mugger

Swearengin, the killer, was taken to the hospital and wasn’t compelled to undergo drug or alcohol screening

From the OP's link. This part really gets me. Anyone who ever drove a company vehicle knows you get tested after any crash, even a fender bender. Why are the police not mandated also? Especially involving a death? I think they need some policy revisions, across the whole country if this is the case.

mainly because they are scum and think themselves as above the law they supposedly uphold. But also becasue they are scum and they'll do anything to get themselves off after killing innocent people.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by JessopJessopJessop

 

I just read a story that 1/3 people are arrested by age 21. Shocking

I heard that 70% of statistics... never mind.

I would be pretty surprised if that number is actually legit. Then again, I can see it happening. There is a huge difference between getting arrested and being detained. I've seen some sources use detention as an excuse to pad numbers for headlines. But that was many moons ago when I was in CJ classes.

www.usatoday.com...

reply to post by mugger


Contrary to popular belief you can refuse to take a breathalyser (as well as the blood / urine). That action could be used in court against him, depending on what all is going on. Usually departmental policy requires officers submit to drug tests randomly, so if he violated the policy its another strike against him.

For the moment, and setting aside the speed of the officer, we need to wait for confirmation on how the incident occurred. What I mean by that is did the 2 people even check to see if cars were coming? Is the fact they crossed where no cross walk is present create a mitigating circumstance?

Coming back to the speed issue the reconstruction will look to determine if speed was a contributing factor. They will check weather conditions as well as what the 2 people were wearing. Even if the officer had all lights going, its not a guarantee the 2 people would not have been hit.

As a side note to some of the comments. This officer didn't wake up and decide he was going to plow into people crossing the street.

[color=mediumorchid]Hello, Sir (:

This is just insane.

But..

Stories like this are becoming more and more common these days. Everything is backwards. I don't have sources but a few examples come to mind. A man was beaten up by a group of guys, he gets arrested--they don't. A woman was crossing the street with her son, son gets hit by a drunk driver and the mom gets more time in jail than the driver.

I would be absolutely furious if I were the girl's parents. I hope they get a damned good attorney..

reply to post by JessopJessopJessop


It started when they decided to make the detention centers a "for profit" entity.

A lot of Detention centers are now privately owned and run by corporations, who get paid based on the number of inmates. Police, Lawyers, city/state governments are in fact getting kickbacks from these corporations for getting them more inmates. (i have heard only of a couple stories about the kickbacks, to be honest, but not every conspiracy is caught, especially when anyone who knows about it and can would stop it, are in on it too.)

(edit - @ Xcathdra

Doesn't matter what he decided to do, he did it. And now he's going to get away with it becasue of his chosen vocation.

This is very wrong on many levels, and to add insult to injury, he arrested the poor father and family members, probably for being a little bit upset that he'd just killed his kid. I know that being upset when your child has been killed by a pig is a bad thing, and he should have dropped to his knees and thanked him, but hey, that's human reactions for you. If that filthy pig had 1 single ounce of common decency, then he'd have known what he had done, and the reactions that is likely to envoke. But no, he's a pig, so he acted like one.

Originally posted by Acidtastic
mainly because they are scum and think themselves as above the law they supposedly uphold. But also becasue they are scum and they'll do anything to get themselves off after killing innocent people.

Food for thought -

People are suppose to cross at pedestrian intersections. If they dont they could be cited for j-walking. When crossing outside of an established crosswalk, the people crossing must give way to the cars, not the other way around.

Its like maritime law when dealing with a sailboat and a motorized boat. If both are on a course that will cause a collision, the motorized boat must give way to the sailboat.

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Doesn't matter what he decided to do, he did it. And now he's going to get away with it becasue of his chosen vocation.

Any chance you an supply us with the winning lottery numbers? I ask since you seem to be psychic, knowing what the outcome will be.

Also can you link us to your source that shows the officer got away with it. All the info I see states its still under investigation by highway patrol.

Any reason you use the 100 meter rush to judgment without having all the facts?

reply to post by Xcathdra

And if someone's belting it towards you at 60-70 mph without sirens, it can be hard to know if someone is coming. Let's blame the pedestrians for getting run over, they obviously deserved it for not being light enough on their feet.

If i were in this position, it would not be me getting arrested.
I would be arresting the officer for manslaughter,
You can do a citizens arrest of a police officer, can you not?

Maybe give him some pepper spray to the eyes, maybe to see what it feels like

I can't even imagine how the father and family must feel, a police officer KILLED their daughter, because of his lack of paying attention and lack of doing things 'by the book', and then slamming the family members to the ground?

Give it a month or two, we'll get a story here soon that says the father snapped and beat the # out of this officer in his own driveway. Would i feel bad? A little, but not really.

There is NO ACCOUNTABILITY

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Acidtastic
Doesn't matter what he decided to do, he did it. And now he's going to get away with it becasue of his chosen vocation.

Any chance you an supply us with the winning lottery numbers? I ask since you seem to be psychic, knowing what the outcome will be.

Also can you link us to your source that shows the officer got away with it. All the info I see states its still under investigation by highway patrol.

Any reason you use the 100 meter rush to judgment without having all the facts?

the winning lottery numbers will be 1-2-3-4-5-6-7

And as it hasn't happened yet, I can't give you a link from the future, but I can use the past as a good level as to how the police deal with it when one of their own kills innocent people. And that is usually, no charge, maybe a few weeks off with pay, or in a worse case scenario, a cop might loose their job. Very rarely do they go to jail for their crimes. The past is my yard stick, I measure things upon their previous actions. And those actions are nothing but deplorable.

Originally posted by daryllyn
[color=mediumorchid]Hello, Sir (:

This is just insane.

But..

Stories like this are becoming more and more common these days. Everything is backwards. I don't have sources but a few examples come to mind. A man was beaten up by a group of guys, he gets arrested--they don't. A woman was crossing the street with her son, son gets hit by a drunk driver and the mom gets more time in jail than the driver.

I would be absolutely furious if I were the girl's parents. I hope they get a damned good attorney..

edit on 21-12-2011 by daryllyn because: (no reason given)

If the guys were roomates then it falls under domestic violence laws. For domestic violence the primary physical aggressor goes to jail. What that means is if they are arguing and the then wife starts punching her husband in the face, and the husband beats her down and does severe damage, he is going to jail, even if the wife started the whole mess.

Primary physical aggressor = the person who does the most damage, regardless of who started it.

If they aren't roommates / living together, a person has a right to defend themselves from aggression. However there is 2 possibilities and it depends on the state. If the person who was attacked goes beyond just defending himself, then he loses that as a defense. A person defending themselves must stop once the threat has subsided.

Also, some states have laws that allow people to defend themselves only as an absolute last resort. If a person has clear escape options, they are required to disengage from the confrontation. If they dont then they can be charged with assault..

Hope the info helps...

Originally posted by Acidtastic
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

And if someone's belting it towards you at 60-70 mph without sirens, it can be hard to know if someone is coming. Let's blame the pedestrians for getting run over, they obviously deserved it for not being light enough on their feet.

Are you really that jaded and closed minded that you are incapable of looking at ALL of the facts surrounding the incident?

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Acidtastic
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

And if someone's belting it towards you at 60-70 mph without sirens, it can be hard to know if someone is coming. Let's blame the pedestrians for getting run over, they obviously deserved it for not being light enough on their feet.

Are you really that jaded and closed minded that you are incapable of looking at ALL of the facts surrounding the incident?

Dude, jaded doesn't even begin to describe the deep loathing I have for the police and the actions they carry out on common folk. Infact, I'm not even sure a word has been invented yet to encapsulate my emotions on the matter. (so to answer your question, yes.)

reply to post by Acidtastic


Then using your logic we can use the actions of criminals to make an argument that the 2 people crossing the road are responsible.

Im just using history as my yard stick.

Dude, jaded doesn't even begin to describe the deep loathing I have for the police and the actions they carry out on common folk. Infact, I'm not even sure a word has been invented yet to encapsulate my emotions on the matter. (so to answer your question, yes.)

Now your posts make sense. I find it funny that you want to do to the police what you accuse the police of doing in the first place.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Acidtastic

 

Then using your logic we can use the actions of criminals to make an argument that the 2 people crossing the road are responsible.

Im just using history as my yard stick.

if the % of the population vrs criminal activity even closely resembled the actions of the police, you'd have a point. And if the population were in a position of "authority" where they are supposed to be an example of how to behave, then again, you'd have a point.

reply to post by Acidtastic


Hypocrisy for the win....

If you spent some time learning about laws and less time devoting all your energies to hating the police, you might understand whats going on with this case.

Since we know that wont happen, by all means continue your stereotypical assault.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Now your posts make sense. I find it funny that you want to do to the police what you accuse the police of doing in the first place.

edit on 21-12-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

I guess the old saying is right then, you become that which you hate the most.