reply to post by areyouserious2010
Your post is ... well... amusing.
Let me show you something...
The Philadelphia police officer who punched a woman in the face during the city’s Puerto Rican Day festivities will be fired from his job, and
could also face criminal charges.
Notice the word "could"? It does not say, "will" or "would". It says, "could". Which means he may, as in it is possible.. or it may not, could not, or
will not. What I am saying is, don't hold your breath. He "could" face charges or he could not faces charges. He is not charged with anything right
now, and I am saying he wont be charged. You see, this is what happens when the masses are being appeased. People like you assume he will be charged
because someone said he might be. 3 Months from now, you forget all about the story, there will still be no charges, and this cop is working in Jersey
[Police Commisioner] Ramsey also stated that Josey, who is a veteran of the Highway Patrol division, may be charged for the incident. Ramsey
stated:“Obviously, he could be criminally charged. The DA would have to make that decision.”
Yes, a decision the DA has to make. Not that the DA DID make it, or that charges were expected. This is simply another way of saying, "It's not our
call". It is called passing the buck. When in REALITY and in the land of real people like you or I, if a there is a video tape of us punching some
women in the face, the cops could and would arrest us based on that evidence of a crime. But when it is one of their own, and it is on videotape, it
is suddenly not up to them anymore to enforce our laws, it is up to District Attorney.
The officer's actions are clearly excessive. And the department is doing the right thing.
Yes they are preparing to sweep it all away. As I have shown above, the police could arrest and charge this man. They are passing the buck to the DA,
who will then take 3-4 months to make a decision. Once the press has died down and the people have found something else to grab their attention, it
will be quietly announced that no charges will be filed. It has happened before many times over and if people have not figured it out by now, they
clearly have never paid attention to Police abuse cases before.
And, the source for this thread is not entirely accurate.
Do you think that is by chance? I don't. It is not accurate because the story is being rewritten. You think it is a coincidence that the article is
accusing her of spraying silly string at the cop (when it wasn't) and she just happens to be holding a can of silly string?
If the officer is charged and convicted, the maximum penalty for assault in Pennsylvania is two years in jail.
If the officer is convicted, he will be Federally prohibited from possessing a firearm. A person is Federally prohibited from possessing a firearm if
they are convicted of a crime that carries a possible penalty of a year and a day or more. Even if they are not neccessarily SENTENCED to that time,
the mere conviction still prohibits them.
Federally prohibited from possessing a firearm=cannot be a police officer.
And now your post is full of assumptions. Fact is, and history is on my side with this, it has happened before. Now you say the maximum penalty is 2
year... the keyword here is "maximum". Which means there is a lesser term as well if convicted, we call that a "minimum" sentencing. You are also
assuming that if a charge comes, it will be assault, but "assault" has varying degrees, such a "simple assault" which is a misdemeanor charge in the
State of PA and carries a maximum penalty of 1 year, which would be just under the 1 year and 1 day that would prohibit him from carrying a firearm.
..and again that is the maximum which means any sentence could be less than a year as well. Guess what? he would still be able to carry a firearm. You
are also assuming there will be a conviction, no plea deal, etc etc. Sorry but the real world does not work this way.
Even if he is not charged and is only fired, if he applies with another police department, that department will contact his former department
and ask why he was terminated. I assure you no one will hire him after hearing that especially because of all of the media attention.
What rock do you live under? Do I really need to post story after story of cops who were fired and rehired elsewhere? Fact is, it happens all
the time and there is no media attention. Just like cops who collect disability payments from one department, while working for another department
down the road. You have one of those cops in the Kelly Thomas case out of California, yet no one seemed to notice until after he killed someone while
on duty. Would you like to see examples of cops who were fired then later rehired? Check next post.
edit on 6-10-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)