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.

 

Cop Arrested for Beating Child Rapist, Good Cop or Bad Cop?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by tanda7
 


I say AFTER the trial and he is found GUILTY then let everybody have a turn in a closed room with him.

Till he is proven guilty I assume he is innocent and he should not be touched.

What if it turns out he didn't do it ???????




posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sharingan
reply to post by tanda7
 


My dad told me something him and his partner did back in the 70s as a Dallas cop. Some dude ran up on the curb and hit a lil girl on a tricycle and drug her a ways as he tried to leave the scene.
He said they caught him, took him to a secluded spot and beat him down pretty good, my dad was a good cop so...


no your dad wasn't a good cop, he was a criminal not so unlike the ones he dealt with. we cannot have it both ways, you either stick to the agreement, (constitution, bill of rights) or you don't, there's no in between. if we choose to go down that path i assure you the next person will be much less to "get a beat down" than the last person and soon people will be getting judged by the police on a regular basis, oh wait that's what we have developing now, hows that working out?



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread962804/pg2#pid16754472]post by

That is something I won't ponder on.

On the question of the age of the boy that is a question? What is easier getting caught in a under age consensual homosexual relationship and being embarrassed and shunned by your family or getting caught with your pants down and screaming rape. It works for under age girls in the same situation.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
I'm assuming the family member who caught him wasn't able to give the rapist a beat down on their own...otherwise the police would have been called to pick up the body. Case closed.

That being said - however difficult it was the police in this case should not have touched the guy...if he was coroprating. Fact is the guy could be 100% innocent.

But maybe the guy at the scene was saying something like "I'm sorry, I'm sorry did that to your child" or something along those lines with the family there...which would make it pretty clear to anyone what happened... I can see how anyone would lose their cool in that situation.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


btw, it is two cents, as in money. But I agree, letting the family have a whack at him doesn't bother me as much. Maybe the cop shouldn't have beat him, but maybe he should have.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by MountainLaurel
 


For all we know the family member could have walked in on two gay teenagers, and the "victim" just happened to be underage.

Raymond is charged with aggravated rape, this is not typical of consensual statutory rape. I can not confirm but I've heard the victim was 5 years old.


An aggravated rape is an offense of rape that is committed under circumstances which render the offense more heinous. The severity of the crime may be increased because of factors such as tender age of the victim, blood relationship between the accused and the victim, the victim is aged, the offender is armed with a weapon, , and more than one offender rapes the victim.
definitions.uslegal.com...

edit on 3-8-2013 by tanda7 because: definition



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by tanda7
 

It is the real world so I give the cop a pass on this one....but not when they beat up innocent citizens or kill their pets.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by tanda7
 

It is the real world so I give the cop a pass on this one....but not when they beat up innocent citizens or kill their pets.


have to respectively disagree, give the cop a pass and you give all criminals a pass, cant have it both ways so choose your poison wisely. yea the guy has problems, needs some help in some ways, if possible, but when we choose to harm first and ask questions later, we all suffer a much greater injustice.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by tanda7
 


Ok, I'm not going to say that this guy didn't deserve what was given to him, but even though he's a disgusting individual, it shouldn't have happened.

To be honest, to agree with what this cop did, is to agree with every single police brutality case out there. You can say I'm wrong, and argue it all you want, but you know it's true. No matter the case, no matter the perp, the cop is NOT supposed to do this. As someone said earlier, that's what we have a jury for. It's what we have jail for.

Remember the case where the homeless guy was beaten to death while screaming for his father to rescue him?? If you're ok with this guy getting beat, then you have to be ok with the homeless guy getting beat. If you're not ok with the homeless guy getting beat, then you should not be ok with this case. It's very hypocritical to be ok with one, and not the other.

To all of you that are ok with what happened here, don't be hypocrites.


I know it's not a joke, but it reminds me of something Matt Stone & Trey Parker said about things to joke about. "Either everything is ok, or nothing is ok." To be fair, those are very wise words. It's very unfair for someone to joke about something offensive to someone, but then tell them not to joke about something that offends them.

Very similar in regards to this. It is not right for the cop to choose who deserves to be beaten, and who doesn't. It's not their call. Either they don't beat anybody, or they beat everybody they interact with. There is no picking and choosing.
edit on 3-8-2013 by Necrobile because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


Dude, it was the 70s in the worst part of Dallas. They couldve killed him if they wanted to and gotten away with it.
I think he showed pretty good restraint, considering it took them a couple of hours to find all of the pieces of the girl he ran over.
So, yea. He was a good cop and he proved it many times over his 30 year career.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   


He said they caught him, took him to a secluded spot and beat him down pretty good, my dad was a good cop so...


That act contradicts the good cop statement. Maybe good cop most of the time would apply.

Police legally cannot beat suspects in custody and it is their duty to protect them. The man who found the act, he could have attacked the suspect with probably no criminal liability by claiming he was stopping a crime. Similar to the case in Shiner, TX.
edit on 8/3/2013 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Sharingan
 


Dude, why all the hate for the funny little guy with the bad mustache? It was back in the late 30's, in the worst part of Berlin.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by tanda7

Yeah I agree with you, but for the record;

The sheriff says that 19-year old Raymond Robison (above) "was engaging in sexual acts with a juvenile" when a family member of the victim walked in a witnessed the rape of the little boy.
www.wwl.com...
If it had been my son getting raped...well, I don't know.


While it's hard to imagine or visualize that situation without having visceral,gutteral rage 'color over' everything, if I'd been the 'family member' chances are there'd 'v been no need to call the police - a coroner, yes.

Bad choices made, in a legal sense, but .... when literally caught in the act of molesting/raping a child ...

dig the hole 6 ft deep, imho.

[edit: to add]

interesting twist to the headline. Apparently the officer didn't 'allow' a family member to assault the guy. he just didn't 'restrain' them from doing so.

Also:

The 45-year-old family member, Charles Madgett, faces a simple battery charge.

Dipuma has since been suspended by the Walker Police Department.


I'd buy 'em both a beer.

edit on 8/3/2013 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Not the proper actions for a police officer so i'd go with: Bad Cop, good Man. If I walked in on something like that there wouldn't be much left to beat when the police arrived. I'd gladly face my day in court. Although "vengeance is mine" sayeth the Lord I don't believe I could control myself, To refrain from killing the man would be hard enough. Reminds me of what was going on at Penn state, that guy that walked on Sandusky raping a kid and felt tattling to Paterno was a sufficient response.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
The cop is NOT doing his job.
Did the cop see it happen? NO!
In my mind he is just as bad as the accused is supposed to be because he physically attacked another person, and worse, he stood by while another person done the same thing.

BAD BAD COP!! He should be in the doc alongside the accused.

However, if I were the family member who walked in on something like this there would be one less person in this world.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by tanda7
 


What kind of stupid question is this?

Ever hear of "innocent until proven guilty"?



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by tanda7
 

As far as i'm concerned the Cop and Family member never hit the guy hard enough...If he had Molested any of my children he would have accidentally fallen down the stairs whilst trying to escape.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by pstrron

The sheriff says that 19-year old Raymond Robison (above) "was engaging in sexual acts with a juvenile" when a family member of the victim walked in a witnessed the rape of the little boy.


If this had been my boy being raped...well lets just say there would be no need to call the police. This pedophile would be in need of other services and they are not provided by the hospital.

He was caught in the act, there is no assumption of guilt, it's a fact, guilty. Where I live, he wouldn't be seeing his 20th birthday. Now all the bleeding hearts here can defend him and talk all kinds of BS of how he is innocent until proven guilty, he was caught in the act.


Hand on heart exactly the same thing I would do

The Policeman was wrong to do what he did ,although if I was the Policeman he would have tripped up numerous times on the way to the back of the car probably hit his head face on top of the car door opening and maybe got his leg trapped in the door as I shut it

Riouz



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwood
reply to post by tanda7
 


I say AFTER the trial and he is found GUILTY then let everybody have a turn in a closed room with him.

Till he is proven guilty I assume he is innocent and he should not be touched.

What if it turns out he didn't do it ???????


Mob justice is not justice.

Cops are sworn to uphold the laws, not take them into their own hands.

They can't just go beating people willy nilly just because they don't like what that person supposedly did.

That's why we live in America.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
This incident is a good example of why I could not be a cop. I'd probably be fired (or worse) my first week on the job.
If I responded to a call and found some scumbag beating a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person, I'd shoot them. Multiple times. Then I'd reload and shoot them some more.
I wouldn't make a good cop.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join