leoaffairs.com

Sir Lancelot wrote:

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

I am getting tired of taking advantage of the mentally handicapped! I don't think he even knows what point he is trying to make. Such a shame that hiring standards for law enforcement have become so low that people like So Fla Cop can get a job. However, Miami Dade PD has so many problems right now, I am sure they are very proud of him!

No Cry Babies is now known as Dennis the Constitutional Peasant!

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

I am getting tired of taking advantage of the mentally handicapped! I don't think he even knows what point he is trying to make. Such a shame that hiring standards for law enforcement have become so low that people like So Fla Cop can get a job. However, Miami Dade PD has so many problems right now, I am sure they are very proud of him!

so fla cop wrote:

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

I am getting tired of taking advantage of the mentally handicapped! I don't think he even knows what point he is trying to make. Such a shame that hiring standards for law enforcement have become so low that people like So Fla Cop can get a job. However, Miami Dade PD has so many problems right now, I am sure they are very proud of him!

I believe we were arguing what intent is and when it's needed particularly in reference to the Trooper Watts incident but have gone off on a tangent.

No cry babies, if The trooper did nothing wrong, then why is she being suspended and transferred.

I hope your investigative skills are better then your ability to pointlessly banter because I don't work for MPD

so fla cop wrote:

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

I am getting tired of taking advantage of the mentally handicapped! I don't think he even knows what point he is trying to make. Such a shame that hiring standards for law enforcement have become so low that people like So Fla Cop can get a job. However, Miami Dade PD has so many problems right now, I am sure they are very proud of him!

I believe we were arguing what intent is and when it's needed particularly in reference to the Trooper Watts incident but have gone off on a tangent.

No cry babies, if The trooper did nothing wrong, then why is she being suspended and transferred.

I hope your investigative skills are better then your ability to pointlessly banter because I don't work for MPD

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

I am getting tired of taking advantage of the mentally handicapped! I don't think he even knows what point he is trying to make. Such a shame that hiring standards for law enforcement have become so low that people like So Fla Cop can get a job. However, Miami Dade PD has so many problems right now, I am sure they are very proud of him!

So fla cop wrote:

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

I'm sure no cry babies would quote some case law like Stallone vs Producers of the movie Over the Top, as to why we couldn't.

Sgt Saddam wrote:Why don't you two just get together and arm wrestle or something

So fla cop wrote:

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:Nope no role play. True story that happened to me. We did not shoot. But I'm asking simply if it would be justified. The only facts I left out was the outcome which I will give after you've answered. It should be a simple answer for you based on your vast knowledge. The question is based on the circumstances would shooting be justifiable or not? And how can I prove intent?

Again, your details are simplistic at best! In a situation as you described, you do not know all the facts as of yet, just as you have left them out in your story. What was his demeanor? What was his body language? Etc.? I already stated that by case law, if he has the Ability (knife) and the Opportunity (distance in this case), you may PRESUME Intent, based on the totality of the circumstances. What is it about that you fail to understand??? So, in the Milo simulation, and since you purposely leave out the most important details I will play the what if game with you as well! If he became aggressive and/or started coming toward you with knife still in hand. Yes! You would be justified in shooting him no ifs, ands, or butts! If, he did not but still refused to drop the knife, one of you should have drawn a taser while the other covered with firearm and tased him! I can go on with about 15 more what if scenarios if you like, but it is pointless. So, go ahead and try to prove your little point so I can slap it down!!!

The good thing about firearms simulation training that you are talking about....you always get a second chance and no one really gets hurt....LMAO!

Actually you just proved the only point I was trying to make. That I don't have to prove intent. Merely believe there was intent based on the circumstances.(Was in fear of my life.)

but so as not to keep everyone in suspense I'll tell you the rest of the story.

After about 30 seconds or so of repeated commands to drop the knife, he did. And here's what was going on. The family was having a family reunion a at the house that day. Dad was on the side of the house with his motherinlaw cutting up fresh deer meat for the barbeque. He heard the loud knocking at his door and went to investigate. He was reluctant to drop is knife because he didn't want to get it dirty. The wife was trying to get everything clean before guests arrived she didn't answer the door because she taught it was her husband doing something outside. And their 5 year old son was playing on the phone and called 911. The fathers demeanor was originally defensive as he came around the corner then it quickly switched to confusion. Had we shot it would have been an unfortunate incident. But based on the circumstances I believe it would had been cleared by the agency and agrand jury. But you seemed to have been saying earlier that since there was actually no intent that I'd be waiting for my lethal injection right now.

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:Nope no role play. True story that happened to me. We did not shoot. But I'm asking simply if it would be justified. The only facts I left out was the outcome which I will give after you've answered. It should be a simple answer for you based on your vast knowledge. The question is based on the circumstances would shooting be justifiable or not? And how can I prove intent?

Again, your details are simplistic at best! In a situation as you described, you do not know all the facts as of yet, just as you have left them out in your story. What was his demeanor? What was his body language? Etc.? I already stated that by case law, if he has the Ability (knife) and the Opportunity (distance in this case), you may PRESUME Intent, based on the totality of the circumstances. What is it about that you fail to understand??? So, in the Milo simulation, and since you purposely leave out the most important details I will play the what if game with you as well! If he became aggressive and/or started coming toward you with knife still in hand. Yes! You would be justified in shooting him no ifs, ands, or butts! If, he did not but still refused to drop the knife, one of you should have drawn a taser while the other covered with firearm and tased him! I can go on with about 15 more what if scenarios if you like, but it is pointless. So, go ahead and try to prove your little point so I can slap it down!!!

The good thing about firearms simulation training that you are talking about....you always get a second chance and no one really gets hurt....LMAO!

So fla cop wrote:Nope no role play. True story that happened to me. We did not shoot. But I'm asking simply if it would be justified. The only facts I left out was the outcome which I will give after you've answered. It should be a simple answer for you based on your vast knowledge. The question is based on the circumstances would shooting be justifiable or not? And how can I prove intent?

So fla cop wrote:

NO CRY BABIES wrote:

So fla cop wrote:No cry babies, I'm confused. Were you teaching me law 101 or backpedaling 101?

No backpedaling by me. It is a shame you lack the ability to comprehend what has been stated. If you think I am backpedaling please show me where. I have proven to you that a person must indeed prove that a subject had the INTENT, ABILITY, and OPPORTUNITY to cause death or great bodily harm to them or another. If not, the judge does not grant them immunty from prosecution.

It is the same when an officer has to testify in front of a grand jury to justify is/her use of deadly force. The officer has to prove the same 3 things based on the totality of the circumstances. However, it is quite apparent you have never testified in front of a grand jury or any case that has had any significance to it. Pray that you never have to because your knowledge base is extremely weak! You remind me of the dumb private on the movie "A Few Good Men." If a question is asked that goes outside your reheresed testimony, you will fall apart.

One very simple but hugely important question. Do I need to PROVE "a subject had the INTENT, ABILITY, and OPPORTUNITY to cause death or great bodily harm to them or another" or do I need to prove why I reasaonably believed so?(or why I reasonably believed I was in fear for my life.)

True example:
A partner and I responded to a 911 hang up around midday. We approach the residence and take a peak through the front window. We can see all the way through the house and can see a woman profusely cleaning up something in the kitchen. My partner says as a joke "Wouldn't it be funny if she was cleaning up a crime scene?" We knock several times, knocking louder each time. Each time she ignores us and continues cleaning. Suddenly a man walks around from the side of the house saying whats the problem? The man has blood on his shirt and he is carrying a large kitchen knife that is dripping with blood. We draw down and tell the man repeatedly to drop the knife. He does not comply. He just stands there holding the knife at his side and continues to say whats the problem each time we tell him to drop the knife. The man is less than 15 feet from us. Shoot or Don't shoot? Do I need to ask his intent first?