So what did you guys do to that man on the bike? - Page 3
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 116
 
  1. #21
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    It’s your form Mod, you can delete whatever you want for whatever arbitrary reason. However, I saw the thread and there was nothing inflammatory, especially compared to other postings on this board. Hell, there’s a huge thread on a neighboring agency’s board accusing a high ranking employee, by name, of a DUI cover up, with no evidence presented. Where’s the consistency?

    Asking what happened when someone lost their life during an encounter with law enforcement, when little information has been released compared to similar events involving this agency, is not anti-LEO in of itself. Suppressing a discussion on such a topic comes off as obstructive, agenda-based, and highly suspicious at best. If there was information that could clear the deputies involved, there would already have been a press conference.
    As soon as I read this I thought "someone is going to all this guy "Jimmy", and sure enough, the next post did. These idiots are so predictable. This case stinks to high hell. Hiding the facts at the PCSO or on this forum both smell bad. Transparency will set you free.

  2. #22
    Administrator LEO Affairs Chief MOD 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Asking a question is not in and of itself inflammatory. One can simply answer "no". Can you please give an example of an inflammatory or anti-LEO question?
    If you don't know that a question can be inflammatory then I'm sorry. An inflammatory question is one that is asked in such a way that would somehow predispose the listeners towards a subject in an unreasonable, prejudiced way. (Paraphrased from www.triallaws.com)

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    It’s your form Mod, you can delete whatever you want for whatever arbitrary reason. However, I saw the thread and there was nothing inflammatory, especially compared to other postings on this board. Hell, there’s a huge thread on a neighboring agency’s board accusing a high ranking employee, by name, of a DUI cover up, with no evidence presented. Where’s the consistency?

    Asking what happened when someone lost their life during an encounter with law enforcement, when little information has been released compared to similar events involving this agency, is not anti-LEO in of itself. Suppressing a discussion on such a topic comes off as obstructive, agenda-based, and highly suspicious at best. If there was information that could clear the deputies involved, there would already have been a press conference.
    1. I can't and don't delete whatever I want for whatever arbitrary reason. I only delete posts that violate the Terms of Use.

    2. The Thread in question violated the Terms of Use by making accusations against the deputies involved of criminal and policy violations in the form of questions and yes, they were inflammatory.

    3. I don't have time to read every post or thread on every board. For the most part, I only get time to read those that are reported properly by someone who clicks on the "Report this Post" button located on the bottom left of every post. 5.

    4. I'm not sure that I have read the thread that you are talking about on another local board. When did you report that you thought it was a violation?

    5. I agree that asking questions alone is not anti-leo. Asking inflammatory questions that are accusatory in nature the way that these were on an LEO web site is anti-leo in my opinion.

    6. I'm not suppressing the discussion, as you can see I am allowing it here without the inflammatory questions. You notice that when the original poster reposted the thread, they knew what to leave out without asking. In fact they didn't mention the original thread being deleted until page 2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    As soon as I read this I thought "someone is going to all this guy "Jimmy", and sure enough, the next post did. These idiots are so predictable. This case stinks to high hell. Hiding the facts at the PCSO or on this forum both smell bad. Transparency will set you free.
    Nobody is hiding any facts here. None have been posted.

    Mod 1
    Mod 1

    http://WWW.LEOAFFAIRS.COM

    Terms Of Use

    The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a
    courthouse is this: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt
    Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of
    lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.

  3. #23
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Mod1 said "If you don't know that a question can be inflammatory then I'm sorry. An inflammatory question is one that is asked in such a way that would somehow predispose the listeners towards a subject in an unreasonable, prejudiced way. (Paraphrased from www.triallaws.com)"

    I read the entire post. The questions were legitimate. The facts are simple. The "suspect" had no injuries moments before coming in contact with the PCSO officers and was fatally and grievously injured with a brain injury moments after contact with these deputies. Asking how that happened with questions such as "was he punched" "Was he kicked" "Was he hit with a batton" "was his head stomped on" are all perfectly legitimate questions. It takes quite a bit of force to cause a fatal brain injury and such force is not implemented casually or accidentally during an LEO encounter. If reading these asked questions "predisposes" you to believe that the LEO's involved in this killing most likely did something wrong, then you are among the vast majority.

    These same questions are being asked by the public and the media. A Sheriff's refusal to explain how this man was killed tends to support a conclusion of misconduct. BG's intentional withholding of the manner of injury is highly suspicious. BG is known for his immediate press releases when he has something positive to say or wants to defend a PCSO action. This time, silence. Asking out here "what happened" is also a legitimate request for information in a forum that probably has some first hand knowledge.

  4. #24
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Go down to his office and ask him. This message board is not the proper venue so motor on down to talk to him in person

  5. #25
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Go down to his office and ask him. This message board is not the proper venue so motor on down to talk to him in person
    BG is hardly ever in town or at his office and as an active invest they aren't releasing any info until they get the "story" straight.

  6. #26
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Mod1 said "If you don't know that a question can be inflammatory then I'm sorry. An inflammatory question is one that is asked in such a way that would somehow predispose the listeners towards a subject in an unreasonable, prejudiced way. (Paraphrased from www.triallaws.com)"

    I read the entire post. The questions were legitimate. The facts are simple. The "suspect" had no injuries moments before coming in contact with the PCSO officers and was fatally and grievously injured with a brain injury moments after contact with these deputies. Asking how that happened with questions such as "was he punched" "Was he kicked" "Was he hit with a batton" "was his head stomped on" are all perfectly legitimate questions. It takes quite a bit of force to cause a fatal brain injury and such force is not implemented casually or accidentally during an LEO encounter. If reading these asked questions "predisposes" you to believe that the LEO's involved in this killing most likely did something wrong, then you are among the vast majority.

    These same questions are being asked by the public and the media. A Sheriff's refusal to explain how this man was killed tends to support a conclusion of misconduct. BG's intentional withholding of the manner of injury is highly suspicious. BG is known for his immediate press releases when he has something positive to say or wants to defend a PCSO action. This time, silence. Asking out here "what happened" is also a legitimate request for information in a forum that probably has some first hand knowledge.
    U seriously took all that time to write that? What a loser...

  7. #27
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Mod1 said "If you don't know that a question can be inflammatory then I'm sorry. An inflammatory question is one that is asked in such a way that would somehow predispose the listeners towards a subject in an unreasonable, prejudiced way. (Paraphrased from www.triallaws.com)"

    I read the entire post. The questions were legitimate. The facts are simple. The "suspect" had no injuries moments before coming in contact with the PCSO officers and was fatally and grievously injured with a brain injury moments after contact with these deputies. Asking how that happened with questions such as "was he punched" "Was he kicked" "Was he hit with a batton" "was his head stomped on" are all perfectly legitimate questions. It takes quite a bit of force to cause a fatal brain injury and such force is not implemented casually or accidentally during an LEO encounter. If reading these asked questions "predisposes" you to believe that the LEO's involved in this killing most likely did something wrong, then you are among the vast majority.

    These same questions are being asked by the public and the media. A Sheriff's refusal to explain how this man was killed tends to support a conclusion of misconduct. BG's intentional withholding of the manner of injury is highly suspicious. BG is known for his immediate press releases when he has something positive to say or wants to defend a PCSO action. This time, silence. Asking out here "what happened" is also a legitimate request for information in a forum that probably has some first hand knowledge.
    You write just like an asshole who has a Facebook page with never ending rants full of assumptions and anti-Leo garbage.

  8. #28
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    You write just like an asshole who has a Facebook page with never ending rants full of assumptions and anti-Leo garbage.
    And you appear to read and comment on every single thing that asshole writes. What does that make you? Give it a rest, get a life.

  9. #29
    Administrator LEO Affairs Chief MOD 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Mod1 said "If you don't know that a question can be inflammatory then I'm sorry. An inflammatory question is one that is asked in such a way that would somehow predispose the listeners towards a subject in an unreasonable, prejudiced way. (Paraphrased from www.triallaws.com)"

    I read the entire post. The questions were legitimate. The facts are simple. The "suspect" had no injuries moments before coming in contact with the PCSO officers and was fatally and grievously injured with a brain injury moments after contact with these deputies. Asking how that happened with questions such as "was he punched" "Was he kicked" "Was he hit with a batton" "was his head stomped on" are all perfectly legitimate questions. It takes quite a bit of force to cause a fatal brain injury and such force is not implemented casually or accidentally during an LEO encounter. If reading these asked questions "predisposes" you to believe that the LEO's involved in this killing most likely did something wrong, then you are among the vast majority.

    These same questions are being asked by the public and the media. A Sheriff's refusal to explain how this man was killed tends to support a conclusion of misconduct. BG's intentional withholding of the manner of injury is highly suspicious. BG is known for his immediate press releases when he has something positive to say or wants to defend a PCSO action. This time, silence. Asking out here "what happened" is also a legitimate request for information in a forum that probably has some first hand knowledge.
    I have to agree with you that those would be legitimate questions, but those were not the questions asked, nor were they in that tone. Also there was allegations of drug use by the deputies in the questions.

    Mod 1
    Mod 1

    http://WWW.LEOAFFAIRS.COM

    Terms Of Use

    The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a
    courthouse is this: You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt
    Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of
    lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.

  10. #30
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Jamie just can’t help himself when it comes to stupid questions. He wastes all this time and effort trying to be a prick and in the end he’s still going to be a nobody.

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •