Results 51 to 59 of 59
-
01-11-2020, 02:34 PM #51UnregisteredGuest
SAO and Ethics personnel scheduled to be back this week to continue the investigations 😳
The threats and hostilities from the head of the Dias was a big NO NO
There will be change. But not what the clowns 🤡 and puppets were expecting
-
01-12-2020, 10:33 PM #52UnregisteredGuest
Fake news.
Provide the video or it never happened.
We did hear that Rolle had to be restrained though. I AM A MAN. LOL
-
01-19-2020, 02:57 PM #53UnregisteredGuest
Looks like action is going to take place soon. Base on a sneak peak at an email 👀
-
02-17-2020, 11:10 PM #54UnregisteredGuest
SL was bragging (after a few liquid lip softening drinks) about how he put some of the council in their place etc. little does he know that some “friends” are not truly friends
Can someone say cell phone recorded 😳
-
02-18-2020, 10:43 PM #55
-
02-19-2020, 01:24 AM #56UnregisteredGuest
Can someone say .... Public location (restaurant) no expectation of privacy. Restaurant also has video surveillance system
-
02-19-2020, 01:32 AM #57UnregisteredGuest
Try to read and think a little. I know not too much as we don't want your brain to get swole.
Video surveillance almost never has audio. You do realize the different between video and audio, correct? You do realize FS. 934.03 only protects oral communication, and not images, correct?
Being in public does not alone mean that there is not an expectation of privacy in a conversation. You should read Katz v US, the landmark SCOTUS case on privacy, since Florida follows federal law on privacy matters.
It's obvious you work for HPD, and are probably brass, as you are clearly retarded.
-
02-19-2020, 11:37 PM #58UnregisteredGuest
Ohhh we thinkith thou is “mistaken” (must be a TH follower)
Conversation in a public restaurant at a public table in the mix of other members of the public. Umm... not protected. Might need to update the post hole digger education
-
02-20-2020, 03:02 AM #59UnregisteredGuest
Bookmarks