|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 20, 2009 13:56:36 GMT -5
 That's BULL SH*T!  No plead bargain is sketched in gold. I know of cases where the defendant plead guilty to receive a particular sentence and DIDN'T get it. The judge over-rode the DA's suggestion and ignore the probation reports and gave his own sentence under the guidelines of the crime. He wasn't worried about what was "fair" to the defendant.  For every one of those, I can find 10,000 as I described. ;D Don't care how many opposite cases you find in the law library. Fact is, a judge can and has over rode plead bargains and can throw the book at a defendant who deserves a tougher sentence suggested by the DA. Proving the courts do have the ability and much more power then you're giving them credit for. We need more judges as such whose focus is not on being "fair" to the defendant but looking to see that some of these dangerous slumbags are off our streets for longer periods of time. |
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 20, 2009 14:18:13 GMT -5
......and the public. The message I am trying to make people understand. There are solutions, if both parties are willing to get informed and educated. Yes, the solution is for a cop to not tase a woman wanting to exercise her 6th amendment rights and see the alleged proof. With that kind of attitude nothing will ever improve in the relationship between the public and police. Swimmy, it's not that simple or that one-sided. We don't live in a perfect world. If I were to play your game, I would simply answer.....for every one bad incident done by an officer there is 10,000 done that are good. For every one bad incident that a citizen is subjected to there are 10,000 they are guilty of or they got away with. I am not looking to argue points. We should be discussing solutions to improve the relationship and both parties have to be willing to want that and work toward it. |
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 20, 2009 14:28:08 GMT -5
Define compliance and order. In my incident with the gas station, he never gave a lawful order. I wasn't stopped. And the law compels him to articulate a lawful reason to make such a demand. See 4th amendment! I have every right to question why I have to produce on demand when I've done nothing wrong. It's called police harassment because I'm suing one of his own for false imprisonment. For the first time in my life, I would love to refer to that cop and others like for the swine they are! Never would have happened a few years ago, though I still thought they were trained to follow the law back then too. Point is that they are no better than us, yet they routinely violate the law by their leisure! Last night, as I walked home from court, a cop turned on his siren and lights to go around traffic at an intersection. Upon passing the intersection, the cop turned off his lights and sirens and slowed back down and stopped at the other red light a block up. You would be crucified if you tried that. Damn Swimmy, am I talking Greek?  As in this Syracuse case.................being stopped by an officer, she did not comply with the officer's order.........by law, could she or anyone else be arrested? Asked this question twice and still don't have an answer. |
|
|
|
Post by corner on Dec 20, 2009 14:44:43 GMT -5
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 20, 2009 14:49:55 GMT -5
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol!!!!!!!!! Asked it of Swimmy. ps: You know I know the answer. |
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 20, 2009 16:10:45 GMT -5
If ya already know the answer, why the hell are you asking Swimmy? That seems a little silly to me.  |
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 20, 2009 17:04:20 GMT -5
(The Ramones say) "I wanna' be sedated".
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 20, 2009 17:12:33 GMT -5
Lightly and pleasantly sedated, or just plain knocked out sedated?? LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by stoney on Dec 20, 2009 17:14:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbbiez on Dec 20, 2009 17:59:11 GMT -5
......and the public. The message I am trying to make people understand. There are solutions, if both parties are willing to get informed and educated. Yes, the solution is for a cop to not tase a woman wanting to exercise her 6th amendment rights and see the alleged proof. Clipper, this is the reason I asked Swimmy. Point being she broke the law from the beginning by not complying with the officers order. Had nothing to do with violating her 6th amendment. |
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Dec 20, 2009 18:00:31 GMT -5
That is what I don't understand. We have beat this thing to death. Yes she could be arrested for failure to comply, but she also had the right to question the officer as to what she was stopped for. She definitely was wrong as the stop progressed, but the cop got totally out of control within the first few minutes of the conversation.
The whole thing went South in a hurry, but the taser was totally uneccessary.Syracuse IS liable for the actions of the on-duty officer, and he WAS out of line in his overkill. Like I said before. No matter what amendment, he could have slammed her down and cuffed her, and it would have been a legitimate arrest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 20, 2009 22:40:16 GMT -5
For every one of those, I can find 10,000 as I described. ;D Don't care how many opposite cases you find in the law library. Fact is, a judge can and has over rode plead bargains and can throw the book at a defendant who deserves a tougher sentence suggested by the DA. Proving the courts do have the ability and much more power then you're giving them credit for. We need more judges as such whose focus is not on being "fair" to the defendant but looking to see that some of these dangerous slumbags are off our streets for longer periods of time. Those cases where the judges overrode the plea bargain agreement were politically motivated for questionable reasons. We need LESS, no more, of those types of judges. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 20, 2009 22:41:40 GMT -5
Yes, the solution is for a cop to not tase a woman wanting to exercise her 6th amendment rights and see the alleged proof. With that kind of attitude nothing will ever improve in the relationship between the public and police. Swimmy, it's not that simple or that one-sided. We don't live in a perfect world. If I were to play your game, I would simply answer.....for every one bad incident done by an officer there is 10,000 done that are good. For every one bad incident that a citizen is subjected to there are 10,000 they are guilty of or they got away with. I am not looking to argue points. We should be discussing solutions to improve the relationship and both parties have to be willing to want that and work toward it. One breach of an individual's constitutional rights is one too many. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 20, 2009 22:44:05 GMT -5
Damn Swimmy, am I talking Greek? As in this Syracuse case.................being stopped by an officer, she did not comply with the officer's order.........by law, could she or anyone else be arrested? Asked this question twice and still don't have an answer. I answered it once, and didn't see your rephrased question. CPL 195.05 makes it a misdemeanor to interfere with the administration of a government function. The irony is that many of "these" arrests are based on facts where the victim is questioning the cop's motives and the cop doesn't like having to comply with the constitution. Many of them are dismissed and open the municipality up to false arrest suits. |
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Dec 20, 2009 22:47:35 GMT -5
If all that was necessary for what happened to be legal, clipper, was for the cop to make a take-down arrest as you described, then why settle for the $75k? Oh because that's not all that would have been necessary. Simply explaining to the woman how the procedure worked would have sufficed and there would be no incident, if she persisted, call in back up, if what she did was lopsidedly wrong.
|
|
That's BULL SH*T! 
