1 edit
Originally posted by Sam The ShamStop being an idiot.. he walked away because he was scared at seeing the cop pointing what he thought was a real gun in his face suddenly like a psycho while under the impression they were there to debate the sign. What was it exactly that the cop did to make the driver think he was about to be arrested? Walking away with his back turned? What sort of **** cop does that?
When a policeman orders you to get out of the car and is talking to you, you don't get in a hissy fit and start to walk away.
The cop could have told the driver he was about to be arrested instead of walking away with his back turned. He could have warned that a failure to sign would have resulted in arrest. He could have even written did not sign and thrown the ticket on the driver's lap. He FAILED on all those counts because he is an ego-manical thug that didnt want to uphold law but his own pride. He lacked the ability to communicate so looked to force when it wasnt needed.
Originally posted by no1marauderA policeman can DETAIN you for questioning without arresting you. When you are pulled over for a traffic violation you are being detained.
It's the law. When policemen break it, they should be held accountable like any other criminal.
You are Not allowed to leave the scene unless you are a Wah, Wah, manboy pinhead.
GRANNY.
1 edit
Originally posted by WWindmillNot luck, but common sense. Massey's lawyer was probably working on a standard contingency fee, taking 1/3 of whatever the settlement would be. If the case looked winable, his lawyer would NEVER have settled for so measly an amount when millions could be had. More likely he realized things didn't look too good and took the small amount when offered instead of spending a lot of time on a lost case and coming away with nothing. Utah on the other hand would have been out a lot more than 40k fighting jerk-boy for months on end. The small settlement is a sure sign that massey's lawyer had lost all hope of winning.
Like No.1. said before UHP were LUCKY to get off so lightly.
Originally posted by no1marauderIt's hard to drill through the wood sometimes but I'll give it another go...
It seems hard for certain idiots to understand, but no an officer is not justified in using ANY force he pleases to effectuate an arrest. He must use reasonable force under the circumstances. A taser is to be used only in self-defense to subdue a threat. That was obviously not the case here as the subject did absolutely nothing that threatened the office ...[text shortened]... if you don't cooperate 100% with any demands that he makes of you. But that isn't the law.
Some Idiots: "Well, I disagreed with the officer, so I just walked away."
I'm sure a lot of people would like to apply that sentiment -- including the thousands of "innocent" people in jail who were "framed" or there "just due to a misunderstanding."
HELLO?!? YOU STANDING ON THE STREET IS NOT WHERE THAT GETS DECIDED. IT GETS DECIDED BY A JUDGE/JURY. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU PLACE YOUR HANDS BEHIND YOUR HEAD AND FOLLOW THE OFFICER'S INSTRUCTIONS.
I'll give you one out...if the officer tells you to step off a cliff or go play in traffic, then you don't have to do it.
BTW the officer in this case said nothing of the kind.
Originally posted by Sam The ShamOff courser Mr,Mrsayey;s lawyer was looking at what he could get. WHY elses would he be working in the job that he goes? He settleed for the sum he did because he didnt realise that I would be on the ***** dirty cops ass for what they did. YEP.. think about that you litttle boysd and thibks about what would have happened if an intelligent man like no.1 was on your cdase. 40,0000 for me... 5000,000 for no.1./ Like I said before UIHP wereLUCKY.
Not luck, but common sense. Massey's lawyer was probably working on a standard contingency fee, taking 1/3 of whatever the settlement would be. If the case looked winable, his lawyer would NEVER have settled for so measly an amount when millions could be had. More likely he realized things didn't look too good and took the small amount when offered ins ...[text shortened]... n end. The small settlement is a sure sign that massey's lawyer had lost all hope of winning.
1 edit
Originally posted by Sam The ShamYou can't win millions when you have no serious injury. Your ignorance is stunning. $40,000 in an excessive force case with no injury is quite a nice settlement for the plaintiff.
Not luck, but common sense. Massey's lawyer was probably working on a standard contingency fee, taking 1/3 of whatever the settlement would be. If the case looked winable, his lawyer would NEVER have settled for so measly an amount when millions could be had. More likely he realized things didn't look too good and took the small amount when offered ins ...[text shortened]... n end. The small settlement is a sure sign that massey's lawyer had lost all hope of winning.
I don't see how it would have cost the State of Utah that much; counsel was from the AG's office. If they were so sure they would prevail and that the cop was justified, you'd think they would want to set a precedent. Instead, the attorney in charge admitted it was a "close case". You think that's confident defense lawyer talk?🙄
1 edit
Originally posted by smw6869He can detain you for the purposes of giving you the ticket and for further investigation if warranted by the circumstances. Once the purposes of the temporary seizure are fulfilled, you are free to leave. Please try to read and understand the quote I gave you from the US Supreme Court's decision in Garner.
A policeman can DETAIN you for questioning without arresting you. When you are pulled over for a traffic violation you are being detained.
You are Not allowed to leave the scene unless you are a Wah, Wah, manboy pinhead.
GRANNY.
A policemen can't actually detain for questioning absent extraordinary circumstances. Take a gander at Terry v. Ohio for further details.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe fact still remains that if he had been paying attention in the first place, and if he could read, he would have signed the ticket and never given the cop an excuse to arrest him. The best way to deal with a cop, bored or not, is to say Yes sir or maybe no sir, or possibly whatever you say sir. Telling the cop what he will or won't do is a recipe for disaster every time. I would just like to point out once again that the ticket clearly stated in the box where you sign it that signing is not an admission of guilt.
He can detain you for the purposes of giving you the ticket and for further investigation if warranted by the circumstances. Once the purposes of the temporary seizure are fulfilled, you are free to leave. Please try to read and understand the quote I gave you from the US Supreme Court's decision in Garner.
A policemen can't actually detain ...[text shortened]... ioning absent extraordinary circumstances. Take a gander at Terry v. Ohio for further details.
Originally posted by dryhumpAnd I would repeat what the vid clearly shows: the cop didn't arrest him before using the taser. Thus, he was free to walk away from the cop under the law.
The fact still remains that if he had been paying attention in the first place, and if he could read, he would have signed the ticket and never given the cop an excuse to arrest him. The best way to deal with a cop, bored or not, is to say Yes sir or maybe no sir, or possibly whatever you say sir. Telling the cop what he will or won't do is a recipe for di ...[text shortened]... e ticket clearly stated in the box where you sign it that signing is not an admission of guilt.
Originally posted by no1marauderSo, if the officer had just told the kid he was under arrest the use of the taser would have been fine? Using a taser is not deadly force, is it?
And I would repeat what the vid clearly shows: the cop didn't arrest him before using the taser. Thus, he was free to walk away from the cop under the law.
GRANNY.