XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.thebird.copwatch, alt.true-crime 
 From: sfurbish@hotpop.com 
  
 "Morf"  wrote in message 
 news:407ED1CC.55F@hotmail.com... 
  
 > Typically, you choose the unconstitutional method of denial of 
 > complaints based on arrest status. 
  
 Typically, I understand that you wouldn't recognize something as 
 "Constitutional" if the entire supreme court bit you on the ass. 
  
 > > Not all people subscribe to the theory that the best 
 > > defense is a good offense, but I doubt that few who read this thread 
 have 
 > > never seen an example of that tact in practice? In fact, the more 
 familiar 
 > > an individual is with the term "plea bargain" the more likely they might 
 be 
 > > to want a few extra chips in their pocket come court day. 
 > 
 > Plea bargains are blackmail. 
  
 Cops don't like 'em much either. You point? 
  
 > > They're not - if we're talking about criminal acts. Cops  get trials by 
 jury 
 > > just like everyone else. 
 > 
 > We aren't and you know it. The cops never get a trial because morons 
 > like you won't 
 > arrest them unless the complainant is a saint with absolute proof. 
  
 You're talkin out yer ass again son. 
  
 > Even then, cops will blackmail and intimidate their way out of these 
 > complaints too. 
  
 Would that be all cops or just those in your vivid imagination? 
  
 > Cops don't have an axe to grind? 
  
 For the most part - nope. 
  
 > You are incredibly ignorant. 
  
 Thanks. I think you are a POS too. 
  
 > >You want minor beefs handled like major crimes, all the while 
 > > knowing that can't happen in any type of forum that is fair to both 
 sides of 
 > > the issue. 
 > 
 > I want all complaints handled exactly the same without prejudice.(your 
 > beliefs that cops are being accused simply for doing theiir jobs) 
  
 My beliefs - just like yours - have nothing to do with the way things are or 
 are likely to be in the immediate future. 
  
 > > If it were the ambition of all cops to step outside the law to punish 
 all 
 > > dirtbags, you'd never see the light of day. 
 > 
 > Now you argue that I claim all cops. 
  
 Omitting the word does not mask the sentiment. 
  
 > Many people are in prison for daring to complain about cops. 
 > 
 > Many are released every year when the fake evidence is uncovered. 
  
 and SOME are released after their meds are adjusted, right? 
  
 > >The fact of the matter is, 
 > > however, most cops try to do an honest job. 
 > 
 > Cops doing an honest job has no bearing on why cops dismiss complaints 
 > against  cops but arrest non cops on identical complaints every day. 
  
 Do you even proof read the shit you post? 
  
 > You are the ignorant defender of accused cops, not me. 
  
 Of course. I thought we'd decided that your position was more that of a 
 know-nothing malcontent? 
  
 > > I'm trying to think of one good (or even one not-so-good) reason for a 
 cop 
 > > to falsely accuse an innocent person of a crime (or a traffic violation, 
 if 
 > > we want to stay on topic)? I can't come up with one. The inverse, 
 however, 
 > > is glaringly not true. 
 > 
 > 
 > Bullshit. Cops plant evidence, and frame people wholesale. 
 > 
 > I guess these cops that are caught just do it for kicks? 
 > 
 > Cops arrest families and friends to force their target into submission. 
  
 I think the term for your condition is "delusions of persecution"? 
  
 > That's how I became a copwatcher, genius. 
 > 
 > I speak from first hand experience. 
  
 Right...... and what was your tale of woe again? Oh yeah, you can't say can 
 you? Not without tossing out your most recent illusions of anonymity. 
  
 > > > Not much experience with bad cops, Steve? 
 > > 
 > > Very little indeed. 
 > 
 > Because you can't see bad in cops. 
  
 And you can't see good. 
  
 > > > The facts are simple. 
 > > > 
 > > > Department after department dismiss complaints wholesale. 
 > > 
 > > You see, that is NOT a fact - it's an allegation. That you apparently 
 don't 
 > > know the difference might speak to the source of your cluelessness? 
 > 
 > No, it is a fact. It is your opinion that it isn't. 
  
 Whatever. I'll try to consider your alternate reality if it ever becomes 
 necessary. 
  
 > > That's a fact. It is indeed easier for an insurance underwriter to pay 
 you a 
 > > few thousand to drop things then to do the right thing and fight you in 
 > > court. It's rarely a call that's left to the law enforcement agency and 
 if 
 > > it were you'd see fewer and fewer settlements. 
 > 
 > Nuisance settlements should be outlawed. 
 > 
 > Cops must be forced to defend every case in court. 
 > 
 > You pay the settlement and you ar guilty. Just like any plea bargain. 
  
 You really are kinda clueless, aren't you? 
  
 > > You have a banner to 
 > > follow as evidenced by your longevity in the cophater - I mean - 
 copwatch 
 > > group. It's no surprise that you'll never offer that benefit of doubt 
 that 
 > > you yourself would like to see... 
 > 
 > Denying people recourse against dirty cops breeds vigilanteism. 
 > 
 > But you aren't interested in saving cops lives, only their power. 
 > 
 > Your beliefs cause cops to die. 
 > 
 > But you will just deny it, as always. 
  
 Backsliding a bit there aren't we? Next thing you know you'll be calling for 
 cop's deaths again. 
  
 Steve 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)