no.. b/c it doesnt change the fact that the police officer used illegal force and falsified police report..
ppl magically assume b/c a criminal is beaten and abused its okay whether its done outside in society or in prison a crime is still a crime regardless of ones past actions.
also i dont know why that charlie chaplin chick isnt jail with no bail what she did is criminal and deserves to be locked up for life
Originally posted by Bardock42
Say it was a child rapist the police officer recognized and he pushed him over to arrest him before he got away, would that not change the circumstances with the exact same video?
Or he could have even been clocked by the copper when he snatched a bag, OR disobeyed an order to stop by another copper further up the road OR he smelt like a doughnut.
The possibilities are endless 😱
Originally posted by Bardock42
Say it was a child rapist the police officer recognized and he pushed him over to arrest him before he got away, would that not change the circumstances with the exact same video?
But those aren't the facts.
Any my post clearly indicates that I have that understanding.
If you want to move into a hypothetical that I don't have sufficient facts on, then I can't make a judgment call. 🙂
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Well, you go on thinking like that then. Says a lot about you.
You're right: it says that I don't believe in some make-believe facts that magically appear in court when presented by a slick-talking city lawyer.
No judgment call has to be made. Since we KNOW that he wasn't being taken down because the cop thought he was a child rapist murderer, or anything silly like that, you should take it for what it is on the video: a criminal physically assaulting a random person (with very real "deadly" ramifications from the assault) and then using his power to make himself appear innocent. That's two pretty big crimes and those two crimes are FACTS, not some random shit that is made up. Jury was a bunch of idiots.
Originally posted by dadudemon
But those aren't the facts.Any my post clearly indicates that I have that understanding.
If you want to move into a hypothetical that I don't have sufficient facts on, then I can't make a judgment call. 🙂
Well, my point was that there may be information that is not present in the video, which is true.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I know, but that wasn't my point.My post clearly indicated that the video + the facts = pretty much an "expert" on the case.
Go back and reread my post I made about it.
Nah, you didn't say anything about additional facts in the post I addressed. You claimed the video alone made you an expert on the events that occurred.
On a related note and seeing how this is making the news again at the moment, here's the footage of Ian Tomlinson being attacked by police at the g20 protests in London.
Tomlinson was walking home from work when a police officer struck him in the legs with a baton before pushing him to the ground.
Within minutes of the attack, Tomlinson lapsed in to unconsciousness and died.
This week it was announced that noone would be charged or held accountable for his death.
Originally posted by jaden101
YouTube videoOn a related note and seeing how this is making the news again at the moment, here's the footage of Ian Tomlinson being attacked by police at the g20 protests in London.
Tomlinson was walking home from work when a police officer struck him in the legs with a baton before pushing him to the ground.
Within minutes of the attack, Tomlinson lapsed in to unconsciousness and died.
This week it was announced that noone would be charged or held accountable for his death.
Oh be serious, look at the way he is walking infront of the police, he wasn't in a rush to get anywhere. He provoked it.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, you didn't say anything about additional facts in the post I addressed. You claimed the video alone made you an expert on the events that occurred.
I certainly did.
Re-read the post.
🙂
Edit - To make your life easier, here are the two additional facts that cannot be directly taken from the video, but require the video in order to prove:
"Falsification of police records to cover up guilt.
Innocence of the biker."
😉
