Followup to Chet Szymecki's arrest

[joab]

Many people wouldn't consider torturing someone with handcuffs, "good faith".

Most people don't consider putting handcuffs on people as torture

And again, I choose to believe the word of the person (Chet) who DIDN'T break the law, as opposed to the those (the Norfolk Police officers) who did break the law.

That's a cop out
VCDL has an agenda and has proven that they will resort to theatrics to further it.
Not that there;'s anything wrong with that, just that that doesn't warrant my total and complete trust of their word

If need be, they'll just raise taxes to pay any judgements.

Again
So?
The taxpayers put those people in office, if they get tired of it they will put them out, if not they get what they deserve.
Same as NOLA

You never answered my question
How did Norfolk respond to your FOIA request?
You didn't honestly thnk I would forget did you?

 

[NickEllis]

Joab.

Dude.

Chill.

Out.

 

[Smurfslayer]

unsubstantiated

We are talking about individuals officers who obviously acted in good faith by calling on their legal authority to clarify, presumably after their filed supervisor was unable to.

Actually, we have not seen this substantiated anywhere. Besides the allegation by the newspaper, what evidence are you offering to substantiate the claim the the officers in fact acted in good faith?

Further, as previously discussed, the city attorney is not the legal authority to which the officers should be addressing a question of law. First, it is the magistrate on duty, next the magistrate on call, finally the commonwealths attorney. NOT the city atty.

 

[joab]

Actually, we have not seen this substantiated anywhere. Besides the allegation by the newspaper, what evidence are you offering to substantiate the claim the the officers in fact acted in good faith?

That would be the supported speculation I spoke of earlier.
If I allowed it then to counter my argument then I am allowed to use it to defend my argument
Up until now no one has disputed that the call took place
Now in keeping with my campaign of honesty that has been lacking in certain other poster's argument
I have to question the call

It appears that VCDL call the CA not the officers oat the scene, from what I can gather

I would also amend my argument to include harsher punishment for the senior officers at the scene, possibly to the point of termination
Especially if it could be shown that those calls were not made


Why would the city attorney be left out of that chain of command?

Esp[ecially if the police could still hold a suspect even if the magistrate released him

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

didn't mr syzmecki report that they called city attorney? funny how his account is alternatly gospel then unsubstantiated

 

[joab]

didn't mr syzmecki report that they called city attorney? funny how his account is alternatly gospel then unsubstantiated

I have only looked at two reports
The other one is an account of what happened when a VCDL officer contacted the city attorney

 

[Deanimator]

Most people don't consider putting handcuffs on people as torture

Most people other than Klaus Barbi consider TIGHTENING handcuffs in response to a complaint that they're already TOO tight, torture.

I can take the word of someone who committed NO crime, or I can take the word of those who committed multiple crimes in addition to the torture. I'll believe the non-criminal.

The VCDL is good at "theatrics". So were the NAACP and SCLC. That doesn't lend any credibility to Bull Connor or the Norfolk PD officers who broke the law.

Punishing the taxpayers of Norfolk won't stop criminal and tortious acts of the type committed against Chet. Deterring those committing them will. It's as close as possible to a 100% guarantee that when other cops see the cops who abused Chet filing for bankruptcy, they'll become EXPERTS on state preemption and follow the wise example of the Cleveland FOP.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Leatherneck, the passage I quoted about the Norfolk police department's policy with respect to marijuana is from the police department's own web site. Read it yourself in the section on "Drug Usage".

I don't know whether my quotation should be considered a supported speculation or an unsupported speculation but I've never been much of a speculation supporter or an athletic supporter either. I lead a sedentary life.

I am, however, fascinated by the prospect interested in hearing more about the Norfolk police department's recreational use of handcuffs. What with toking, recreational handcuffing, and the apparent lack of a need for it to know the law it enforces, the Norfolk police department is beginning to look like paid fun. It's emerging as a kind of video game but played on real streets with real people.

 

[Noxx]

Frequent use of marijuana, e.g., ten times within two years prior to the application date.

Frequent? I get dinged on the wizz quiz ONCE and I'm out of work... and we don't carry guns either. Yeesh.

 

[joab]

Perhaps if some read more and sent less time on simplistic quips they would see that the "frequent marijuana use" is the threshold before joining the academy and not after

Also further scrutiny into the statements of "tortuous" handcuff tightening will reveal enough discrepancies to render the statements suspect, at least

Tell mw D who were those witnesses to this torture
And BTW what was Norfolk's response to your FOIA request?

 

[TCB in TN]

I have stayed out of this till now, but do you seriously think that recruiting those individuals who have only broken the law and smoked pot and by doing so have broken the law even if only ten or fewer times within two years prior to the application date, is really a good thing?

Obviously you expect less from our LEAs than do I.

 

[Deanimator]

Also further scrutiny into the statements of "tortuous" handcuff tightening will reveal enough discrepancies to render the statements suspect, at least

I choose to believe the victim of a crime rather than the perpetrators...

 

[Robert Hairless]

Is it possible that I'm being reproached for my fledgling attempt at a "supported speculation"?

What I wrote in my message addressed to the estimable Arfin Greebly was this:

Of course no one here wishes to be unfair to Norfolk's finest. In that spirit we should recognize the following disqualification for recruits to Norfolk's police department:

3. Frequent use of marijuana, e.g., ten times within two years prior to the application date.

So it's okay for Norfolk police officers to have used marijuana as long as it was less than ten times within the two years prior to their application. There seems to be no restriction on their use of marijuana while they are Norfolk police officers....

To support my speculation I quoted from information distributed by the Norfolk police department itself.

And yet I've just been speculated against for not having noted that "the 'frequent marijuana use' is the threshold before joining the academy and not after" and that speculation is--horrors!--unsupported speculation. So much of the speculation going around nowadays seems to be the unsupported kind that is being passed off as the supported kind. Mine, however, is the genuine supported speculation. Accept no substitutes.

We are not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

 

[joab]

I have stayed out of this till now, but do you seriously think that recruiting those individuals who have only broken the law and smoked pot and by doing so have broken the law even if only ten or fewer times within two years prior to the application date, is really a good thing?

Obviously you expect less from our LEAs than do I.

You want to show me where I said it was a good or bad thing?
Obviously I expect more attention to detail than you do

Simplistic juvenile twists and weak attempts at pseudo intellectual humor Robert nothing more
Apparently twisting statements and belittling arguments is what passes as countering them in your circles

 

[joab]

This is starting to bore even me

If anyone has any INTELLIGENT comments with any basis in the real world and that do not rely on theatrics, melodrama and false accusations feel free to PM me


Notice I said intelligent, idiotic twists and fabrications will be ignored

 

[Deanimator]

If anyone has any INTELLIGENT comments with any basis in the real world and that do not rely on theatrics, melodrama and false accusations feel free to PM me

The only false accusations were by the Norfolk PD, followed by a false arrest and a battery. Simple justice demands that they pay severely for these shocking crimes and tortious acts.

 

[Smurfslayer]

that was a cheap shot

If anyone has any INTELLIGENT ...

Time to throw the red card at Joab. Plenty of posters herein have disagreed with you in an intelligent fashion. I would point out that you blatantly insinuated the officers were exercising diligence in contacting the city attorney, which is false. As I previously pointed out the commonwealths attorney represents the (people of the) commonwealth at trial. the city attorney represents the city against claims of liability, and in litigation as well as advises the council.

It was uncalled for to insult everyone herein who has disagreed with you in this fashion and well below THR.

http://www.thehighroad.org/code-of-conduct.html

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Error 611: Loss of Civility

Time, gentlemen, please.

I think this has had about as much "speculation" as can be stood.

There will be more news on this, and at that time a new thread will, I'm sure, be opened for its discussion.

Pretty sure this one here won't stand much more discussion before personalized "red cards" start being issued.

And I'd hate to have to do that.

Being all cuddly and stuff, you know.