Cop arrests random girl, takes her cell, steals nudes

[awesome31312]

"Cop Arrests Woman for DUI, Then He Steals Nude Photos from Her Phone"

"California Highway Patrol officer Sean Harrington, of Martinez, California is accused of forwarding nude photos of a DUI suspect from her cellphone to his, while she was locked up in a holding cell."

Source



Follow-up:

"Cop Who Stole Nude Photos From Woman’s Cellphone, Says It’s A “Game” Among Police"

"Earlier this week, we broke the story of California Highway Patrol officer Sean Harrington, a cop who was accused of stealing nude photographs from a woman who was arrested for DUI.

On Friday, Mercury News obtained court documents showing that the situation was more disturbing and more widespread than was initially expected. The victim and her lawyer did suspect that other officers were involved in the crime, and according to the recently obtained documents, there were a number of other officers involved. In fact, it was admitted by officer Harrington that collecting nude photos from the phones of arrested women was a “game” that he and other officers played while on duty."

Source

[1715246020]

1715246020

[Grand_Voyageur]

Moron


Follow-up:


Morons

[awesome31312]

Moron


Follow-up:


Morons

Was your spam really worth the 0.00005 BTC?

[farjia]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

[awesome31312]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

[Grand_Voyageur]

Moron


Follow-up:


Morons

Was your spam really worth the 0.00005 BTC?

I didn't mind a satoshi about it. However the post summarize very well what I think about of the Officer(s) involved: they are morons! Only one (or more) moron(s) can make such an idiotic act for fun. I think the force need to better discipline their men about what is permissible and what is not. IMHO, If one or more of them need to lose the shield....bad for them.

Just my 2 satoshi, mate.

[Grand_Voyageur]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

[bitsmichel]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Could surveillance of the police prevent such cases?

[awesome31312]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

[TECSHARE]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

[awesome31312]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

It's easy to find out where a cop lives

You're better off "misplacing" your USB and hoping he picks it up and plugs it into his computer, where his wife's newdz are stored

[Yeezus]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

Then they should have head-mounted cameras. If they have them in the cars I can't see why they shouldn't have them on their person. It will provide great evidence for both sides of the law if it's ever needed.

[awesome31312]

We're talking about turning cops into cyborgs here

[CoinCidental]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

Then they should have head-mounted cameras. If they have them in the cars I can't see why they shouldn't have them on their person. It will provide great evidence for both sides of the law if it's ever needed.

the  police already have body mounted cameras in most forces  and i dont think they  want to wear them

it takes away their use of the badge to beat the shit out of people

[CoinCidental]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

What the fuck is wrong with you? His wife is also one of his victims and you want to punish her for his crimes?

why is the cops wife a victim ? 

[Grand_Voyageur]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

Then they should have head-mounted cameras. If they have them in the cars I can't see why they shouldn't have them on their person. It will provide great evidence for both sides of the law if it's ever needed.

the  police already have body mounted cameras in most forces  and i dont think they  want to wear them

it takes away their use of the badge to beat the shit out of people

What is wrong with you? Police is not your enemy! See this "poor drunk girl" attempting to frame the Police Officer with sexual assault!

[CoinCidental]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

Then they should have head-mounted cameras. If they have them in the cars I can't see why they shouldn't have them on their person. It will provide great evidence for both sides of the law if it's ever needed.

the  police already have body mounted cameras in most forces  and i dont think they  want to wear them

it takes away their use of the badge to beat the shit out of people

What is wrong with you? Police is not your enemy! See this "poor drunk girl" attempting to frame the Police Officer with sexual assault!

LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvSmY5LJ2LM

http://www.quizlaw.com/blog/police_take_advantage_of_drunk.php

[CoinCidental]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

What the fuck is wrong with you? His wife is also one of his victims and you want to punish her for his crimes?

why is the cops wife a victim ? 

Would you be cool with your husband/wife molesting other people while at work?

He is breaching the contract of marriage at the very least.

he should be fired from the force but ive seen so many bent cops over the years nothing they get away with  surprises me anymore

as for being a bad husband ,i suppose he is but thats not illegal

the sexual assualt should be and would be if anyone else except a cop was accused of it .....

[CoinCidental]

does anyone give a shit about the cops wife ? 
she wasnt sexually  assaulted nor was she even present when the other assault took place
" breaching the contract of marriage " lol what century are you living in ?
do try to keep up 

[TECSHARE]

does anyone give a shit about the cops wife ? 
she wasnt sexually  assaulted nor was she even present when the other assault took place
" breaching the contract of marriage " lol what century are you living in ?
do try to keep up 

This is pretty much my point. Since when to cops give a flying fuck about your family? I don't think they are going to stop until people start perpetrating upon them what they do to others. Yeah his wife probably didn't do anything and I was being a bit facetious, but perpetrators of brutality only understand one thing - more brutality.

[Spendulus]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

It's easy to find out where a cop lives

You're better off "misplacing" your USB and hoping he picks it up and plugs it into his computer, where his wife's newdz are stored

BWHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

you mean, like totally, prove his moronitocity!

[Vod]

Disgusting behaviour, but from the read of the article he'll probably pay for it with his job and maybe some money and/or freedom.

[BitMos]

I have heard the same story about a security guard in a woman wc night club... the girl wanted to take C. in the toilet, sadly for her the security guard came. The deal was for him to finger her, and no cops would be involved. She accepted.

Concerning this case, I do believe that they are agencies that deals with that kind of behaviors... who wants rogue cops harvesting the cocoon? On the others side who can be stupid enough to carry "sensitive data" in such a careless way?

The question what will happen to this cop?

[TECSHARE]

I have heard the same story about a security guard in a woman wc night club... the girl wanted to take C. in the toilet, sadly for her the security guard came. The deal was for him to finger her, and no cops would be involved. She accepted.

Concerning this case, I do believe that they are agencies that deals with that kind of behaviors... who wants rogue cops harvesting the cocoon? On the others side would can stupid enough to carry "sensitive data" in such a careless way?

The question what will happen to this cop?

This is quite a bit different considering a cop can destroy your life. The worst a security guard could do is kick you out of the club.

[BitMos]

Problem most People don't know their constitutional rights, and accept the unacceptable. But for the defense of her choice, she had, according to the rumors, already been caught by the cops for her consumption, the security guard knew it, and used this knowledge in threatening her to call the cops again in the night club and arrest her (probation). Furthermore, once you are inside the place, there is always some difficulties to get out, furthermore, once you use violence to open a path, it's more than probable that the girl wouldn't have the kinetic energy needed for full&safe extraction. As such we can agree that she was cornered. A  POTUS was assassinated while protected by cops... so about the Immortality of cop, I am very doubtful.  Once upon a time in southern country full of sand, a cop said he was the law, until the Force entered his town, the next morning, the house of the cop was blown up... and not by the Force.

[Swordsoffreedom]

The main problem with these type of cases is that it is your words versus a cop.
Knowing how cops operate and take care of each other in a sense it is an uphill battle especially when their is not any evidence against it.
(Power corruption)

[BitMos]

digitalize it all. And if she wasn't under persecution for her habit, she could have gone to the hospital and ask for dna sample: Mr. Judge how did his sample arrives in my genital area?

[CoinCidental]

digitalize it all. And if she wasn't under persecution for her habit, she could have gone to the hospital and ask for dna sample: Mr. Judge how did his sample arrives in my genital area?

I don't think fingering someone would leave  much dna  to find later at hospital
is not the same as if  they had sex 

Anyways, it's very traumatic for the victim to have to go  hospital and tell the story
so in most cases these scumbags get away with it and people are afraid of what they
might be capable of so reluctant to make matters worse

[awesome31312]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

That's when you find out where he lives and finger his wife while hes tied to a radiator.

What the fuck is wrong with you? His wife is also one of his victims and you want to punish her for his crimes?

Strange world we live in, where a man will be "punished" for sexual assault not by getting assaulted himself, but by getting his wife abused.

[BitMos]

I don't think fingering someone would leave  much dna  to find later at hospital
is not the same as if  they had sex 

Anyways, it's very traumatic for the victim to have to go  hospital and tell the story
so in most cases these scumbags get away with it and people are afraid of what they
might be capable of so reluctant to make matters worse

The predator knew exactly what he was doing... even if there is only "a little" dna trace, it's enough to prove a contact in my untrained assertion. As a side note, if there is a man, even from a staff in the woman wc where ever... be aware.

[TECSHARE]

digitalize it all. And if she wasn't under persecution for her habit, she could have gone to the hospital and ask for dna sample: Mr. Judge how did his sample arrives in my genital area?

I don't think fingering someone would leave  much dna  to find later at hospital
is not the same as if  they had sex  

Anyways, it's very traumatic for the victim to have to go  hospital and tell the story
so in most cases these scumbags get away with it and people are afraid of what they
might be capable of so reluctant to make matters worse

There actually would likely be DNA under the cops finger nails.

Problem most People don't know their constitutional rights, and accept the unacceptable. But for the defense of her choice, she had, according to the rumors, already been caught by the cops for her consumption, the security guard knew it, and used this knowledge in threatening her to call the cops again in the night club and arrest her (probation). Furthermore, once you are inside the place, there is always some difficulties to get out, furthermore, once you use violence to open a path, it's more than probable that the girl wouldn't have the kinetic energy needed for full&safe extraction. As such we can agree that she was cornered. A  POTUS was assassinated while protected by cops... so about the Immortality of cop, I am very doubtful.  Once upon a time in southern country full of sand, a cop said he was the law, until the Force entered his town, the next morning, the house of the cop was blown up... and not by the Force.

I don't agree with this assessment. I used to work security at a club so I know first hand what security guards can and can not do legally, and additionally how police interact with them and the limit of BS they will buy from security. For one, a club usually has multiple entrances and exits, usually required by law for fire code reasons. Second, a security guard at a club CAN NOT hold you against your will unless you have assaulted someone, and even then it is a grey area. Being too drunk is not a legal reason to prevent someone from leaving the premises. There might be an argument to be made that she shouldn't be driving but that is also stretching it. Stopping someone from leaving is tantamount to kidnapping in a court of law. This woman had a lot more options, I think she just preferred to be a sloppy drunk slut IMO.

[awesome31312]

The DNA under the cop's fingernails is useless though since the cop would never be arrested for it

[CoinCidental]

The DNA under the cop's fingernails is useless though since the cop would never be arrested for it

I can only  assume the cop isn't likely  to report himself for sexual misconduct and voluntarily go to hospital so his fingers can be tested  for dna in a timely fashion since dna samples need to be taken quickly if there's any hope of collecting them  which leaves it up to the victim and there may or may not be any dna even if she gets straight to the hospital and admits everything to them

Without a lot of proof its always going to be hard for a drunk girl to be believed over a cop  on duty

Even if there was dna obtained it would be his word against hers that she was assaulted and it was not consensual

The odds are stacked in favor of dirty cops and they should all be made to wear body recording devices at all times when on duty to cut down on this kind of stuff

Also they should never be left alone with  drunk, young or otherwise vulnerable girls or other citizens 

[Furio]

"Cop Arrests Woman for DUI, Then He Steals Nude Photos from Her Phone"

"California Highway Patrol officer Sean Harrington, of Martinez, California is accused of forwarding nude photos of a DUI suspect from her cellphone to his, while she was locked up in a holding cell."

Source



Follow-up:

"Cop Who Stole Nude Photos From Woman’s Cellphone, Says It’s A “Game” Among Police"

"Earlier this week, we broke the story of California Highway Patrol officer Sean Harrington, a cop who was accused of stealing nude photographs from a woman who was arrested for DUI.

On Friday, Mercury News obtained court documents showing that the situation was more disturbing and more widespread than was initially expected. The victim and her lawyer did suspect that other officers were involved in the crime, and according to the recently obtained documents, there were a number of other officers involved. In fact, it was admitted by officer Harrington that collecting nude photos from the phones of arrested women was a “game” that he and other officers played while on duty."

Source

ACAB ALL!!!!

[awesome31312]

Moral of the story:

Always record police encounters!!!!!!!



We the people are FED UP of a service you cannot opt out for!

[BitMos]

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

[awesome31312]

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

How come I only hear such fairy tales on the internet?

[Grand_Voyageur]

Moral of the story:

Always record police encounters!!!!!!!



We the people are FED UP of a service you cannot opt out for!

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

How come I only hear such fairy tales on the internet?

I got the impression that you have some bias against Police. Maybe I am wrong but You seems to think all the hell come out of Police Officers while they as any other social Group have they own bad & good subjects. We Always call for Forces to recognize good ones and purge the bad apples.
So, why are you so biased against LEOs?

[awesome31312]

Moral of the story:

Always record police encounters!!!!!!!



We the people are FED UP of a service you cannot opt out for!

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

How come I only hear such fairy tales on the internet?

Facts have an anti-cop bias

I got the impression that you have some bias against Police. Maybe I am wrong but You seems to think all the hell come out of Police Officers while they as any other social Group have they own bad & good subjects. We Always call for Forces to recognize good ones and purge the bad apples.
So, why are you so biased against LEOs?

[Grand_Voyageur]

Moral of the story:

Always record police encounters!!!!!!!



We the people are FED UP of a service you cannot opt out for!

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

How come I only hear such fairy tales on the internet?

Facts have an anti-cop bias

I got the impression that you have some bias against Police. Maybe I am wrong but You seems to think all the hell come out of Police Officers while they as any other social Group have they own bad & good subjects. We Always call for Forces to recognize good ones and purge the bad apples.
So, why are you so biased against LEOs?

 
You're very rude to put such your assertion - Facts have an anti-cop bias - in my mouth. You should know media are biased versus any news who shocks or made sensation to sell more advs, so I'm sure they're not reporting on good cops or good samaritans but they cover a lot of bad cops or thieves, murders and other predators since they allow news outlets to make more money. So about what kind of facts are you talking about?

[awesome31312]

Fact:

Police are twice as likely to assault their wives and girlfriends than regular citizens
Source  

Fact:

The police are not legally obligated to protect and serve citizens

See: Warren vs District of Columbia

Fact:

The police are required to meet a certain IQ quota, and exceeding it would mean they cannot become cops. In other words, a person with a lower IQ has a much greater chance of becoming an officer than someone with a high IQ, who may not be allowed to become a police officer at all.

Source

Fact:

The police are trained to try and incriminate you if you try to talk to them for getting help.

Source

Do your research, stop being a mindless drone.

[TECSHARE]

Moral of the story:

Always record police encounters!!!!!!!



We the people are FED UP of a service you cannot opt out for!

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective... then again, on a personal level I only encountered very professional law enforcement agents in the USoA. All of the time treated with respect, care and of course was helped. Furthermore, my greatest memories of the high value job that US Policemen can do, was on 4th of July on a beach at night, where the cop (alone) was in charge of watching over all of us, who were doing a great party... to say the least... very professional, courteous and didn't hinder the flow in any way, but guaranteed a safe place for all. I am sure that most parents appreciated.

How come I only hear such fairy tales on the internet?

I got the impression that you have some bias against Police. Maybe I am wrong but You seems to think all the hell come out of Police Officers while they as any other social Group have they own bad & good subjects. We Always call for Forces to recognize good ones and purge the bad apples.
So, why are you so biased against LEOs?

Other social groups don't have the power to take everything you own and put you in a cage for the rest of your life.

[Furio]

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective...

So someone who does C has no rights and should be exposed by the man who should be protecting her.... Nice one, bet you are a cop or know a few....

[aljunking]

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective...

So someone who does C has no rights and should be exposed by the man who should be protecting her.... Nice one, bet you are a cop or know a few....

There is no need to argue. Not all cops are like that so as not all girls are like that. This one is an isolated case and should be handled fairly by the state.

[Grand_Voyageur]

just for a short reply, the story is about a security guard and a girl who do "C" in a night club... just to put this in perspective...

So someone who does C has no rights and should be exposed by the man who should be protecting her.... Nice one, bet you are a cop or know a few....

There is no need to argue. Not all cops are like that so as not all girls are like that. This one is an isolated case and should be handled fairly by the state.

+1. You have a point aljunking. I tried to put this in words a few page before by myself.

[awesome31312]

If there were good cops, they would try to arrest the bad ones

[Grand_Voyageur]

If there were good cops, they would try to arrest the bad ones

Grow up, bro. Good cops exist and do their jobs at huge costs. Even if this mean arresting a fellow cop! 

[awesome31312]

If there were good cops, they would try to arrest the bad ones

Grow up, bro. Good cops exist and do their jobs at huge costs. Even if this mean arresting a fellow cop! 

Care to show me one story where they do?

[BitMos]

So someone who does C has no rights and should be exposed by the man who should be protecting her.... Nice one, bet you are a cop or know a few....

it's f--king impressive how to 2 People can share the same opinions on not understand each others. I was saying that the private security guard of the night club was exploiting the prohibition of C, to use the repercussion of the law, in pressuring the girl to commit a crime against her.

[Mccoy818]

Not new. Cops always do that. Specially in corrupt third world countries.

[awesome31312]

Not new. Cops always do that. Specially in corrupt third world countries.

But America claims to be a developed first world country

[ScryptAsic]

Some of them do much worse than that, I remember sometime back one of my friend was busted for having sex in car, the cop handcuffed my friend and took him to his car and told the girl to be remained seated nude in the car. After putting my friend in the car, he returned, molested (fingered) the girl for a while than told her to get dressed and then left them with a warning. They didn't filed a complaint because they knew that they didn't had any proof and the cop got away with it  .

Oh my god, that's terrible. This is why we should always film police encounters.

Yeah. It's very bad to hear such stories. Hopefully police dashcams can help both prevent & prosecute this things to happen as well as protect officers from false accusation.

Police dashcams are worthless as officers can turn them off at their will

The simple solution would be to disable the turning off of dashcams by officers locally. The dashcams should only be able to turned off by a superior and at least "x" time after the police officer is off duty and the police car is parked at the police station.

The same is true for the body cameras that some police officers are now being mandated to wear. They should remain active for an officer's entire shift and only be able to be turned off by someone above him when the officer clocks out

[TECSHARE]

Rialto, CA Police Made to Wear Cameras, Use of Force Drops by Over Two-Thirds
www.informationliberation.com/?id=44427

[awesome31312]

Rialto, CA Police Made to Wear Cameras, Use of Force Drops by Over Two-Thirds
www.informationliberation.com/?id=44427

Thank you for sharing.

Are you the only one on here that agrees with me about the need for police accountability through media recording?

[TECSHARE]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it... 

If you think your job is too dangerous and you don't like it FUCKING QUIT, just like the rest of free humanity is forced to do in the same situation. Police ceased being public servants and have become parasitic on the public as an institution, regardless of individual police officers desires to do the right thing (or not). Police are no longer deserving of that same respect, because they no longer occupy the same role. They are now the predators not the protectors, and the conditioning they go through to obfuscate this fact from the individual officers is extensive.

[segvec]

Wow, that is something I have never heard of.
Crooked cops now a days, sad.

A common "game" among cops?
Disgusting.

[wunkbone]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it... 

I agree 100% with this. I think the police need to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt when they are forced to make split second decisions, however their decisions need to be documented as well as the information they used to make such decisions. The only way to really document this is for the police to wear body camera (see your previous post in this thread)

[hamza171]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it... 

I agree 100% with this. I think the police need to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt when they are forced to make split second decisions, however their decisions need to be documented as well as the information they used to make such decisions. The only way to really document this is for the police to wear body camera (see your previous post in this thread)

This is the truth, every major incident usually ends with paid leave and "we found no misconduct".

If police officers were held more accountable for their actions like the average civilian that they go after, then things amy be a bit different.

I punch someone I got to jail, they beat the shit out of a guy and get to go on vacation.

[koshgel]

The fact they did this numerous times as a game is gross. Everyone needs to have passwords on their phone so that information can't be accessed as easily.

[Furio]

Rialto, CA Police Made to Wear Cameras, Use of Force Drops by Over Two-Thirds
www.informationliberation.com/?id=44427

Disgusting to say the least, it's well known that power gets abused, power corrupts, and if there's no suprvision, this is what happens. Bodycams the only way to go, ACAB ALL THE WAY

[wunkbone]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it... 

I agree 100% with this. I think the police need to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt when they are forced to make split second decisions, however their decisions need to be documented as well as the information they used to make such decisions. The only way to really document this is for the police to wear body camera (see your previous post in this thread)

This is the truth, every major incident usually ends with paid leave and "we found no misconduct".

If police officers were held more accountable for their actions like the average civilian that they go after, then things amy be a bit different.

I punch someone I got to jail, they beat the shit out of a guy and get to go on vacation.

I think it all boils down to the amount of evidence between each case. If there is an allegation that a police officer punches someone, then they will likely receive paid leave while internal affairs investigates, however the police officer cannot be charged for this or fired for this if there is not sufficient evidence against him (the same is true for a normal citizen who punches someone).

This only strengthens the argument for police officers to always needing to wear a body camera so their actions can be documented while they are working

[Furio]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it... 

I agree 100% with this. I think the police need to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt when they are forced to make split second decisions, however their decisions need to be documented as well as the information they used to make such decisions. The only way to really document this is for the police to wear body camera (see your previous post in this thread)

This is the truth, every major incident usually ends with paid leave and "we found no misconduct".

If police officers were held more accountable for their actions like the average civilian that they go after, then things amy be a bit different.

I punch someone I got to jail, they beat the shit out of a guy and get to go on vacation.

I think it all boils down to the amount of evidence between each case. If there is an allegation that a police officer punches someone, then they will likely receive paid leave while internal affairs investigates, however the police officer cannot be charged for this or fired for this if there is not sufficient evidence against him (the same is true for a normal citizen who punches someone).

This only strengthens the argument for police officers to always needing to wear a body camera so their actions can be documented while they are working

This is not the case when someone alledgely punches a cop, then you WILL go to jail if the pig says so....

[TECSHARE]

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2014/11/chp-cop-resigns/

[deluxeCITY]

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2014/11/chp-cop-resigns/

So apparently this was not the first time he has done this, only the first time someone complained.

Per the article, two other women have come forward with similar claims.

[awesome31312]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

[CoinCidental]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

That's why most cops can't even recite the law they claim you have broken and end up like the  stuttering fucks they are

There are plenty of videos online of cops arresting people for things that are not even illegal and getting into arguments when they occasionally do encounter a lawyer or a citizen who knows the law they usually back down or make a false accusation to save face...

[Connor936]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law. 

[junglecat]

Lack of accountability is the issue. Police always fall back on trying to say their job is so dangerous, and civilians wouldn't understand, but this is just a guilt trip tactic to distract you from persisting with holding police accountable for their negligence or active criminal activity. They have it made right now. In some states you can't even sue the police! They have total immunity. In any line of work, no accountability means there will be problems. When peoples lives are on the line this lack of accountability is unacceptable. Furthermore this lack of accountability has been turned into a for profit industry as police run roughshod over the generally law abiding population to fatten their pension funds, or so they can drive dodge chargers with camouflage vinyls and American flags on it...  

I agree 100% with this. I think the police need to be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt when they are forced to make split second decisions, however their decisions need to be documented as well as the information they used to make such decisions. The only way to really document this is for the police to wear body camera (see your previous post in this thread)

This is the truth, every major incident usually ends with paid leave and "we found no misconduct".

If police officers were held more accountable for their actions like the average civilian that they go after, then things amy be a bit different.

I punch someone I got to jail, they beat the shit out of a guy and get to go on vacation.

If a business comes under enough public scrutiny it must shut it's doors. A police station is a business not a public service and being owned by the government means they must do allot of damage control to stay out of the public eye so they can keep raping the citizens.

[awesome31312]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

That's why most cops can't even recite the law they claim you have broken and end up like the  stuttering fucks they are

There are plenty of videos online of cops arresting people for things that are not even illegal and getting into arguments when they occasionally do encounter a lawyer or a citizen who knows the law they usually back down or make a false accusation to save face...

They don't stutter, they just beat you up and throw you in the car

[CoinCidental]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

That's why most cops can't even recite the law they claim you have broken and end up like the  stuttering fucks they are

There are plenty of videos online of cops arresting people for things that are not even illegal and getting into arguments when they occasionally do encounter a lawyer or a citizen who knows the law they usually back down or make a false accusation to save face...

They don't stutter, they just beat you up and throw you in the car

Not when they know they're being recorded they don't

[BitMos]

Not when they know they're being recorded they don't

I prefer when they don't know... the shadows have ways that are more fun to bring truth to light.

[CoinCidental]

Not when they know they're being recorded they don't

I prefer when they don't know... the shadows have ways that are more fun to bring truth to light.

You will still get a beating and sent to jail unless you have someone else to be a witness and present the video tape to your lawyer etc

[BitMos]

anyway, if any entity that has to be watched&control the recording... I smell the catshit already...

Imagine, a cell, the camera is only pointing on the left side... what will happen on the right corner will still be matter of discussion... but once the wall themselves will speak, no place un turn will be left for the criminals... Mercy isn't my +.

[CoinCidental]

anyway, if any entity that has to be watched&control the recording... I smell the catshit already...

Imagine, a cell, the camera is only pointing on the left side... what will happen on the right corner will still be matter of discussion... but once the wall themselves will speak, no place un turn will be left for the criminals... Mercy isn't my +.

You don't got the proof of police brutality that allegedly happened off camera, they can shoot you in "self defence "and say you attacked them  and they will get away with it

I know which one I would prefer...

[MakingMoneyHoney]

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2014/11/chp-cop-resigns/

Thank God.

This whole thing isn't surprising, but it is disgusting.

Reading this: "In addition to being charged with stealing and dispersing the 23-year old woman’s photo, another 19-year-old woman who was arrested in August for a suspected DUI came forward making similar claims against Harrington. He is also under investigation in relation to a third woman’s complaint that her phone may have been tampered with by Harrington when he arrested her...."

I can't help but think if they did all this and did it to a 19 year old, how likely is it they took underage photos too? That's a whole 'nother thing with distributing child pornography, isn't it?

[BitMos]

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2014/11/chp-cop-resigns/

Thank God.

This whole thing isn't surprising, but it is disgusting.

Reading this: "In addition to being charged with stealing and dispersing the 23-year old woman’s photo, another 19-year-old woman who was arrested in August for a suspected DUI came forward making similar claims against Harrington. He is also under investigation in relation to a third woman’s complaint that her phone may have been tampered with by Harrington when he arrested her...."

I can't help but think if they did all this and did it to a 19 year old, how likely is it they took underage photos too? That's a whole 'nother thing with distributing child pornography, isn't it?

the law is sinuous... what's fun is that it could happen to any girls in America... who knows who could be her daddy... .

[awesome31312]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law. 

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

That's why most cops can't even recite the law they claim you have broken and end up like the  stuttering fucks they are

There are plenty of videos online of cops arresting people for things that are not even illegal and getting into arguments when they occasionally do encounter a lawyer or a citizen who knows the law they usually back down or make a false accusation to save face...

They don't stutter, they just beat you up and throw you in the car

Not when they know they're being recorded they don't

Then they smash your camera and then beat you up and throw you in the car, then proceed to shoot your dog

[bluemountain]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law. 

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

You can get charged with any crime for any reason at all, however it is up to the courts to determine if a law has actually been broken. Obstruction of justice and resisting arrest are two very common crimes for people to be charged with however they are also crimes that are rarely prosecuted and have a very low conviction rate

[awesome31312]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law. 

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

You can get charged with any crime for any reason at all, however it is up to the courts to determine if a law has actually been broken. Obstruction of justice and resisting arrest are two very common crimes for people to be charged with however they are also crimes that are rarely prosecuted and have a very low conviction rate

It's innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Cops shouldn't be allowed to give false tickets.

[TrianglePythagoras]

Wtf is this?  Where has this world come to.

[deluxeCITY]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law. 

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

You can get charged with any crime for any reason at all, however it is up to the courts to determine if a law has actually been broken. Obstruction of justice and resisting arrest are two very common crimes for people to be charged with however they are also crimes that are rarely prosecuted and have a very low conviction rate

It's innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Cops shouldn't be allowed to give false tickets.

A ticket is nothing more then a summons for you to appear in court so the court can determine if you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Most people choose to plead guilty and pay the associated fine ahead of time because they do not want to deal with the hassle of going to court.

[awesome31312]

I don't wanna have to argue this with you.

Cops get paid overtime to appear in court, even though that's part of the job.

[TECSHARE]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law.  

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

You can get charged with any crime for any reason at all, however it is up to the courts to determine if a law has actually been broken. Obstruction of justice and resisting arrest are two very common crimes for people to be charged with however they are also crimes that are rarely prosecuted and have a very low conviction rate

It's innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Cops shouldn't be allowed to give false tickets.

A ticket is nothing more then a summons for you to appear in court so the court can determine if you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Most people choose to plead guilty and pay the associated fine ahead of time because they do not want to deal with the hassle of going to court.

Technically signing a ticket is signing a contract.

[dontCAREhair]

It takes six years to learn the law but only six months to be handed a badge and a gun to enforce it

This is why there are checks and balances that prevent the police from giving sentences to people that allegedly break the law.  

Actually, there aren't. You can get charged for obstruction of justice for merely observing a police officer and documenting the scenario (your first amendment right)

You can get charged with any crime for any reason at all, however it is up to the courts to determine if a law has actually been broken. Obstruction of justice and resisting arrest are two very common crimes for people to be charged with however they are also crimes that are rarely prosecuted and have a very low conviction rate

It's innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Cops shouldn't be allowed to give false tickets.

A ticket is nothing more then a summons for you to appear in court so the court can determine if you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Most people choose to plead guilty and pay the associated fine ahead of time because they do not want to deal with the hassle of going to court.

Technically signing a ticket is signing a contract.

signing a ticket is the officer signing the order for the citizen to appear in court to be tried for the crime they are alleged to have committed. Generally speaking the citizen will be asked to sign the ticket and they are signing that they are promising to appear in court

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

[dontCAREhair]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

[cutesakura]

but sometimes the current court system into a system that is unfair, the judge may be paid for certain cases, an adjustable perkaran winner, depending on how much money can be given to the judges are corrupt, I am confused where more justice can be sought this time, I hope that justice can be achieved in the near future ... 

[awesome31312]

You guys are missing TECSHARE's point. You should not have to prove you are not guilty of a crime, the burden of proof lies on the accuser.

By forcing you to sign a contract they are impeding on your first amendment rights.

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

[MelodyRowell]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.   

[BADecker]

This is nothing. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Guerena_shooting :

Asleep after returning from a 12-hour overnight shift at the ASARCO Mission mine, Guerena was awakened about 9:30 am by his wife who heard noises outside their house, later identified as flash/bang grenades deployed by police in the back yard as a diversion. He instructed his wife and 4-year-old son to hide inside a closet while he grabbed his AR-15 rifle and crouched down preparing to defend himself from the unidentified people breaking and entering into his home. The Sheriff's Department initially claimed that Guerena had fired on officers; at least three of the SWAT members including the team commander reported in their post-operation debriefings that they had observed muzzle flashes aimed at them from inside the house. After an examination of the rifle Guerena allegedly pointed at the officers however, it was determined that the rifle had not been fired; the safety was still engaged. Other officers claimed they saw splinters from the doorjamb being hit by bullets; the shots that caused this were determined to come from other members of the SWAT team themselves. "There were five officers at the door beginning to make entry into this home, when they engaged this individual that they believed was actually firing at them." Other versions of this story claim that officers started shooting after Guerena pointed the gun at them, though under questioning they were initially unsure whether he had actually moved to target them. A video of the raid shows roughly 38 seconds expired from the time the police briefly sounded a siren upon pulling into Guerena's driveway until they shot him. At this point the five person team fired at least 71 rounds at Guerena in less than seven seconds, who died after being hit 22 times.

Guerena's wife called 911 to request medical assistance for her husband shortly after the shooting. Paramedics, however, were instructed to hold back. Guerena was denied attention, for about one hour, until the team declared the "area secured". Ambulance crews were then notified they were no longer needed, one hour and fourteen minutes after Guerena's wife's call to 911. An official autopsy report was released on 6 June. It confirmed that Guerena had been shot 22 times, including one grazing shot to the head. No drugs were found in his system. The medical examiner expressed doubts that medics could have saved Guerena, even if they had reached him quickly. The report also notes that the body showed "no evidence of medical intervention".

[MakingMoneyHoney]

This is nothing. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Guerena_shooting :

Asleep after returning from a 12-hour overnight shift at the ASARCO Mission mine, Guerena was awakened about 9:30 am by his wife who heard noises outside their house, later identified as flash/bang grenades deployed by police in the back yard as a diversion. He instructed his wife and 4-year-old son to hide inside a closet while he grabbed his AR-15 rifle and crouched down preparing to defend himself from the unidentified people breaking and entering into his home. The Sheriff's Department initially claimed that Guerena had fired on officers; at least three of the SWAT members including the team commander reported in their post-operation debriefings that they had observed muzzle flashes aimed at them from inside the house. After an examination of the rifle Guerena allegedly pointed at the officers however, it was determined that the rifle had not been fired; the safety was still engaged. Other officers claimed they saw splinters from the doorjamb being hit by bullets; the shots that caused this were determined to come from other members of the SWAT team themselves. "There were five officers at the door beginning to make entry into this home, when they engaged this individual that they believed was actually firing at them." Other versions of this story claim that officers started shooting after Guerena pointed the gun at them, though under questioning they were initially unsure whether he had actually moved to target them. A video of the raid shows roughly 38 seconds expired from the time the police briefly sounded a siren upon pulling into Guerena's driveway until they shot him. At this point the five person team fired at least 71 rounds at Guerena in less than seven seconds, who died after being hit 22 times.

Guerena's wife called 911 to request medical assistance for her husband shortly after the shooting. Paramedics, however, were instructed to hold back. Guerena was denied attention, for about one hour, until the team declared the "area secured". Ambulance crews were then notified they were no longer needed, one hour and fourteen minutes after Guerena's wife's call to 911. An official autopsy report was released on 6 June. It confirmed that Guerena had been shot 22 times, including one grazing shot to the head. No drugs were found in his system. The medical examiner expressed doubts that medics could have saved Guerena, even if they had reached him quickly. The report also notes that the body showed "no evidence of medical intervention".

That made me sick. 

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.   

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

[BootstrapCoinDev]

That's why I always have some sort of screen lock on. Not saying that makes it any more okay that the CHP did that

[TECSHARE]

That's why I always have some sort of screen lock on. Not saying that makes it any more okay that the CHP did that

They don't need you to unlock it to access every bit of info on your phone. Police regularly copy the entire contents of people's phone upon detainment. They have all the default password settings, they don't need your assistance.

[deluxeCITY]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.   

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.  

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

"In contract law, ticket cases are a series of cases that stand for the proposition that if you are handed a ticket or another document with terms, and you retain the ticket or document, then you are bound by those terms. Whether you have read the terms or not is irrelevant, and in a sense, using the ticket is analogous to signing the document. This issue is an important one due to the proliferation of exclusion clauses that accompany tickets in everyday transactions.

The case of Parker v. The South Eastern Railway Co (1877) 2 CPD 416 illustrates restrictions on this concept:

    Knowledge of writing and of terms: If the recipient of the ticket knew that there was writing on the ticket and also knew that the ticket contained terms, then the recipient is bound by the terms of the contract.
    Reasonable person: If the recipient did not know of the existence of the terms, then the court will consider whether a reasonable person would have known that the ticket contained terms. If that is so, then the ticket-holder is bound by those terms; if not, then the court will return to the general test of whether reasonable notice of the terms was given.

The test of whether a document fits within the description of a ticket is an objective test, that is, whether a reasonable person in the position of the ticket-holder would perceive it to be contractual in nature. For instance, if exclusion clauses accompany a docket, it may be held that it is not contractual in nature since it is just a receipt.

Furthermore, Interfoto Picture Library Ltd v. Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd [1989] 1 QB 433 held that if a party wishes to incorporate onerous terms into a document that is to be just accepted by the other party, reasonable notice must be given to make it a term of the contract."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticket_cases

"CITATIONS:
The CITATION process can be handled much easier; through the mail.  When a Police Officer issues you a CITATION, he is actually requesting you to CONTRACT with him!  He is alleging that you violated a corporate regulation in writing, which you have accepted by signing and thus requires you to respond.

The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT; PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and the case!
You can cancel that CONTRACT however by rescinding your CONSENT.  The Federal Truth in Lending Act provides that any party to a CONTRACT may rescind his CONSENT, within three business days of entering into such a CONTRACT.  So across the face of the CITATION you should print or type in large print, the following words:
I DO NOT ACCEPT THIS OFFER TO CONTRACT
and
I DO NOT CONSENT TO THESE PROCEEDINGS.
Use blue ink [for admiralty] or purple ink [for royalty].  Admiralty is the Court and Royalty represents your Sovereignty.  Either way is appropriate.  Sign your signature underneath in blue or purple ink and in front of a Notary and under your signature type: Without prejudice, UCC 1-308.  This is another way to declare that you may not be held responsible for this Contract pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code.

Serve Cancelled Citation back it on the Clerk / Court, along with a Certificate of Service, by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested.  This kills the CITATION; removes your CONSENT and removes the JURISDICTION of the Court, all at the same time.  It really is that simple!"

http://lucas2012infos.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/judge-dale-retired-the-great-american-adventure-secrets-of-america-part-1-5-25-may-2012/

[deluxeCITY]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.  

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

-snip-
The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT; PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and the case!
-snip

So you are claiming that by signing a ticket you are acknowledging that the subject court has jurisdiction over the subject case? If this is the case then what is the downside to consenting to this? You should have the same rights if your case is heard in the 1st district or the 2nd district (for example), and in the event the court makes an incorrect ruling then you can appeal to a higher court which can correct any incorrect ruling.

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.  

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

-snip-
The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT; PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and the case!
-snip

So you are claiming that by signing a ticket you are acknowledging that the subject court has jurisdiction over the subject case? If this is the case then what is the downside to consenting to this? You should have the same rights if your case is heard in the 1st district or the 2nd district (for example), and in the event the court makes an incorrect ruling then you can appeal to a higher court which can correct any incorrect ruling.

The down side of this is you are not required to, and any contract that is forced and signed under duress is not legally enforceable. By signing the ticket you submit to jurisdiction as well as all of the terms written on the ticket.  You are entering into a binding agreement regardless of what you think your rights are.

[deluxeCITY]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.  

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

-snip-
The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT; PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and the case!
-snip

So you are claiming that by signing a ticket you are acknowledging that the subject court has jurisdiction over the subject case? If this is the case then what is the downside to consenting to this? You should have the same rights if your case is heard in the 1st district or the 2nd district (for example), and in the event the court makes an incorrect ruling then you can appeal to a higher court which can correct any incorrect ruling.

The down side of this is you are not required to, and any contract that is forced and signed under duress is not legally enforceable. By signing the ticket you submit to jurisdiction as well as all of the terms written on the ticket.  You are entering into a binding agreement regardless of what you think your rights are.

Okay, so the ticket is not legally enforceable. I don't think the police make mistakes regarding jurisdiction very often, and when they do, any mistake the court makes can be reversed via the appeals process. However I would say in the vast majority of cases, even if you did not provide consent to the court having jurisdiction, the court would find that they do have jurisdiction based on the facts of the case.

Also per your own argument, any contract entered into in duress is not enforceable, therefore any disadvantage you receive from consenting to jurisdiction could be reversed in the event that the court in fact does not have jurisdiction.

[TECSHARE]

You are still entering into a binding contract.

The contract has nothing to do with you being guilty though. All the contact says is that you will appear in court to face the accusation that you committed a crime.

The court system is the only institution that is able to make the conclusion that you committed a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

Regardless of your guilt or innocence it entangles you into a contractual agreement that you do not willfully wish to enter into. If you do not you will usually be arrested in most jurisdictions. Any contract where you are forced to sign under duress is not valid, but in this case it has the full weight of contract law behind it in addition to any criminal penalties.

A ticket is merely a summons to appear in court, and your signature is merely your acknowledgment of receipt of the summons. In the event that you refuse to sign the ticket, you are correct that you would likely be arrested, however when you are brought before a magistrate you would likely be released on your own recognize after the magistrate can document that you have been served the summons to later appear in court to face the charge.

When you are summoned to appear in court you do not have a choice as to if you wish to appear or not, it is an order to appear.  

You are describing to me what happens according to policy during a ticket. It is a fact signing a ticket is a BINDING CONTRACT with a corporation, regardless of how many thousands of other ways you can also describe it.

What exactly are you claiming that the contract is binding you do? From what I can tell a ticket is a summons for you to appear in court and your signature is your acknowledgment of you being served such summons. Can you give a different explanation as to what your signature means on a ticket?

-snip-
The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT; PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and the case!
-snip

So you are claiming that by signing a ticket you are acknowledging that the subject court has jurisdiction over the subject case? If this is the case then what is the downside to consenting to this? You should have the same rights if your case is heard in the 1st district or the 2nd district (for example), and in the event the court makes an incorrect ruling then you can appeal to a higher court which can correct any incorrect ruling.

The down side of this is you are not required to, and any contract that is forced and signed under duress is not legally enforceable. By signing the ticket you submit to jurisdiction as well as all of the terms written on the ticket.  You are entering into a binding agreement regardless of what you think your rights are.

Okay, so the ticket is not legally enforceable. I don't think the police make mistakes regarding jurisdiction very often, and when they do, any mistake the court makes can be reversed via the appeals process. However I would say in the vast majority of cases, even if you did not provide consent to the court having jurisdiction, the court would find that they do have jurisdiction based on the facts of the case.

Also per your own argument, any contract entered into in duress is not enforceable, therefore any disadvantage you receive from consenting to jurisdiction could be reversed in the event that the court in fact does not have jurisdiction.

You are completely missing the point. You don't HAVE TO submit to ANYTHING to begin with. The legal system isn't just making mistakes, it is broken on a systematic level and you are clearly incapable of perceiving this reality. You have to know how to extract your rights by understanding the law. Just doing what they tell you to do is a recipe for your own servitude. The system is not there to serve you, it is here to consume you.