Posted on 11/19/2008 7:19:18 AM PST by Daffynition
Yes the sheriff was a jerk. But I don't see where he was at fault for destroying the trailer.
I agree with your comments. I am sad for this lady, losing her house, and it’s disgusting watching Freepers dancing with joy and condemnation over this.
Something tells me Jesus Christ wouldn’t have chortled and mocked her as they’re doing...
Ed
The trailer was already destroyed (wheels came off) by the time the sheriff got there. Further attempts to unblock the road by moving the trailer did not work and were causing greater damage - how many times must that be said before you get it. There was not a better solution as to the saving of the house.
As for allowing more time to clear out belongings, maybe so.
Actions have consequences. That is the only perspective I have.
What do you think they would have done if it were a truck illegally transporting a 50 gallon drum of paint thinner and the drum had a small rupture and thinner spilled out?
They could have let those poor people get their belonging out of their home before destroying everything.
What would two more hours be?
There entire existence was trashed to the side of the road.
It is the Sheriff’s attitude and approach that was the problem.
From the article: "He said he gave Barton and her friends and family at least two hours to get out what they needed and asked more than once if they had everything they wanted before he issued the order to push."
What would two more hours be?
Did you even read the article?
"He said he gave Barton and her friends and family at least two hours to get out what they needed and asked more than once if they had everything they wanted before he issued the order to push. Garrett said he didn't know how badly damaged the trailer might be, but thought he had no other choice."
Quite frankly, I bet only a small town sheriff would let people crawl through a disintegrating pile of wood and aluminum to get their stuff. Most LE would be afraid of the liability.
One of the people claims someone told him he would shot if didn’t get out of there.
The highway wasn’t completely blocked and he could have given them at least until morning to get their stuff out.
This whole thing is ridiculous.
I have no idea. What are you getting at?
They could have let those poor people get their belonging out of their home before destroying everything.
According to the Sheriff, they had that chance:
He said he gave Barton and her friends and family at least two hours to get out what they needed and asked more than once if they had everything they wanted before he issued the order to push.
It is the Sheriff’s attitude and approach that was the problem.
The Sheriff does seem like a bit of a jerk, but what other approach could he have taken here?
If there were a truck with a 50 gallon drum of a substance like paint thinner that had a small leak. If a few ounces spill they have to call in EPA responders. The highway would have been closed for many hours completely and they would have spent 10’s of thousands of dollars dealing a few ounces of a “hazardous” material.
That is what is absurd here. At the point they trashed the trailer it was the middle of the night and what difference would it have been if they waited a couple more hours to let the people get their stuff out.
This is really inexcusable. These poor people were trying to better their situation. She actually paid off her “mortgage” and was trying to take the next step yet this Sheriff in his infinite wisdom at 2:30am decided to trash their belongings.
Alot of people have no clue how the poor live.
It is a funny story though the way it is written. The sheriff is responsible for damages. He is the one who had it destroyed.
Thank you! The two stories are like a matched set! There has to be a third one out there. These things always come in threes.
Law enforcement officials have the legal power to move broken vehicles and other impediments off of public roads. Barring some sort of willful misconduct, any damages caused as a result of such removal are the responsibility of the person who caused the impediment.
I suppose the homeowner could sue Mr. "Pancake," but I have a strong feeling he is more or less judgment-proof. If she had spent a few minutes making sure the guy moving her house had proper insurance, she would have been able to at least be repaid for her losses here.
A relative of Rachel Corrie?
My thought exactly. LOL.
There has to be a third one out there. These things always come in threes.
Let's keep our eye out.
;^)
This is the price we pay for assuming that business people have integrity, even if they tout a famous logo.
I’ve moved enough in my life to know there are movers and then there are movers. The best ones are those who have a longstanding reputation and check on their men while they are out on the job and then follow-up. It’s hard to know but sometimes word-of-mouth is better than the yellow pages.
I hope you are settled for a long while nwa-granny and that packing and moving are but a distant memory.
Is it the building or the picture that is listing to starboard?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.