"Since Jun 6, 2010"
Cheers!
Posted on 07/03/2011 12:24:50 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
“Everything seemed, you know, fairly calm and what not, but as soon as the husband showed up, things got a little heated,” Ragone said.Ragone says it was Hoyt Tessener’s actions inside the holding area that got him to really focus on the Tesseners and Tpr. Wyrick.
“He showed up, and the officer had actually greeted him outside and then came in and had mentioned that he wasn’t very happy,” Ragone said. “At that point they allowed (Hoyt Tessener) into the holding area, and he just went pretty ballistic. She actually stayed pretty calm the entire time, but he definitely got loud and was pretty upset by the whole thing, which I guess was understandable, but it got pretty crazy.”
So even the drunk at the station realizes that it was "understandable" that the husband would be "pretty upset" by finding his wife arrested and brought to the police station.
And, he informs us that the trooper is aware that there are cameras and audio in his station, as he acts "fairly calm," although "he wasn't very happy."
The text messages between the two troopers shows that stopping the husband (who was told to follow Wyrick) was not a coincidental encounter.
-PJ
wow. And I only thought people to the left of fidel castro were capable of reading a report that totally destroys their position on an issue but come away from reading it actually BELIEVING in their mind that it supports them.....
Sad.
They also told us that our actions outside the courtroom could strip us of both.
And before you really shoot yourself in the foot I was the Republican Central Committee and the McCain/Palin POC in my county.
I have something you and this senator do not - honor and objectivity.
Thanks you are making the case that they are guilty!
1) Texting while driving and saying “F*ck Her”... Real professional police officers. I would say this evidence of lack of professionalism.
2) Once again why are the police sending evidence to the media? Why don’t they do this for all their cases? Hmmmmm ..... Gee I wonder why????
3) Now the police want to use a DUI suspect as their witness.... because the audio in the hallway was not there at first and NOW all of sudden it comes in very low. LOL!
Can you say Quid Pro Quo???
Wow all I can say is that the Wilmington police are really desperate on this one.
Bingo and thanks for that great post. That is all we want from our police.
For the record I believe most police are good, and support them. However, when I see a bad apple I’m not afraid to call it out. Plus it helps keep the integrity of the police overall.
the .00 destroys anything the officer wrote that he observed which gave him a reason to arrest her
regardless of how the husband behaved, there is no way in hell that the officer had PC to lock the woman up - NONE...which means whatever he wrote in the report that gives him probable cause is a lie.
and that's the bottom line...
Thank you for confirming the cops’ lack of professionalism on this case, and for verifying that even the cops acknowledge that she committed no crime, per the acknowledgment that she blew a 0.00 and per the strange absence of a citation or warning for the alleged non-functional light.
Did no one ever teach you that the first rule of holes is to stop digging?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2744337/posts
I sure feel safe now!
Not all police officers are bad
the one-percenters that you are reading about make everyone look bad...but you should not judge a whole group by a few bad apples
Haven’t you figured out how to place multiple people in the TO: box?
Not all police officers are bad
the one-percenters that you are reading about make everyone look bad...but you should not judge a whole group by a few bad apples"
I don't have a police record.....only a handful of traffic stops in 45 years of driving.
BUT every cop I've had the displeasure of meeting was/is an doublewide asshole!
the one-percenters that you are talking about are the ones that have been caught W/their hands in the cookie jar. The other 99% havn't been caught YET.
Agreed. But if an officer had any such activity on his mind, he would not be a good policeman.
Exactly.
I think that goes to the heart of the issue here. I think this officer was getting just the effect he wanted in exactly the setting deliberately choose.
The officer just didn’t get the desired happy ending he looking for.
Now we have conspiracy to deprive civil rights. FEDERAL offense. These two cops are going to enjoy their stay in the Bar-Hotel. Going to meet lots of interesting and 'loving' people.
Every PO with an ounce of integrity should be shouting from the rooftops for their heads on a pike.
You are delusional. The word of a “witness” who blew at least a 0.16? Righhhhht. And have you ever heard of witness intimidation? That would be a real possibility considering there is already evidence of Jethro and Gomer engaging in conspiracy in the husband’s traffic stop. That may even rise to the level of a federal offense.
You just can’t stop embarrassing yourself, can you?
You need to lay off the weed. You have some real reality issues.
You have some serious mental health issues. You’re taking this incident so personally that it’s evident either one of these idiots is a relative of yours or you’re a corrupt, badge heavy LEO. Your insane hatred of lawyers to the point of declaring that they should not be able to exercise their constitutionally protected rights is downright psychotic. You really need some therapy with a trained professional. You’re also a childish little snot with your incessant banging on the abuse button. You’re a poor example of a conservative, a rotten representative of FR and too juvenile in attitude to be called a “man.”
Cheers!
>>...REFUSING THE BREATHALYZER TEST WHEN THE OFFICER STOPPED HER ON THE ROADWAY!...<<-
Now hang on, did *you* read the report? She refused *field-sobriety tests* at the roadside stop because she calmly explained to the rogue, predator cop that she was wearing high-heels and the ground surface was gravel. You do know there is a world of difference between *field-sobriety-tests* (walk & turn, one-legged-stand, etc) and the breathalyzer machine back at the station, right? You severely weaken your argument defending the attempted molestation by that rogue, predator cop when you misuse the terminology.
Also, If you would calm down, you wouldn’t get so much spittle on the screen as you fail to defend those rogue, predator, outlaw, rapist cops. :-)
(now, you know I’m just messing with you. You mad?)
Why would you suppose that a witness who blew a .16 would be a reliable witness to the activities of a woman who blew a 0.00, twice?
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.