Posted on 12/10/2005 6:28:19 AM PST by TennMountains
Edited on 12/11/2005 12:54:13 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
I can say that because I live in one...and grew up in one. I can say that because when I visited Mississippi 16 years ago on a military trip I had my car towed in a brother-in-law owns the towing yard racket...and the local cop told me...and I quote "you-ore in Mississippi now boy." End quote. Either you are too ignorant to understand this or very naive. Either way...have a nice day with rainbow filled skies and fields full of butterflies and lollipops. Go hug your tree and support your local sherriff because they could never do anything wrong. Oh...and if you think they are so above boards...I invite you to some small towns in Southern Louisiana. They would LOVE you there.
Filth? Baahhhhhhhhhhhhhh ha ha
Why have you resorted to insults? Facts not going your way?Folks volunteered to join the SS, folks volunteer to join Swat Teams and go collect cash for engaging in the WOD. Both don't give a rats ass about what they leave in their wake.
You may read the Constitution differently than I do, because I sure as hell do not see where the government was given the power to decide how we choose to treat our own health as to what substances we choose to use. Show me the intent in the Constitution, in the Bill of Rights. Where was this right given up by the people and given to the state?
I read the Constitution as limiting the government and reserving all else to the individual. It is obvious we disagree.
The innocent man is already dead.
Like I say, the cops' story flunks the smell test bigtime.
I've lived in both Mississppi and Southern Louisiana. You're full of crap.
Someone was falsely claiming he was a revenue agent.
Usually defense attorneys who have a weak case will keep their clients OFF the stand. As a general rule, you only let innocent defendants expose themselves to cross-examination. If this man testified in his own behalf, it speaks to his innocence, not guilt, even though juries are not supposed to take it into account. And this jury apparently did not.
Crackpots post nonsense.
Your comment made me laugh out loud!
I've rarely seem such a slobbering apologist for state brutality as you. Are you already on a gubmint pension or are you still qualifying?
In either event, I sincerely hope that you become the victim of such police initiatives as are reported in this story.
And don't come weeping for sympathy - brown-nosing lickspittles should learn how to suck it up!
The jury, who has all the facts, found him guilty. It's a good bet we ain't getting all the facts.
Someone has pointed out that this is a freedom issue and it is just that:
We DO have the right to defend ourselves and most here would exercise that right.
The police are NOT free to terrorize and should not be free from paying a penalty for screwing up.
Small towns DO give their police more slack than large ones.
I not only don't care that he was a K9 cop...I don't believe for an instant that a cop would break into a suspect apartment unarmed - particularly when a five man department calls in three additional bodies - to take down the wrong house.
Finally, I know from experience that cops & CI agents are in a position that allows them to bend and taint the law and not all but many do just that daily.
All that said, and noting that the available reportage strongly suggests the kid was clean but never had a chance;
The verdict MIGHT be legitimate but in the end I am most concerned with the apparent lack of any follow up, any appeal, any concern even among some in FR, that might cause the verdict to be tested - proved valid or invalid.
And, since the counter is so obvious, I DO support the police, Customs, etc.......when they are right or when they err in the course of doing their job properly.
Me too.
I am civilized.
Knock on my door and state your business.
Bt kick it in and you will get hurt, I don't care who you are.
"Let's summarize: Cops mistakenly break down the door of a sleeping man, late at night, as part of drug raid. Turns out, the man wasn't named in the warrant, and wasn't a suspect. The man, frigthened for himself and his 18-month old daughter, fires at an intruder who jumps into his bedroom after the door's been kicked in. Turns out that the man, who is black, has killed the white son of the town's police chief. He's later convicted and sentenced to death by a white jury. The man has no criminal record, and police rather tellingly changed their story about drugs (rather, traces of drugs) in his possession at the time of the raid.
The story gets more bizarre from there."
This is from the agitator.
That would actually be useful although it would only be part of the story. There is a lot of stuff not allowed in at trial on both sides.
And there are bits that are taken out of the record.
If you find a transcript though I would like to read it. I am now curious.
After Cory committed the murder, the police arrested the uninjured perp. What brutes!
I did a search at www.naacp.org... There are ten pages of articles about Tookie Williams, but not one mention of Cory Maye. I guess being a young black man, with no criminal record, just trying to live your life means that you aren't worth the time. Now if he been a big time drug dealer they'd be crawling out of the woodwork.
Like the scoutmaster who was the object of a mistaken location raid, and attempted to use a cap and ball revolver defend himself from the scruffy looking men breaking in to his apartment. But in that case it was the raidee rather than raider who ended up dead. No charges filed of course.
They have a rationalization ready. The crooked judge must not have let the racist southern jury hear all the facts. Or something like that.
Oops, should have read a few more posts...
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.