So you say we should become him to defeat him? Do that which is evil, in order that the greater good may result?Are we all just Bill Ayers Weathermen Democrats now?
Not sure you and I see eye to eye, hayna? Or no?
Much simpler than that. A picture is worth a thousand words, but a video conveys a thousand lies.
In either case, this is why the Pentagon has such a down on war photos and flag draped coffins, because there is no way they can be seen that reflects highly on the US military.
It was put to me this way. “Here you see a picture of a dead young boy, lying in the street and looking unarmed, pitiful and fly-blown. Tragic. Shame on the US for killing him when they could have arrested him, or something!”
But was is not seen in the picture is how this 22-year-old “young boy” threw Molotov cocktails into an orphanage and was machine-gunning burning children as they ran out before a policeman shot him. Sort of changes the context a bit.
In this case, the police had pulled over a car in front of her house. So she exits the house and stands on the sidewalk video recording. When the policeman asked her to back up, he could do so—up to when she was standing on her lawn. At that distance, and in that location, just video recording, she could not be legally construed as interfering with what the officers were doing.
When the officer decided to intervene, he began an entire chain of intentional efforts to violate the law *and* obstruct justice. And this latter charge is critical. As he addresses her, he is *not* talking to her, but is attempting to subvert the legal process and suborn perjury with false statements that may be seen later in court.
This is a serious criminal offense.
His first actual offense was to cross onto her property, after being told he could not. Then he lied and said that something that had happened before she had begun video recording somehow justified what he was doing.
He continued to give what amounted to illegal orders. The flashlight trick, while not illegal in and of itself, does indicate that he was intentionally trying to conceal his identity.
Adding it all up, had she *not* attempted to use her own “tricks”, though she wisely denied that anything had happened prior to video recording, he would have had so many legal advantages that he would have likely been able to shield both illegal and improper acts behind either police policy or other legal defenses.
As far as “descending to his level”, that is no more the case than insisting on fighting Queensbury rules when Queensbury rules are not in effect. Trial is not based on reason, but the opinion of prosecutor, judge and jury.