Posted on 11/01/2014 6:21:34 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
bump to my ownself.
Yep. Someone tries to steal from me. They are going to get hurt, cop or not. Plus, how do I know it’s a cop? I’d be demanding my lawyer on seen pronto, other cops, so they would know their boy in blue is a lying cheating corrupt piece of scum.
The information missing from this story is why Mr Anderson had the $ in his car.
The “why” is missing.
The “who”, “what”, “when”, and “where” have been covered.
Any time one of those cardinal rules of journalism are either omitted or ignored, is when the alarm bells should be going off...
Why is the “why” coverage missing???!!!????
I got flamed for suggesting Eric Frein ‘could’ have had a good motive for what he did.
This is one of those motives.
Is the offense criminal? If so then this should apply:
Amendment VIIf it's not, then this should apply:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment VIIIn either case, most
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
asset forfeiturecases would require a jury-trial.
How is the “why” relevant?
The 5th amendment protects him from having to answer that question.
....nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
The sheeple need to take back their own town’s government.
Then proceed to the county and state level.
Take it back.
Yep, $20 or more.
Think about that in divorce cases.
How much is confiscated without jury trials ? Basically the total court-ordered in every divorce, child support, etc., case.
Sheeple need to take back their own government.
It sounds like, perhaps, he never sued.
People might not sue because of the astronomical cost.
Remember playing “Cops and Robbers”..?
Now it’s, “Cops ARE Robbers”.
What do you mean the “why” is missing? What business is it of yours? Its not a crime to have cash in your possession. The “why” is irrelevant.
I agree with you —reports like this show there are really great reasons for completely law-abiding people to feel *provoked*.
C C guy,
Keep asking the “why”; ask all the variants of it.
Then it will, besides answer the first question (justify possession), tell us the motive and agenda behind the exclusion of the phrase ....
I.e. ‘why he needs to justify possessing that much currency ‘
Or maybe because he can’t prove it happened? I’m not doubting it happened but how does one prove it unless the cop filed paperwork.
Here’s where I am puzzled but from a different angle. I thought Henry Hyde had sponsored reform legislation a decade ago to provide for speedy replevin absent clear and convincing evidence, the highest possible requirement in a court of law. There were a few exceptions such as the person being wanted on a criminal list, or previously convicted of felonies.
I’d want to know, “why” this fellow did not avail himself of this.
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.