[IrishCatholic]

Only up to post 15 on the thread and so many Olympic athletes jumping to conclusions.

First: The deputy called for another deputy. Was that the one on duty? Was the deputy on the side job there for traffic control? Or don’t we care?

Second: What was the power company doing? Was it stringing line? That tells me the legal part was settled long ago. Both would have been nice to include in the story.

Third: Was it an easement? Was it always the right of the power company to access the property? Goes with number two above.

Fourth: From the story she was stripped searched and dusted not in her driveway, but most likely at jail be a female deputy. It is probably the standard procedure at the jail for everyone. There is no indication anyone was outside the line on standard procedures for an arrest.

Fifth: If the charge was disorderly, what did she do or say? Did the deputies have it on tape? Or is only one side needed here for the “jack booted thug” crowd?

What a pathetic excuse for journalism. We don’t have a full story, we only have a small part of the story. But that seems to be enough for our Olympians.

[decimon]

Only up to post 15 on the thread and so many Olympic athletes jumping to conclusions.

My less-than-Olympian conclusion is that nothing would have happened to her if a private security guard had been there in place of the deputy.

[PAR35]

Second: What was the power company doing?

"When surveyors showed up"

Well, I'll jump to the conclusion that surveyors were surveying. What do you think surveyors might be doing? Where I'm from, surveyors don't string line. They survey to set the description for filing an eminent domain action.

[DoughtyOne]

I like the way you jumped on this thread to damn others for jumping to conclusions, just before jumping to your own.

I see no indication the power company had any right to be there. The letter of intent doesn’t justify anything.

Now you can jump to conclusions that they did, but that’s no wiser than jumping to conclusions that they didn’t.

[maine-iac7]

C'mon guys. All you have to do is take one look at this dangerous perp to understand why it took backup to haul her off for strip search and lice dusting -

Do you guys know what's involved in a strip search? Unless there is at least a tiny reason to suspect that someone may be 'harboring' a weapon or drugs in their body cavities, they should not be strip searched. I highly doubt they had any reason to suspect this woman of hiding drugs or weapons inside her body cavities...the law need changing.

Ask yourself, honestly, what a strip search would do to you - or your mother or, as it looks in this case, a grandmother.

[Talking_Mouse]

Thank you for pointing out some of the unanswered questions to this “story”. The 60 year old woman strip searched is supposed to be the emotional hook to this story. Emotions often tend to override reason and facts, especially in biased (and this story is VERY biased) journalism.

[Eagle Eye]

Good job defending the strip seaching of Grandma.

Good job.

[bcorbett]

First thing to remember is the situation did not call for an arrest! There was no crime committed even if she gave a threatening opinion to the police.(Freedom of speech “Its in our constitutional rights”. The police allowed the situation to get out of control and went with it because like most law enforcement,including judges “They practice a system, NOT LAW!!!. The american people must learn to fight to maintain our freedom and stop letting law makers make up our minds.Once we do this, govt.policies will change and american freedoms will not be abused!!!

[FreedomPoster]

>>What a pathetic excuse for journalism.

Conservatively, I’d say we could say that for 90%-98% of the MSM stories out there.