“I assume in your little smartassed tirade against me,”
Surely you are up to the intellectual challenge. Or is everyone who questions your opinion, your ‘authority’, a little smartass? And do you TASER them or SHOOT them when they smart off?
” in your attempt to some how discredit me (which, by the way you didn’t)”
I wasn’t attempting to discredit you. I was debating the issue of legality and procedure as set forth by the UTAH PD.
I was merely trying to discredit your arguments. Not you.
Or did you take it personal? (like you accuse Officer Gardner of doing)
“you were attempting to actually ask me that question.”
Yes. But your answer is a little difficult to parse.
FOR EXAMPLE:
“if he had not filed a lawsuit he wouldn’t have won.”
DUH.
And then it gets contradictory:
“he DID file a lawsuit, and didn’t “win” anything “
“Sorry, but he won, because the cop was wrong.”
Then this:
“They ADMIT that the cop was wrong by settling out of court. “
Funny, that is not what the UTAH PD said.
Finally:
“The fact is, had this gone to trial there would have been a JURY which would have been specifically selected having NEVER SEEN the freakin’ video.”
And can you guarantee that they would have found for the plaintiff?
P.S.
Thank you for your responses on this thread.
I may not agree with your opinion, but I respect your right to have it.
The importance of debating the issue is that, hopefully, those involved (lurkers, too) have learned something from it.
Whether it helps them protect their family, or avoid arrest, or win a case over an abusive authority figure, or even be more observant of traffic laws, so be it.
It’s a good thing.
You seem like an educated, intelligent person, and have put up some very strong arguments.
I have read many of your other comments, on other threads, and have found them interesting.
Just remember, it’s not personal. It’s just a debate.