2 officers out of jobs in wake of repeated Tasering of woman

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | Monday, July 12, 2010 | Rhonda Cook

[Oztrich Boy]

Janice Wells called the Richland Police Department when she feared a prowler was outside her clapboard house in the rural west Georgia town.

The third-grade teacher had phoned for help. But within minutes of an officer coming to her backdoor, she was screaming in pain and begging not to be shocked again with a Taser. With each scream and cry, the officer threatened her with more shocks.

~~~~~~~~~~~

"I did what I had to do to take control of the situation," Smith told the AJC about his decision to repeatedly discharge his Taser.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[onona]

“It was worse than what I thought it was. I was shocked,” the sheriff told the AJC.

Heh heh heh....

[jocon307]

This is incredible. Wasn’t there another story from the AJC about some middle aged woman who got arrested for failure to “move along”?

These cops sounds like they’ve got crime all under control in Georgia and are now focusing on “controlling” the law abiding.

[jocon307]

“...the NYPD has 35,000 uniformed members.”

I heard an expert years ago on the radio who said that there are only 2 decent police forces in the world, the NYPD and Scotland Yard.

Having lived in NYC for 1/2 of my life I must agree that the cops there are head & shoulders above others I’ve encountered.

[bjorn14]

“Chattahoochee County Sheriff’s office.”

Isn’t that the county where the movie Deliverance was to have taken place?

[calex59]

She called about a prowler, called a friend to come be with her. The cops somehow turned the call into a domestic violence situation, which it wasn't. She had every right to refuse to give the name of her friend. She didn't make a mistake, these a**holes pretending to be cops are the ones who made a mistake. There was no reason to arrest this woman. She had broken no laws, the obstructing an investigation was BS. The original guy wanted to make an arrest when he showed up, hence the assumption about domestic violence when the call was for a prowler.

If he wanted the guy's name why didn't he ask the guy when he was questioning him? Clearly an abuse of power.

[calex59]

According to the story the woman has invented after she lawyered up, John came to stay with her until the police arrived. So why then in the video does she tell the sheriff, “I just wanted them to ask John to leave”?

So, let's say John was abusing her and that's whey she called. Why did the first cop let the guy go? Why didn't he handcuff that guy and leave the woman alone? You can try to white wash this if you wish, however, this woman broke no laws and was manhandled worse than if she had not called them at all. You can bet next time she will not be calling cops to "protect" her, a person can only stand so much protection.

[LIBERTARIAN JOE]

Lesson 1...

Good lessons to live by.

A good one that I often repeat is there are very few situations that can't be made worse by bringing in the cops.

Depending on cops to do anything other than writing reports for legal or insurance purposes after you have resolved the situation in question, is a dangerous game these days.

[Kenny Bunk]

Sheriffs really need a bit of local looking-into. They are in the confiscation and resale business big time with RICO. It seems to me that while the Sheriff and his cousins, in-laws, and girlfriend (aka "Deputies") are taking care of inventory, no one is actually picking up thousands of bad boys with outstanding warrants for everything from Arson to Zoophilia.

Check outstanding warrants in your county. If Sheriff Joe of Maricopa county is reading this, permit me to say, "Present company excepted" .... I hope.

In the meantime, due to the public school journalism courses taken by the reporter, I cannot actually tell from this interesting report, who did what to whom, where, when, and why.

[SaraJohnson]

Brutalizing a citizen to cover up an on-the-job mistake is a tad too common these days.

We recently had an another incident where police shot and killed a West Point graduate (masters from Duke) after someone called them saying the man was armed at a store. He had a permit to be armed and carry. The police kept yelling he had a gun in his hand while tasing him and it led to them shooting him multiple times when witnesses say he was not holding his gun and was not a threat to the officers. The three cops were trying to shape the witnesses’ experience to justify what they were doing to an innocent man by shouting he was pointing a gun at them when he had never touched his gun. They tortured him with tasers before they all opened fire on him. The witnesses were terrorified!

The Feds have Nationalized our police force in military training and mentality to fight “foreign and domestic” terror and now these officers are professionally and morally corrupted. The Feds have spread their disease of incompetence and disrespect through the whole nation. It began with Clinton’s “community policing” Federal initatives. That was an Orwellian lable as there was not anything “community” about it.

I give the cops the benefit of the doubt in blaming this systematic brutality on their training. I don’t want to think they are criminally insane monsters, rather they are doing what they have been wrongly trained to do to Americans. They have been taught to hate and fear Americans like enemy combatants in a war. In a war, anything goes to win against the enemy.

If we want to support the cops and the rule of law, we have to go after their supervisors and training academies so they don’t end up in prison and being disrespected and dispised by the public/juries. If I were on a jury and the defendent made the case the cops planted evidence on him, I would not longer automatically believe the police. And when they lose my trust, that is saying something!

[jimt]

How sad appropriate. Because this woman made a mistake the two cops greatly abused their authority, the two officers jack-booted idiots lost their jobs.

And enjoy hopefully a fat monetary penalty as Ms. Wells wins a successful lawsuit.

[Vigilantcitizen]

I know the Richland PD personally. I know Chief Edge personally. This does not surprise me. I had a bad experience with them but I cannot discuss it due to legal reasons.

[Vigilantcitizen]

See 91. Remember when I moved to South ga?

[Fundamentally Fair]

Not sad at all... These police shouldn’t be allowed to breath any more air, much less work for the taxpayer...

From the article:

Smith now works for the Chattahoochee County Sheriff's office.

So, he resigned just before being fired, then hired on with another force.

[FreedomPoster]

Holy crap!

I’d love to hear the details of that some day.

[RachelFaith]

Sheriffs really need a bit of local looking-into. They are in the confiscation and resale business big time with RICO. It seems to me that while the Sheriff and his cousins, in-laws, and girlfriend (aka "Deputies") are taking care of inventory, no one is actually picking up thousands of bad boys with outstanding warrants for everything from Arson to Zoophilia.

Yes. I agree. They DO need just as much oversight as city cops. My point is, however, that unlike administrative bureaucratic unionized city cops, the Sheriff is a constitutionally provisioned officer. Which is or in some cases was, why the city cops take you to county for arrest. The Sheriff is the only true person allowed by natural law, to hold someone against their will to be tried by a jury of their peers.

What has happened in the last 100 years, is the systematic inception, and corruption of local municipal government bureaucrats, exercising the law unto themselves with no accountability to the people. Such a system is, inherently corrupt. Any government system outside the constitutional checks and balances is de facto unlawful. It may have the municipal codification of statutory standing, but then so did statutes which made blacks sit in the back of the bus, or allowed Germans in the 40's to confiscate Jew's property.

Statutory Codification does not make a deed LAWFUL. Thus, city cops, all of them, without any exception or regard to their personal codes of ethics or behaviors are nothing short of unlawful thugs protected by a government syndicate at the expense of our civil liberties.

[RachelFaith]

A good one that I often repeat is there are very few situations that can't be made worse by bringing in the cops.

Depending on cops to do anything other than writing reports for legal or insurance purposes after you have resolved the situation in question, is a dangerous game these days.

Glad we totally agree Joe. I often wonder how long America can continue before our very thoughts and beliefs are indeed crimes. I know that is what these types wish, I just don't see any sign that America is waking up.

[RachelFaith]

After watching this, I don’t think I would disagree with any of that, which is sad, really.

Don’t Talk to Cops, Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

You’ve probably seen this. If not, you need to.

I have. And I am an attorney. They do still teach us this in Law School. Never say anything to a cop.

[Vigilantcitizen]

I’ll share it with you later this evening or tomorrow. Got a funeral to attend today. I got the cop fired.

[RachelFaith]

Where oh where to begin with this rant.

How about, learn to use a paragraph space. One long disjointed run on is annoying and very hard to follow.

I see more conspiracy-theorist libertarianism seeping into the Freerepublic base every day.

Well, at least you do see the root element. Liberty. Because, it is the root of Liberty which is the last bastion for the establishment and their patsies to assail.

My usual advice for someone who doesn’t like the police or generally distrusts them is they should then go to your local city or county department.....or go a couple cities over, and request a ride-a-long.

So, what is you usual advice for highly educated, liberty minded, strict constructionist constitutional jurists? Because, I am very very familiar with our laws, statutes, codifications, and administrative regulations.

What is missing from your understanding is the difference between those four citations above.

There is LAW. Which is, self evident, natural, God given, inalienable, and absolute.

There is everything else, which are either in harmony with natural law or in rebellion against natural law. Most of the others, in 20th and 21st century America are in rebellion against natural law.

One of the chiefest rebellions is the creation and expansion of the Police State. A precursor to every known tyranny.

Since we do not have time for the course or the proofs and since these concepts are well researchable elsewhere, I will just refresh your acquaintance with the general theorems.

City cops are an administrative enforcement division of civil law. An unlawful and unnecessary government burden upon the tax payers and populous. They are without any direct elected oversight or accountability and in constitutional effect operating as private citizens who exercise the citizens own God given rights of police powers. With the added pejorative that city cops do so while protected by a unaccountable unionized bureaucratic syndicate.

A free people, should utterly reject this form of usurpation of their rights, as surely as they defend their own rights to the same as documented in the 2nd amendment.

Is it any wonder that so called Law Enforcement types are among the worst perpetrators against the rights of the people to go armed? Is it any wonder that these types hold themselves above the laws and to the extend consider the general and sovereign populace to be "citizens" as if that is a lowly denominator to which cops are above?

I am not discussing at ALL... Not in the least, the personal ethics of individuals. Not "bad apples". Those are your words, not mine. It is not baseless charges against a person for deeds done or undone. So listen clearly to what it is, and do not imagine the lies with which you have been indoctrinated.

Any city cop. All city cops. Are, de facto, unlawful agents of a corrupt tyrannical abusive police state. By their very existence. If the greatest hearted, most gentle loving, kind, honorable, never hurt a fly human, takes upon himself the power and authority, or accepts the charges of such an authority, which is abusive by its very nature to the laws of God, that man is now corrupt by the deed itself.

There is no moral authority for municipal administrative police powers granted under heaven. None. Therefore, all who usurp these lawful powers, reserved to the sovereign people, are criminals and posing as the self appointed law, criminals of the worst kind. Usurpers. Traitors. Posers. Liars. Thugs. Brutes. The lowest of the low, their good intentions be damned.

Now, that this is settled, at least to the degree that you can no longer mince words, or toss about inane generalities and are informed of the specifics, even if you outright reject the foundations of a Republic, we can move on to your other red herrings.

Should 75% of the military be thrown out or executed? Maybe all catholic priests need to be executed? No? Yett that sentiment applies to police.

Hopefully you can see now, and if not you, others, that this is not at all about the behaviors of persons.

Let's go for the God hatred. Since one of the roots of those who support a police state is the hatred for God and His Law. You did not choose to attack the church in vain. Even if you deny God hatred your choice of targets betrays the inner motive and heart.

Are their members of the organized religious hierarchy known as the Catholic Church who have committed abuse and violated the laws of God? Of course. Should they be arrested, tried, and if convicted sentenced under law? Without objection. So ordered. Do you see this is a red herring? Priests are individuals and their behavior in these cases is criminal and the system of justice is in place for this reason.

It has nothing to do with city cops. It has nothing to do with usurpation of authority. Priests, by natural law are in fact lawful agents of their own estate.

City cops on the other had are unnatural agents of a corrupt application of a Fascist bureaucracy exercising police powers against the very citizens from which and to which those powers belong directly.

Guilty abusive Priests need punished, to protect victims.

Administrative police bureaucracies need abolished and those powers returned to and resumed by the people, to protect the very foundations of liberty itself.

NEXT UP: MILITARY

The very purpose of the state is to protect the citizens from foreign assault. The Military is constitutional. But, should 75% of it be retired, inactive and should we stop being the world's policemen? Oh boy. Now I have really opened the can of worms. This rabbit hole is deep. But, alas we have not the time or space for it. So I will be brief.

First, the givens. A well regulated militia. Yes, the national defense is a Lawful exercise of delegated powers. And from time to time, military engagement to protect the nation will occur. But, this is a far cry from what has become of our military industrial complex. So, in brief, we should cut the expenditures and bring our troops home, close these overseas empire building bases and use our resources for our basic infrastructure.

75%. Sure. It was a basic round number. As good as a point as any for the debate to begin.

But we have left out the very telling tale. The very words: "The World's Policeman".

Words have meanings. And the meanings in that statement are profound. What is exactly a Policeman and how should we tell if one is behaving as such?

Well, I think the above posting has presented a very clear view. So, if the Military is acting in a lawful way, it is a military. If they act in a way such as a bureaucratic administrative enforcement agent, it would be likewise an unlawful execution of otherwise lawful powers.

Did I sum that up too succinctly or did you follow it ok?

Let me be direct:

It is lawful for our nation, under the provision of a declaration of war, to engage enemies, rote them from the field of battle and then to return to our homes.

It is unlawful to occupy for an indefinite period of time and to administer statutory enforcements upon people with their just consent.

It is unlawful to do so in some other nation upon some other nations peoples, just as it is unlawful for such administration upon our own people in our own country.

This is the very crux of the matter. City cops, are a de facto occupying militarized force of unaccountable, power usurping bureaucrats hostile to the liberties of man.

And you, reading this, either get it, and understand where and what and why and how you are to secure your liberties or you will continue to see them eroded, usurped, stolen, abused and you will be systematically be reduced to servitude.

If there are any good men of moral conscience who truly seek to support the very pillars of liberty, they cannot in any good conscience continue to support a doctrine which is the primary vehicle for the direct destruction of our natural rights and the foundations upon which hang the very hopes for the freedoms of the entire world.

If after reading this, you reject this understanding, and embrace the lies of the state, you are an enemy of God and of the people and an agent of absolute evil.

[LIBERTARIAN JOE]

Good post!

Are you a Libertarian? You sure sound like one of us.