And the result was? What was the guy doing with the rake---cleaning his yard? When you leave out important details like that, you can distort the picture and condemn an innocent man, who sometimes happens to be a cop.
Map Kernow: When you leave out important details like that, you can distort the picture and condemn an innocent man, who sometimes happens to be a cop. 333
You certainly do know how to omit key context and create a straw man just so that you can kick the stuffing out of it -- as you have so clearly demonstrated below. Thanks for exposing your true colors.
* * *
Zon: Don't you two (er, make that three) just "love" it when a person jumps to conclusions or a person accuses others of things they didn't say or imply. Excuse me, I couldn't resist the drama of it all.304
Oh yeah, I hope nobody minds that I included the sentences between the brackets that were in JJ's original post.
Carry on... :-)
To: John Jorsett
[There's nothing kneejerk or conclusion jumping about my criticism. In a finger-pointing contest, I'll generally give the benefit of the doubt to the cops, since most of the people they deal with aren't the most truthful individuals.] However, when presented with videotaped evidence, I'm not going to deny my own eyes, nor my sense of what constitutes unnecessary force. If you want to go on thinking that expecting a peace officer to live up to a code of behavior that doesn't include roughing people up is anti-cop, that's your choice.
No one appointed you judge and jury of that cop's fate, sir, and it is not an endorsement of "police brutality," as you so primly and dishonestly put it, to insist that every piece of evidence, not simply the videotape you find so conclusive, be evaluated to determine whether the cop's actions were justified. And yeah, my "choice" of opinion is, you're anti-cop.
86 posted on 7/11/02 9:26 PM Eastern by Map Kernow
Who claimed I was his judge and jury? I've got eyes, a brain, and (probably to your horror) an opinion. And I don;t know where you got the idea that I don't want all the evidence examined. There may indeed be mitigating factors for some of what went on. The cop should be off the force in any case; the additional evidence, if any, will simply determine whether he should also be pursued civilly and/or criminally. That's my assessment and if it upsets you, tough.
330 posted on 7/12/02 4:24 PM Eastern by John Jorsett
Apparently Map Kernow thinks that any reader couldn't see her (or his) obvious intent to deceive the reader. And she has the gall to accuse her target/victim of being dishonest. Isn't that a hoot.