cOoTeR

I saw a picture on Facebook that has figured out the conspiracy behind all these police brutality race fueled issues. It was a picture of protesters and the caption was "Nothing says F*[k the police like giving hundreds of them lots of overtime right before the holidays." The police are committing these acts on purpose to create media fueled riots so they can get extra money for Christmas. So right after Christmas this will all probably stop being covered and everything will go back to normal.

I want saying kill them all I was just pointing out they aren't always as sweet as they seem to be. As far as them knowing the coyote in heat most I believe it was speculation. But a friend did tell me he based that belief on the evening prior to his lab getting killed that the dog was acting the same as when one of his female dogs go into heat. But none of his dogs were in heat.

I've known several people out in the sticks that have had their dogs killed by coyotes. I've heard stories about packs of coyotes sending a female in heat up to a property with dogs and drawing dogs away from the house. Once Seau from people they ambush the domestic dog. Is not just a city thing.

He's going to crash his dad's bike and off himself. Or run away to Mexico and marry Nero.

What are you basing that opinion on? That they should have indicted him.

Is this a fact based on statistics or just the perception derived from the recent media coverage.

You do know that it wasn't Ferguson PD that collected the evidence and worked the case right? What are you basing that he committed perjury on?

So that makes all cops dishonest?

Or maybe they actually did fear for their life. You just re-worded what I've already said and addressed to twist it to your cop hating agenda.

Yes and as a part of my job I find people breaking laws and arrest them. Sometimes having to use force while doing that. So yes I do police work but unlike a cop I don't write tickets or citations. Either the person gets arrested and I charge them with a crime then it goes to court or they don't get anything. But I do get called to assist local and state officers in carrying out their duties. Before I got my federal job I worked in law enforcement at the state level. So you could say in not just in the "inner circle" I'm part of it. I wasn't going to put any of our private message discussion out here until after you decided to bring it out here. After in the private message I told you I completed two law enforcement academies you posted out here asking if I was a cop.

Incorrect^^^^^^ in the context you are using it. Did you not read the PM I sent you. But since you really want to know I'm a federal agent. So not a cop but plenty of experience as a Law Enforcement Officer at the state and federal level. So again since you want to try to call me out what is your law enforcement experience? I'm using first hand experience and facts to base my decisions and beliefs. What are you using? EDIT: Never mind got your PM. You know some cops and "banged" some lady cops. Your are officially an expert sir.

Please read the court documents that document that details what the grand jury and prosecution had to go on. Don't be lazy and just jump on the story that the media wants you to believe. Form your own opinions instead of remaining blindly ignorant to the facts.

Something like that. Get caught lying under any official capacity and a cop can lose their ability to testify in court. Google Giglio effect. It only takes one person to have integrity and be honest to get all the liars outted. The honest person cannot be treated unfairly due to whistleblower policies in most departments. Even so its easier to not be welcome in 1 department than to be barred from any law enforcement position as I already explained in the PM reply in sent you. Once again nothing changes the fact that your statement that cops are trained to say "they feared for their life" is not a correct or true statement. Just because that's what you think reality is does not make it a fact.

I don't believe you because actual experience tells me otherwise.

So the prosecution should just go to the grand jury with their opinion and day indict this guy without presenting evidence? Or picking and choosing evidence to get an indictment? Or even worse what would happen if he only presented some evidence and the grand jury still didn't indict? Imagine the conspiracy theories that would come out of that. The prosecution had the evidence and testimonies of everyone and most likely knew the want enough evidence to indict Wilson. So why waste the time trying to prosecute? I'm calling bullshit on your bullshit call. Please tell me about the law enforcement academies or law enforcement training you've attended? Specifically training where the officer is told to say they feared for their life? Witnesses and involved participants from both sides of a case often meet with legal council before they testify to prepare for court. That is common practice but there is no lying in court course that you seem to believe there is. Courts often will not let law enforcement officers testify in uniform because the opposing lawyer will claim that the uniform makes them appear more honest to a jury. So whose getting discredited right of the bat?

The guy that got arrested for the threats, I wouldn't be surprised if a terrorism investigation isn't launched looking into him. His name appears to be Muslim and Isis has stated they plan to divide our country. (Current Race issues over Ferguson have our opinions divided). Another Isis threat is to attack police and military and this case has cop hate at an all time high. At a first glance it looks like that guy who got arrested was recruiting to encourage or carryout what is a current terrorist threat.

Did you guys read the testimonies that were presented to the grand jury for yourself or are you blindly following the cop hater beliefs? Why not submit to a polygraph? Because the results are determined by interpretation you can be 100% honest and fail or be 100% dishonest and pass. The test itself picks up natural reactions to being nervous muscle tightness, heartbeat, breathing etc.. Most people get nervous when they lie but they also have the same reactions to stress. So reliving a stressful situation will cause the same involuntary reactions. Or just being stressed about the test can make it look like a person is being dishonest. So he could pass the test and everyone would go with the fact that they are based on interpretation and not 100%accurate so the test was wrong and they still don't believe him. Still wouldn't clear his name. Second he could take it and the results could show he was being dishonest even if it was just the stress reaction to thinking about a stressful time when he shot somebody. Think about telling a story about a stressful time such as a close call or crash on a motorcycle. As you rethink about the details your heart rate will most likely increase. Doesn't mean you're lying just that your body is reacting to stress. If you haven't read the court documents you should. The prosecutor wasn't the person involved in the grand jury proceedings. He was there the first day to instruct the grand jury and inform them that they were being held longer due to the case and they were only going to work the Wilson case. Other than that it was the assistant prosecutors that handled the case. Why would you expect the prosecution to not present all they evidence? They need all the facts to make an informed decision. Leaving out information would look like they were hiding something to me. The reason it is uncommon for the accused to testify to the grand jury is they do so alone without their lawyer to help them and 5th amendment rights. It's the accused that decides to testify or not, not the prosecutor. Read the testimony of Dorian who was with Brown when the shooting happened. He is very detailed about a lot of stuff that Wilson did but claims not to be sure what a lot of Brown's actions were. Seems like convenient amnesia or bending the truth to me. If they weren't looking for trouble why didn't Brown and Johnson get out of the street when the cop told them to? Or when they were hit by the cop trying to open the door why didn't they back up if they or Brown weren't trying to attack Wilson in the car? Wilson and Johnson both testified that Wilson said get back or I'll shoot from inside the car when he drew and pointed his gun at Brown. Why didn't Brown get back then? Johnson claimed Wilson was holding Brown with only his left hand. preventing him from getting back as ordered. Brown was then shot straight on. If he was trying to get away and not go for the gun why was he shot straight on and not through the side? I'm significantly smaller than brown but I can garauntee that there isn't a person on this planet that can hold me with one hand while they are seated in a vehicle. I'm at least going to get turned away. Also in his testimony Wilson stated he pulled the trigger multiple times and the gun didn't fire it also malfunctioned after the first shot and Wilson had to rack the slide to get it ready to fire again. The easiest way to get a gun to do this is to push the slide back to prevent it from firing or disrupting the slides motion as it is ejecting and chamber the rounds. Which is quite likely if someone is trying to take it from the person using it. Johnsons testimony also stated that Brown didn't have both hands up when Wilson shot him away from the cop car. Cops are not trained to say they feared for their life after using force. They are trained to NOT use deadly force unless they have a reason to fear for their life or someone else's life because that is when deadly force is necessary. So of course they are going to say that's why the used deadly force, because that actually is the reason they used deadly force. If you're stopped at an intersection and the light turns green and you get hit by someone running the red light after you go you are going to have the same answer as anyone else who's ever gone through a green light if asked. If asked why you entered the intersection you're response would be something along the lines of because the light was green. The scenario is not the same but you can see my point. Any relevant response will be similar to any other person because everyone is taught to wait until the light is green before entering the intersection. They aren't taught to give the same answer is just that the answer to the question is the same.

If it were me I'd talk to a lawyer. But id have to really wonder if the stress and delay of a court case is worth it. In the end it may be easier to just let the insurance company cover it. That way you get it all fixed up and don't have to deal with it and worry about him having a good enough lawyer to end up not paying all of it. The insurance companies have lawyers that only deal with cases like this.

Maybe the ones from CO were the only ones stoned enough to think hanging out in the road was a good idea.

I wonder if the driver can claim they are protesting also to get out of any trouble. That seems to be working for all the anarchists that are rioting and sitting down roadways.

But standing in the street to be an asshole does.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/208237-driver-slams-car-protesters-blocking-way-crowd-doesnt-respond-well/ If you're dumb enough to stand in the street you deserve to be hit by a car. I wonder if the line from Anchor Man, "I immediately regret this decision." ever went through the lady's head as her legs were about to be run over.

And people say natural selection is non-existent in our modern society.

I could use some liquor. I think I'm going to head down to the liquor store and "demonstrate"/"protest" by kicking in the door and picking up some free booze. After that I think I may run by the auto parts store. On a side note it appears Ferguson has decided to start the Black Friday deals early this year. There are several stores having fire sales tonight.

Pics or it didn't happen. Here's a video. http://therightscoop.com/watch-cnn-get-teargassed-after-almost-being-run-over-by-protesters-video/