>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^jonny:
"he spent in a 5 ft. by 10 ft. cell, where he could not spread his arms out wide."
How long are this dude's arms?!?!

He was handcuffed. Odd wording but it's the only explanation.
All they seized were some soft drugs - shrooms, weed, ecstacy, some other crap and "some weapons" ie. various things that you'd find in a normal house that can be used to fluff out the report and make sure such drugs are associated with violence!
Someone remind me again what's so terrible about taking those things in the privacy of your own property?


Here's a more recent CNN story.

Yes, he was handcuffed in the cell. The house that was raided seemed to be an MDMA distribution center, and the DEA claims they seized 18,000 pills, as well as several guns and cases of ammo. But it also wasn't the kids house; it seems he was just there with friends to get high. Which is why he wasn't charged and supposed to be released.

>> ^jonny:

"he spent in a 5 ft. by 10 ft. cell, where he could not spread his arms out wide."
How long are this dude's arms?!?!


He was handcuffed. Odd wording but it's the only explanation.

All they seized were some soft drugs - shrooms, weed, ecstacy, some other crap and "some weapons" ie. various things that you'd find in a normal house that can be used to fluff out the report and make sure such drugs are associated with violence!

Someone remind me again what's so terrible about taking those things in the privacy of your own property?

Your video, Man "forgotten" in DEA custody for 5 days, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^00Scud00:

It will be interesting to hear what their excuse for this is.


I really doubt even the DEA would try to claim it's excusable or understandable.

More likely, now that it's public they'll express "regret" without apologizing properly, and someone will get a slap on the wrist corrective action or paid temporary suspension.

I get so exhausted sharing and talking and fighting for/against causes that i care about like this. That's why politicians seem to frequently get their way; they have no other job, they mime bullshit for a living.

However, every time I hear someone talk about how they dont give a shit about politics it gets me fired up enough to keep going.
--
--
I attended a funeral this weekend and had a few cousins come up to me "what's up with your facebook page, is that like the government posting that on there or is that you doing it?"

"Oh it's me, I post a lot of things about politics"

"Why do you care so much about that stuff? I just dont even pay attention to any of it."

"Well, take what happened last week in the Supreme Court for example; Do you know what decision was handed down regarding strip searches?"

"No..."

"Well, the supreme court, as you obviously know, renders the final decisions on cases, and those decisions become law of the land. Basically what happened last week involved a man who was arrested for a traffic stop and was strip searched and held in jail for a solid week while the police were trying to figure out what the man had been telling htem all along; there was a computer error that led to a false warrant for his name."

"So?"

"So now, since they ruled against this man who sued the police from his city who arrested/strip searched him and lost, if you or I are taken into custody for ANY reason, we can be subject to a complete strip and body cavity search. Do you care about that?"

"WTF they can't do that!"

"They can and they are because people dont care about politics. Now fuck off!"



("Now fuck off!" added for dramatic emphasis and not actually spoken at the funeral viewing ceremony)

In short, yeah yeah, I'll help you fight your crazy cause you crazy kid.

EDIT: shared on social media and sent letters to my congress peoplez !

I have outrage fatigue...I find myself not caring about this case anymore now that he has actually been arrested. That was the major driving force behind the outrage in the first place, not whether he was guilty or innocent, but that he wasn't even in custody.

Regardless of the outcome...guilty or innocent, there is going to be outrage either way and I'm just tired of it.

I'm still kinda pissed that this is yet another situation that gets torn right down the partisan lines and it's just fodder for pundits on both sides.

Sure I have my own views on his guilt/innocence and I have expressed them here, but I feel like it just doesn't matter any more. It's just going to be milked to death. Now that he's in custody, I tend to feel like trials like this should be kept closed off to the public until the verdict.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^probie:
I never got into Frasier. Frasier Crane was my favorite character on Cheers and the Frasier on Frasier was not the Frasier on Cheers.
Perhaps this will help to explain the evolution of the character from one show to the next.

Soon after Frasier debuts on Cheers, he dates Diane Chambers (Shelley Long). They get engaged, but the relationship ends when Diane abandons him at the altar. Frasier nevertheless visits the bar often and eventually marries Lilith Sternin (Bebe Neuwirth), a fellow psychiatrist. Together, they have a son, Frederick, but Lilith cheats on Frasier with a colleague. The couple reconciles briefly, but between the end of Cheers and the start of Frasier, they separate permanently and divorce. During his separation with Lilith, Frasier publicly threatens suicide, to gain Lilith's attention and win her back, but the thought of his son stops him from doing so. Lilith gains custody of Frederick.

>> ^probie:

I never got into Frasier. Frasier Crane was my favorite character on Cheers and the Frasier on Frasier was not the Frasier on Cheers.

Perhaps this will help to explain the evolution of the character from one show to the next.

Soon after Frasier debuts on Cheers, he dates Diane Chambers (Shelley Long). They get engaged, but the relationship ends when Diane abandons him at the altar. Frasier nevertheless visits the bar often and eventually marries Lilith Sternin (Bebe Neuwirth), a fellow psychiatrist. Together, they have a son, Frederick, but Lilith cheats on Frasier with a colleague. The couple reconciles briefly, but between the end of Cheers and the start of Frasier, they separate permanently and divorce. During his separation with Lilith, Frasier publicly threatens suicide, to gain Lilith's attention and win her back, but the thought of his son stops him from doing so. Lilith gains custody of Frederick.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Yogi:
"You're gonna see a lot of drug seeking behavior in your practice...because it works."
-House
That doctor should have his license to practice taken away. I blame the cops for a lot of heartless things in this story, but the doctor is responsible for her health and well being and he is just shit at his job...Unless she died from some sort of aneurysm that couldn't be detected then maybe he's off the hook.

She was complaining about leg pain and numbness. The first thing they should check in that situation is for blood clots. If a blood clot broke off and lodged in her heart or lungs she could have (probably did) die directly from medical negligence.


Very good, yes I saw this while watching House as well. Good consult Dr. Boise_Lib.

>> ^Yogi:

"You're gonna see a lot of drug seeking behavior in your practice...because it works."
-House
That doctor should have his license to practice taken away. I blame the cops for a lot of heartless things in this story, but the doctor is responsible for her health and well being and he is just shit at his job...Unless she died from some sort of aneurysm that couldn't be detected then maybe he's off the hook.


She was complaining about leg pain and numbness. The first thing they should check in that situation is for blood clots. If a blood clot broke off and lodged in her heart or lungs she could have (probably did) die directly from medical negligence.

Actually went and looked up the law. Because as more evidence comes out, I still thought that a teenager being followed by a much older adult (~10 years) should result in that teenager being covered under the SYG (Stand Your Ground) Law.

So looking at the text. Trayvon could use justfied force, in accordance with 776.012 and deadly force if he met the criteria of 776.012 (1). He was the person SYG, being stalked for unknown reason by a complete stranger. This is ignoring Zimmerman's comments and just looking at his actions. He followed a kid heedless of advice and the standard op of a neighborhood watch - call it in and remove yourself if no crime is taking place.

776.032 should not apply to Zimmerman, because he caused the confrontation by following. There was no defensive nature in stalking someone to the point of them defending themself from you.

776.041 could apply to Zimmerman as he is the clear aggressor (Again lots of people feel that aggressor means you threw the first punch, that's not what the law says, it's all about reasonable belief that you are in danger and I think being stalked = reasonable). The police had to verify that under 776.041 (1) wasn't happening, which I don't think it is easily proven that Zimmerman was commiting a hate crime via the stalking/profiling/shooting. 776.041 (2) only grants immunity if (A) OR (B) are fulfilled. I have not seen that the police have established (A) or (B) were fulfilled.

(A) Did Zimmerman exhaust every reasonable means of escape the danger of Trayvon? Does yelling help count? My argument here is that persistent following and disregard of advice of written material for conduct PLUS verbal command from dispatch shows that he is incapable of acting reasonably. The reasonable act would be to call it in and leave it the fuck alone. Plus he had no reason to be out of his vehicle after Trayvon.

(B) There is no evidence that Zimmerman tried to withdraw from conflict. There is evidence he was getting thrashed on the ground by his victim after he forced the confrontation on Trayvon, but not that he tried to de-escalate the encounter by either (A) or (B).

So again, I wonder why Zimmerman was let go when he there is no evidence to suggest he didn't force the encounter by his rash and impulsive decisions to get the people "who always get away". Then you count the "fucking coons", which according to many is "fucking punks" or "fucking goons" because "coon" is something no one under 40 has said in a decade. But coons sounds nothing like punks and goons is what all the kids are saying these days (sarcasm).


I've had this discussion on other sites. And overall people seem to keep preaching that you should apply the evidence and the evidence shows that Zimmerman was attacked. Following isn't illegal and questioning someone isn't illegal, and calling the police isn't illegal, and saying "fucking coons" isn't illegal, and ignoring advice of dispatch isn't illegal, and using lethal force in defense of yourself isn't illegal, and.....blah. But taken together, it shows that Zimmerman did a lot of stupid shit to provoke an incident that WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED if a reasonable and rational person had been in his place. And according to the SYG law, Martin was covered under it more so than Zimmerman. Yet far too many people are all about believing the police THIS TIME because......of some reason...whether it be Zimmerman is white, an adult, or is alive to "say so". Yet Martin is unbelievable because he is black, a teen, or hit Zimmerman (many believe unprovoked at that).

Over all, it has a lot of earmarks of a case of road rage. Where Martin does something to upset Zimmerman. Zimmerman follows Martin, violence goes down. In most cases I've heard, the guy who does the following and forces an encounter = guilty. Because it's unreasonable anger/decision making leading up to the event and there may not have been an offense in the first place...especially because there's no evidence of an offense to require that kind of action on the part of the guy following you to your home, work, or whatever destination...getting out and starting shit.


2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[14]

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

>> ^marinara:

First of all, I was privileged to be out there with a lot of brave and beautiful people. I'd like to give my own account of what happened on Saturday, because the mainstream coverage I've seen has been universally laughable, not that that's any surprise.
Folks were mostly gathered up in Oscar Grant Plaza by about noon, and the march started around 1 or 1:30. There were probably between one and two thousand marchers. There was a sound truck playing music, and the mood was festive and happy. Parents brought their children along, and the whole thing felt a bit like a roving dance party in the streets. There was also a bus following along which the police detained about halfway through the first part of the march on some minor infraction like people weren't all wearing their seat belts or something.
When the demonstrators reached the first target building, it was already heavily surrounded by riot cops, and people didn't even try to get near it. I don't think anyone was actually expecting the "secret" target to stay secret, given the open nature of the movement and the heavy infiltration. By this point police had begun targeted arrests against certain individuals which were evidently on their list of organizers or repeat "troublemakers". Nonetheless, the marchers were being quite peaceful and were prepared to just continue the march around the city. The police weren't having that though, and they fired a number of smoke grenades into the crowd, which caused a bit of a panic since many people initially thought it was teargas. Minor injuries were incurred amongst the marchers.
A number of older demonstrators as well as people with children decided that this was a good time to call it a day and headed away from the main police line and crowd. Police then rushed in and attempted to arrest some of the parents for endangering their children. I'm not sure exactly how this turned out, but I was told that a number of parents were able to get away with their children.
Police began to close on the demonstrators who decided to continue the march through the city. Soon after police began to deploy actual tear gas along with beanbag rounds and paint balls apparently intended to mark people for later arrest. Police claim that people were throwing things at them after this. I didn't witness demonstrators throwing anything, but it is possible. I don't find it to be a constructive activity, but I also can't blame people for being angry after a peaceful march was attacked. Medics responded to high numbers of chemical contamination and blunt force trauma cases.
As the march continued, police started to use a new tactic which recklessly endangered lives and led to many injuries. They would form up in a line behind the marchers and then on some signal charge towards the back of the march with their batons at the ready. Although attempts were made among the demonstrators to keep everyone calm, inevitably many people started running as a natural reaction to seeing a line of angry club-wielding police charging at them. Lots of people got knocked down in the press of bodies. People helped up whoever they could, but I have no idea how many people were injured during this or how badly. The police continued to use this tactic all the way back to Oscar Grant Plaza, charging forward for a block before stopping for a minute or two and then charging again. This charging tactic served absolutely no crowd control purpose, as they were pushing people in the direction the march was already going, and they could have just marched behind the demonstrators keeping pace, since nobody wanted to get within arm's reach of them anyways.
Anyways, people regrouped at OGP to rest, wash up, seek medical attention, and eat. After some time, a decision was made to march around downtown Oakland again. The march was somewhat smaller this time, but probably still around 1,000 people. Oaklanders don't give into police intimidation easily. The march eventually became a bit of a cat-and-mouse game as lines of police tried to surround the marchers and "kettle" them in for mass arrests. At one point fairly early on the police nearly succeeded, but a temporary chain link fence was pulled down allowing most or all of the marchers an escape route. Later on, a group of ~50-100 demonstrators did get blocked in on a section of Broadway without any side streets. Police then rushed in, jabbing, pushing, and beating people with batons until they were forced back into a corner near a YMCA building. Some people may have escaped through the YMCA building, and police used this to claim that the protesters were trying to take over the building, although I'm fairly certain this was never the plan since the YMCA was open and operational, not abandoned. Once the group of demonstrators was blocked in and completely surrounded, police announced that this was an unlawful assembly and ordered them to disperse. A few people tried to leave with their hands raised and were promptly thrown on the ground, beaten, and arrested. The police undoubtedly thought that they were quite clever with the Catch-22 situation they had constructed, but I doubt any of the subsequent arrest charges are going to stick as a result. Getting the charges to stick was probably not the point though.
The demonstrators were pinned into the corner like this for probably 40-60 minutes before enough police buses and vans showed up for mass arrests to begin. As the time approached, the police suddenly singled out on of the demonstrators and yanked him out of the crowd, threw him down and cuffed him. It is likely this was one of the people on their special list. A small bag of powder (possibly meth) was planted on him as he was dragged away. Given the fact that everyone knew they were going to be arrested for the past half hour or so, it is utterly illogical that this person wouldn't have ditched the drugs if they really were his. He was overheard to say that they weren't his, that he didn't do drugs, and was willing to take a drug test right then and there to prove it.
Police later arrested a large number of demonstrators near OGP using similar tactics. Apparently some demonstrators got into City Hall, although I'm not sure if any arrests were made in the building. Some people were taken to jail in Oakland, others to Santa Rita (a much nastier place) in Dublin. Some were cited and released the next day, others are still in police custody.
Given my impending court appearance, I don't want to discuss the exact involvement I may or may not have had in any of the above. I think, however, this provides a much more accurate picture of what went down than has been presented in the mainstream media, and I thank you for taking the time to hear the other side.


**I need to give attribution, this blog was posted on reddit by a so called street medic attached to occupy oakland

First of all, I was privileged to be out there with a lot of brave and beautiful people. I'd like to give my own account of what happened on Saturday, because the mainstream coverage I've seen has been universally laughable, not that that's any surprise.

Folks were mostly gathered up in Oscar Grant Plaza by about noon, and the march started around 1 or 1:30. There were probably between one and two thousand marchers. There was a sound truck playing music, and the mood was festive and happy. Parents brought their children along, and the whole thing felt a bit like a roving dance party in the streets. There was also a bus following along which the police detained about halfway through the first part of the march on some minor infraction like people weren't all wearing their seat belts or something.

When the demonstrators reached the first target building, it was already heavily surrounded by riot cops, and people didn't even try to get near it. I don't think anyone was actually expecting the "secret" target to stay secret, given the open nature of the movement and the heavy infiltration. By this point police had begun targeted arrests against certain individuals which were evidently on their list of organizers or repeat "troublemakers". Nonetheless, the marchers were being quite peaceful and were prepared to just continue the march around the city. The police weren't having that though, and they fired a number of smoke grenades into the crowd, which caused a bit of a panic since many people initially thought it was teargas. Minor injuries were incurred amongst the marchers.

A number of older demonstrators as well as people with children decided that this was a good time to call it a day and headed away from the main police line and crowd. Police then rushed in and attempted to arrest some of the parents for endangering their children. I'm not sure exactly how this turned out, but I was told that a number of parents were able to get away with their children.

Police began to close on the demonstrators who decided to continue the march through the city. Soon after police began to deploy actual tear gas along with beanbag rounds and paint balls apparently intended to mark people for later arrest. Police claim that people were throwing things at them after this. I didn't witness demonstrators throwing anything, but it is possible. I don't find it to be a constructive activity, but I also can't blame people for being angry after a peaceful march was attacked. Medics responded to high numbers of chemical contamination and blunt force trauma cases.

As the march continued, police started to use a new tactic which recklessly endangered lives and led to many injuries. They would form up in a line behind the marchers and then on some signal charge towards the back of the march with their batons at the ready. Although attempts were made among the demonstrators to keep everyone calm, inevitably many people started running as a natural reaction to seeing a line of angry club-wielding police charging at them. Lots of people got knocked down in the press of bodies. People helped up whoever they could, but I have no idea how many people were injured during this or how badly. The police continued to use this tactic all the way back to Oscar Grant Plaza, charging forward for a block before stopping for a minute or two and then charging again. This charging tactic served absolutely no crowd control purpose, as they were pushing people in the direction the march was already going, and they could have just marched behind the demonstrators keeping pace, since nobody wanted to get within arm's reach of them anyways.

Anyways, people regrouped at OGP to rest, wash up, seek medical attention, and eat. After some time, a decision was made to march around downtown Oakland again. The march was somewhat smaller this time, but probably still around 1,000 people. Oaklanders don't give into police intimidation easily. The march eventually became a bit of a cat-and-mouse game as lines of police tried to surround the marchers and "kettle" them in for mass arrests. At one point fairly early on the police nearly succeeded, but a temporary chain link fence was pulled down allowing most or all of the marchers an escape route. Later on, a group of ~50-100 demonstrators did get blocked in on a section of Broadway without any side streets. Police then rushed in, jabbing, pushing, and beating people with batons until they were forced back into a corner near a YMCA building. Some people may have escaped through the YMCA building, and police used this to claim that the protesters were trying to take over the building, although I'm fairly certain this was never the plan since the YMCA was open and operational, not abandoned. Once the group of demonstrators was blocked in and completely surrounded, police announced that this was an unlawful assembly and ordered them to disperse. A few people tried to leave with their hands raised and were promptly thrown on the ground, beaten, and arrested. The police undoubtedly thought that they were quite clever with the Catch-22 situation they had constructed, but I doubt any of the subsequent arrest charges are going to stick as a result. Getting the charges to stick was probably not the point though.

The demonstrators were pinned into the corner like this for probably 40-60 minutes before enough police buses and vans showed up for mass arrests to begin. As the time approached, the police suddenly singled out on of the demonstrators and yanked him out of the crowd, threw him down and cuffed him. It is likely this was one of the people on their special list. A small bag of powder (possibly meth) was planted on him as he was dragged away. Given the fact that everyone knew they were going to be arrested for the past half hour or so, it is utterly illogical that this person wouldn't have ditched the drugs if they really were his. He was overheard to say that they weren't his, that he didn't do drugs, and was willing to take a drug test right then and there to prove it.

Police later arrested a large number of demonstrators near OGP using similar tactics. Apparently some demonstrators got into City Hall, although I'm not sure if any arrests were made in the building. Some people were taken to jail in Oakland, others to Santa Rita (a much nastier place) in Dublin. Some were cited and released the next day, others are still in police custody.

Given my impending court appearance, I don't want to discuss the exact involvement I may or may not have had in any of the above. I think, however, this provides a much more accurate picture of what went down than has been presented in the mainstream media, and I thank you for taking the time to hear the other sid

Thanks @dotdude for the update,

Alabama fan wanted in post-BCS sexual assault on LSU fan arrested in New Orleans


http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/01/alabama_fan_wanted_in_sexual_a_1.html
Brian xxxxxx, identified as the Alabama fan who pressed his testicles on the neck of an unconscious LSU fan in a Bourbon Street burger joint after the BCS Championship Game, was arrested by New Orleans police Thursday night after driving to meet police. xxxxxx, of Smiths Station, Ala., was taken into custody by New Orleans police about 10 p.m.

Detectives met xxxxxx, 32, at his attorney's office in Mid-City and then took him to Central Lock-Up, where he was booked with one count of sexual battery and one count of obscenity.

Earlier in the day, Russell County Sheriff Heath Taylor, who said he is a second cousin to xxxxxxx, said he personally spoke with the NOPD sex crimes detective handling the case about whether to arrest the man or send him to New Orleans for questioning.

Although he'd heard about the video -- which has created a firestorm on the Internet -- for a couple days, Taylor said he watched it Thursday morning at the prompting of other people who suggested the University of Alabama fan was his relative. The man in the video indeed appeared to be Downing, he said.
"So then I went out there and looked at it and was, like, you have to be kidding me," Taylor said. At that point, he called Downing's father and told him to bring his son to the sheriff's office.

>> ^ToastyBuffoon:

I gotta be honest. I'd fear for my life if a cop flipped on me like that. That was just bat shit insanity. The man shouldn't be carrying a firearm with a temper like that.


For me I'd consider running and calling 911 while on the road saying I didn't feel safe with this nutcase pulling me over and would gladly go into custody with a sane person arresting me.