Reality Check

[DamnYankee]

Wrong again, you proudly ignorant lout. A police report can and often is used in any court proceedings as testimony. If a cop falsifies his submitted report, that is tantamount to perjury upon court review, subject to disciplinary actions. Ask any prosecuting attorney, and he'll tell you that. To get yourself up to speed, do a little research on recent cases where cops falsified evidence, altered police reports. Who knows *shrug* you might actually learn something.

Again you say that he "falsified" evidence, when all he did was assume that the gal was who she said she was. (How ironic that it is you who willingly, stupidly, "falsified" your assertion.) Since this person in question was not a necessary part of the investigation, this issue is also inconsequential to the arrest. *shrug*

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
It's been a few years since I've had to deal with braying jackasses on this subject, so rattling off stats and references are not at my fingertips anymore. And quite frankly I get tired of doing others homework. Common sense approach using easily accessible general knowledge doesn't help, I see. Well, with just a quick google, I found a gentleman that puts my point into perspective

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archive...mative-action/

Also, FYI to cover the rest of the issue.

http://www.bamn.com/doc/factsheet.asp
http://www.adversity.net/Pro_AA/docs/Pincus_JIR.htm

Again twit... you are trying to justify the existence of one wrong because another also exists. That is pure ignorance. Installing a second wrong, especially a racist one, just because another wrong exists is justified how again?

No genius, I giving FACTS to justify my point....which YOU seem most furiously trying to avoid. My POINt was that for the relatively small number of blacks that got into college on affirmative action, that would mean that a relatively small number of whites didn't get into those particular colleges. My point was that back in the day you had America up in arms as if MILLIONS of whites were being denied ANY college entrance (which was not true, they just didn't get into that particular college...unlike the black students who's option was no college at all).....and as my source material showed, the vast majority of people screaming bloody murder wouldn't be in balance to the number of students affected by affirmative action. It's a simple fact that many people don't want to address...it doesn't automatically justify affirmative action per se, it just puts things in perspective.

second, you are not 'doing others work for them' by providing evidence to support YOUR claim. You are doing YOUR work. It is not the responsibility of others to go out and find evidence to support YOU.
When folk like you start shooting off your mouths without having all the facts, it means that you didn't do basic research. So when start talking down to me about how wrong I am about something YOU HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF, it means that I have to do your homework for you (as I've done here and previously). So next time you want to discuss an issue, know WTF you're talking about.

Idiot. Don't be too hard on yourself...we all make mistakes!

That said, I will now go and read your links and then follow up with you.

So let me get this straight...you're little tirade here is based on nothing but your opinion BEFORE you read the material? WTF is the matter with you, bunky? That I merely challenge your precious viewpoint drives you to distraction to rant like this? Get a grip!

Bottom line though... your assertion that one cannot be eliminated without both being eliminated at the same time is ridiculous. That is like saying you are not allowed to solve one crime unless all are solved simultaneously.

Wrong again, mastermind. You wailed that two wrongs don't make a right.....yet you automatically defend the "wrong" that favors one group. That's just pure hypocrisy on your part. Maybe you should think about such things BEFORE your fingers hit the keys....makes you look less foolish. Carry on.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Wrong again, you proudly ignorant lout. A police report can and often is used in any court proceedings as testimony. If a cop falsifies his submitted report, that is tantamount to perjury upon court review, subject to disciplinary actions. Ask any prosecuting attorney, and he'll tell you that. To get yourself up to speed, do a little research on recent cases where cops falsified evidence, altered police reports. Who knows *shrug* you might actually learn something.

Again you say that he "falsified" evidence, when all he did was assume that the gal was who she said she was. (How ironic that it is you who willingly, stupidly, "falsified" your assertion.) Since this person in question was not a necessary part of the investigation, this issue is also inconsequential to the arrest. *shrug*

The 911 call by the woman CONTRADICTS what Crowley put in his official report. The woman who made the call had a press conference with legal counsel present to state in no uncertain terms that Crowley's claim of his actions based on her call is NOT true regarding description of the alleged perpetraitors or the situation in general. Since she gave name and address on the 911 call, she is verified as the source. NO ONE HAS DISPUTED THIS. You're BS about what Crowley assumed is pure supposition and conjecture, as there is NO record of evidence or testimony to substantiate what you say. There IS, however, the 911 call and Crowley's report, which don't jibe. Since the charges were dropped, it was determined by a review of superiors and legal that Crowleys charges. Bottom line: Crowley's credibility is partially suspect to a small degree....whether you accept it or not is irrelevent.

*Shrug* But facts are not what you're about....so just go right ahead and make an ass of yourself repeating your fairy tale. I'm done responding to your parrotings here.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

The 911 call by the woman CONTRADICTS what Crowley put in his official report. The woman who made the call had a press conference with legal counsel present to state in no uncertain terms that Crowley's claim of his actions based on her call is NOT true regarding description of the alleged perpetraitors or the situation in general. Since she gave name and address on the 911 call, she is verified as the source. NO ONE HAS DISPUTED THIS. You're BS about what Crowley assumed is pure supposition and conjecture, as there is NO record of evidence or testimony to substantiate what you say. There IS, however, the 911 call and Crowley's report, which don't jibe. Since the charges were dropped, it was determined by a review of superiors and legal that Crowleys charges. Bottom line: Crowley's credibility is partially suspect to a small degree....whether you accept it or not is irrelevent.

*Shrug* But facts are not what you're about....so just go right ahead and make an ass of yourself repeating your fairy tale. I'm done responding to your parrotings here.

the 911 call and what she told crowley don't have to "jibe".....a logical fallacy to discredit one out of hand simply because of the other....she was pressed for a description of race on the 911 call....when crowley personally interviewed her....it is entirely possible she had thought more about their race

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
The 911 call by the woman CONTRADICTS what Crowley put in his official report. The woman who made the call had a press conference with legal counsel present to state in no uncertain terms that Crowley's claim of his actions based on her call is NOT true regarding description of the alleged perpetraitors or the situation in general. Since she gave name and address on the 911 call, she is verified as the source. NO ONE HAS DISPUTED THIS. You're BS about what Crowley assumed is pure supposition and conjecture, as there is NO record of evidence or testimony to substantiate what you say. There IS, however, the 911 call and Crowley's report, which don't jibe. Since the charges were dropped, it was determined by a review of superiors and legal that Crowleys charges. Bottom line: Crowley's credibility is partially suspect to a small degree....whether you accept it or not is irrelevent.

*Shrug* But facts are not what you're about....so just go right ahead and make an ass of yourself repeating your fairy tale. I'm done responding to your parrotings here.

the 911 call and what she told crowley don't have to "jibe".....a logical fallacy to discredit one out of hand simply because of the other....she was pressed for a description of race on the 911 call....when crowley personally interviewed her....it is entirely possible she had thought more about their race

Again, you give supposition and conjecture to superscede the FACTS. In short, you're shoveling a steaming load of excuses.

And for the record: if a cop's official report does NOT jibe with the recorded 911 call that the cop is basing parts of his report on, then that cop is going to catch hell when the arrested is brought before a judge on the charges for sentencing or dismisal. Hell, slam dunk arrests have been thrown out of court because a cop forgot to mirandize a perp, and you're saying that evidence doesn't have to match testimony? I don't know if you're just stubbornly pulling this nonsense out of your butt or someone you trust is lying to you. Whatever, you need to do your homework on what a cop needs to do to make a criminal charge stick. Remember, the charges were dropped...and that was all on the police side of the story.

 

[DamnYankee]

The 911 call by the woman CONTRADICTS what Crowley put in his official report. The woman who made the call had a press conference with legal counsel present to state in no uncertain terms that Crowley's claim of his actions based on her call is NOT true regarding description of the alleged perpetraitors or the situation in general. Since she gave name and address on the 911 call, she is verified as the source. NO ONE HAS DISPUTED THIS. You're BS about what Crowley assumed is pure supposition and conjecture, as there is NO record of evidence or testimony to substantiate what you say. There IS, however, the 911 call and Crowley's report, which don't jibe. Since the charges were dropped, it was determined by a review of superiors and legal that Crowleys charges. Bottom line: Crowley's credibility is partially suspect to a small degree....whether you accept it or not is irrelevent.

*Shrug* But facts are not what you're about....so just go right ahead and make an ass of yourself repeating your fairy tale. I'm done responding to your parrotings here.

The 911 call contradicts reality, since no one was breaking into the house. But that's irrelevant to the main issue, which is that Gates is a racist and did not obey police orders. *shrug*

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Again, you give supposition and conjecture to superscede the FACTS. In short, you're shoveling a steaming load of excuses.

And for the record: if a cop's official report does NOT jibe with the recorded 911 call that the cop is basing parts of his report on, then that cop is going to catch hell when the arrested is brought before a judge on the charges for sentencing or dismisal. Hell, slam dunk arrests have been thrown out of court because a cop forgot to mirandize a perp, and you're saying that evidence doesn't have to match testimony? I don't know if you're just stubbornly pulling this nonsense out of your butt or someone you trust is lying to you. Whatever, you need to do your homework on what a cop needs to do to make a criminal charge stick. Remember, the charges were dropped...and that was all on the police side of the story.

you don't have any factual truth as to what she told the cop you lying sack of poop....all you have is conjecture and opinion...like i said, they were two seperate conversations and it is possible she thought more about the race and/or time went by and she actually noticed their race since the phone call you ignorant ass

 

[TuTu Monroe]

The 911 call contradicts reality, since no one was breaking into the house. But that's irrelevant to the main issue, which is that Gates is a racist and did not obey police orders. *shrug*

You'll be stuck will this kook a year from now, going round and round and round if you let him.

 

[christiefan915]

The 911 call contradicts reality, since no one was breaking into the house. But that's irrelevant to the main issue, which is that Gates is a racist and did not obey police orders. *shrug*

You'd think if Gates were a racist his buddies would be rioting in the streets over the arrest.

Au contraire: Gates is now getting death and bomb threats, and I'm pretty sure they're not from his supporters. Also, I haven't read of any blowback to Crowley for his part in the mess.

 

[Taichiliberal]

you don't have any factual truth as to what she told the cop you lying sack of poop....all you have is conjecture and opinion...like i said, they were two seperate conversations and it is possible she thought more about the race and/or time went by and she actually noticed their race since the phone call you ignorant ass

This is why I call folk like you willfully ignorant. Obviously, you weren't paying attention to national news when the woman who made the 911 call went public to demonstrate that Crowley's statement of looking for 2 black guys in a possible B&E was NOT based on her description. Part of the tape was played that corroborated her statement. To date, the cops are not disputing her claim...so knee jerk clowns like you automatically try to discredit this information by creating all types of fantastic tales of supposition and conjecture. Worst yet, you combine your ignornace of the facts with your tall tale and try and pass it off as plausible. In short, you just come off as a braying ass.

You're done, bunky.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You'd think if Gates were a racist his buddies would be rioting in the streets over the arrest.

Au contraire: Gates is now getting death and bomb threats, and I'm pretty sure they're not from his supporters. Also, I haven't read of any blowback to Crowley for his part in the mess.

Once again, our resident confederate flag waving neocon trys to blame everyone BUT Crowley for Crowley's error. Now he's blaming the 911 caller, despite the FACT that Crowley report does NOT accurately reflect that call.

Like you say here, it's not Crowley that's getting death threats. IMHO, Gates may well be a pompus ass and blowhard...but the nano-second his ID and residence was confirmed, Crowley should have left. Asking Gates 3 times to step outside and THEN arrest him claiming public disturbing of the peace is totally bogus....which is why the charges were dropped. Obama's little tete-a-tete somehow lets everyone off the hook without apology. But like I said, if an investigation or lawsuit comes up, we'll all have at it again.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You'll be stuck will this kook a year from now, going round and round and round if you let him.

And all Tutu (alias Blabba) can do is constantly spew sour grapes about me yet she never DARES directly debate an issue with me....being that I humiliated her so bad on the AOL boards she threw a hissy fit and vowed never to take me off IA. I guess dishonesty of intention is her strong suit....along with being a serious grudge holder.

You're a joke, Blabba....just like the doofus you're trying to soothe here. You always were a joke, and you always will be.

 

[DamnYankee]

You'd think if Gates were a racist his buddies would be rioting in the streets over the arrest.

Au contraire: Gates is now getting death and bomb threats, and I'm pretty sure they're not from his supporters. Also, I haven't read of any blowback to Crowley for his part in the mess.

Bostonians hate Gates because he's an elitist asshole and they appreciate Crowley because he did the right thing. *shrug*

 

[DamnYankee]

You'll be stuck will this kook a year from now, going round and round and round if you let him.

He'll quit- he always does. He expects me to take his baiting and will be disappointed yet again.