Quote from: Darth Fife on December 15, 2014, 10:31:08 AM
It is often useful to follow the link with the post (or at least read the title of the link...

A Long Island federal jury rewarded Nancy Genovese, 58, a mother of three, $1.12 million in compensatory damages after being arrested in 2009 for attempting to photograph a helicopter at a Air National Guard base in the Hamptons.

Darth

That doesn't tell us though what was done to the officer who made the false arrest. Are they still even a cop employed by that city?

Were they themselves arrested, and tried, and if found guilty, sentenced to some time in prison themselves?

After all what the cop did, is a criminal act in and of itself.

Quote from: daidalos on December 15, 2014, 06:47:09 PM
That doesn't tell us though what was done to the officer who made the false arrest. Are they still even a cop employed by that city?

Were they themselves arrested, and tried, and if found guilty, sentenced to some time in prison themselves?

After all what the cop did, is a criminal act in and of itself.

Watch for the actual court hearings to be released. Thing is, it's a he said, she said, in other words, alleged. Without a recording, it's simply hearsay, and never enters as evidence.

But obviously they broke the law and that's why she won.

Quote from: Solar on December 15, 2014, 07:23:20 PM
Watch for the actual court hearings to be released. Thing is, it's a he said, she said, in other words, alleged. Without a recording, it's simply hearsay, and never enters as evidence.

But obviously they broke the law and that's why she won.

Well with a cop it's a little different. Usually a cops testimony is not testimony. It's evidence.

And yes it will be interesting to see the actual court proceedings.

Damn I wish the SCOTUS would allow camera's inside of it and the federal courts. :)

Quote from: daidalos on December 16, 2014, 10:26:17 AM
Well with a cop it's a little different. Usually a cops testimony is not testimony. It's evidence.

And yes it will be interesting to see the actual court proceedings.

Damn I wish the SCOTUS would allow camera's inside of it and the federal courts. :)

Nope! Only in traffic court, but he still needs to back up or corroborate his statements.
What was said would be mere hearsay, unless she had witnesses, or another cop backed up her statement.
What you see here is her version of what happened, but it was the fact that she had not broken any laws that proved her case, regardless of what was said.

Quote from: daidalos on December 16, 2014, 10:26:17 AM
Well with a cop it's a little different. Usually a cops testimony is not testimony. It's evidence.

And yes it will be interesting to see the actual court proceedings.

Damn I wish the SCOTUS would allow camera's inside of it and the federal courts. :)

There is already far too much political influence on the cases heard before the SCOTUS. The Justices would play to the cameras (and their constituents) rather than apply the Constitution to the facts of the cases they hear.  To "see the actual proceedings" one may read the transcript!

As far as cops testimony, it's "just the facts, mam"  just as it was in the days of Dragnet!

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on December 15, 2014, 06:03:30 PM
If you think that then I think you are getting your info from the wrong conspiracy theory magazine.

Right now the Govt and Obamao admin have zero credibility among the local cops and less with sheriff Depts a few FBI I know are shaking their heads as well. You should hear some of the things I've been hearing the last month .....

Don't be surprised if you see some sort of mass walk out or "sick out" from Cops nation wide and see how you all like a little dose of complete anarchy for a few days.

You're on!

I'll reconsider my position if and only if I see a mass (meaning more than just one department) sick call, work stoppage, etc by cops and/or sheriffs in the next 18 months! In other words, it has to be significant enough to make national news.

But, it has to be specifically as a protest to the Government overreach! A strike for more money or better benefits doesn't count!

Darth

Quote from: Darth Fife on December 16, 2014, 02:26:43 PM
You're on!

I'll reconsider my position if and only if I see a mass (meaning more than just one department) sick call, work stoppage, etc by cops and/or sheriffs in the next 18 months! In other words, it has to be significant enough to make national news.

But, it has to be specifically as a protest to the Government overreach! A strike for more money or better benefits doesn't count!

Darth

Its going to start in New York City and aimed at DeBlasio, the Union said they don;t want him at any cops funerals or any other function, a vote of no confidence is in the making, "the grapevine" says they are going to stage a "sick out".

Also some sort of March on Washington is planned with the backing of the FOP over Furgueson