Pregnant Woman Loses Eye After St. Louis Cops Shoot Bean-Bag Round

[reconmark]

[QUOTE="reconmark, post: 10266054, member: 49013"

Why is it okay for you to lie, but others are not supposed to lie to you?

You tried to use the same tactic before, then as now, it didn't work.
If you want to attempt to post something out of context be my guest, I'll simply prove you either a liar or incapable of reading comprehension.
Take your pick.

Post #33 In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.

Now please for the last time, show me where I attempted to absolve the officer of wrong doing as you claimed.

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?[/QUOTE]

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.

 

[Papageorgio]

You tried to use the same tactic before, then as now, it didn't work.
If you want to attempt to post something out of context be my guest, I'll simply prove you either a liar or incapable of reading comprehension.
Take your pick.

Post #33 In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.

Now please for the last time, show me where I attempted to absolve the officer of wrong doing as you claimed.

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.[/QUOTE]

Post where I said I was absolving the officer of anything. So far you give me your weak interpretation. I want the post I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are lying.

 

[Ravi]

Hey, what do you all think of the guy that got killed by the little shits with hammers?

Was it his fault for being out in a riot?

 

[reconmark]

Post #33 In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.

Now please for the last time, show me where I attempted to absolve the officer of wrong doing as you claimed.

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.

Post where I said I was absolving the officer of anything. So far you give me your weak interpretation. I want the post I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are lying.[/QUOTE]
In other words, your own words aren't enough to convince you...smh

 

[Papageorgio]

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.

Post where I said I was absolving the officer of anything. So far you give me your weak interpretation. I want the post I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are lying.

In other words, your own words aren't enough to convince you...smh[/QUOTE]

Nice spin try, I never absolved the officer of anything, asking for more information is not absolving.

So post where I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are a liar.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

[QUOTE="reconmark, post: 10266054, member: 49013"

Why is it okay for you to lie, but others are not supposed to lie to you?

You tried to use the same tactic before, then as now, it didn't work.
If you want to attempt to post something out of context be my guest, I'll simply prove you either a liar or incapable of reading comprehension.
Take your pick.

Post #33 In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.

Now please for the last time, show me where I attempted to absolve the officer of wrong doing as you claimed.

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.[/QUOTE]
And you are quoting her lies, the cops did not shoot her in the face with a bean bag round, a cop about to be run over shot the car. And your own link says the Family said that. Then SHE lies with the claim they were just trying to maneuver around the police, like as if they were just passing a parked car, they were attempting to flee from a crime scene and the car was trying to avoid the cop cars that were trying to box it in, then the Boyfriend tried to run over a cop. You claim he jumped to conclusions yet you are the one that bought everything she had to say hook line and sinker, now we have the cops sworn testimony and it does not match with hers at all.

SO again who was it that took one side and accused everyone else of doing that again?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.

Post where I said I was absolving the officer of anything. So far you give me your weak interpretation. I want the post I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are lying.

In other words, your own words aren't enough to convince you...smh[/QUOTE]You have yet to actual quote where he absolved the officer of anything. Just keep lying it suits you so well.

 

[Ravi]

Hey, what do you all think of the guy that got killed by the little shits with hammers?

Was it his fault for being out in a riot?

Bump for RetardedGaySerge.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Hey, what do you all think of the guy that got killed by the little shits with hammers?

Was it his fault for being out in a riot?

Bump for RetardedGaySerge.

THe answer is yes, he was negligent for being out during a riot.

However, that doesn't negate the fact that someone else was criminally culpable for his death.

Not every death is due to criminal actions.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Hey, what do you all think of the guy that got killed by the little shits with hammers?

Was it his fault for being out in a riot?

Bump for RetardedGaySerge.

He did not attempt to run anyone over nor was he in a car that attempted to run anyone over. Guess what sweet cheeks? Try to run a cop over and you get shot at.

 

[candycorn]

What is the range of a bean bag? It's probably 10-20 yards.

 

[reconmark]

No, I question everything about the situation, sorry but show me where attempted to absolve the officer. I never said her statements were meaningless, again more of your lies.

No, just your refusal to admit your lies.
The only target of yours was the woman and your attack on her credibility, yet that critique was totally absent for the officer's actions.
Those were your words and actions, no need to be bitter because they bit you in the ass.

Bullshit and you know it.

I tire of your silly games.

Lots of questions need to be answered.

Why did cops need to be there, why did they surround the car?

Why were they out in a riot area?

Why were 16 people arrested at the gas station?

Why did the officer fire a bean bag when bullets should have been used if he feared for his life.

Why was the boyfriend arrested?

And why are you such a dick on this issue?

If showing your posts attempting to exonerate the officer and make the woman totally guilty, although you have presented not a single iota of evidence, proof or testimony to the contrary, so be it.

You just posted a load of questions that the police department have yet to answer, yet you have attempted to reduce the woman's direct statements and acts as hearsay.

I could see why you would be upset that your prejudice is so evident.

Post where I said I was absolving the officer of anything. So far you give me your weak interpretation. I want the post I said I absolved the officer of anything or you are lying.

In other words, your own words aren't enough to convince you...smh

You have yet to actual quote where he absolved the officer of anything. Just keep lying it suits you so well.[/QUOTE]

It was there, you just chose to ignore it...run along, if you post more than two lines it will contain a lie.
There's other posters who are a bit more honest than you.

 

[reconmark]

[QUOTE="reconmark, post: 10266054, member: 49013"

Why is it okay for you to lie, but others are not supposed to lie to you?

You tried to use the same tactic before, then as now, it didn't work.
If you want to attempt to post something out of context be my guest, I'll simply prove you either a liar or incapable of reading comprehension.
Take your pick.

Post #33 In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.

Now please for the last time, show me where I attempted to absolve the officer of wrong doing as you claimed.

Not a problem at all.

First you lied and your lies were this:

Post#28
No the quotes were coming from her father, not her. So your ignorance is again out front.

The quotes were not coming from her father, they were coming directly from her, which I clearly pointed out to you.
The following post in it's entirety shows the bolded actions that the woman, not her father, performed.


Your sheer mastery of ignorance is breath taking.
Let me help your primitive, moronic brain discern what she said and did, first person:


A pregnant woman who says she wasn't even protesting lost her left eye after police on Tuesday in St. Louis shot her in the face with a bean bag round, her family said Friday.

Dornella Conner wrote on Facebook that she and her boyfriend weren't protesting that morning or trying to cause a disturbance.

Conner said that her boyfriend was trying to maneuver around police,

So your sheer inability to comprehend third grade English, allows me to pity you instead of having disdain for your ignorance.

In the future don't post a lie in order to attempt to boost your attempt at a logical rebuttal to a fact.
I never posted that the officer was required to render an IMMEDIATE rebuttal. I will not ask you to retract that lie, that would require some medium of intellectual honesty on your part

In your impotent failings at logic you have by chance drawn one factual conclusion.

It would indeed be really, really stupid to take one side without hearing all the evidence, so I'm not surprised that you have attempted to absolve the officer of any wrong doing, in the blinding of a young woman.


So you attempted to nullify the woman's direct statements by saying that they were heresay, thereby rendering them without merit.
If you are attempting to nullify the woman's direct action without any statements, proof, evidence, etc from the opposing side, how aren't your actions absolving the officer of any wrong doing in the blinding of the woman.

I never stated that any party was lawful or right or wrong in their actions. You attempted to diminish the lady's statements as meaningless.

And you are quoting her lies, the cops did not shoot her in the face with a bean bag round, a cop about to be run over shot the car. And your own link says the Family said that. Then SHE lies with the claim they were just trying to maneuver around the police, like as if they were just passing a parked car, they were attempting to flee from a crime scene and the car was trying to avoid the cop cars that were trying to box it in, then the Boyfriend tried to run over a cop. You claim he jumped to conclusions yet you are the one that bought everything she had to say hook line and sinker, now we have the cops sworn testimony and it does not match with hers at all.

SO again who was it that took one side and accused everyone else of doing that again?[/QUOTE]

Whatever, you keep changing statements, telling lies, refuse to admit you have lied.
I don't have the time to trade or debate liars.

If you believe that lying is a trademark of adult debate, please continue.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The liar her is you. You lied about supporting her with out all the facts and you lied about supporting the idea that Brown was murdered.

 

[Papageorgio]

So far recon has failed to give me the post where I said I was absolving the officer of any responsibility.

He keeps lying and that seems to be his way.

Strike two for recon.