Deven Guilford killed by police - an indepth investigation

[bucs90]

I said the stats are wrong. You said prove it. I did.

Now you're arguing over who is responsible for the stats being wrong. Or who is responsible for those bad stats.

I said the stats were bad. I proved it. You lose.

Getting uncomfortable? You disproved the stats how? By saying incidents exist....which you can't prove exist??

 

[ClosedCaption]

You talking in circles isnt fooling anyone. What I said was correct. Now if you want to move on to what Obama and Holder are doing have at it...by yourself

 

[ClosedCaption]

I said the stats are wrong. You said prove it. I did.

Now you're arguing over who is responsible for the stats being wrong. Or who is responsible for those bad stats.

I said the stats were bad. I proved it. You lose.

Getting uncomfortable? You disproved the stats how? By saying incidents exist....which you can't prove exist??

 

[bucs90]

So....summary.

UCR and NCIC.

All 50 state police agencies can mandate their smaller agencies report all incidents to them. And they do. The Constitution allows that. But states rights means the Feds cant. However.....like highway funding....the Feds can mandate voluntary participation in something in order to access something the Feds provide.

So while the Feds can't force Charleston PD to report to them....SCs state police, SLED, can....and do. All 50 states do.


So that narrows it to 50 databases.

And all 50 NEED access to NCIC. Which the Feds maintain. Just like highway money and seat belt laws. And the terrorism fusion centers.

So....once each of the 50 state police get the statewide data....they can choose to send it to the Feds...or not. Hint: They do. Access to all those federal goodies depends on it.



So what are these "unreported" killings? When a killing happens in December 2014....and the investigation takes 3 months....by that time the 2014 stats and reports are already in. And it won't go into the 2015 ones...because it was in 2014.

And THAT is what the cop haters and media are harping on.

They don't go "unreported" or uncounted. It's a clerical and statistical quirk that sometimes occurs. Due to laziness by the Feds mostly who don't wanna go back and redo a past years report.

 

[bucs90]

You talking in circles isnt fooling anyone. What I said was correct. Now if you want to move on to what Obama and Holder are doing have at it...by yourself

Oh.... I know you want me to stop. This is devastating to your argument.

 

[bucs90]

So....summary.

UCR and NCIC.

All 50 state police agencies can mandate their smaller agencies report all incidents to them. And they do. The Constitution allows that. But states rights means the Feds cant. However.....like highway funding....the Feds can mandate voluntary participation in something in order to access something the Feds provide.

So while the Feds can't force Charleston PD to report to them....SCs state police, SLED, can....and do. All 50 states do.


So that narrows it to 50 databases.

And all 50 NEED access to NCIC. Which the Feds maintain. Just like highway money and seat belt laws. And the terrorism fusion centers.

So....once each of the 50 state police get the statewide data....they can choose to send it to the Feds...or not. Hint: They do. Access to all those federal goodies depends on it.



So what are these "unreported" killings? When a killing happens in December 2014....and the investigation takes 3 months....by that time the 2014 stats and reports are already in. And it won't go into the 2015 ones...because it was in 2014.

And THAT is what the cop haters and media are harping on.

They don't go "unreported" or uncounted. It's a clerical and statistical quirk that sometimes occurs. Due to laziness by the Feds mostly who don't wanna go back and redo a past years report.

ClosedCaption. ....I'll repost this often just to remind you.

Loser.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I know you will continue to ask me for stats that dont exist. Its a favorite of yours. Next you will ask for the hair of a unicorn or the shoes of an imp and when I dont you'll claim victory

 

[bucs90]

I know you will continue to ask me for stats that dont exist. Its a favorite of yours. Next you will ask for the hair of a unicorn or the shoes of an imp and when I dont you'll claim victory

Yes. Because they dont. I laid it all out for ya above.

Cities and counties report to 50 state police agencies. 50 state police agencies report to Feds. Access to NCIC and fusion centers and all other federal goodies are tied to participation and all 50 state agencies do it. Just like they did with highway money and "voluntary" passing seat belt laws.

A few police killings in November or December MIGHT not be in an end of year report....because the investigation may extend into the next year after the data is done. If the federal bean counters go back and amend those past year totals...who knows. It's up to them.


But it's collected. All reported.

Which is why you couldn't show me even 1 unreported killing by police. In a y year. Not 1.

But you and the media will say North charleston police aren't requires to report to the Feds....and thus....there just MUST BE unreported killings right? We just can't know?

Except we do know. Because NCPD must report to SLED. AND SLED...like the other 49 state police....do report to the Feds. That cooperation is how they get access to all the federal goodies. Like highway money. And NCIC. And terrorism fusion center reports.


I knew you wouldn't like this.

 

[Moonglow]

Funny. The narrator empathize the suspects "innocent until proven guilty" line. Yet...immediately assumes guilt upon the officer.

ONCE AGAIN....resist arrest and assault a cop....you risk your own life.

BTW...Fords headlights are bright. But....if a police department alters it the warranty is void. That's how government fleet contracts work.

Why sure, any excuse for law enforcement to break the law and not write themselves a ticket...It will not void the warranty if a certified repair is done by a certified technician..

 

[bucs90]

Haha. Thanks. So once again....they aren't "unreported". The DOJ just doesn't get off its lazy ass to track it.

Once again false. The local police are to self report. They dont. Try to keep up. Do you still want just 1 or are you now going to talk about the Washington Post and other stuff?

Local police report to state police. That's mandatory. They could send it straight to the Feds. Many do along with the state since local FBI offices are close. Then state police combine it in a pretty package...and send it to the Feds.

Is it that hard to understand? Or is this gonna be like the motorcycle vs cop car thread where you insist something happened...while overwhelming evidence says otherwise.

 

[bucs90]

Funny. The narrator empathize the suspects "innocent until proven guilty" line. Yet...immediately assumes guilt upon the officer.

ONCE AGAIN....resist arrest and assault a cop....you risk your own life.

BTW...Fords headlights are bright. But....if a police department alters it the warranty is void. That's how government fleet contracts work.

Why sure, any excuse for law enforcement to break the law and not write themselves a ticket...It will not void the warranty if a certified repair is done by a certified technician..

Depends on the contract. With these new Fords....there isn't anything to "repair". The lights are just that way...like many other new vehicles. To change them would mean to alter it. Police vehicles come under a police fleet package with its own contract and warranty, purchased in bulk numbers. That's why they're strict about alterations.

 

[MikeK]

The cop said he didnt have his brights on.

Then later said IF the kid had been nicer, the cop wouldve told the truth that hes gotten the same complaint by 3 other people.
[...]

The cop did admit that?

I haven't read that anywhere but it is a very important consideration and will alter my entire impression of this encounter. So please provide me with a link to your source.

Thanks in advance.

Its in the OP and starts at the 10 min mark. Watch it, I'm interested in what you think about it

I'm glad I came across your mention of facts surrounding this incident. I am embarrassed to admit having jumped to an erroneous conclusion rather than focusing my full attention on the entire video.

At one point in the video it appeared to me that the boy was belligerently provocative. At that point I stupidly concluded he was asking for what finally happened and stopped watching. But at your suggestion I've just watched the entire video and I wish to retract everything I said in my earlier comment about the incident and apologize for doing something I normally try not to do.

It now is clear that this police sergeant, J. Frost, was completely wrong in his actions from beginning to end. He did admit having stopped three other motorists for flashing to alert him to what he knew are his defective headlights. He knew that before stopping Deven Guilford yet he chose to assert his authority unreasonably on that innocent teen-age boy.

Frost's awareness of his own responsibility for prompting Deven's perfectly reasonable action occurred as categorical entrapment. I believe his awareness of that fact accounts for what I mistakenly perceived to be politeness on his part during the initial stages of this egregious example of police misconduct.

Anyone who has not watched the video of this incident is urged to do so -- and to support the demand for an investigation of Sergeant Frost's responsibility for Deven Guilford's death. Go to: The People vs. Jonathan Frost

 

[EverCurious]

I find it interesting that flashing brights is illegal. In Alaska it's actually considered common curtsey to flash oncoming drivers if you see a moose near the road, it happens pretty much constantly up here. It's also considered "polite" to flash a driver in front of you to pull over if they are holding up traffic (that relates specifically to single lane roads where passing is most often unsafe. There's a law on our books that if you have five or more cars behind you, you're obligated to pull over at the next safest spot and let them all pass.)

 

[MikeK]

Funny. The narrator empathize the suspects "innocent until proven guilty" line. Yet...immediately assumes guilt upon the officer.

ONCE AGAIN....resist arrest and assault a cop....you risk your own life.

BTW...Fords headlights are bright. But....if a police department alters it the warranty is void. That's how government fleet contracts work.

Why sure, any excuse for law enforcement to break the law and not write themselves a ticket...It will not void the warranty if a certified repair is done by a certified technician..

I don't see why any police department would need to "repair" what clearly is an inherently dangerous flaw in Ford's headlight design -- because the first time a serious accident is credibly blamed on those dangerous headlights a progression of lawsuits will commence.

So I don't think Ford would hesitate to issue a recall to adjust or alter its dangerous headlights. Mainly because those lights are dangerous -- as anyone who drives at night will attest.

 

[MikeK]

I find it interesting that flashing brights is illegal. In Alaska it's actually considered common curtsey to flash oncoming drivers if you see a moose near the road, it happens pretty much constantly up here. It's also considered "polite" to flash a driver in front of you to pull over if they are holding up traffic (that relates specifically to single lane roads where passing is most often unsafe. There's a law on our books that if you have five or more cars behind you, you're obligated to pull over at the next safest spot and let them all pass.)

Actually I was surprised to learn (tonight) that flashing to alert an oncoming driver that his/her brights are on is illegal. I've been driving for sixty years and that's how long I've been breaking that law and didn't know it. I regard it as both a courtesy and an important warning.

 

[MikeK]

No Charges In The Deven Guilford Killing:

(Excerpt)

"The Eaton County Prosecutor has announced that there will be no charges in the fatal shooting of Deven Guilford during a traffic stop.

The prosecutor played several minutes of body cam footage, along with videos recorded from Deven Guilford's cell phone.

WILX News 10 has a reporter at the press conference, and will continue to update this story with details."

No Charges in Deven Guilford Shooting

(Close)

 

[EverCurious]

I imagine it's only illegal to flash brights in specific cities/states. It certainly isn't illegal anywhere in Alaska. Though I suppose I'll go look it up for curiosities sake heh

[Update] - Interesting

So yea it's based on state ~ Headlight flashing - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Alaska's law isn't about flashing lights, rather driving with them on (both in and out of traffic.) (13 AAC 04.020. Headlights

13 AAC 04.020. Headlights

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a motor vehicle must be equipped with at least two headlights, one on each side of the front of the motor vehicle. The headlights must emit white light to the front of the vehicle, comply with the requirements and limitations set out in this section, and be mounted at a height of not more than 54 inches or less than 24 inches.

(b) Repealed 6/28/79.

(c) Repealed 6/28/79.

(d) Repealed 6/28/79.

(e) When a motor vehicle is driven on a highway during the times specified in sec. 10 of this chapter, the driver shall use a high distribution of light or composite beam, directed at a height and of sufficient intensity to reveal persons and vehicles at a distance of 450 feet in advance of the vehicle for all load conditions, subject to the following requirements and limitations:

(1) when the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, the driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, so that the glaring or high-intensity portion of the light is not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver; the light must be of sufficient intensity to reveal a person or a vehicle at a distance of 150 feet in advance of the vehicle for all load conditions; and

(2) when the driver of a vehicle approaches another vehicle from the rear, within 300 feet, the approaching driver may not use the highest distribution of light.

(f) Headlight systems which provide a single distribution of light are permitted on all implements of husbandry, motor-driven cycles, bicycles and off-highway vehicles regardless of date of manufacture, if the systems are, as far as practicable, mounted and aimed as required in (a) of this section and are of sufficient intensity to reveal a person or a vehicle at a distance of 200 feet in advance of the vehicle, except as otherwise provided for motor-driven cycles or bicycles in sec. 320(a) and (d) of this chapter.

(g) A motor vehicle may be driven under the conditions specified in sec. 10 of this chapter when equipped with two illuminated lights upon the front of the vehicle capable of revealing persons and vehicles 100 feet ahead; provided, however, that a vehicle using the lights may not be driven at a speed in excess of that specified in 13 AAC 02.325(c) .



~ So apparently, we actually have a legal obligation to drive with brights /on/ if we're the only vehicle within 500 feet, and off the rest of the time. Learn something new everyday heh

Also it looks like they have "legal cause" to pull you over for flashing brights because they consider it "aggressive driving", but it's not illegal in and of itself to flash brights. Shrug. I got pulled over because the license plate light was covered with snow, getting pulled over because I flashed brights over something isn't going to bother me. I suspect I'll never get pulled over for that though, I'm not an aggressive driver and I bet they look for other signs before wasting their time/paperwork on "flashed brights" (aka possibly drunk, unsafe driving, etc. something that would stick.)

Also interesting that the blue lights are apparently illegal, see those all the time. They don't bother me as much as the whites, but my husband absolutely hates them heh.