Should Casebolt Have Shot the Kids who Charged At Him ?

[protectionist]

What suspect, where? What was she suspected of? What was his probable cause? What law did that 14 year old girl break? By the way, I am hoping that you continue to respond to my posts, because as long as you are posting here, you aren't a menace out in the real world.

I don't know what she was suspected of. It wasn't shown in the video. I told you that before, and I'm really getting damn tired of having to tell you things 2, 3, or 4 times, until it sinks into your thick skull.

 

[protectionist]

The video clearly shows her walking away when the officer walked up and grabbed her, slinging her to the pavement, then swinging her around and throwing her to the ground, then grabbing her left arm while also grabbing her head and shoving it into the ground. Then he sat on her for the duration of the video while she was crying her eyes out in obvious pain. She wasn't resisting arrest because in order to be under arrest, you have to actually be under arrest. She was not under arrest. he never said the words, and certainly did not read her her rights. She was an INVITED GUEST. She was not trespassing. If you think she was under arrest, what were the charges? Because, according to the police department no charges were filed against any of those children.

NO, IT DOES NOT SHOW THAT. DON'T LIE. NOBODY saw the initial encounter between these two, INCLUDING YOU.

Casebolt was arresting her or detaining her. In eihter case, she was obviously resisting, and the force she got, she brought upon herself .

And of course no charges were filed, you idiot. They whole thing was political - man, you have no clue what's going on here. Go fishing.

 

[orogenicman]

Those so called charging thugs were not charging at all when Jackass cop pulled his weapon. The vid clearly shows them backing off and moving away from Jackass as soon as he reaches for his weapon. By the time he pulls leather the suspects are beginning to turn and run. If Jackass cop had shot one of those guys he would be facing murder charges.

FALSE! They were charging at full force and speed. And, you are ignoring the 21 foot rule. You are not properly posting in this thread.

For the third time, the 21 feet (it is feet, not foot) rule only applies to armed suspects.

For the TWENTY third time, all attackers are armed, and it is FOOT rule. How many times do you have to be corrected ?

But since the officer wasn't attacked, and the boys weren't armed, the 21 feet rule (21 feet is plural - foot is singular - learn some grammar, son) doesn't apply.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Should Casebolt Have Shot the Kids who Charged At Him ?"

A moronic question consistent with the moronic OP.

 

[orogenicman]

What suspect, where? What was she suspected of? What was his probable cause? What law did that 14 year old girl break? By the way, I am hoping that you continue to respond to my posts, because as long as you are posting here, you aren't a menace out in the real world.

I don't know what she was suspected of. It wasn't shown in the video. I told you that before, and I'm really getting damn tired of having to tell you things 2, 3, or 4 times, until it sinks into your thick skull.

And I'm getting tired of telling you that the officer resigned because he knew he was going to be fired. The department said his behavior was inexcusable, that he was unquestionably in the WRONG. The ensuing lawsuits are going to show that to be the case; and he is going to lose his ass. And you are defending a sadistic bastard who assaulted a little girl for no just reason.

 

[protectionist]

It is not obstruction if you are preventing a police officer from committing a criminal act. In case you missed the memo, the Police have to obey the law. Otherwise, they are just tyrants.

Subduing a suspect, who is resisting, is not committing a criminal act. It is a police officer DOING HIS JOB, you nitwit.

 

[protectionist]

And I'm getting tired of telling you that the officer resigned because he knew he was going to be fired. The department said his behavior was inexcusable, that he was unquestionably in the WRONG. The ensuing lawsuits are going to show that to be the case; and he is going to lose his ass. And you are defending a sadistic bastard who assaulted a little girl for no just reason.

Here we go again. Don't tell me about the department. You know damn well why the department took the policy they did. I've told you 10 times already. Don't play dumb with me. You ARE A WORTHLESS TROLL, And a cheap, stinkin LIAR.

 

[orogenicman]

It is not obstruction if you are preventing a police officer from committing a criminal act. In case you missed the memo, the Police have to obey the law. Otherwise, they are just tyrants.

Subduing a suspect, who is resisting, is not committing a criminal act. It is a police officer DOING HIS JOB, you nitwit.

You keep making that claim and yet you cannot say what she was suspected of doing. You are making shit up because you aren't mane enough to admit that you are wrong. The police department made it clear that no charges were filed against the girl, in fact, another police officer took the cuffs off her and she was released at the site. The police officer was NOT doing his job, otherwise, he would STILL HAVE A JOB. Jeez, are you really this stupid?

 

[protectionist]

"Should Casebolt Have Shot the Kids who Charged At Him ?"

A moronic question consistent with the moronic OP.

Oh God!! Who left the cage door open ? Hey, CCJ, aren't you going to throw in your customary "ignorant, hateful" line ? Gosh, I almost didn't recognize you without it.

 

[protectionist]

nnn

 

[orogenicman]

And I'm getting tired of telling you that the officer resigned because he knew he was going to be fired. The department said his behavior was inexcusable, that he was unquestionably in the WRONG. The ensuing lawsuits are going to show that to be the case; and he is going to lose his ass. And you are defending a sadistic bastard who assaulted a little girl for no just reason.

Here we go again. Don't tell me about the department. You know damn well why the department took the policy they did. I've told you 10 times already. Don't play dumb with me. You ARE A WORTHLESS TROLL, And a cheap, stinkin LIAR.

The police took the line they took because the officer was wrong. Flat out wrong. There is no way you can spin this man assaulting an innocent child and have it be right. End of story.

 

[orogenicman]

I don't HAVE TO say what she was suspected of. And there you go with that "department" crap again. Dude, that was refuted 20 times now. Give it up.

Right, because if you did make a claim as to what she was suspected of doing, you'd have to defend it. This way, you can make up any old shit you care to.

 

[protectionist]

You keep making that claim and yet you cannot say what she was suspected of doing. You are making shit up because you aren't mane enough to admit that you are wrong. The police department made it clear that no charges were filed against the girl, in fact, another police officer took the cuffs off her and she was released at the site. The police officer was NOT doing his job, otherwise, he would STILL HAVE A JOB. Jeez, are you really this stupid?

No he would NOT still have a job. He WAS doing his job, and the only reason he lost it was becasue of the threat of a Justice Dept lawsuit, AND YOU KNOW IT, because I've told it to you 20 times in this tread, so you can stop playing dumb now.

 

[protectionist]

The police took the line they took because the officer was wrong. Flat out wrong. There is no way you can spin this man assaulting an innocent child and have it be right. End of story.

You're full of shit. You know what going down here, You're a baldfaced LIAR.

 

[protectionist]

I don't HAVE TO say what she was suspected of. And there you go with that "department" crap again. Dude, that was refuted 20 times now. Give it up.

Right, because if you did make a claim as to what she was suspected of doing, you'd have to defend it. This way, you can make up any old shit you care to.

What she was suspected of has nothing to do with it. That is a neutral thing. Nobody knows . It doesn't matter. The girl was resisting, so she got force to subdue her. That's how police work works. Welcome to the real world.

 

[orogenicman]

You keep making that claim and yet you cannot say what she was suspected of doing. You are making shit up because you aren't mane enough to admit that you are wrong. The police department made it clear that no charges were filed against the girl, in fact, another police officer took the cuffs off her and she was released at the site. The police officer was NOT doing his job, otherwise, he would STILL HAVE A JOB. Jeez, are you really this stupid?

No he would NOT still have a job. He WAS doing his job, and the only reason he lost it was becasue of the threat of a Justice Dept lawsuit, AND YOU KNOW IT, because I've told it to you 20 times in this tread, so you can stop playing dumb now.

What threat from the Justice Department, where? If you are going to make an outrageous accusation like that, you have better back it up, pal. Show us a link to a Justice Department threat to the McKinney Police Department, or shut the **** up about it.

Even his lawyer as much as admitted that he was in the wrong:

"he allowed his emotions to get the better of him,"

 

[protectionist]

So, all in all, Casebolt could have shot the stupid kidws who charged at him, and that includes the 2 idiot girls as well. And instead od being condemned for overreacting, he could well be praised for underreacting,. and letting 4 moron kids live, who by all rights, really could be dead right now.

 

[protectionist]

What threat from the Justice Department, where? If you are going to make an outrageous accusation like that, you have better back it up, pal.

"he allowed his emotions to get the better of him,"

HEY MORON!!! Are you brains in the toilet ? How any fuckin times have I already told you about the Justice Dept lawsuit threat and the Obama/Sharpton Vote hustle campaign ? How many times, blockhead / 10 ? 20 ? 25 ? And dont you ever watch the news / It's been reported 300 times for almost a year now. Where have you been living ? In a closet ?

LOOK IT UP, ass clown!

 

[orogenicman]

I don't HAVE TO say what she was suspected of. And there you go with that "department" crap again. Dude, that was refuted 20 times now. Give it up.

Right, because if you did make a claim as to what she was suspected of doing, you'd have to defend it. This way, you can make up any old shit you care to.

What she was suspected of has nothing to do with it. That is a neutral thing. Nobody knows . It doesn't matter. The girl was resisting, so she got force to subdue her. That's how police work works. Welcome to the real world.

The police have to have probable cause to subdue someone. So it has everything to do with it. You cannot simply walk up to someone and throw them to the ground and then claim that they are resisting arrest when they try to defend themselves (which, by the way, she didn't do, couldn't possibly do (against someone three times her size) when no arrest has been made or probable cause has been determined.

 

[orogenicman]

The police took the line they took because the officer was wrong. Flat out wrong. There is no way you can spin this man assaulting an innocent child and have it be right. End of story.

You're full of shit. You know what going down here, You're a baldfaced LIAR.

Prove it.