The Stupidity Of The Gates Arrest

[Anguille]

I found it interesting that Croakley claimed Gates said he was lured outside by the police officer when in fact Gates has said he went out of his own free will and wasn't lured.

Coakley would be more familiar with certain unethical police tactics than Gates. Apparently she recognized one when she saw it whereas Gates is oblivious to having been manipulated.

No it sounded as if she had knowledge of Mr Gates raising the issue after the fact, which if you listen to the other clip I posted (I'll see if I can find it) He states he was aware at the outset that the officer could arrest him if he stepped outside, which is why he replied to the officer's initial request, "No, I will not!" In the same clip he later admits to proceeding outside after "doing our dance in the kitchen" Mr Gates states that he stepped outside of his own accord.

See how everyone has no problem profiling this cop with his "big ego" and his "unethical tactics" ?

I'm pretty sure Martha Coakley didn't get to where she is without ever hearing about these types of questionable and unethical tactics sometimes used by police looking to make an arrest till now.

 

[Anguille]

I almost took the time last night to write them down, but meh. I'm done with this topic.


Tonight we all drink domestic brew and forget about it!

I definitely got way too obsessed myself! LOL! But I like to argue

 

[paperview]

Valerie found it, only it wasn't the District Attorney of Middlesex County

...it was the Massachussetts Attorney General.

Maybe you can share for us what the Mass AG said at "around the 34 min mark."

I wish I could find the text transcript of her remarks, but I couldn't.

Maybe you'll have better luck finding them...as it was your contention that every scrap of information pertinent to Gatesgate is within easy reach on the internet.

A statement that many people were TOLD here was made by the DA - that it was a "lawful arrest" is pretty damn quotable to ANY reporter, observer, listener, viewer, journalist, lawyer, or poster on the internet.

EVERY salient word that was uttered by the principles in this case have been pulled out and examined. Those words a few are claiming here were said
are pretty damn important words.

THAT seems to be the contention.

It's utterly ridiculous to say things like "it was disappeared off the internet" or "just cause we can't find them, doesn't mean it wasn't said."

C'mon folks. THINK!

I am sick and tired of people making claims they can't back up.

At least have the decency (I am not directly talking to you, but ALL who contended and STILL contend it was FACT) -to say
"until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said."

 

[Valerie]

I almost took the time last night to write them down, but meh. I'm done with this topic.


Tonight we all drink domestic brew and forget about it!

I definitely got way too obsessed myself! LOL! But I like to argue

You might even say things were occasionally a tad tumultuous.

 

[Anguille]

A statement that many people were TOLD here was made by the DA - that it was a "lawful arrest" is pretty damn quotable to ANY reporter, observer, listener, viewer, journalist, lawyer, or poster on the internet.

EVERY salient word that was uttered by the principles in this case have been pulled out and examined. Those words a few are claiming here were said
are pretty damn important words.

THAT seems to be the contention.

It's utterly ridiculous to say things like "it was disappeared off the internet" or "just cause we can't find them, doesn't mean it wasn't said."

C'mon folks. THINK!

I am sick and tired of people making claims they can't back up.

At least have the decency (I am not directly talking to you, but ALL who contended and STILL contend it was FACT) -to say
"until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said."

There are some quite talented amateur spin- meisters on this board, aren't there.

 

[Anguille]

I almost took the time last night to write them down, but meh. I'm done with this topic.


Tonight we all drink domestic brew and forget about it!

I definitely got way too obsessed myself! LOL! But I like to argue

You might even say things were occasionally a tad tumultuous.

LOL! I owe you rep!

 

[Ravi]

Maybe you can share for us what the Mass AG said at "around the 34 min mark."

I wish I could find the text transcript of her remarks, but I couldn't.

Maybe you'll have better luck finding them...as it was your contention that every scrap of information pertinent to Gatesgate is within easy reach on the internet.

A statement that many people were TOLD here was made by the DA - that it was a "lawful arrest" is pretty damn quotable to ANY reporter, observer, listener, viewer, journalist, lawyer, or poster on the internet.

EVERY salient word that was uttered by the principles in this case have been pulled out and examined. Those words a few are claiming here were said
are pretty damn important words.

THAT seems to be the contention.

It's utterly ridiculous to say things like "it was disappeared off the internet" or "just cause we can't find them, doesn't mean it wasn't said."

C'mon folks. THINK!

I am sick and tired of people making claims they can't back up.

At least have the decency (I am not directly talking to you, but ALL who contended and STILL contend it was FACT) -to say
"until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said."

Don't hold your breath. Most people on the forum have a hard time admitting they were wrong, even over the silliest things.

 

[Missourian]

Maybe you can share for us what the Mass AG said at "around the 34 min mark."

I wish I could find the text transcript of her remarks, but I couldn't.

Maybe you'll have better luck finding them...as it was your contention that every scrap of information pertinent to Gatesgate is within easy reach on the internet.

A statement that many people were TOLD here was made by the DA - that it was a "lawful arrest" is pretty damn quotable to ANY reporter, observer, listener, viewer, journalist, lawyer, or poster on the internet.

EVERY salient word that was uttered by the principles in this case have been pulled out and examined. Those words a few are claiming here were said
are pretty damn important words.

THAT seems to be the contention.

It's utterly ridiculous to say things like "it was disappeared off the internet" or "just cause we can't find them, doesn't mean it wasn't said."

C'mon folks. THINK!

I am sick and tired of people making claims they can't back up.

At least have the decency (I am not directly talking to you, but ALL who contended and STILL contend it was FACT) -to say
"until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said."

No, it should be directed at me, I'm the one who posted it.

Until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said.

That said, and more to the topic at hand, does anyone believe that the Attorney General of Massachusetts would take the side of Officer Crowley if she believed the arrest was unlawful?

 

[Anguille]

No, it should be directed at me, I'm the one who posted it.

Until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said.

That said, and more to the topic at hand, does anyone believe that the Attorney General of Massachusetts would take the side of Officer Crowley if she believed the arrest was unlawful?

Innocent till proven guilty. The arrest is still under review.

 

[Missourian]

No, it should be directed at me, I'm the one who posted it.

Until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said.

That said, and more to the topic at hand, does anyone believe that the Attorney General of Massachusetts would take the side of Officer Crowley if she believed the arrest was unlawful?

Innocent till proven guilty. The arrest is still under review.

Your reply doesn't answer the simple yes or no question I posted...

 

[Tommy Lucchese]

No, it should be directed at me, I'm the one who posted it.

Until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said.

That said, and more to the topic at hand, does anyone believe that the Attorney General of Massachusetts would take the side of Officer Crowley if she believed the arrest was unlawful?

Innocent till proven guilty. The arrest is still under review.

Cops can't be brought up on criminal charges for a bad arrest.

They can be sued in civil court (more accurately the city can), and they can be punished administratively by their department, but that's pretty much it.

 

[Ravi]

If the arrest is still under review the AG had no business commenting. She looks pretty stupid, imo. She criticizes Obama for making judgment on the case and then she makes judgment on the case.

 

[Anguille]

No, it should be directed at me, I'm the one who posted it.

Until it can be proven otherwise, I am unable to say for certain this was said.

That said, and more to the topic at hand, does anyone believe that the Attorney General of Massachusetts would take the side of Officer Crowley if she believed the arrest was unlawful?

Innocent till proven guilty. The arrest is still under review.

Your reply doesn't answer the simple yes or no question I posted...

Let me say it more clearly. Coakley has said she doesn't know all the facts. She is not in a position to say yet if the arrest was lawful or not as it's still under review. Until she has more info she can only say that she supports Crowley in a general way seeing as he is a cop, so far, in good standing with his department.

I don't believe she will take his side if the review determines the arrest was unlawful.

 

[del]

If the arrest is still under review the AG had no business commenting. She looks pretty stupid, imo. She criticizes Obama for making judgment on the case and then she makes judgment on the case.

the arrest isn't under review.
try not to let that shake your faith in the purity of anguille.

 

[Ravi]

I don't hold grudges against people when they get something wrong.

 

[del]

I don't hold grudges against people when they get something wrong.

how nice

 

[Valerie]

If the arrest is still under review the AG had no business commenting. She looks pretty stupid, imo. She criticizes Obama for making judgment on the case and then she makes judgment on the case.

The only judgmental statement she made was in answering a question about Obama's comments.


Say it Ravi, Obama was out of line, OBAMA was out of line, OBAMA was out of line.

AND stupid.

 

[Ravi]

I don't hold grudges against people when they get something wrong.

how nice

At the same time, Commissioner Robert C. Haas announced that an independent panel will review the confrontation between the black professor and the white officer, an incident President Obama criticized for a second straight day.

Cambridge police chief backs sergeant, but promises review of Gates arrest - The Boston Globe

oops!

 

[Ravi]

If the arrest is still under review the AG had no business commenting. She looks pretty stupid, imo. She criticizes Obama for making judgment on the case and then she makes judgment on the case.

The only judgmental statement she made was in answering a question about Obama's comments.


Say it Ravi, Obama was out of line, OBAMA was out of line, OBAMA was out of line.

AND stupid.

I've already said that more than once. That doesn't change my opinion that the cop abused his power.

 

[del]

I don't hold grudges against people when they get something wrong.

how nice

At the same time, Commissioner Robert C. Haas announced that an independent panel will review the confrontation between the black professor and the white officer, an incident President Obama criticized for a second straight day.

Cambridge police chief backs sergeant, but promises review of Gates arrest - The Boston Globe

oops!

a confrontation isn't an arrest just as an agreement between two parties isn't a deal.
fortunately, i don't hold a grudge...