St. Louis prosecutor says she will no longer accept cases from 28 city police officers

originally posted by: pointessa
a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not sure any of us could make a real judgement on the validity of this unless we had a documentation of what each of them did. If in fact, they are making false charges or are not following the laws for arresting or citing someone they need to be held accountable.

Think of the ramifications and the cost to the defendant and the government if charges are regularly being made and are not prosecutible due to sloppiness, corruption or indifference. Imagine repeatedly having a cop not show up to court or pleading the fifth in a case that he/she initiated. Why they weren't fired if this is true, before it came to this is really puzzling, but it is the government at the end of the day.

Excellent points -- especially given the backlog of cases that many courts are dealing with. It's a waste of time, money and resources for everyone. And it certainly isn't fair or just or equal application of the law for the defendants.

The damaging effects will be felt across the legal system and the entire community.

originally posted by: one4all
It may be that people need to see a basic template describing exactly how the Unions lawyers and the States lawyers and Judges and others conspire to maintain the structure of and to support the continued existance of The Thin Blue Line....its possibly about time to indoctrinate everyone.

I agree. I have been finding that it's the unions and fraternities that object loudest and strongest against any type of policing reform. And who defend the excessive use of force and other corruption most.

a reply to: one4all

Excellent points!

a reply to: one4all

You're not telling me anything I don't already know.

As for the unions, the Democrats are just a bunch of hypocrites on this issue. They demand them and then complain about them all in the same breath.

In all of these areas, there are arguments that can be made for both sides.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: one4all

You're not telling me anything I don't already know.

As for the unions, the Democrats are just a bunch of hypocrites on this issue. They demand them and then complain about them all in the same breath.

In all of these areas, there are arguments that can be made for both sides.

Oh yes I am....and I am also telling everyone else....we are now seeking to IDENTIFY PATTERNS...DYNAMIC PATTERNS....we are not FOLLOWING THE MONEY ANYMORE...we are following the ripples on the surface of the water...LMAO....the influence...the fiscal empowerments...the PERIPHERY....we are coming from the outside working our way to the middle from 360 degrees of externally generated impact….we are now learning how these groups are connected on a much deeper level than ever before we are digging down into deeper layers of the Onion...lol....lol...and yes if I was an old dog who had been hiding behind this methodology for eons and I was being outed I would be nervous to...blame it on whoever created the internet...that is the catalyst of all the changes we see.


There are no two sided arguements....lol...lol...that is a cry for democracy...a DISPLACED INTENTIONAL but meaningless cry to my ears....forget it...we are going to show how our good solid processes have been bastardised and harnessed by a Collusionary group right under all of our noses....the processes they use are ALWAYS THE SAME...there is almost zero creativity...so once you clue in and identify how they do what they do and why they do it then you can EASILY identify EVERY SINGLE AREA OF OUR WORLD WHERE THEY ARE INVOLVED AND PULLING STRINGS AND PUSHING BUTTONS SO TO SPEAK.

a reply to: one4all

There are no two sided arguements....lol...lol...that is a cry for democracy...a DISPLACED INTENTIONAL but meaningless cry to my ears....forget it...we are going to show how our good solid processes have been bastardised and harnessed by a Collusionary group right under all of our noses....the processes they use are ALWAYS THE SAME...there is almost zero creativity...so once you clue in and identify how they do what they do and why they do it then you can EASILY identify EVERY SINGLE AREA OF OUR WORLD WHERE THEY ARE INVOLVED AND PULLING STRINGS AND PUSHING BUTTONS SO TO SPEAK.

LOL! You can show (as well as rant and rave) how our good solid processes have been bastardized all you want, but it ultimately won't change anything. You're not capable of wiping evil out on this earth. You'd be better off appealing to the one who can. For every person who knows what it really takes to put an end to this is another person who refuses to acknowledge it or promotes the evil. That will never change. Such is life as we know it here on earth.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: one4all

There are no two sided arguements....lol...lol...that is a cry for democracy...a DISPLACED INTENTIONAL but meaningless cry to my ears....forget it...we are going to show how our good solid processes have been bastardised and harnessed by a Collusionary group right under all of our noses....the processes they use are ALWAYS THE SAME...there is almost zero creativity...so once you clue in and identify how they do what they do and why they do it then you can EASILY identify EVERY SINGLE AREA OF OUR WORLD WHERE THEY ARE INVOLVED AND PULLING STRINGS AND PUSHING BUTTONS SO TO SPEAK.

LOL! You can show (as well as rant and rave) how our good solid processes have been bastardized all you want, but it ultimately won't change anything. You're not capable of wiping evil out on this earth. You'd be better off appealing to the one who can. For every person who knows what it really takes to put an end to this is another person who refuses to acknowledge it or promotes it. That will never change. Such is life as we know it here on earth.

Correct...I am not...the only thing we are in agreement about is that IAMNOT.....capable...of even defining evil never mind wiping it out on earth....lol....however I only speak of myself.

Gardner is just as crooked as the cops she's refusing to take cases from, if not worse. Look at everything she pulled during the case against our governor, well former governor now. All because he was a Republican. She threw everything she had into the case until she could find something, anything, she could use to remove him from office. She's been known not to prosecute minorities but, if you're white, republican, or a cop, she'll pull out every dirty trick she can think of to get a conviction. She should have been removed from her position long ago.

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux
Gardner is just as crooked as the cops she's refusing to take cases from, if not worse. Look at everything she pulled during the case against our governor, well former governor now. All because he was a Republican. She threw everything she had into the case until she could find something, anything, she could use to remove him from office. She's been known not to prosecute minorities but, if you're white, republican, or a cop, she'll pull out every dirty trick she can think of to get a conviction. She should have been removed from her position long ago.

Crooked, huh? Well, at least you acknowledge the crookedness of the cops.

But Greitens sure didn't do himself any favors. And he certainly wasn't a Republican for long. Nor does it seem that most of his Republicans in Missouri support him.

You may or may not be correct about Gardner. I don't know.

What I do know is that generally speaking, her methods for addressing the very real problem of dirty cops and dirty policing are legal, practical, and productive.

originally posted by: Boadicea


Crooked, huh? Well, at least you acknowledge the crookedness of the cops.

But Greitens sure didn't do himself any favors. And he certainly wasn't a Republican for long. Nor does it seem that most of his Republicans in Missouri support him.

You may or may not be correct about Gardner. I don't know.

What I do know is that generally speaking, her methods for addressing the very real problem of dirty cops and dirty policing are legal, practical, and productive.

Greitens still had many supporters when he resigned. Personally, I would've liked to have seen him fight it out, but what's done is done. Haven't lived in St. Louis for some years now, but know how the cops are there.

Now Gardner is trying to say the list was made by the SLPD, chief said not so fast, and called her out on it. I'll believe the chief considering there are several officers on the list no longer with the department, and she's doing what she's always done when caught pulling something like this...blame someone else.

Knowing Gardner I'd like to see what precincts the officers on the list patrol.

Sorry, police commissioner called her out, not the chief.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Boadicea

I remember a few years back the locals quit prosecuting mj cases unless the officers would call the prosecutor and get them on scene during the bust. It was done cause they were losing so many cases.

Exactly - sounds like she is crap at her job and wants to blame everyone else.

What makes it sound that way?

I see it as though she is doing her job by setting a standard and level to the department she represents.

Keep in mind that lawyers can eat away at a sloppy case and it only causes the taxes to go up.

As long as she has evidence of certain officers not watching their p's and q's and she has tried before to tighten them up then the department hands will be tied. There only defense will be to bring race or personal character attacks into play.

If she does not have the goods to back up her actions then she will have to answer to that.

Yah except this this

And also an article that she got money from a Super pac funded by Soros..... just cant make this stuff up Soros money

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Yea just because i understand that a prosecutor has they power to take the actions outlined in the op does not mean i do not understand that what you posted has merit too but it just does not tie into the op well. It would take someone with knowledge of those particular officers to make any type of a case against her actions.

If she is dirty then surely someone will be able to tie all of this together.

We ARE sure she blacklisted Blackhats not Whitehats..no....could crooked Judges have furtively ruled against good solid apples in a long term investment type of dynamic in small but potent ways...and are they now cashing in on their studious investments by showing an massive example of what happens when you try to break the Thin Blue Line in a group assault......mmmmmm.anyone out there know of anyone who has direct experience with one of these listed Cops....anyone reviewed the evidence that she used to make her decision in terms of the court documents to see how these lies or these wrongful statements were embedded......in what context and to what ends.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux
Gardner is just as crooked as the cops she's refusing to take cases from, if not worse. Look at everything she pulled during the case against our governor, well former governor now. All because he was a Republican. She threw everything she had into the case until she could find something, anything, she could use to remove him from office. She's been known not to prosecute minorities but, if you're white, republican, or a cop, she'll pull out every dirty trick she can think of to get a conviction. She should have been removed from her position long ago.

Crooked, huh? Well, at least you acknowledge the crookedness of the cops.

But Greitens sure didn't do himself any favors. And he certainly wasn't a Republican for long. Nor does it seem that most of his Republicans in Missouri support him.

You may or may not be correct about Gardner. I don't know.

What I do know is that generally speaking, her methods for addressing the very real problem of dirty cops and dirty policing are legal, practical, and productive.

She had Soros money backing her. There were 4 Democrats who ran for that office.
I also grew up in St Louis. It saddens me to see this kind of dirty politics .

originally posted by: generik
so your home is robbed, your wife raped and badly beaten. you call the police. they come, they do their job, they arrest the suspect. yet the prosecutor decides not to even accept the case. and so the felon is just let go free? just because you had the bad luck to have the police officers that were sent to deal with the crime are blacklisted? sounds like a situation that can easily result in vigilantism. and the thing is the vigilante would actually be in the right, in this type of situation, to take justice into their own hands because the legal system refuses to do their jobs.

i am sorry but not just no, but HELL NO to a prosecutor being allowed to discriminate over what cases get to be taken to court, based upon solely the police officers involved. this prosecutor needs to immediately be fired and disbarred from practising law. and they should probably be investigated with criminal charges pending to see if they have allowed their bias to get in the way of justice.

if there is an issue with certain police officers, then those police officers in question need to be taken off duty (NO PAY, loss of benifets and pensions), and be propperly investigated for wrongdoing. if they are indeed found guilty of crimes, then they should of course be charged and prosecuted for those crimes. if they are found not to have done anything, then their jobs can be regained with back pay and restoration of pensions and benifets. that is the propper way to deal with the situation. not a prosecutor deciding to prosecute crimes based upon the police officers involved.

Yes, exactly this. Those cops shouldn't be on the force in the first place and while it's sad the family in your hypothetical situation has to suffer, it's unfair the countless lives of those being targeted suffer in silence. Sucks when it hits home right? I've cost a few sheriff's their jobs after being treated like a criminal on a casual ride home. I've been targeted for over 3 decades and there was nothing more satisfying then destroying their lives. My only regret is that these cancerous individuals are still hiding among their honest brothers, often dragging them down into the dark. Good for her, only if more would stand and help defend this nation from tyranny, both foriegn and domestic. These individuals are terrorists, period.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Yea just because i understand that a prosecutor has they power to take the actions outlined in the op does not mean i do not understand that what you posted has merit too but it just does not tie into the op well. It would take someone with knowledge of those particular officers to make any type of a case against her actions.

If she is dirty then surely someone will be able to tie all of this together.

There's been a trend lately of being anti-police. It's been a trend at least since Obama was POTUS. Soros money is dirty money always. He must be the most evil man on the planet. He is on a mission to destroy US National Sovereignty and stability. While that alone may not mean anything....it is still suspect. I'm looking at the trail of articles on this woman.
Here's another one listing a criminal complaint against her kmox.radio.com...

But of course they could really all be bad cops

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: UKTruth

Exactly - sounds like she is crap at her job and wants to blame everyone else.

You think public servants should be aloud to plead the fifth while in the process of trying to convict a citizen with a crime?

I know you come from a police state where you're always on camera and have to register your butter knifes, but we do things a bit different here. We aren't always right, but we fight to make sure the citizen always has the upper hand.

The police officer is a citizen too ...

We cannot take a fundamental principle of the Constitution and turn it against a citizen. Do that to any citizen (even a police officer) and you erode those rights for everyone else.

originally posted by: DanDanDat

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: UKTruth

Exactly - sounds like she is crap at her job and wants to blame everyone else.

You think public servants should be aloud to plead the fifth while in the process of trying to convict a citizen with a crime?

I know you come from a police state where you're always on camera and have to register your butter knifes, but we do things a bit different here. We aren't always right, but we fight to make sure the citizen always has the upper hand.

The police officer is a citizen too ...

We cannot take a fundamental principle of the Constitution and turn it against a citizen. Do that to any citizen (even a police officer) and you erode those rights for everyone else.

They have freedom and speech, and can plead the fifth just like the rest of us. Doesn't mean they can't see ramifications of expressing that while on the taxpayer dime.

Go to your job and plead the fifth to your boss while they're asking you about something that happened with your involvement, what do you think would happen.

I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't defend the cop if he pled the fifth while you were in court arguing your case.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Does it sadden you to see dirty cops? Is it plausible that is why the prosecutor is taking this stance with these particular officers?

a reply to: DanDanDat

But, it is arguable that an LEO is not your typical citizen, they are given powers by the state, agents of the state..if you will. they have power over the common citizens life. I believe they should be held to a different standard.