It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SFA437
I was describing an extension of a crime scene to include the typical reaction gap of an officer as well as a crime scene not being limited to, for example, a dead body.
You stated you knew what the officer was thinking which can only come through personal interaction with that officer.
You're welcome.
Originally posted by SFA437
reply to post by Manhater
Kitilani said it. Twice. Now of course there is denial of ever making those statements...
Originally posted by Kitilani
You are missing the point that I am not the least bit concerned with anyone's fantasy woulda shoulda couldas. None of the made up things that could have happened impress me since you know, they didn't happen.
Originally posted by ABWarrior58
Weather that's true or not(sorry i disagree) would you like people going to your job and tell you what you're doing is right or wrong?By that I mean people who arn't your bosses or co-wokers.The point is her mouth and attitude got her in trouble
Originally posted by SFA437
Kitilani did say it- I've pulled her multiple quotes up several times.
Of course now Kitilani is stating she never said what she is quoted as having said.
Originally posted by SFA437
I definitely do not advocate complacency. The end goal is going home at the end of shift.
Being that there was prior negative interaciton to wit the officer saying the woman made him nervous because of what she said before (got no clue what it was) the officer was within the scope of his duty to expand the scene to include the woman's yard in order to remove whatever he saw as a possible threat.
Originally posted by Kitilani
Unfortunately that is part of that whole "public servant" thingy. There are plenty of private security firms to work for if you only want your actual bosses to watch what you do. If you want to be a cop, you are going to answer to the people. That used to be a good thing about the US.
Originally posted by Kitilani
She does specifically ask the officer what it is that she said that caused him the problem.
What was his response?
Originally posted by ABWarrior58
Not trying to impress you, far from it. Im trying to get you to understand their point of view. Im sure whatever office you work in is very safe and secure. However these guys don't have that luxury and must perceive everyone as a potential threat until deemed otherwise,
MY MAIN POINT was that she was interfereing with an ongoing investigation. Just because CSI wasn't involved doesn't mean it wasn't an investigation
Originally posted by Sparky63
Police corruption is rampant and has been increasing for years. People are so sick and tired of having their rights abused by police officers that they feel compelled to record them for their own safety.
Originally posted by ABWarrior58
You're absolutely right, that used to be a good thing. Years ago cops could do their jobs. Nowadays people want to be defiant and oppose cops for the "abusers they are" just because their may be one or two bad apples doesn't mean all cops are evil gestapo like officers.
Originally posted by Kitilani
I think you took "impress" the wrong way. Better be careful or else another certain poster on this board might ask you to prove you know I work in an office because he has a huge problem with people assuming things like that about others. I do not want to point fingers though so how about you just do not assume to know what kind of environment I work in.
Originally posted by Kitilani
My main point is that I do not agree that she was interfering and so far the only arguments I have seen to explain how she was all rely on "could have..." which fails to make much of an impression on me.
Originally posted by ABWarrior58
just because their may be one or two bad apples doesn't mean all cops are evil gestapo like officers.
Originally posted by js331975
Have officers who acted honorably been thrown under the bus by video out of context in the past? Possibly.
Originally posted by ABWarrior58
Originally posted by Kitilani
She does specifically ask the officer what it is that she said that caused him the problem.
What was his response?
every argument you make is null and void and shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
What she on her own private property?yes, but she was in the open(if she was standing outside in the nude that would also be illegal).
They never told her to stop recording. She was interfering with an investigation. She was warned several times(I counted 6+) to go inside so they could finish their job.
Originally posted by Manhater
I forgot, I live in a world where everyone is right. No one is ever wrong.
I said, I'm pretty sure, I saw it somewhere, in one of these threads. Not a 100% sure. So, I could be wrong, and I could be right.
So, stop taking me out of context.
Originally posted by Kitilani
You say she was interfering because you think she was. I see a suspect that was later released already in handcuffs and two other officers dealing with it. I do not care if she was "warned" a bazillion times. How much more in handcuffs did the suspect need to get?