Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

The type of danger on jobs is totally and completely irrelevant



Errrr it was you who raised it!

quote:

The taxi drivers, convenience store clerk, etc., have a much higher rate of murder than police do



But AGAIN for possibly the third time now, logging is dangerous where ever you do it it isnt significantly more dangerous in one place than it is in another - the risk is pretty much standard.

This is not true of the police, policing in much of the country is peaceful and reasonably safe in other areas however it is very much more dangerous - the risk is not standard.

If you compared the risks in a city with a high violent crime rate I dont think that they would compare quite so favourably with logging.

If you were to look at the situation in UK, in England where mostly things are quite peaceful the police are not generally armed (with guns) but in some places where there is an enhanced risk - mainly London they do have guns AND here in Northern Ireland where the risk is still pretty high police not only have guns when on duty thay also carry them off duty




No, you raised it because you incorrectly said the risk to police in large cities was far greater than rural police, and clearly that is false because the main risk to any police anywhere is traffic. And rural police face more highway situations where traffic is much more dangerous, that urban police do not face.

I was comparing police to police by showing traffic the main source of police deaths.
The point being that homicide is not relevant.

You started comparing lumberjacks to police over homicides, which is totally irrelevant.

Northern Ireland is a perfect example of where the police themselves are at fault for the majority of the risk they themselves have created.
9/19/2017, 11:11 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


 
quote:

you raised it because you incorrectly said the risk to police in large cities was far greater than rural police




so you say that all areas have similar rates of police deaths - I have already demonstrated that they dont by the way!


 
quote:

was comparing police to police by showing traffic the main source of police deaths



except that it isnt!

2017
33 cops shot dead 33 in automobile accidents

2016
63 shot dead 41 in automobile accidents

2015
41 shot dead 40 in automobile accidents

2014
48 shot dead 42 in automobile accidents

2013

32 shot dead 43 automobile accidents (finally!)

2012
48 shot dead 39 automobile accidents

BTW I have not included 'accidental' shootings in the shooting death figures nor have I included vehicular assault in the automobile accident figures

---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
9/19/2017, 11:34 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 4312
Karma: 2 (+15/-13)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


This does NOT include those 'Assaulted on Duty' and shot or stabbed but survived either.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2015-statistics-on-law-enforcement-officers-killed-and-assaulted
9/20/2017, 12:12 am Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


quote:

mais oui wrote:

 
quote:

you raised it because you incorrectly said the risk to police in large cities was far greater than rural police




so you say that all areas have similar rates of police deaths - I have already demonstrated that they dont by the way!


 
quote:

was comparing police to police by showing traffic the main source of police deaths



except that it isnt!

2017
33 cops shot dead 33 in automobile accidents

2016
63 shot dead 41 in automobile accidents

2015
41 shot dead 40 in automobile accidents

2014
48 shot dead 42 in automobile accidents

2013

32 shot dead 43 automobile accidents (finally!)

2012
48 shot dead 39 automobile accidents

BTW I have not included 'accidental' shootings in the shooting death figures nor have I included vehicular assault in the automobile accident figures



Your numbers are simply wrong.
Not only have I always seen traffic deaths to be the majority, but the last time I quoted, it said that was true "for the last 12 years".
Which means your source is wrong.
9/20/2017, 2:01 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 7485
Karma: 47 (+62/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


How do you "see" traffic deaths to be the majority? You either have the stats or you don't.
9/20/2017, 3:08 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

How do you "see" traffic deaths to be the majority? You either have the stats or you don't.



Of course I saw the stats and posted them only a few hour ago. In fact, I post these stats ever 6 months or so, whenever someone incorrectly implies that police have an even remotely dangerous job. The year I remember was 60 traffic deaths and 51 other.
9/20/2017, 3:37 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


quote:

Which means your source is wrong.



OR your source is wrong!

quote:

I post these stats ever 6 months or so



and you think that that makes them valid somehow?

post the source, post the year the stats refer to



quote:

The year I remember was 60 traffic deaths and 51 other.



Ah! so you dont ACTUALLY have a source just a half remembered number for a year you dont know.

But even assuming your memory is correct all that proves is that in one particular year more cops were killed in automobile accidents, it doesnt demonstrate a trend it highlights an anomally.

---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
9/20/2017, 8:36 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


Let's get back to the main topic of this thread. Whether a judge entrusted with objectively looking at evidence in a murder case did so.

If he did not that should be a pretty big story in the media but I don't see that happening. And in this case we have the judge's own court document to look at to see if he performed his job well or was incompetent.

Here's more information about Anthony Smith. He was convicted of drug dealing one time but only marijuana, not heroin.

It's interesting that the judge in question who tried Officer Stockley branded Smith a heroin dealer without Smith ever being convicted of selling that drug. Where was his reasonable doubt about Smith being a heroin dealer?

 http://www.kmov.com/story/36407224/answering-viewers-questions-about-anthony-smiths-criminal-history
9/22/2017, 6:34 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 5097
Karma: 25 (+31/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?



quote:

Whether a judge entrusted with objectively looking at evidence in a murder case did so.
If he did not that should be a pretty big story in the media but I don't see that happening



so isnt the natural conclusion that he did a fairly solid job?


of course not because some people decided that the cop was guilty of murder before the deceased was even declared dead!


quote:

It's interesting that the judge in question who tried Officer Stockley branded Smith a heroin dealer without Smith ever being convicted of selling that drug. Where was his reasonable doubt about Smith being a heroin dealer?




What brought him to th eattentuion of the police was the fact that he was acting like some one involved in selling drugs, when approached he went to extreme measures to escape AND when the cops searched the car there was dealer amounts of heroin in the caror did a cop plant that whilst Stockley was planting the gun?


He wasnt convicted of dealing heroin for the simple reason that he was dead!

---
HAPPINESS, THE IGNOBLE LIFE GOAL OF THE ILLITERATE
9/22/2017, 6:45 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Reasonable doubt or bias?


quote:

so isnt the natural conclusion that he did a fairly solid job?-mais



I hope not because he didn't. He was very biased in favor of the police officer Stockley.

I think what's more likely being displayed is respect for the system and respect for judges among people who didn't particularly care about the victim.

I was told once by an editor that we don't second guess juries(or judges). It's like some unwritten rule that we have to just assume that they are doing a good job because they are part of a fair system.

Also, I doubt that most people have read the judge's court transcript. I bet you didn't read it and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that nobody else here did either.

I will commend the St. Louis news channel KMOV that made the transcript available to viewers and the reporter who talked about some of its contents. That was good journalism. We need to see how our judges and juries think. It was an eye opening document for anyone hoping the judge was not biased. Of course anyone reading it who is as biased as the judge probably wouldn't have a problem with it.

quote:

of course not because some people decided that the cop was guilty of murder before the deceased was even declared dead!



Doesn't sound like they were any more objective than the judge. They just favored the victim more than the killer.

quote:

What brought him to the attentuion of the police was the fact that he was acting like some one involved in selling drugs...



According to the two officers, one of whom shot and killed him.

quote:

... when approached he went to extreme measures to escape AND when the cops searched the car there was dealer amounts of heroin in the car or did a cop plant that whilst Stockley was planting the gun?



It could have been planted just as easily as the gun by Stockley. He was the one who sat in the driver's seat of the Buick after Smith's body was dragged out of the car. We don't know. We don't even know that it was a dealer amount. A baggie containing capsules with heroin in them doesn't tell us a whole lot. How many capsules, how much heroin? There's nothing to keep a shady cop looking to make arrests from keeping some heroin on hand for the sake of planting it on some suspected drug dealer.

quote:

He wasnt convicted of dealing heroin for the simple reason that he was dead!



No, but he was branded a heroin dealer in a public document by a judge who didn't know that he was one.
9/22/2017, 7:18 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3 ... 5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 





You are not logged in (login)