Re: Suffolk Co. Incident (was: About Recovery - Training t...

January 5, 2001

> hi all,

>

> It seems to me the woman had two choices. Of course she

wouldn't have been in

> the situation had she been sober, but let's just say she was

perfectly sober

> and she was pulled over for running a red light(something

nearly as dangerous

> to others and self as driving under the influence) and were

given the same

> two choices ........ Would she then strip if told to by the officer or

would

> she refuse an accept whatever consequences ...... ?

irrelevant.

there is no circumstance to do this , under ANY Circumstance's.

there is no excuse for this. this in fact makes his action even

more inexcusable, because she was under influence and in

less of condition to defend herself. what if she had been on cold

medication, which also can effects your ability to drive, would that

make it alright then? if she had told she had to blow him or go to

jail, would that be ok because she was drunk too?

>

> How 'bout postulating this: Who would be the " victim " if she

had plowed into

> another vehicle and left someone's soul smashed to pieces all

over the road?

irrelevant.

if she was drunk, his job was to arrest her, not act as the judge,

or bypass the constitution because of his personal power

fetishes. he is not paid to make the law, but to uphold it. the law

doesn't hold people responsible for what they COULD have

done. and even if she ahd plowed into a group of people, how is

public nudity justice by any measure? if my loved ones were

killed, i would want to see jail time, not this side show which is

an insult to the judiciary system and rule of law in the nation.

>

> another thought .... most police officers are required through

the nature of

> their job to be rescue personnel at the scene of many

accidents, far to many

> caused by drunk drivers. I have talked to several who do this for

a living

> about this particularly difficult aspect of their resposibilities and

it is

> both an extremely difficult thig to do and absolutely

heartbreaking almost

> everytime. I may not agree with his particular choice under the

circumstances

> but maybe I would have given her a ride down to the morgue to

have a damn

> good look at what she was fortunate to not have happen to her

or someone she

> cared about.

once again, totally irrelevant., that is for judge to order, his job is

to uphold the law as it is written, that is what he is SWORN to do.

not to violate it to teach a dubious and abusive " lesson " . how

does violating his sworn duty, and the justifiable negative

publicity he earned for him and his police department, make the

jobs of any police office easier ? dont they have a hard enough

job as it is without losing more of the publics trust?

>

> Finally, I was not there. I don't know the woman or the officer

but it seems

> to me to be a significant stretch to start labeling someone an

abusive

> redneck power tripping policeman from my easy chair in front

of this safe and

> protective computer screen.

no its not ,

because thats exactly what it is. he went beyond his authority and

the constitution, he violated his oath and public trust he was was

sworn to protect. he has in fact given all police a black eye with

his over stepping of his and any legal authority to what he did.

tell me where it says in any state law, or in constitution that what

he did was legal? a child can tell you he abused his power.

if he had done this to jay walker, would it be any more of a

" power trip " and a violation of his sworn duty?

> There are infinate variables of posibilities

no, there are not.

there is only two possibilities, she was drunk or she was not

if she was drunk, his job, paid for with tax payer money, was to

arrests her, not make her perform a public nudity show.

> engendered in the given situation, who am I to judge anyone's

behavior or mental state except by the simple facts.

simple facts is no police office is allowed ot do this . period

>One huge one pops into my mind. This

> woman was brandishing a huge deadly weopon, in an

intoxicated condition, in a

> public place ..........

One huge one pops into my mind,

thats why we have laws, and that why we arrest people who

drive drunk. we pay are officers to uphold the law and protect the

public, not to violate the laws , strip citizens them and have them

parade around in public to humiliate them.

> I am not defending nor condemning anyone just thinking too

much as I've often> been " accused " . I do expect everyone to

accept responsibility for their> actions.

bullshit, you totally defended this officer and seem to forget he

had responsibility himself, to protect and serve the public, to

uphold the law and the constitution.. not make it up himself,

by doing so, he has not only weakened the publics trust in him,

but police everywhere. he caused nothing but harm to her, to

himself and abilty of his fellow officers to be trusted as well next

time they pull some one over, for ANYTHING.

January 5, 2001

> hi all,

>

> It seems to me the woman had two choices. Of course she

wouldn't have been in

> the situation had she been sober, but let's just say she was

perfectly sober

> and she was pulled over for running a red light(something

nearly as dangerous

> to others and self as driving under the influence) and were

given the same

> two choices ........ Would she then strip if told to by the officer or

would

> she refuse an accept whatever consequences ...... ?

irrelevant.

there is no circumstance to do this , under ANY Circumstance's.

there is no excuse for this. this in fact makes his action even

more inexcusable, because she was under influence and in

less of condition to defend herself. what if she had been on cold

medication, which also can effects your ability to drive, would that

make it alright then? if she had told she had to blow him or go to

jail, would that be ok because she was drunk too?

>

> How 'bout postulating this: Who would be the " victim " if she

had plowed into

> another vehicle and left someone's soul smashed to pieces all

over the road?

irrelevant.

if she was drunk, his job was to arrest her, not act as the judge,

or bypass the constitution because of his personal power

fetishes. he is not paid to make the law, but to uphold it. the law

doesn't hold people responsible for what they COULD have

done. and even if she ahd plowed into a group of people, how is

public nudity justice by any measure? if my loved ones were

killed, i would want to see jail time, not this side show which is

an insult to the judiciary system and rule of law in the nation.

>

> another thought .... most police officers are required through

the nature of

> their job to be rescue personnel at the scene of many

accidents, far to many

> caused by drunk drivers. I have talked to several who do this for

a living

> about this particularly difficult aspect of their resposibilities and

it is

> both an extremely difficult thig to do and absolutely

heartbreaking almost

> everytime. I may not agree with his particular choice under the

circumstances

> but maybe I would have given her a ride down to the morgue to

have a damn

> good look at what she was fortunate to not have happen to her

or someone she

> cared about.

once again, totally irrelevant., that is for judge to order, his job is

to uphold the law as it is written, that is what he is SWORN to do.

not to violate it to teach a dubious and abusive " lesson " . how

does violating his sworn duty, and the justifiable negative

publicity he earned for him and his police department, make the

jobs of any police office easier ? dont they have a hard enough

job as it is without losing more of the publics trust?

>

> Finally, I was not there. I don't know the woman or the officer

but it seems

> to me to be a significant stretch to start labeling someone an

abusive

> redneck power tripping policeman from my easy chair in front

of this safe and

> protective computer screen.

no its not ,

because thats exactly what it is. he went beyond his authority and

the constitution, he violated his oath and public trust he was was

sworn to protect. he has in fact given all police a black eye with

his over stepping of his and any legal authority to what he did.

tell me where it says in any state law, or in constitution that what

he did was legal? a child can tell you he abused his power.

if he had done this to jay walker, would it be any more of a

" power trip " and a violation of his sworn duty?

> There are infinate variables of posibilities

no, there are not.

there is only two possibilities, she was drunk or she was not

if she was drunk, his job, paid for with tax payer money, was to

arrests her, not make her perform a public nudity show.

> engendered in the given situation, who am I to judge anyone's

behavior or mental state except by the simple facts.

simple facts is no police office is allowed ot do this . period

>One huge one pops into my mind. This

> woman was brandishing a huge deadly weopon, in an

intoxicated condition, in a

> public place ..........

One huge one pops into my mind,

thats why we have laws, and that why we arrest people who

drive drunk. we pay are officers to uphold the law and protect the

public, not to violate the laws , strip citizens them and have them

parade around in public to humiliate them.

> I am not defending nor condemning anyone just thinking too

much as I've often> been " accused " . I do expect everyone to

accept responsibility for their> actions.

bullshit, you totally defended this officer and seem to forget he

had responsibility himself, to protect and serve the public, to

uphold the law and the constitution.. not make it up himself,

by doing so, he has not only weakened the publics trust in him,

but police everywhere. he caused nothing but harm to her, to

himself and abilty of his fellow officers to be trusted as well next

time they pull some one over, for ANYTHING.

January 6, 2001

> hi all,

>

> It seems to me the woman had two choices.

Police officers are authority figures. That status is legitimately

bestowed upon them by our society. Police carry guns. If the officer

is a man and the civilian is a woman, that is an probably additional

source of power since most men are stronger than most women. And I'm

not even going into the possibility that women are socialized to be

subservient and men are socialized to be dominant. The point is,

however many choices the woman had, the cop had infinitely more. The

option the cop chose to exercise is indefensible, given the facts we

have: the article on the web.

This case is worthy of note because frankly, I assume that most cops

have the decency and the smarts not to abuse their power. I assume

that most cops, and most men, would not make a choice like this in a

similar situation.

> Finally, I was not there.

I wasn't in Beijing a decade ago either, but I have an opinion about

the student uprising in Tieneman Square and how that uprising was put

down by the Chinese army.

>I don't know the woman or the officer but

it seems

> to me to be a significant stretch to start labeling someone an

abusive

> redneck power tripping policeman from my easy chair in front of this

safe and

> protective computer screen. There are infinate variables of

posibilities

> engendered in the given situation, who am I to judge anyones

behaviour or

> mental state except by the simple facts.

We absolutely, absolutely should have an opinion based on the limited

facts we have. You absolutely are qualified to judge someone else's

behavior *in addition to your own*, you absolutely are entitled to

your opinion and to express it. How else are you going to learn other

sides of the situation and hopefully develop a more balanced

perspective?

judith

January 6, 2001