No Gun Charges....Again
Here's how bad Kim Foxxx is:
- Kim Fox is CI-ing [Continuing Investigation] way too many UUW cases. We had an incident at Puerto Rican fest over the weekend where the command post saw a guy on the pod with a gun in his waistband. They called it out including a detailed description of the guy right down to his tattoos. Area central gun team grabs him just after he pitched the gun in a bush. They CI the case pending DNA analysis. Mind you because of the crowds gathering the gun was recovered by the officers so prints and DNA will come back inconclusive. BUT they have 22 min of pod video showing this goof with the gun in his waist. Unreal.
Twenty-two minutes of a subject on the public way, in a park, with a gun, in violation of God knows how many laws, but Kimesha and her minions need to get a DNA swab, which will come back as nothing more than an opportunity for Defense Counsel to claim fifty other people might have touched that gun or hidden it in the bushes.
Meanwhile, he roams the streets, probably looking for another gun and someone to shoot. And the media will be amazed when he either gets pinched again or shoots someone.
Meanwhile, he roams the streets, probably looking for another gun and someone to shoot. And the media will be amazed when he either gets pinched again or shoots someone.
Labels: county, un-fucking-believable
posted by SCC at 12:05 AM
93 Comments:
Screw the “CI”, just give me your name and charges denied at this time... Charge with misdemeanor and send the goof on his way. Then it will be on the SA’s hands when dude gets another gun and kills someone.
Not the whole story...developing. Patience, children.
Okay.
IF:
The swab comes back as His, and no other indicators of the presence of any other DNA, then?
If His prints are identifiable, and found upon the evidence, then? Especially if no other prints are found thereupon?
If these two conclusions are found, plus the video, then?
Then what this empowered with the authority, and obligation, sworn duty, to apply the law person does may be the glaring proof of her willful malfeasance.
IF.
guns, guns, guns. just a distraction to keep your
thoughts off salary, taxes, living expenses.
meanwhile the big boys are minting profits.
Check out: The Mystery West Chicago Tower.
You guys are too lazy to investigate until things
are established, screwing you, then you complain.
Chicago ham radio operators: get on this and
put things right at SCC.
Fuck Kim Fux it up and the democ"RATS" They are evil twisted leaders whose leftist sanctuary city agenda will be the final straw for the city, county and state that are all on a banana peel to bankruptcy! CCW will straighten out the problem faster than the National Guard.
Let me guess. The asswipe ASA's last name is Eggleston. That useless women has to be the worst ASA I have come across in twenty years of dealing with Felony Review.
Just what don't you understand about the term sanctuary?
Kim Foxx is just helping her peoples an' folkses
get their revenge against the man...
Keep doing police work. Why don’t the command staff go and grab the guy with gun?
Everyone is waisting their time locking anyone up. Kim Fox won't prosecute as prescribed by law. This is Chicago where the Mayor openly states that he will disobey federal law.
Can't wait to move.
You could have the pod video, the PO witness observing it, DNA, prints, GSR on his hands and clothing, independent eyewitness testimony, receipt from where he bought the gun, and his facebook pictures posing with the gun. They have an agenda, and that's to keep certain people out of jail. Just look at the national political scene. Law enforcement, DOJ & FBI kept one Presidental candidate out of jail with all kinds of evidence that would be obvious to a grade schooler. And the same people are trying to drive another out of office with an investigation where no crime exists and an investigation that has been going on over a year that has not produced any evidence of a crime. Yes they have an agenda. Is there a certain political group behind both. Why yes, their called the Democrats. Welcome to socialism.
I can’t stress enough on how bad she needs to go. She should be a public defender never a prosecutor
Betcha it was asa Marshall who CI the case
It’s sad that it took 22 min of them watching him with a gun to make a stop on the guy. That’s about 20 more minutes than it should have been. Whomever was monitoring that pod put a lot of coppers in harms way keeping this information off the zone or citywide, and for what so a gun team could recover the weapon.
She needs to be investigated.
Speaking of such things, has anyone seen the clarifications of use of force policy? Apparently, holding a weapon and refusing orders to disarm does not justify use of force; the threat of death or great bodily harm has to be imminent. So that means what, exactly? He has to point it at us? What would a reasonable person believe to be imminent when an armed offender refuses lawful police orders to disarm?
kimbo... you da man
So we have this "proof" why doesnt anyone or the FOP go to the media and say THIS is the problem in Cook County...The Legal system! Spill your guts and say the truth about how this legal system and Kim Foxx are fucking up Chicago!
Normally DNA results take a year to get back if not longer. A rush job couple of months
Watched world news last night and police arrested a man who had 500 guns in his house ~ he had a prior gun conviction so wasn't allowed to have a gun but some judge released him on bond anyway!
The POD video only shows the offender had A gun and not THE gun recovered. It sounds like the offender did not admit to the gun being his, hence the CI pending ISP results.
This is Investigations 101 people.
The real outrage is that there, is, in fact, outrage with the CI. Learn how to properly investigate and you will never have to worry about CI’s
Why do officers even make an arrest??? Just collect your check!!!
DNA, body cams, drug tests.
My friend, if you test positive
after peeing into the bottle, just
remember that the barista at Starbucks
could have pissed in your cup. There's
really no free coffee.
Jeeeez....ya think the Sheeple will ever put 2 and 2 together and finally realize that NOTHING EVER happens to these gun offenders?????
Maybe said goof will shoot kimmee. Or any other ASA. In that case, he should be let off.
Who cares, let him have his gun. FOIA the incident and make it public and believe me, the public and the politicians won’t care either.
Hey if he was in a park is it and " enviromental" issue ???? Maybe if the Fibune had an "enviromenal" reporter they could jump on this right ???
The demonrats are not law and order people !
Exactly why this city is crime ridden, Vote this simpleton out in the next election.
Keep voting Democratic!
What’s the point of being a sanctuary city if you can’t act like one?
Of course, all black and brown criminals are set free, unleashed on the community like a plague - SANCTUARY!!!!
Just another of a million examples why Kim is a disgrace to the legal profession.
If she wants to pull this kind of shit, let her move over to the Public Defenders office.
Kim, if you don't want to do the job right, then fucking resign!
Signed,
Another Lawyer
Fyi it takes over 18 months for dna to be tested. Even if rushed it will take some time. This case wont be rushed
The gun is off the streets. That's all they care about. Another gun for the table show later this month.
The entire reason she was placed in this spot by George Soros is to undermine legitimate law enforcement efforts. Soros is seeking destabilization and destruction of the American establishment. Kim Foxx is one of his tools to accomplish his mission. That's why he gave her hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Besides that little hiccup, how was the fest?
this is just an excuse thought up by a liberal who does not want to put a black or brown in jail.Next thing you know they will not approve charges because the food does not conform to the minority diet.
City can save a lot of money by letting the prosecutors office also be the public defenders office. That way one city lawyer could argue both sides of case, so no matters the verdict the office has a win. 100% record to run on, what's not to love.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Never any problems at the Columbus Day parade. ♠️
Replying to:
Anonymous said...
Just what don't you understand about the term sanctuary?
6/20/2018 12:33:00 AM
Thank you for saying this as it sums up the politicians and it's thought towards any and all criminals and their MURDERING, STABBING, ROBBING, PUNCHING, PUSHING, ETC. others, unless the criminals are white. Then they are thrown in prison. This entire city reminds me of Jurassic Park.
So how was the offenders DNA obtained? You had to get a warrant? Consent? What? So the CI file will sit in felony review for a year?
This is HER agenda. She wants cases that her office can win “hands down”. So when she runs again for SA she can say “Oh look at me. I prosecuted all these cases and got a 100% conviction”. Ooo! Elect me again! We’re on to you girl.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Speaking of such things, has anyone seen the clarifications of use of force policy? Apparently, holding a weapon and refusing orders to disarm does not justify use of force; the threat of death or great bodily harm has to be imminent. So that means what, exactly? He has to point it at us? What would a reasonable person believe to be imminent when an armed offender refuses lawful police orders to disarm?
6/20/2018 03:37:00 AM
--
You just have to roll the dice ... shoot, don't shoot ... you're always wrong. I guess you just have to hope that a jury woke up in a good mood? Why the fuck would anyone take this job? Look at Rialmo, he's a half inch away from being charged with murder, and he could be charged at any time for the rest of his life on the whim of any new states attorney looking to make a name for themselves. No way to live.
I've wasted my life. 40 hours of training a year, FOID and CCW, $50 FFL fees, ammo tax, all that paranoia about printing or crossing a magical gun-free line.
When all along Chicago is open carry! Do bangers charge the Cook County gun tax when they sell stolen firearms?
Anonymous said...
She needs to be investigated.
6/20/2018 03:09:00 AM
She needs to be thrown out on her pathetic, zero experience ass! What kind of states attorney favors the thugs and vilifies the police? Right a democratic brainless agent,that obviously likes the bloodshed and murder/mayhem to continue unabated!
Parents when your children are shot/killed beat take a walk to kimmys house and place the blame where it rightfully belongs, then detour to "rahms ballerina castle" on Hermitage, then on to Hyde Park Tonis "mansion" they ya go!
Will any spineless political official in office or running make a TV or radio ad or even a billboard showing how many gun criminals have been set loose either with no charges or low bond. The public at large needs to know they are being played for a damn fool.
Wow, and yet they still cry about the flood of illegal guns on the streets. All bitch and moan, but when they can do something about it, Catch and Release. Thanks for bringing anarchy to our city in teh name of social justice.
Get that to FoxNews
No demands from parkland ❄️❄️ Or Sabina father flakey
I can’t stress enough on how bad she needs to go. She should be a public defender never a prosecutor
Yeah, but does she drink? I heard a Branch 42 Public Defender has been showing to court inebriated. Naturally, nothing is done about it.
Everyone might as well be a PD, they make more than the state.
They need to come up with a gun attached to the POD and fire it at the descriptionless, tattooed offender...
@anonymous and your socialist democratic comments GFY !
If you are a Democrat, you can do no wrong.
Apparently, holding a weapon and refusing orders to disarm does not justify use of force; the threat of death or great bodily harm has to be imminent. So that means what, exactly? He has to point it at us? What would a reasonable person believe to be imminent when an armed offender refuses lawful police orders to disarm?
6/20/2018 03:37:00 AM
Check with Lovey and Lovey first.
Anonymous said...
Speaking of such things, has anyone seen the clarifications of use of force policy? Apparently, holding a weapon and refusing orders to disarm does not justify use of force; the threat of death or great bodily harm has to be imminent. So that means what, exactly? He has to point it at us? What would a reasonable person believe to be imminent when an armed offender refuses lawful police orders to disarm?
6/20/2018 03:37:00 AM
The Peoples Republic of California is real close to changing the state use of force law requiring deadly force to be necessary and not just "reasonable." Translated that to English means the police take the first round or else the police are in violation of the law as defined and interpreted by the second guessers.
About two years ago when Detectives were doing follow up investigations on UUW's, I called in a UUW for two P.O.'s and the case was C.I.'d for DNA. When I submitted the gun to be tested, the evidence coordinator would not allow me to submit the gun, because the state crime lab would not test a gun for DNA for a basic UUW arrest. There had to be more involved, such as the gun had to be recovered during an investigation for homicide, armed robbery, etc; etc....not simply for mere possession. If this is still going on at the crime lab today, then it's pointless for the state to C.I. UUW's because the lab won't test the gun based on a UUW possession type case.
California advances biggest US change to police use of force
AP Updated: 5:18 PM PDT Jun 19, 2018
By Sophia Bollag and Don Thompson
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) —
California would lead the U.S. in significantly changing the standard for when police can fire their weapons under legislation that cleared its first hurdle Tuesday after an emotionally charged debate over deadly shootings that have roiled the country.
It's time to change a "reasonable force" standard that hasn't been updated in California since 1872, making it the nation's oldest unchanged use-of-force law, said Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a San Diego Democrat who introduced the measure.
"It must be guided by the goals of safeguarding human life," she said.
A state Senate committee advanced the legislation that would allow police to use deadly force only in situations where it is necessary to prevent imminent and serious injury or death to the officer or another person.
Now, California's standard makes it rare for officers to be charged after a shooting and rarer still for them to be convicted. Frequently it's because of the doctrine of "reasonable fear": if prosecutors or jurors believe that officers have a reason to fear for their safety, police can use deadly force.
++MORE: Proposal would limit when California police can shoot guns....
http://www.kcra.com/article/hearing-advances-california-bill-limiting-police-use-of-force/21613748
Speaking of such things, has anyone seen the clarifications of use of force policy? Apparently, holding a weapon and refusing orders to disarm does not justify use of force; the threat of death or great bodily harm has to be imminent. So that means what, exactly? He has to point it at us? What would a reasonable person believe to be imminent when an armed offender refuses lawful police orders to disarm?
6/20/2018 03:37:00 AM
It depends on the weapon. A person holding a gun, regardless of where it's pointed, is an imminent threat. A person holding a knife, within range of stabbing you or someone else before you could stop the threat, is an imminent threat. A person holding a bat, 50 feet away from you or anyone else, is not an imminent threat. A person holding no weapon, but repeatedly kicking and stomping on the head of another person, is an imminent threat. Basically, don't shoot anyone unless you absolutely have to in order to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. Different weapons present different threats depending upon distance and other factors. The important things to remember are that even if you do everything exactly right, you still may need a judge or jury to agree that you did everything right, and you still may have to fight to keep your job. More important than that, is the fact that you can't let any new policy or potential legal issues allow you to second guess when you know you're doing the right thing. If someone is an imminent threat, eliminate that threat. As we learned from JVD, that doesn't mean shooting until the person is dead or until you run out of bullets. It means shooting until the person is no longer an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. It's easy to get a few rounds off before you can reassess if the threat still exists, so some people may get shot several times even if they drop their weapon when the first shot is fired. Be sure you can justify each shot that is fired, or they'll decide you shot too many times. Once you see that the person is no longer a threat of death or great bodily harm, stop shooting. Those in charge have decided that you're the bad guy, but that doesn't mean you should let someone get the first shot or not use force where appropriate.
Anonymous said...
Just what don't you understand about the term sanctuary?
6/20/2018 12:33:00 AM
Sanctuary? Wasn't that the place Michael York hoped to escape to in the movie Logan's Run?
This friggin Restorative Justice bullshit is way out of hand.
How many layers of possession does the State Law, as it stands, need?
So what’s the turnaround time these days for DNA testing since fingerprint are in the ballpark of 3-6 months?
What is it they’re afraid of?
CookCo has an idiot for a prosecutor, a moron for chief judge and plenty of DartJail vacancy.
Merit Hacks please chime in.
If there are SOOOOOOOOO many illegal guns out there (according to Jugghaid Special Ed & Lil AntKnee and The Imperials), why isn’t the UUW image enough?
Cook Co States Atty has several hurdles and hoops for CPD to jump through...just to get a charge approved when there’s nothing in the State Law that states DNA has to be obtained.
And then, what other authorization/warrants are needed to get a buccal swab and what if shitbird refuses?
More manipulation of the Law by a racist, bias hate monger from Cabrini.
Got to keep these underserved, disparaged folks out of jail.
So in the meantime an I-Bond is drawn up, maybe an ankle monitor for show, and the feral urban predator is already released back into the amazon.
No political accountability when his gun totin feral predator commits his next crime whilst on Bond, and he will commit another crime before that DNA is even sent down.
Fake News Media not interested in reporting on how armed felons are routinely released.
Let’s all get on the same page:
Camera Pod Guy...just focus on the armd white folk so the DC can get some reliable, no challenge District numbers.
Zero tolerance for white offenders from here on through Labor Day.
Consider that period your COPA-free holladay, ok.
Which is Reason # 749 why Chicago and Crook County should be left far far behind by any decent law abiding people.
She is one of them. Make no mistake.
This is about turning Shitcago into an even bigger shithole than it is and forcing even more taxpayers out of state.
its hell being a cop,when both sides are against you.wanna say fuck it,"kill each other assholes!"
From now on she gets an extra X in her name every time one of her wrist-slapped felons commits another murder.
OT, but with a suspected serial killer running loose, this caught my eye:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-hammond-officer-help-st-0620-story.html
Officer Daniel Sangkaratana pulled over Randol Thomas Palmer Hall on June 1 after receiving reports of attempted child abductions, Lt. Steve Kellogg said in a news release.
Hall, 27, of Matteson, Ill., was charged in Lake Superior Court with disarming a law enforcement officer, attempted criminal confinement, battery against a public safety official, resisting law enforcement and battery, court records show.
Hall pleaded not guilty to the charges and is scheduled to appear in court again July 30, according to court records.
Hammond police responded around 2:30 p.m. June 1 to the 2900 block of 165th Street for “an attempted child abduction,” Kellogg said. A 15-year-old girl said she was grabbed by a man in a vehicle but “she was able to quickly pull away from the male and ran,” he said.
Witnesses gave police a detailed description of the license plate and vehicle the man was driving, the release states.
“A few minutes later, a 10-year-old female reported that a male matching the same description tried to lure her into his vehicle in the 6400 block of New Hampshire,” Kellogg said.
Sangkaratana patrolled the area and found a gray Ford Explorer with a matching license plate from Illinois.
Hmmmmmmm . . . could this be the "person of interest" who left town not so long ago after a few bodies turned up?
it is all about living in a sanctuary city.
name the criminal infraction. screw the law.
First, thank you to all you police officers for arresting these criminals. We citizens appreciate you and hate fox. She should be fired!!!! She won't lock here people up and the mayor breaks the law by welcoming the illegals. Thank you for what you do. If I write more, it won't be posted. You all are our only saving grace in the middle of HELL!!
She is one of them. Make no mistake.
This is about turning Shitcago into an even bigger shithole than it is and forcing even more taxpayers out of state.
It’s sad that it took 22 min of them watching him with a gun to make a stop on the guy. That’s about 20 more minutes than it should have been. Whomever was monitoring that pod put a lot of coppers in harms way keeping this information off the zone or citywide, and for what so a gun team could recover the weapon.
6/20/2018 01:59:00 AM
Are you really that stupid? Ever think that the footage was reviewed after the gun was originally seen?? And that led to the 22 minutes of being on camera? You must work with Fenner, Boyd and Ben
I've wasted my life. 40 hours of training a year, FOID and CCW, $50 FFL fees, ammo tax, all that paranoia about printing or crossing a magical gun-free line.
When all along Chicago is open carry! Do bangers charge the Cook County gun tax when they sell stolen firearms?
6/20/2018 09:00:00 AM
Well, if, upon being stopped and questioned by CPD officers, (unlike!y as that may be), you can be merrily on your way, by displaying your credentials.
Not sofor those without said credentials.
So, not quite a waste, just an unconstitutional hassle, courtesy of the state of the socialist democratic domain of illinois.
Other coppers around the area where put in harms way bc somone watching the pod wanted the gun team to get a gun. Unbelievable
If he were convicted sentence would community service and time served. After all he didn't shoot anyone.
California would lead the U.S. in significantly changing the standard for when police can fire their weapons under legislation that cleared its first hurdle Tuesday after an emotionally charged debate over deadly shootings that have roiled the country.
It's time to change a "reasonable force" standard that hasn't been updated in California since 1872, making it the nation's oldest unchanged use-of-force law, said Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a San Diego Democrat who introduced the measure.
"It must be guided by the goals of safeguarding human life," she said.
Not all human life needs to be safeguarded. Some people DO NEED killing.
Kimmie is practicing her “restorative justice”
First, thank you to all you police officers for arresting these criminals. We citizens appreciate you and hate fox. She should be fired!!!! She won't lock here people up and the mayor breaks the law by welcoming the illegals. Thank you for what you do. If I write more, it won't be posted. You all are our only saving grace in the middle of HELL!!
6/20/2018 05:33:00 PM
All well and good.
Yet, you still choose to pretend that you are not totally responsible for your own safety.
Law enforcement officers enforce the law, when not obstructed, by the well known by now political putz party minions, and even when enforcements are accomplished, those same ppp minions thwart their efforts's effectiveness, by substantially negating the neccessary follow through, via prosecutin and adjudication of those apprehended.
So, to hold the viewpoint that law enforcement officers are the ONLY saving grace possible, you must be choosing to relieve yourself of any actual obligations.
This is the why in the answer to the question, How the fuck did things get so bad here?
From now on she gets an extra X in her name every time one of her wrist-slapped felons commits another murder.
6/20/2018 03:56:00 PM
Awwwww, c'mon now.....
Sure, the letter x deserves more respect than that.
It is, I believe, the letter least used as the first letter of words in the english language, so, why do ya want to go and make such a suggestion?
You're gonna give the letter x a Rodney Dangerfield complex!!!!!
Felony Review is useless. Bunch of liberal ass clowns up on the 14th Floor.
Just what don't you understand about the term sanctuary?
6/20/2018 12:33:00 AM
Sanctuary? Wasn't that the place Michael York hoped to escape to in the movie Logan's Run?
6/20/2018 12:50:00 PM
I always think of that movie as one which starred Jenny Agutter, but, maybe, that's just me..........tho, from a certain perspective, (K Bandit shameless baiting), Michael does look quite youthful.....
Are you really that stupid? Ever think that the footage was reviewed after the gun was originally seen?? And that led to the 22 minutes of being on camera? You must work with Fenner, Boyd and Ben
Nice try pal. No I typically look into things before I make a comment to aovid making an ass of myself, something you should also integrate into your life. I watched the pod footage. They (whomever was monitoring) actively followed him with the camera for well over 35 min actually. A few police vehicles were actually seen driving by the guy. We should be glad that nothing happened.
Anonymous said...
So how was the offenders DNA obtained? You had to get a warrant? Consent? What? So the CI file will sit in felony review for a year?
——————-
Ummm...maybe he’s a convicted felon and had to submit DNA as a condition of a prior arrest?
When will this foxx guy wise up to reality?
I give up-no reason to arrest anyone, so why bother. Let them all go free and might as well give them there gun back while your at it. Justice in Chicago/Illinois is [ ] fill in the blank yourself, I give up.
Kim is a loser and has to go
Should have called the Deputy Chief for an override
Well this continues more now as Preckwinkle is solidly in thanks to deadbeat Fioretti and his felon campaign manager who raised money, didn’t pay bills and shilled a phony campaign to insure Preckwinkle’s reelection.
Be sure you can justify each shot that is fired, or they'll decide you shot too many times. Once you see that the person is no longer a threat of death or great bodily harm, stop shooting. Those in charge have decided that you're the bad guy, but that doesn't mean you should let someone get the first shot or not use force where appropriate.
6/20/2018 12:16:00 PM
***
Been in shootings. This sounds retarded. What you’re ask is sometimes possible but if this is what coppers are being asked to think about when someone is pointing a gun or shooting at them, we are going to be burying a lot more cops. Best line: “those in charge have decided you’re the bad guy...[use force where appropriate].” Gee thanks. Better advise: “tuck tail and run, call a supervisor to meet you and give a description over air. Hopefully you don’t get hit. Bad guy gets away and nearly kills you but you won’t hahe to worry about being crucified.”
Law should change to read shoot to eliminate threat, with the understanding that such actions will result in death or great bodily harm to the offender, as a direct result, and in an effort by officer(s), to eliminate said threat. Apparently, this stuff needs to be spelled out. To use deadly force means to kill, let’s just be honest. If you present a deadly force scenario to me, I’m going to try my hardest to kill you before you kill me. That is not achieved by reciprocal and “wait and see” tactics. If you want to live, you respond with overwhelming violence of action and ensure the offender(s) are dead, dispatched, eliminated, liquidated, neutralized, KIA, whatever other word you deem politically appropriate
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
So how was the offenders DNA obtained? You had to get a warrant? Consent? What? So the CI file will sit in felony review for a year?
——————-
Ummm...maybe he’s a convicted felon and had to submit DNA as a condition of a prior arrest?
6/21/2018 01:48:00 AM
--
I thought that was too obvious to mention. We can take it step by step if that's what you want. But, ya, that's a possibility. If this is the policy of Kim Foxx, then, at some point, the offender is NOT going to have his DNA in the database. So I'll repeat the question ...
what do u expect from libtard d-suckers?
It's time to change a "reasonable force" standard that hasn't been updated in California since 1872, making it the nation's oldest unchanged use-of-force law, said Assemblywoman Shirley Weber, a San Diego Democrat who introduced the measure.
"It must be guided by the goals of safeguarding human life," she said.
Not all human life needs to be safeguarded. Some people DO NEED killing.
6/20/2018 08:22:00 PM
To state the obvious, for those firmly planted in the delusional lands of the oblivious, what the fuck are laws prohibiting the commissions of violent acts intended to accomplish, if not to protect and safeguard the living from the perils of the violently inclined?
And of what use are said laws if they are being impeded in their enforcements?
And of what use are these moronic politicians concockting their absurd revisions of laws which obstruct the enforcements of the very laws intended to provide said safeguarding?
Anonymous Anonymous said...
When will this foxx guy wise up to reality?
6/21/2018 06:23:00 AM
Right after you quit pretending to know what's going on.
As a former gun prosecutor (not in Chicago, but in a city with its own gun problems), it might not be such a bad idea to submit the gun for prints and/or DNA. As the article points out, any such test will most likely come back inconclusive. But, rest assured, if the gun is not tested, defense counsel will have one hell of a good time cross-examining and then arguing the point:
Q. So you never submitted the gun for prints?
A. No.
Q. And you never submitted the gun for DNA analysis.
A. No.
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the police don't even care enough about this case or about my client's rights to try to make sure that the person they're claiming had the gun actually possessed it at some point. There's no prints. There's no DNA. And the cops didn't even SUBMIT the gun for analysis! They claim my client was SEEN with the gun, but can you really believe them when they didn't do such a simple thing as submit the gun for prints or DNA?"
I'm not saying arguments like these should win. But I've heard these arguments made, and I've seen them prevail. Why? Always remember: A jury is the stupidity of one person multiplied by 12.
Again, I have no personal interest in this matter. And it's frustrating to think that someone who illegally possessed a firearm is out, free, while the gun is being processed. But even if the analyses come back inconclusive, at least the defense attorney can't make the police look like they were "too lazy to do their jobs properly". And even if the analyses come back inconclusive, the prosecutor assigned to the case can argue to the jury, "Ladies and gentlemen, these officers did everything they reasonably could to ensure they arrested the right person. The fact that DNA and fingerprint analyses were inconclusive is unfortunate. But it doesn't mean that the defendant didn't possess the weapon. The State has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he did so based on the testimony of those who actually SAW him with the gun."
Just some thoughts from someone who's been there and hates seeing thugs with guns walk free just because juries are dumb enough to buy into some defense attorney's b.s.
Been in shootings. This sounds retarded. What you’re ask is sometimes possible but if this is what coppers are being asked to think about when someone is pointing a gun or shooting at them, we are going to be burying a lot more cops. Best line: “those in charge have decided you’re the bad guy...[use force where appropriate].” Gee thanks. Better advise: “tuck tail and run, call a supervisor to meet you and give a description over air. Hopefully you don’t get hit. Bad guy gets away and nearly kills you but you won’t hahe to worry about being crucified.”
Law should change to read shoot to eliminate threat, with the understanding that such actions will result in death or great bodily harm to the offender, as a direct result, and in an effort by officer(s), to eliminate said threat. Apparently, this stuff needs to be spelled out. To use deadly force means to kill, let’s just be honest. If you present a deadly force scenario to me, I’m going to try my hardest to kill you before you kill me. That is not achieved by reciprocal and “wait and see” tactics. If you want to live, you respond with overwhelming violence of action and ensure the offender(s) are dead, dispatched, eliminated, liquidated, neutralized, KIA, whatever other word you deem politically appropriate
6/21/2018 10:24:00 AM
It sounds retarded because it is retarded, and I'm the one who posted it. I don't agree with any of this shit, but that's just how it is now. I agree with you. Anyone who dares to present an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to another person, especially to a police officer, deserves nothing less than certain death. Certain actions should be seen as voluntarily forfeiting your right to live. Pointing a gun at the police, charging at them with a bat or knife or pipe, or driving a vehicle toward them with the intent to strike them, should all be met with as many rounds as the officer can squeeze off before running out or having a tired trigger finger. This "police as the bad guy" idea is absolutely going to get officers hurt and killed. We already had one officer choose not to use deadly force when it was warranted because she was afraid she would lose her job and get indicted. The result was a severe beating. I feel like you were joking when you said better advice would be to tuck tail and run, but you're actually right, as sad as it may be. The best advice is to avoid potential deadly encounters whenever possible. If a bad guy is running with a gun, wave goodbye. If someone is high on PCP and carrying a knife, stay in your car, and maybe drive away. You can't actually be the police anymore in these situations. About the best you could hope for if you have to use deadly force, is that the offender is a white male. Then no one will say you did anything wrong. Killing blacks and browns is racist and wrong no matter what. White guys are fair game. Welcome to the land of liberal thinking.
Post a Comment
<< Home