Legal/scotus thread

Tapate50 said:
You may wanna get better sources, like did you even skim this?

No where in this article does it say he violently attacked an innocent woman during sentencing. It says he came to the scene of a robbery and a woman matching the suspects description touched him and interfered with his duty while videoing him, so he subdued her.

It does not say anything connecting Biden / Ukraine either
Click to expand...

Did you read it?

In June 2023, Kirk was responding to a reported robbery when he threw a woman to the ground and pepper-sprayed her in the face while she filmed him outside a Lancaster WinCo


The newly appointed federal attorney agreed to a sweetheart plea deal DURING sentencing,




The video is in this news clip. He never gave her any commands before resorting to violence. He tried to snatch her phone which is not step 1 in arresting or detaining someone. Most likely he wanted to destroy the evidence on her phone. Then he grabs her and throws her on the ground. And only then did he issue his first command "get on the ground".That is not how arressts work. If they arent fleeing or attacking someone he should have told her "you are under arrest turn around and put your arms behind your back". There was no need to initiate violence at the time he did.
 
Also link the Ukraine/Biden info Trumps getting you posted earlier from this incident please. I didn’t see anything coming from this conviction of this armed robber arrest you reference in the same post .
 
cajunrevenge said:
Well it shows you never read the article because you wouldnt be confused if you did. Not really interested in your opinion so not gonna help you out on that Mr Magoo
Click to expand...
Did you not say that in post 3318?

I tried to find that fact that you wrote in the article twice because I couldn’t fathom such a thing occurring. Guess what? What you claimed wasn’t in there.

Shocker!

I’m neutral ! lol

You aren’t helping yourself here.
 
Tapate50 said:
Did you not say that in post 3318?

I tried to find that fact that you wrote in the article twice because I couldn’t fathom such a thing occurring. Guess what? What you claimed wasn’t in there.

Shocker!

I’m neutral ! lol

You aren’t helping yourself here.
Click to expand...
No, I did not. I said the new US attorney agreed to a plea deal during sentencing with an officer who attacked a woman. You then chose to argue about sentence structure when you know damn well what I said.
 
Tapate50 said:
Two sources confirmed to The Times that Assistant U.S. Attys Eli A. Alcaraz, Brian R. Faerstein and section chief Cassie Palmer resigned from the office over a “post-trial” plea agreement filed Thursday in the case of Trevor Kirk, an L.A. County sheriff’s deputy who was convicted of a felony for assaulting and pepper-spraying a woman outside a Lancaster supermarket.










According to Meghann Cuniff, an independent legal affairs reporter, the Department of Justice is reviewing a separate case involving Alexander Smirnov, a former FBI informant who pleaded guilty to lying about a phony bribery scheme involving President Biden and his son Hunter. A federal judge sentenced Smirnov to six years in prison.
Click to expand...



Hope this helps sunshine.
 
Trumps DoJ also ending consent decrees with several police departments. Which is weird because most consent decrees are just asking police sternly to please stop violating peoples constitutional rights. Which I am not a fan of. Dont ask, demand it by enforcing the law.
 
www.texastribune.org

Texas’ undocumented college students no longer qualify for in-state tuition

Within hours of a federal lawsuit targeting Texas’ policy of letting undocumented students qualify for lower public tuition rates, the 24-year-old law was no more.
www.texastribune.org www.texastribune.org

Trump DoJ sues Texas because of their law offering college tuition to illegal immigrants. And they reached a settlement in 6 hours...... agreeing to just pretend the law doesnt exist. And it was filed in the Wichita Falls Division of the Northern District of Texas where there is only one Judge so they knew exactly which Judge would be getting the case. I dont think thats how the legal system is supposed to work.
 
The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously revived a lawsuit from a pair of Atlanta residents seeking to hold the federal government accountable after FBI agents mistakenly battered down their front door and held them at gunpoint during a predawn raid of the wrong house.

The federal government is generally shielded from legal liability, and lower courts had dismissed the case brought by Hilliard Toi Cliatt and his then-partner, Curtrina Martin.

The justices sent their case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to grapple with the meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows individuals to bring claims for damages for certain actions taken by federal employees that lead to personal injury or property damage.


interesting ruling
 
You know how to cut down on 90% of wrong raids? Fine each cop who sets foot on their property 1000 dollars. Its a small amount but it matters more to them than the public paying out 100 million. I bet next time they make sure to get the right address. And I bet whoevers fault it was of the cops will be held accountable. If you are a cop and you lose 1k because the person in charge fucked up you wont be going on raids led by that guy anymore. And if you do you will make sure he doesnt fuck it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top