Pity The Children

[R. Richard]

Warning, this is a rant! This is the story of a guy who has been arrested several times. He is wealthy and from a wealthy family. Thus, he is on probation. Never mind that he has been arrested several time, while on probation. He is still on probation. He was arrested yet again in New York, but the fuzz 'transferred the monitoring of his probation' to Connecticut, where he was first arrested. Yeah, sure, I believe that Connecticut can monitor the guy while he is in NYC, but then I also believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Mind you, the NYC fuzz are ready to 'monitor' the guy's probation, they are just first waiting for a child to be found floating face down in a pond in Central Park. What probation? The son-of-a-bitch has been on probation and violated said probation several times. IMTHO the guy should be serving time in solitary.

VERMIN'S PROBATION GOES UNCHECKED

Sex fiend Carl Timothy Fisher leaves a Manhattan court yesterday.August 9, 2007 -- A wealthy and violent West Village child molester remains free - and is now going virtually unmonitored - as he awaits the outcome of his probation and public lewdness cases, The Post has learned.

Carl Timothy Fisher, 37, is a registered sex offender who groped a sleeping 11-year-old girl's genitals to the point of bruises and tears during a 1996 attack at his family's Connecticut home. Yesterday, he strode cockily out of a Manhattan courthouse after a hearing on a case in which he's charged with masturbating in public.

"Thanks for the attention!" the would-be film director and son of well-heeled Connecticut dog breeders told news photographers. "You make me feel like Paris Hilton."

Fisher's latest arrest came May 30 after shocked neighbors told cops they saw him standing naked and masturbating on the stoop of his $3 million townhouse at 56 Bank St.

The alleged incident happened at 10 a.m., as mothers and young children were walking past to Bleecker Park playground, only a half-block away.

Fisher had also been arrested in January, court records show, after his live-in fiancé showed cops her own bruises and told them Fisher had punched her and dragged her around the townhouse by her hair during a fight. Those charges were dropped when she subsequently declined to prosecute.

Fisher's rap sheet includes marijuana and drunken-driving charges, and his 1989 arrest for admittedly entering the Syracuse University dorm rooms of four sleeping female schoolmates and trying to fondle the women's breasts and kiss them until they awoke.

Fisher was being supervised by New York probation officials, but on July 20, they transferred custody to officials in Connecticut because his two 2007 arrests violated his probation.

New York's First Deputy Probation Commissioner Richard Levy called Connecticut probation officials to personally urge them to incarcerate Fisher, said Jack Ryan, a spokesman for the New York office.

"He's very dangerous - that's our position," Ryan said.

But Connecticut probation officials said yesterday that pending the outcome of their own probation violation proceedings, they are not supervising him.

His next court date in Danbury - the jurisdiction where the violent girl-grope happened - is Tuesday, a Connecticut probation spokeswoman said. He has posted $20,000 bail on the Connecticut probation case, the spokeswoman said.

Outside of keeping his court dates in Manhattan and Danbury, Fisher has gone virtually unmonitored since New York probation released him from its jurisdiction three weeks ago. That fact would likely chill the hearts of the parents of his young Connecticut victim.

"He is a predator who has continued over many years to victimize the young and the helpless," the girl's parents wrote Fisher's Danbury judge in 1997, in asking he be sentenced "to the most intense probation period allowed under the law."

 

[galaxygoddess]

He needs his dick shoved in a meat grinder, with it still attached... and then it fed to him through a straw.

 

[R. Richard]

He needs his dick shoved in a meat grinder, with it still attached... and then it fed to him through a straw.

I would agree only if the people who were supposed to monitor his probation get the same thing.

 

[galaxygoddess]

I would agree only if the people who were supposed to monitor his probation get the same thing.

I think everyone involved with letting this monster go free should be. His lawyers, the "monitors" the judges who GAVE him probation!

 

[SensualCealy]

I only wish people who pray on children were left to suffer through the number of years the children suffer for.

I think a much better idea is to tie a rope around is dick and another around his testicles and hang him from them. Let him hang till both pop off, then let him there to bleed to death...humane dontcha think?

C

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Warning, this is a rant! This is the story of a guy who has been arrested several times. He is wealthy and from a wealthy family. Thus, he is on probation. Never mind that he has been arrested several time, while on probation. He is still on probation. He was arrested yet again in New York, but the fuzz 'transferred the monitoring of his probation' to Connecticut, where he was first arrested. Yeah, sure, I believe that Connecticut can monitor the guy while he is in NYC, but then I also believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. Mind you, the NYC fuzz are ready to 'monitor' the guy's probation, they are just first waiting for a child to be found floating face down in a pond in Central Park. What probation? The son-of-a-bitch has been on probation and violated said probation several times. IMTHO the guy should be serving time in solitary.

VERMIN'S PROBATION GOES UNCHECKED

Sex fiend Carl Timothy Fisher leaves a Manhattan court yesterday.August 9, 2007 -- A wealthy and violent West Village child molester remains free - and is now going virtually unmonitored - as he awaits the outcome of his probation and public lewdness cases, The Post has learned.

Carl Timothy Fisher, 37, is a registered sex offender who groped a sleeping 11-year-old girl's genitals to the point of bruises and tears during a 1996 attack at his family's Connecticut home. Yesterday, he strode cockily out of a Manhattan courthouse after a hearing on a case in which he's charged with masturbating in public.

"Thanks for the attention!" the would-be film director and son of well-heeled Connecticut dog breeders told news photographers. "You make me feel like Paris Hilton."

Fisher's latest arrest came May 30 after shocked neighbors told cops they saw him standing naked and masturbating on the stoop of his $3 million townhouse at 56 Bank St.

The alleged incident happened at 10 a.m., as mothers and young children were walking past to Bleecker Park playground, only a half-block away.

Fisher had also been arrested in January, court records show, after his live-in fiancé showed cops her own bruises and told them Fisher had punched her and dragged her around the townhouse by her hair during a fight. Those charges were dropped when she subsequently declined to prosecute.

Fisher's rap sheet includes marijuana and drunken-driving charges, and his 1989 arrest for admittedly entering the Syracuse University dorm rooms of four sleeping female schoolmates and trying to fondle the women's breasts and kiss them until they awoke.

Fisher was being supervised by New York probation officials, but on July 20, they transferred custody to officials in Connecticut because his two 2007 arrests violated his probation.

New York's First Deputy Probation Commissioner Richard Levy called Connecticut probation officials to personally urge them to incarcerate Fisher, said Jack Ryan, a spokesman for the New York office.

"He's very dangerous - that's our position," Ryan said.

But Connecticut probation officials said yesterday that pending the outcome of their own probation violation proceedings, they are not supervising him.

His next court date in Danbury - the jurisdiction where the violent girl-grope happened - is Tuesday, a Connecticut probation spokeswoman said. He has posted $20,000 bail on the Connecticut probation case, the spokeswoman said.

Outside of keeping his court dates in Manhattan and Danbury, Fisher has gone virtually unmonitored since New York probation released him from its jurisdiction three weeks ago. That fact would likely chill the hearts of the parents of his young Connecticut victim.

"He is a predator who has continued over many years to victimize the young and the helpless," the girl's parents wrote Fisher's Danbury judge in 1997, in asking he be sentenced "to the most intense probation period allowed under the law."

You missed the 2nd half to this story.

He just got elected to Congress as a Republican. *ducks*

 

[R. Richard]

Punishing the whako is tempting, but does not really solve the problem, even if he is executed. What the problem consists of is a judiciary that lets a whako who preys on children loose to harm kids. The other part of the problem is the fuzz who conspire with the judiciary to help let whakos loose on the streets.

 

[SeaCat]

R. Richard,

Truth be told your rant lost much of it's steam with your attack on the Police.

All of us here know how you dislike the Police but this case, believe it or not, has absolutely nothing to do with the Police. They did their jobs, they arrested him. (Or would you have prefered they shot him? In which case I'm sure you would have attacked them for that.)

This case deals entirely with the courts and those who vote the Judges into their seats and not with the Police.

A better case for your attacks would be the Police allowing their co-workers to get off free when they drive drunk. Or cover up for them when they kill someone without reason. (Three officers were recently fired just north of here for the former.)

Cat

 

[R. Richard]

R. Richard,

Truth be told your rant lost much of it's steam with your attack on the Police.

All of us here know how you dislike the Police but this case, believe it or not, has absolutely nothing to do with the Police. They did their jobs, they arrested him. (Or would you have prefered they shot him? In which case I'm sure you would have attacked them for that.)

This case deals entirely with the courts and those who vote the Judges into their seats and not with the Police.

A better case for your attacks would be the Police allowing their co-workers to get off free when they drive drunk. Or cover up for them when they kill someone without reason. (Three officers were recently fired just north of here for the former.)

Cat

Cat:
The fuzz are responsible for monitoring the activities of parolees. Yes, the terms of parole are set by the court, but the actual monitoring is the responsibility of the fuzz. The fuzz arrested the whacko and then handed off the responsiblity of monitoring the guy to another state. This last is dereliction of duty, IMNTHO.

The fuzz also provide security for the judges who let whacko boy go. No security, and bleeding heart judge walks. Guaranteed, there are lawyers who would go armed into court and provide their own security to get a judge job. I can also tell you, with a great deal of confidence that the second set of judges would not be nearly so lenient with those who pose a danger to children. Then the fuzz ccould again provide security. [Normally, the Chief fuzz would get fired, but not when the public knows about whacko boy.]

 

[cloudy]

Cat:
The fuzz are responsible for monitoring the activities of parolees. Yes, the terms of parole are set by the court, but the actual monitoring is the responsibility of the fuzz. The fuzz arrested the whacko and then handed off the responsiblity of monitoring the guy to another state. This last is dereliction of duty, IMNTHO.

The fuzz also provide security for the judges who let whacko boy go. No security, and bleeding heart judge walks. Guaranteed, there are lawyers who would go armed into court and provide their own security to get a judge job. I can also tell you, with a great deal of confidence that the second set of judges would not be nearly so lenient with those who pose a danger to children. Then the fuzz ccould again provide security. [Normally, the Chief fuzz would get fired, but not when the public knows about whacko boy.]

This makes absolutely zero sense.

 

[R. Richard]

This makes absolutely zero sense.

Cloudy:
The problem is a political one. If the fuzz are to do their duty, they have to play a little politics. The obviously are not willing to play politics to protect children. I will be happy to discuss the matter, item by item off-line.

 

[SeaCat]

Cloudy:
The problem is a political one. If the fuzz are to do their duty, they have to play a little politics. The obviously are not willing to play politics to protect children. I will be happy to discuss the matter, item by item off-line.

No no no R. Richard.

Do not take this offline. I too would be interested.

You advocate the Police start playing Politics. Now that is a mistake if I ever heard of one. Yes I know that you are saying they should enter the political arena to protect children. (Their protection is a laudable goal by the way.) What would be the next step in the political arena for them then?

We do not want or need the Police to enter the political arena. They have a job to do, to enforce the laws handed down by the duly elected officials of the town, city, county, state and nation they work within. They are limited by these same laws they have to enforce.

I find it amusing that you of all people would want those whom you have such a deep mistrust and disregard, (not to mention disrespect) for to enter the political arena and possibly expand their powers.

Cat

 

[Boxlicker101]

I think everyone involved with letting this monster go free should be. His lawyers, the "monitors" the judges who GAVE him probation!

It's the Golden Rule at work. And we all know what that rule says.

 

[R. Richard]

No no no R. Richard.

Do not take this offline. I too would be interested.

You advocate the Police start playing Politics. Now that is a mistake if I ever heard of one. Yes I know that you are saying they should enter the political arena to protect children. (Their protection is a laudable goal by the way.) What would be the next step in the political arena for them then?

We do not want or need the Police to enter the political arena. They have a job to do, to enforce the laws handed down by the duly elected officials of the town, city, county, state and nation they work within. They are limited by these same laws they have to enforce.

I find it amusing that you of all people would want those whom you have such a deep mistrust and disregard, (not to mention disrespect) for to enter the political arena and possibly expand their powers.

Cat

Let's look at the situation. The guy is arrested and the NY Post says so in so many words. If there were any doubt, any lack of witnesses, the story would have used all sorts of 'alleged' and 'charged' phrases, to cover their ass. Thus, the case against whacko boy was open and shut.

The police march whacko boy into court and the judge lets whacko boy out on his own recognizance [unsupervised probation.] Now, I can't prove it, but whacko boy's parents and whacko boy's lawyer did not argue the case on legal grounds, there was obviously no argument. Thus, the argument was on political grounds, that is whako boy's wealthy enablers talked to the NY powers that be and/or Connecticut politicians talked to the NY powers that be. The powers that be talked to the judge and whako boy walks. We no longer have a legal matter or a police matter, but a political matter. [Yes, there could be other explanations, but none of them work unless you believe in the tooth fairy.]

The only way that whacko boy walks free is if the fuzz throw up their hands [admittedly difficult to do when you are eating a doughnut] and abandon their responsibility. [I hate and distruct the fuzz, for good and sufficient reasons. However, I hate and distrust politicians even more.]

All the fuzz need to do is to refuse to play the political game that whako boy's wealthy enablers want to play and instead play their own political game. "We will not just stand by and let a many times convicted sex offender walk the streets and endanger your children. If the judicial system wants to play that game, they will do it without our support." I submit that the court of public opinion would support the police in the matter. In fact, I submit that some bright lights would be shined into some dark corners and some political cockroaches would scuttle off into the dark.

The police abandoned their sworn duty, like the gutless cockroaches they are.

[To short circuit the ususal mindless outcry, I cite another, different but relevant political case. James Curley, the Mayor of Boston, was re-elected Mayor while he was in jail. Mayor Curley was caught taking a civil service exam for one of his Irish constituents. Mayor Curley was convicted and sentenced to jail. May Curley said something to the effect, "They better keep a cell warm for me, because if I have to go to jail so that a fine Irish bhoy can support his family, then jail is where you'll find me!" There was sort of a groundswell of public support, especially from one ethnic group. [I forget which one, but there are a lot of Irish in Boston.] The groundswell was sufficient to get Curly elected from jail. [By the way, Mayor Curley was not only a hero, he was also a crook who eventually had to be pardoned [fraud] by President Truman.]]

 

[SeaCat]

Let's look at the situation. The guy is arrested and the NY Post says so in so many words. If there were any doubt, any lack of witnesses, the story would have used all sorts of 'alleged' and 'charged' phrases, to cover their ass. Thus, the case against whacko boy was open and shut.

The police march whacko boy into court and the judge lets whacko boy out on his own recognizance [unsupervised probation.] Now, I can't prove it, but whacko boy's parents and whacko boy's lawyer did not argue the case on legal grounds, there was obviously no argument. Thus, the argument was on political grounds, that is whako boy's wealthy enablers talked to the NY powers that be and/or Connecticut politicians talked to the NY powers that be. The powers that be talked to the judge and whako boy walks. We no longer have a legal matter or a police matter, but a political matter. [Yes, there could be other explanations, but none of them work unless you believe in the tooth fairy.]

The only way that whacko boy walks free is if the fuzz throw up their hands [admittedly difficult to do when you are eating a doughnut] and abandon their responsibility. [I hate and distruct the fuzz, for good and sufficient reasons. However, I hate and distrust politicians even more.]

All the fuzz need to do is to refuse to play the political game that whako boy's wealthy enablers want to play and instead play their own political game. "We will not just stand by and let a many times convicted sex offender walk the streets and endanger your children. If the judicial system wants to play that game, they will do it without our support." I submit that the court of public opinion would support the police in the matter. In fact, I submit that some bright lights would be shined into some dark corners and some political cockroaches would scuttle off into the dark.

The police abandoned their sworn duty, like the gutless cockroaches they are.

[To short circuit the ususal mindless outcry, I cite another, different but relevant political case. James Curley, the Mayor of Boston, was re-elected Mayor while he was in jail. Mayor Curley was caught taking a civil service exam for one of his Irish constituents. Mayor Curley was convicted and sentenced to jail. May Curley said something to the effect, "They better keep a cell warm for me, because if I have to go to jail so that a fine Irish bhoy can support his family, then jail is where you'll find me!" There was sort of a groundswell of public support, especially from one ethnic group. [I forget which one, but there are a lot of Irish in Boston.] The groundswell was sufficient to get Curly elected from jail. [By the way, Mayor Curley was not only a hero, he was also a crook who eventually had to be pardoned [fraud] by President Truman.]]

LOLOL

Oh my R. Richard, you do yourself an injustice by limiting your writing here. You could write for so many Newspapers.

Look at what you have written and think about it.

In your first comment you state that the Police did their job by arresting him and marching him into court.

In your second paragraph you clearly state that it was the courts and the Judges who allowed him to walk free. Not the Police you so dislike. Again the Police did their job, the courts failed.

Again, let me state, the Police did their jobs. The courts and the Publicly Appointed Judges didn't.

Then you dig up a case from the Truman Administration.

This kind of reminds me of a case down here not too long ago. A neighborhood was over run with Drug Dealing and affiliated crime. Houses were being broken into and people were being robbed. People complained and the Police responded. There was an increase in patrols and an increase in Police in the area. People were getting busted right and left. The Drug Dealers were getting hauled off, as were the speeders, the Hookers and the Johns.

The same people who had complained about the lack of Police and their protections now started complaining because there were too many Police. (Sounds kind of familiar doesn't it?)

Cat

 

[R. Richard]

In your second paragraph you clearly state that it was the courts and the Judges who allowed him to walk free. Not the Police you so dislike. Again the Police did their job, the courts failed.

Again, let me state, the Police did their jobs. The courts and the Publicly Appointed Judges didn't.

Cat

Read my post again. Yes, the judge allowed whako boy to walk free. However the only reason that makes any sense is that the judge had political pressure applied. So, it was not really the gutless judge who let whacko boy walk free, it was the politicians.

The fuzz arrested whacko boy, well and good. The fuzz also obviously had witnesses and evidence. The fuzz [the DA is fuzz] had an open and shut case. Up until that time, the fuzz did their job. Then the politicians undid the work of the fuzz and the fuzz bent over and let the politicians have their way. That last is not the fuzz doing their job and is the basis of my complaint.

If the fuzz want to do their sworn job, they either have to play politics themselves or let the politicians [so to speak] ass fuck them. They let the politicians ass fuck them. That last in not really the problen I have.

After the politicians butt fuck the police, can the children of NY be far behind in the process? The cry of BOHICA echos in the land. Do the fuzz need to wait until they find a child floating face down in a Central Park pond to do their sworn job? Apparently. I would not have handled the matter as the fuzz did. JMNTHO.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Let's look at the situation. The guy is arrested and the NY Post says so in so many words. If there were any doubt, any lack of witnesses, the story would have used all sorts of 'alleged' and 'charged' phrases, to cover their ass. Thus, the case against whacko boy was open and shut.

The police march whacko boy into court and the judge lets whacko boy out on his own recognizance [unsupervised probation.] Now, I can't prove it, but whacko boy's parents and whacko boy's lawyer did not argue the case on legal grounds, there was obviously no argument. Thus, the argument was on political grounds, that is whako boy's wealthy enablers talked to the NY powers that be and/or Connecticut politicians talked to the NY powers that be. The powers that be talked to the judge and whako boy walks. We no longer have a legal matter or a police matter, but a political matter. [Yes, there could be other explanations, but none of them work unless you believe in the tooth fairy.]

The only way that whacko boy walks free is if the fuzz throw up their hands [admittedly difficult to do when you are eating a doughnut] and abandon their responsibility. [I hate and distruct the fuzz, for good and sufficient reasons. However, I hate and distrust politicians even more.]

All the fuzz need to do is to refuse to play the political game that whako boy's wealthy enablers want to play and instead play their own political game. "We will not just stand by and let a many times convicted sex offender walk the streets and endanger your children. If the judicial system wants to play that game, they will do it without our support." I submit that the court of public opinion would support the police in the matter. In fact, I submit that some bright lights would be shined into some dark corners and some political cockroaches would scuttle off into the dark.

The police abandoned their sworn duty, like the gutless cockroaches they are.

[To short circuit the ususal mindless outcry, I cite another, different but relevant political case. James Curley, the Mayor of Boston, was re-elected Mayor while he was in jail. Mayor Curley was caught taking a civil service exam for one of his Irish constituents. Mayor Curley was convicted and sentenced to jail. May Curley said something to the effect, "They better keep a cell warm for me, because if I have to go to jail so that a fine Irish bhoy can support his family, then jail is where you'll find me!" There was sort of a groundswell of public support, especially from one ethnic group. [I forget which one, but there are a lot of Irish in Boston.] The groundswell was sufficient to get Curly elected from jail. [By the way, Mayor Curley was not only a hero, he was also a crook who eventually had to be pardoned [fraud] by President Truman.]]

As I said, it's the Golden Rule being followed.

I have to agree with what Cat said, though. The cops busted the guy, and had witnesses lined up to testify, and there is not much more that they can do, outside of gunning him down in the street, which would result in even more outcry. They did their job.

After that, the politicians took over, and I think we all know what I think of politicians. The DA (elected) apparently failed to prosecute. Judges cut him loose for a pittance of bail. He was on probation, and could have been locked up for a violation of that.

In all honesty, for the initial rap, he was sentenced to prison, but got released early. He served over a year, which wasn't enough but was more than a slap on the wrist.

I just reread your post, and I still can't see what more the cops could have done, within reason. I hope you are not suggesting they should let the judges get murdered by people who disagree with their decisions.

ETA: I note somebody used this thread to badmouth Republicans. Without defending politicians of any party, I think you will find that it is usually Democrats who oppose being tough on criminals, or mandatory sentencing. One of the reasons for this is they are pandering to The Trial Lawyers Association, one of their strongest supporters.

 

[R. Richard]

I just reread your post, and I still can't see what more the cops could have done, within reason. I hope you are not suggesting they should let the judges get murdered by people who disagree with their decisions.

The fuzz would, in no way, let a judge be murdered by people in said judges courtroom. The decision to enter a courtroom with no baliff(s) would rest entirely on the judge.

The fuzz would simply let the public decide if the obvious behind the scenes politicing would stand or no. I suspect that the public would overwhelmingly condem the judge. However, to actually take a stand would require some guts on the part of the Chief fuzz. If the public supported his actions [it is at least technically a he,] then there would not only be no punishment for the Chief fuzz, but the kind of public support that would undoubtedly elevate him. However, to take a stand to protect the children of NY would require guts. The fuzz have no guts, IMNTHO.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The fuzz would, in no way, let a judge be murdered by people in said judges courtroom. The decision to enter a courtroom with no baliff(s) would rest entirely on the judge.

The fuzz would simply let the public decide if the obvious behind the scenes politicing would stand or no. I suspect that the public would overwhelmingly condem the judge. However, to actually take a stand would require some guts on the part of the Chief fuzz. If the public supported his actions [it is at least technically a he,] then there would not only be no punishment for the Chief fuzz, but the kind of public support that would undoubtedly elevate him. However, to take a stand to protect the children of NY would require guts. The fuzz have no guts, IMNTHO.

The Chief Fuzz is also a politician. He might not be elected, but he is a political appointee, as are some judges and ADA's.

 

[galaxygoddess]

Ok, because the police wouldn't let the judges be shot (which IS a crime even if you don't want it to be) is putting the police at fault?


If a police officer broke his line of cuty and went against orders and either LET someone die or killed the person themselves, THEY are BREAKING THE LAW.


The cops are not in fault here.

The monster, and the people who let him walk (judges) and the lawyers and anyone else helping this man go free deserves punishment. However, you cannot blame the police for upholding the law. they didn't let the man go free they didn't let the man attack an innocent child, they arrested him, gathered the evidence they could to convict him, and some expensive lawyers and pilable judges let this bastard go free and then basically tied the cops hands in this situation.

If a cop is standing within let's sat 15 feet of this monster, who is at the given moment NOT breaking law (the given moment, not previously, not in the furture) and someguy ran at the sicko with a knife, and the cop did nothing to stop the attacker, the cop would go to jail, even if the monster deserves to die in the most horrible way imaginable.

Because the attacker is breaking the law. Assualt with a deadly weapon. The cop's duty is to protect the population no matter how sleazy that population is. Regardless of their person feelings about the monster.


If the ruling dictated that the cops couldn't DO anything, then they are breaking the law by going against a court order.

Asinine as it seems, if a court order sent a 5 year old to be executed, anyone attempting to prevent that 5 year old from being executed would be sent to prison for breaking the law.

 

[R. Richard]

Ok, because the police wouldn't let the judges be shot (which IS a crime even if you don't want it to be) is putting the police at fault.

If a police officer broke his line of cuty and went against orders and either LET someone die or killed the person themselves, THEY are BREAKING THE LAW.

The cops are not in fault here.

You have a misunderstanding. The police are NOT required to enforce the law. There have been several court cases where the police were found to have failed to enforce the written law and it had been decided that the police are under no requirement to enforce the written law.

In the area where I live, there is a written law that requires a man with a flag [daytime] and a lantern [night] to procede any motor vehicle in operation on the public roads. The fuzz don't enforce the law and it is one of the few times I agree with the fuzz.

The monster, and the people who let him walk (judges) and the lawyers and anyone else helping this man go free deserves punishment. However, you cannot blame the police for upholding the law. they didn't let the man go free they didn't let the man attack an innocent child, they arrested him, gathered the evidence they could to convict him, and some expensive lawyers and pilable judges let this bastard go free and then basically tied the cops hands in this situation.

The police ARE helping whacko boy go free, by not monitoring his probation. Fact.

If a cop is standing within let's sat 15 feet of this monster, who is at the given moment NOT breaking law (the given moment, not previously, not in the furture) and someguy ran at the sicko with a knife, and the cop did nothing to stop the attacker, the cop would go to jail, even if the monster deserves to die in the most horrible way imaginable.

Because the attacker is breaking the law. Assualt with a deadly weapon. The cop's duty is to protect the population no matter how sleazy that population is. Regardless of their person feelings about the monster.

Not true. The police mission [court approved, time and again] is to enforce police policy. If police policy gets too far out of line, they fire the Chief fuzz and a few others and hire new. Where do the new come from? Mainly fuzz who were fir3ed elsewhere. Waje up and smell the doughnuts!

If the ruling dictated that the cops couldn't DO anything, then they are breaking the law by going against a court order.

Asinine as it seems, if a court order sent a 5 year old to be executed, anyone attempting to prevent that 5 year old from being executed would be sent to prison for breaking the law.

A court can't just 'make rulings.' If a court does make rulings that are clearly against the law, said rulings ae routinely disregarded without penalty. Also frequently higher courts overrule the bad court rulings.

Back when, a Georgia court found a man guilty of [in short] living while black. The US Supreme Court overruled the Georgia ruling withing 15 minutes! [Obviously the SC was monitoring the Georgia 'trial' and reacted as soon as said trial ended.]

There are two items, 1) law; 2) politics. Law is supposedly prinary, but politics is actually primary. If a law is against NATIONAL politics, the law is null and void. There are numerous examples. Back in the days of overt racial segregation, numerous laws were passed [and still exist today] to keep Negroes 'in their place.' The laws were overruled by NATIONAL politics.]

 

[cloudy]

You have a basic misunderstanding of how probation works, R.Richard.

The police do not monitor probation. That is his probation officer's responsibility, not that of the police.

 

[galaxygoddess]

You have a basic misunderstanding of how probation works, R.Richard.

The police do not monitor probation. That is his probation officer's responsibility, not that of the police.

Matter of fact, my criminal justice teacher in college was a probation officer. She was NOT a cop she was not TRAINED to be a cop, she was just married to one.




And the interpretaion of the law in the bodily harm of another is a completely different thing than enforcing the law to add a flag to your vehicle.

They're called "rediculous laws" google it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudy
You have a basic misunderstanding of how probation works, R.Richard.

The police do not monitor probation. That is his probation officer's responsibility, not that of the police.

Matter of fact, my criminal justice teacher in college was a probation officer. She was NOT a cop she was not TRAINED to be a cop, she was just married to one.

And the interpretaion of the law in the bodily harm of another is a completely different thing than enforcing the law to add a flag to your vehicle.

They're called "rediculous laws" google it.

The police and probation officers, being basically on the same side, do work together, at least usually. Neighborhood cops usually know who the bad apples are on their beat, and they know who is on parole or probation. Knowing this, they keep a special eye on such characters, and bust them for transgressions, even if they might not have busted someody else for the same thing. Their jobs are much easier if they can keep dangerous and career criminals off the street.

Also, a parole or probation officer will sometimes ask the police to arrest somebody who is believed to be in violation, and this is within the duties of the cops, so they do it.

Here, you apparently have a naked man sitting in a public place, jacking off as he watches children go by. Such a man would have been taken into custody regardless of his status in regards to the penal system. If he was on probation for sex crimes at that time, he should have been thrown into jail to complete his sentence, while a new trial was arranged on the new charge. In other words, he should have ben violated.

The fact that he wasn't is because the Golden Rule almost always trumps all others.

All jurisdictions have stupid and outdated laws that should be repealed. They are not enforced, and should be eliminated and, once in a while, one of them is.

 

[R. Richard]

You have a basic misunderstanding of how probation works, R.Richard.

The police do not monitor probation. That is his probation officer's responsibility, not that of the police.

What I said was that the fuzz monitor probation. There are any number of different kinds of fuzz. Some of them wear badges, some do not. IMNTHO, they are all fuzz. I don't like fuzz at all.