smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
just to reiterate:
Cash in pocket.
Plaintiff is happy with the result.
Cash in pocket.
Plaintiff is happy with the result.
Last edited:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Marine gets turned away from voting because of OC'ing
- Thread starter smellslikemichigan
- Start date
OC for ME
Regular Member
Training curriculum:
To cops: Don't do that crap again.
Poll workers: Don't do that crap again.
Settlements do little beyond the rhetoric of the settlement. Trials are public and assigning names to faces begets the public's attention to wayward government officials. Also, the cost to defend the indefensible is brought to the public's attention.
If the case against the state is as strong as was alluded to, a trial would have gone much farther in educating the key players.
To cops: Don't do that crap again.
Poll workers: Don't do that crap again.
Settlements do little beyond the rhetoric of the settlement. Trials are public and assigning names to faces begets the public's attention to wayward government officials. Also, the cost to defend the indefensible is brought to the public's attention.
If the case against the state is as strong as was alluded to, a trial would have gone much farther in educating the key players.
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
OC for ME - There in lies the problem! It is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to get a prosecutor to bring one of these cases to court. Police know this, because in our perverted injustice system the prosecutors work for the police, not the other way around as it should be. That's how so many BS cases make it to trial. It's just good business...
SO ... we are left with the best crappy tools at our disposal: the federal court system and 1983 civil suits.
Haman J.T.
New member
Whats more important than folks being "Educated" to "Leave You Alone/Harrass You"? Thats Exactly what Clay (I Too) Did! If They're not "trained" they Will Do It to Other "Law Abiding Citizens"! Simple! When Good People Do Nothing, Evil/Ignorance Thrives! CARRY ON!
davidmcbeth
Banned
"trained"? Your kidding...suits are about what happened to YOU...restitution for injury you GOT...not for any future injury prevention.
And suits are all about $$$ ... I would not ask for training, would not care if they trained their people or if they were going to.
Sue them for the maximum amount of $$$ ... doing it for political reasons too? Then get a judgment...not a settlement.
OC for ME
Regular Member
It is unfortunate that some folks see a law suit as a teachable moment for LE. I would think that teaching, and thus subsequent learning, is something LE desired to mitigate a law suit. Nope, some in LE see a law suit as nothing more than the cost of doing business.
Judgements educate the citizenry. Whether or not LE is educated is irrelevant. A law suit should be exactly what it is meant to be, punishment for violating the law.
Judgements educate the citizenry. Whether or not LE is educated is irrelevant. A law suit should be exactly what it is meant to be, punishment for violating the law.
MSG Laigaie
Campaign Veteran
DMcB, you may have missed my point because I was not clear. It was not what the OP did that I saw unproductive. It is this attitude that I see as unproductive. It may work for you, but I consider "sticking it to the man" as very '70s and vindictive.
I think the idea is to make our Communities better for the People who live in them. It took three incident/confrontations and two lawsuits to get B'hams LEOs to follow the law and train. In the last incident several local OCers assisted the PD in writing/amending their training. What the OP did was positive for the Community. Will it happen again? Who knows, but someone will step up to help fix it.
Sorry I was not clear in my last post
Haman J.T.
New member
A "settlement" where the Fed Court orders said "training" has eliminated "Gun drawn/swat style/citizen endangerment" in the 3rd largest city in MI. ZERO OCers/Citizens "Rights" Violated due to the LE "Training(knowing how to make contact with Lawfull OC)" from 2010-2014. Tell Us again how suits and settlements Do Nothing! 1st Amendment "Redress of Grievences" Works! Thats why We Do It! Simple! CARRY ON!
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
And this is a great example of what I was speaking of above. Even though the responding officer in his case committed a felony(s) IMHO - there was not a snowballs chance in hell of him or his comrades being tried in a criminal case. If I had a person call me as a citizen & express concern about a man OCing lawfully down the sidewalk. What do you think would happen to me if I: drove down the road, jumped out my car, pointed my pistol at him, made him get on his knees, cuffed him, drug him by the cuffs down the sidewalk until his knees bled.... ??? Pretty sure I'd be sitting in a state prison for multiple felonies.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Really? You need to train someone not to violate their rights? Poppycock ... they changed their actions because a federal judge put them on notice because of a civil suit filed that continued violations would cost them dearly.
Suits with judgments? Good.
Suits with settlements? Useless (except for the guy involved with the suit who is happy with the results).
Federal judges generally don't f**k around .. if they are unhappy with the actions of a party, they will let that party know...believe me, talking from experience.
Just MO of course...you are free to believe in whatever dreamworld you like.
Lawsuits are ALL about $$$.
budlight
Regular Member
OC for ME - There in lies the problem! It is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to get a prosecutor to bring one of these cases to court. Police know this, because in our perverted injustice system the prosecutors work for the police, not the other way around as it should be. That's how so many BS cases make it to trial. It's just good business...
SO ... we are left with the best crappy tools at our disposal: the federal court system and 1983 civil suits.
I'm confused, are you talking about a prosecutor bringing the civil suit to court? When does a prosecutor bring a civil lawsuit to court? The plaintiff's attorney does this, and if the plaintiff wants to go all the way, they can.
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
1983 suits are CIVIL suits. A prosecutor must bring criminal charges forward.
ETA - That's why civil suits often are a OCers only chance at some type of justice [all be it only a settlement or a ruling], police that acted as criminals are not going to jail in a 1983 civil suit loss.
Make sense now?
ps - maybe you should trade in the budlight for some O'dools... LOL... just kiding...hope WYANDOTTE PD are still well versed in the law & OC?
ETA - That's why civil suits often are a OCers only chance at some type of justice [all be it only a settlement or a ruling], police that acted as criminals are not going to jail in a 1983 civil suit loss.
Make sense now?
ps - maybe you should trade in the budlight for some O'dools... LOL... just kiding...hope WYANDOTTE PD are still well versed in the law & OC?
Last edited:
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
for the record, federal court did not have jurisdiction on this case. the federal court denied the motion to hear this case so it was filed with the county.
FreeInAZ
Regular Member
Ooops,
So basically, what was done was voter abuse/denial of rights which IIRC is a felony in many states. So the county knew they screwed up & just opted to pay up.... makes sense. Thanks for the clarification SLM.
I think my earlier point is worth reflecting on - why is it that suits are our only avenue often to seek relief from these types of abuses? If I as a citizen stop someone from voting...pretty sure am facing some serious charges.
Last edited:
davidmcbeth
Banned
Ooops,
So basically, what was done was voter abuse/denial of rights which IIRC is a felony in many states. So the county knew they screwed up & just opted to pay up.... makes sense. Thanks for the clarification SLM.
I think my earlier point is worth reflecting on - why is it that suits are our only avenue often to seek relief from these types of abuses? If I as a citizen stop someone from voting...pretty sure am facing some serious charges.
Well, its the election judges who make the call .... hence different rules for them. Don't like it? Change your constitution. Good luck with that...they have their rules, we have ours