• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

I bet this LEO had a Known History

Virginiaplanter

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
402
Location
, ,
imported post

Man acquitted of wounding policeman

"Saturday, Oct 20, 2007 - 12:08 AM

By JAMIE C. RUFF
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
FARMVILLE -- A Farmville man was found not guilty yesterday of shooting a town policeman in the leg during a 2005 traffic stop, the prosecutor said.

The jury deliberated about an hour before deciding that Russell Smith was not guilty of attempted capital murder, malicious wounding and two counts of use of a firearm in the Oct. 21, 2005, shooting of Farmville police officer Johnny Garrett, Prince Edward County Commonwealth's Attorney James R. Ennis said.

The trial lasted two days.

Garrett testified Thursday that he had learned Smith's license had been revoked and the officer was preparing to administer a breath test to determine Smith's alcohol level when he saw Smith raise a .38-caliber handgun just inches from the officer's chest.

Garrett said he was shot in the thigh when the gun fired as he slapped it down. Garrett said he heard several other shots as he fled for cover, and returned fire. Garrett was treated at Southside Community Hospital and released. He is the first town officer shot since 1974.

Defense attorney John Mann insisted the gun went off accidentally and Smith fled as Garrett fired on him.

"He wasn't intending to hit anybody," Mann said of his client. "He left [because] the officer was trying to kill him."

But Ennis noted during questioning of Garrett that Smith did not throw the gun out of window, put up his hands or say it was an accident.

In late January, a mistrial was declared in the middle of closing arguments when Smith's defense attorney, James Sheffield, said he lost his train of thought and could not continue. "

We don't know the whole story, but I bet the LEO was well known by the people and not in a good way.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/cva/ric/news.PrintView.-content-articles-RTD-2007-10-20-0109.html
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Somebody in this case should go to jail for sure. Smith, Garrett, the CA, the judge or the whole dman jury.

Actually, I'd vote for Ruff going to the clink for writing a story without ANY of the essential details involved that would let a reader figure out what the h*ll really happened.

Well, at least we know onething for sure (probably):

That RussellSmith isa goof with a gun.
yessmiley.gif




No matter what thefull details are, there is enough here to make that call.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

OK.... I am confused.

Driver is stopped and when officer is about to administer a breath test..... the driver pulls out a gun and it is pointed in the direction of the officer's chest. The gun is slapped downward and the driver pulls the trigger shooting the cop in the leg.

Ican agree the shot in the leg was unintentional.

But I have a problem.

Q: Why did the driver draw a gun?

Q: Why did the driver not warn the cop he was pulling out a gun?

Q: Why was his finger on the trigger?

Q: Why was it pointed at the cop?
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
Q: Why did the driver draw a gun?

Q: Why did the driver not warn the cop he was pulling out a gun?

Q: Why was his finger on the trigger?

Q: Why was it pointed at the cop?
Goof with a gun is the answer to all four questions....



What I can't figure out is how thejury did what it did...theremust be a LOT more important stuffin the story...

But we know that smith was a, well, a goofwith a gun.
 

sjhipple

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,491
Location
Concord, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
OK.... I am confused.

Driver is stopped and when officer is about to administer a breath test..... the driver pulls out a gun and it is pointed in the direction of the officer's chest. The gun is slapped downward and the driver pulls the trigger shooting the cop in the leg.

Ican agree the shot in the leg was unintentional.

But I have a problem.

Q: Why did the driver draw a gun?

Q: Why did the driver not warn the cop he was pulling out a gun?

Q: Why was his finger on the trigger?

Q: Why was it pointed at the cop?
Could it be that juries are starting to give citizens the same benefit of the doubt they give cops when cops blow unarmed people away by "accident?" Or could it be that the public doesn't trust what cops say anymoresince they "support their officer" no matter what happens?
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
Q: Why did the driver draw a gun?

Q: Why did the driver not warn the cop he was pulling out a gun?

Q: Why was his finger on the trigger?

Q: Why was it pointed at the cop?
Goof with a gun is the answer to all four questions....



What I can't figure out is how thejury did what it did...theremust be a LOT more important stuffin the story...

But we know that smith was a, well, a goofwith a gun.

I am going to link this jury to the same that failed to convict OJ Simpson.

The common people can be dumb at times and fail to see things clearly.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

ama-gi wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
OK.... I am confused.

Driver is stopped and when officer is about to administer a breath test..... the driver pulls out a gun and it is pointed in the direction of the officer's chest. The gun is slapped downward and the driver pulls the trigger shooting the cop in the leg.

Ican agree the shot in the leg was unintentional.

But I have a problem.

Q: Why did the driver draw a gun?

Q: Why did the driver not warn the cop he was pulling out a gun?

Q: Why was his finger on the trigger?

Q: Why was it pointed at the cop?
Could it be that juries are starting to give citizens the same benefit of the doubt they give cops when cops blow unarmed people away by "accident?" Or could it be that the public doesn't trust what cops say anymoresince they "support their officer" no matter what happens?

Everyone knows you should NOT draw a gun and point it at a cop!!

IMO....The shot in the leg was absolutely unintentional. The driver had actually wanted to shoot the cop in the chest.

As far as I can tell.... this guy had no valid reason to draw and point his gun at the cop.

Do you think the driver was going to arrest the cop? This can be the only valid reason I can think of.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
The common people can be dumb at times and fail to see things clearly.
The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP KMA$$
Love the little catch phrases... How about posting something else more intelligent...
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Do you think the driver was going to arrest the cop? This can be the only valid reason I can think of.

Citizen's arrest....Citizen's arrest!!

Gomer_Pyle.jpg
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

You didn't read the Wikipedia URLs, now did you? Try this

http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/rhetoric.php

Educating the invincibly ignorant is like sweeping the tide or whistling at the wind - or trying to teach an old dog new new tricks. D'ya ever wonder what Barney Fife was going to be like in his dotage? LEO666.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP KMA$$
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
You didn't read the Wikipedia URLs, now did you? Try this

http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/rhetoric.php

Educating the invincibly ignorant is like sweeping the tide or whistling at the wind - or trying to teach an old dog new new tricks. D'ya ever wonder what Barney Fife was going to be like in his dotage? LEO666.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP KMA$$
Most of what you post I gloss over. You normally do not contribute much worth reading.

Either we are equal or we are not...... Stupid is as Stupid does.
 

sjhipple

Regular Member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
1,491
Location
Concord, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
Most of what you post I gloss over. You normally do not contribute much worth reading.

Either we are equal or we are not...... Stupid is as Stupid does.

That figures. I love what doug huffman posts. Half the time it makes me think and the other half it makes me laugh, and it's usually concise and to the point...andoften it's rather eloquent.

Btw, Doug, is the quote that you use as your signature...where is that from?
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
Most of what you post I gloss over. You normally do not contribute much worth reading.

With so much to post, passing 3000, I imagine you gloss over a lot. I don't know where you might find the time to read.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP KMA$$
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
Blushing... They are all mine.

Grasping another opportunity to be wrong.

The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.

Either we are equal or we are not.

Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP KMA$$
I heard that one a long time ago on keepandbeararms.com, was that you?
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
I am going to link this jury to the same that failed to convict OJ Simpson.

The common people can be dumb at times and fail to see things clearly.

And I am going to use your post as the perfect evidence of why a jury system is so important.

All you, a police officer,have to go on is what is in this article, and you are sure that this man should be convicted.

But the jury of his peers heard all the evidence, and after deliberating all of them decided that this man is not guilty.

In the OJ Simpson case, the prosecution failed to convince a jury of 12 people that there was enough evidence to support a conviction.

You want to blame the juries, but clearly it was the prosecution and the police who bungled it, either by wrongly accusing these men of crimes, or by failing to provide proof to support an otherwise correct accusation.

The jury is your last defense against a bad law or a wrong accusation, and it's the only thing that stands between a system with some sense of fairness and the bananna republic's prejudice.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
I am going to link this jury to the same that failed to convict OJ Simpson.

The common people can be dumb at times and fail to see things clearly.

And I am going to use your post as the perfect evidence of why a jury system is so important.

All you, a police officer,have to go on is what is in this article, and you are sure that this man should be convicted.

But the jury of his peers heard all the evidence, and after deliberating all of them decided that this man is not guilty.

In the OJ Simpson case, the prosecution failed to convince a jury of 12 people that there was enough evidence to support a conviction.

You want to blame the juries, but clearly it was the prosecution and the police who bungled it, either by wrongly accusing these men of crimes, or by failing to provide proof to support an otherwise correct accusation.

The jury is your last defense against a bad law or a wrong accusation, and it's the only thing that stands between a system with some sense of fairness and the bananna republic's prejudice.
Sorry, they were blinded by his fame. It is called celebrity justice!

All the evidence was there.... They chose not to see it.

The jury was stacked in his case. The polls show he should have been convicted. He had money and fame... That is what saved him.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/polls.html



Stars get paid millions to entertain us and they get the pitty of the people all the time. Do not believe it? How much jail do you get for DWI?


[line]


Having pleaded guilty to driving under the influence, Nicole Richie -- a celebrity whose fame is so inexplicable that Paris Hilton's almost makes sense by comparison -- arrived last week at the Central Regional Detention Facility in Lynwood, Calif., to serve her four-day sentence. Eighty-two minutes later, she was released due to overcrowding in the jail.

[line]


Paris Hilton has not only had her sentence cut short, she is already out of jail!
The deal was sealed yesterday, and that Hilton made her exit early early this morning.
She was originally sentenced to 45 days in jail, but that was reduced to 23. She served a total of five days -- the normal stay for a violation of this kind.


[line]


I do not knowall the details in the guy pointing a gun at the cop and being set free.. Seems a little suspicious to me. If I lay out the facts given in the story.. I think any clear minded person would say "He was going to shoot that cop!"
 
Top