Undercover Cop Charged With Felony In Manhattan Motorcycle Melee
An off-duty undercover cop was among the six people arrested in the beating of a New York City man after being chased by motorcyclists last week. While the cop, Wojciech Braszczok, told investigators that he didn’t help the victim because he arrived to the crime scene late, the New York Post obtained a video that showed he slapped the victim’s car window so hard that it broke. Braszczok, a 10-year veteran of the job was initially charged with criminal mischief, but on Wednesday prosecutors added a felony charge of gang assault. aBC news http://abcnews.go.com/US/cop-charged-suv-assault-worked-undercover-occupy-wall/story?id=20539148
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
He should of ran that fcker over to, at least he paralyzed the one idiot.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
The analogies are simple, you hold cops to a separate standard to everybody else. If they kill people in what they perceive is self defense, you give them a pass. internal investigation, and maybe a suspension with pay. If a regular ole citizen kills in self defense, they do not get the same benefit of the doubt, they must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Joe, your reality is, cops are special people. And cop homicide is always justified.
Let's try this again... When have I EVER stated or condoned what you believe to be me holoding cops at a higher standard and/or giving them a pass? Those are YOUR misguided words, not mine. You continue to be reading challenged, and forget how many times I have said NEUTRAL until all information is received before making judgement. You on the other hand do hold cops to a differnet standard than others...you believe immeidately they are wrong no matter what the situation is, before you ever receive al lthe information. You allow your own hatred and bias to overshadown facts and/or fair judgement!
If your "regular ole cutuzen" kills in self-defense, then if self-defense is confirmed and justifed, I see no reason they would be prosecuted. If self-defense did not require use of deadly force, that is a different story!
So Cissyboy, your reality is, cops are special people.....they just happen to be at the bottom of the food chain. Cissyworld is a convoluted mess!!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
As stated above, I want YOUR SPECIAL cops to have SPECIAL additional oversight. Because we entrust the police with power, we need to oversee that power to prevent abuse and corruption..
See, I have the understanding that the Constitution and the judicial branch of government in particular, protects all people from having their rights violated by laws(legislative branch) and law enforcement(executive branch). Now which branch of government would the citizen review board fall under, and what power do they have?
You allow your own hatred and bias to overshadown facts and/or fair judgement!
You don't follow the point here. I started by equating this to the Zimmerman case. Where a president made a public statement that swayed public opinion and compelled a prosecutor to file charges against Zimmerman even after the investigator determined it was self defense. The reasoning was because a full trial was the only way justice could be served and all the facts could be presented. We have Box a Rox STILL keeping the Zimmerman thread going even AFTER the trial and facts were presented. Yet, in this case, nobody is screaming for a trial. And you and box are coming up with justifications on why the police may have been appropriate in their action. But you NEVER gave Zimmerman the same benefit of justifiable homicide in self defense.
So I ask again, why shouldn't these cops stand criminal trial, regardless the outcome of the investigation? Since a trial is the only fair way to determine guilty or not guilty.
Facts are determined by juries. At least that's what the outcry for a Zimmerman trial argument was. "No justice -no peace". Why isn't that the same for cops?
See, I have the understanding that the Constitution and the judicial branch of government in particular, protects all people from having their rights violated by laws(legislative branch) and law enforcement(executive branch). Now which branch of government would the citizen review board fall under, and what power do they have?
I would assume (but I don't know for sure) that the local citizen review board, which would have no power other than to review and report violations, would come under local govt... City, town or county.
Ultimately, the prosecution of the police would fall under the State Attorney General's office. And in the case of a state wide conspiracy, under the federal dept of justice.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You don't follow the point here. I started by equating this to the Zimmerman case. Where a president made a public statement that swayed public opinion and compelled a prosecutor to file charges against Zimmerman even after the investigator determined it was self defense. The reasoning was because a full trial was the only way justice could be served and all the facts could be presented. We have Box a Rox STILL keeping the Zimmerman thread going even AFTER the trial and facts were presented. Yet, in this case, nobody is screaming for a trial. And you and box are coming up with justifications on why the police may have been appropriate in their action. But you NEVER gave Zimmerman the same benefit of justifiable homicide in self defense.
So I ask again, why shouldn't these cops stand criminal trial, regardless the outcome of the investigation? Since a trial is the only fair way to determine guilty or not guilty.
Facts are determined by juries. At least that's what the outcry for a Zimmerman trial argument was. "No justice -no peace". Why isn't that the same for cops?
EXACTLY...you cannot stay on point in a discussion, you must spin it in the direction that you want for your purpose and for your benefit. CLARIFICATION: I don't believe I have condoned this action at all nor am I providing justification for their actions. I have simply pointed out facts as currently known, compared to your condemnation without benefit, because of your bias. If this were a case of a citizen having committed the shooting, you would be immediately be defending them against the corrupt legal system that would investigate them. You don't have a double standard...you have a Cissy standard....if you think it should be, then it should be!
My position on Zimmerman has been stated...go to that thread if you want to understand. You will note my "opinion" occurred well after the incident and when facts were being presented in the court proceedings.
So maybe if you stayed on point, there could have been a rational discussion. But true to Cissy rules, you always what to spin it YOUR WAY!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
EXACTLY...you cannot stay on point in a discussion, you must spin it in the direction that you want for your purpose and for your benefit.!
Not for my benefit. I just stated an analogy. Two cops shoot a diabetic man in his home - no protests demanding cops get charged with a crime. Zimmerman shoots in self defense, police determine self defense, NOT GOOD ENOUGH. The president of the United States makes a public comment to force "justice" and a prosecutor charges him because the public outcry generated by Obama's public statements.
I am willing to accept a jury's verdict that the cops were justified and found not guilty. I'm just curious why people like box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide, but the judicial system handle citizen homicide. Shouldn't everybody be treated equally under the law?
Not for my benefit. I just stated an analogy. Two cops shoot a diabetic man in his home - no protests demanding cops get charged with a crime. Zimmerman shoots in self defense, police determine self defense, NOT GOOD ENOUGH. The president of the United States makes a public comment to force "justice" and a prosecutor charges him because the public outcry generated by Obama's public statements.
I am willing to accept a jury's verdict that the cops were justified and found not guilty. I'm just curious why people like box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide, but the judicial system handle citizen homicide. Shouldn't everybody be treated equally under the law?
Just a note to clarify cicero's errors: "box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide" Of course this is not my position. It's yet another Cicero Straw Man.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Just a note to clarify cicero's errors: "box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide" Of course this is not my position. It's yet another Cicero Straw Man.
What's the citizen review board for- cop assault or cop theft?
Do you think the cops should be held in jail until a hearing then a trial?
I'm just curious why people like box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide, but the judicial system handle citizen homicide.
Um... anyone see the straw man emerging from Cicero's post??? It's like he has nothing to post of any value, so he distorts others position as if the post were real.
What's the citizen review board for- cop assault or cop theft? Then he expands on his feeble straw man.
Here we go again. Cicero's newest ploy... he posts a straw man, then runs from it This is not worth my time.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box, might as well give up...Cissy cannot stay on point because then he has nothing to say...shown, proven. I repeat my validated opinion..... Cissy's Rules Cissy's game Cissy's world Distort, distract, twist, bend, confuse....avoid staying on point.
Of course, this only applies in cyberspace and not in a social setting!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Box, might as well give up...Cissy cannot stay on point because then he has nothing to say...shown, proven. I repeat my validated opinion..... Cissy's Rules Cissy's game Cissy's world Distort, distract, twist, bend, confuse....avoid staying on point.
Of course, this only applies in cyberspace and not in a social setting!
If you've ever followed the cartoon strip Calvin & Hobbes, you know of "CALVIN BALL". A game played by Calvin and his pet tiger.
Calvinball is a game invented by Calvin in which one makes the rules up as one goes along. There is only one permanent rule in Calvinball: One can't play it in the same way twice
It appears that Cissy has adopted CalvinBall rules for his discussions. The score is JoeBoxer G, Cicero 9!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Um... anyone see the straw man emerging from Cicero's post??? It's like he has nothing to post of any value, so he distorts others position as if the post were real.
Here we go again. Cicero's newest ploy... he posts a straw man, then runs from it
You are really stretching the definition of straw man. YOU, clarified that you supported citizen review boards. Now you are saying I can't question you position on them. When box does want to defend his position, he throws the straw man. Funny...
You are really stretching the definition of straw man. YOU, clarified that you supported citizen review boards. Now you are saying I can't question you position on them. When box does want to defend his position, he throws the straw man. Funny...
I would be glad to discuss a citizens review board with you Henry. However don't be confused by Cissy's words that he attributes to me. Such as his strawman:
Quoted Text
I'm just curious why people like box wants a citizen review board handle cop homicide, but the judicial system handle citizen homicide.
So far my posts on the issue have been:
Quoted Text
I would assume (but I don't know for sure) that the local citizen review board, which would have no power other than to review and report violations, would come under local govt... City, town or county. Ultimately, the prosecution of the police would fall under the State Attorney General's office. And in the case of a state wide conspiracy, under the federal dept of justice.
Quoted Text
Given their training and position, I would hold the police to a higher level of responsibility than the average citizen. I am a firm believer of 'citizens review boards' to oversee any charge of police corruption or police brutality. I would like to see any accusation of abuse of power to be investigated by an 'outside' agency... providing local, state or federal oversight.
Quoted Text
As stated above, I want YOUR SPECIAL cops to have SPECIAL additional oversight. Because we entrust the police with power, we need to oversee that power to prevent abuse and corruption. I want prosecutors PLUS a citizens review board. One doesn't replace the other.
Quoted Text
If you feel that the review board is not doing it's job, then you should do something about it. Get elected yourself and work to make the system better. If you feel the review board is corrupt, then report your evidence to the state attorney general.
So Henry... where do we differ?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
Cicero's newest ploy... he posts a straw man, then runs from it 
