[quote=Bent Wookie;880617]
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Ya. You'll notice I didn't give a 'praise the lord' at the end of quote did you. I was simply repeating what he wrote in his report- from a man, that sat through the entire trial- i am sure he has some insight. To question the report and his findings based on what you think of his intelligence is perhaps a little too judgemental.
If you believe that his rationale is flawed too, I guess there is no convincing you and you will continue to believe what you want. History is riddled with people who believe things despite evidence to the contrary.
|
This is the problem that you are overlooking and why the Varley family finally got it to go to the grand jury. The law involving cops is different from the law involving the average citizen, cops tend to know judges and have a good relationship with them.
I am pretty sure that Darrens family sat through the entire trial 3 times only to realise that the system that they were dealing with was flawed. Then it goes before a different system where the cop in question is not know and tada.....he's found guilty, that's interesting.
Again, what exactly is the evidence? When i worked with Darren over the course of 12-16 months, he wasn't much of a drinker and i never seen him be agressive, i tend to beleive that the cop was/is power hungry.
This leads me to a question that i have asked you several times without an answer, why would a cop put himself in a situation which he feels could be harmful to the man in jail. The man is already in a cell, he was drunk and asleep, why does the cop need to do anything? Now lets say that Darren reached for his arm through the bars on the cell, is this cop to weak to remove the arm or hit him? Does he need to shoot him in the head? If i walk downtown and brush up against a cop does that give him the right to shoot me twice? That is exactly what this sets us up in the future for.