patrick.net

Strategist says

Is this the best you can do Dan?

It was a slow day on youtube...

indigenous says

Strategist says

Is this the best you can do Dan?

It was a slow day on youtube...

After all his claims about how criminal all the cops are, he finds an example of a cop who became horny long ago. Meanwhile we have rapes, murder, assault and crime after crime every second of the day.
Damn cops.

Where is the rape in this? she willingly sleeps with a married man and makes the same accusations twice. How is this rape?? Why should the officer be fired?

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

Call it Crazy says

lostand confused says

Where is the rape in this? she willingly sleeps with a married man and makes the same accusations twice. How is this rape?? Why should the officer be fired?

In Dan's twisted mind, the cop is guilty.. In the real world, she carries the responsibility.

I give Dan credit for his hard work exposing crimes of evil cops. Sadly he exposed nothing.
Hey Dan, you couldn't expose anything even if you stripped.

thunderlips11 says

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

Reminds me of Clinton.
Who cares who sleeps with who.

Strategist says

thunderlips11 says

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

Reminds me of Clinton.

Who cares who sleeps with who.

Just saying that the cop isn't a Pure Saint in this case - he made some ill decisions.

thunderlips11 says

Just saying that the cop isn't a Pure Saint in this case

There are no crimes committed where either is completly innocent.

Isn't that what they're supposed to do?

thunderlips11 says

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

That is morality issue -not rape. Whores like these ought to be charged -there have to be consequences for these kind of fake accusations.

If she's interacting with a cop, she's a criminal, and I don't care about criminals.

indigenous says

thunderlips11 says

Just saying that the cop isn't a Pure Saint in this case

There are no crimes committed where either is completly innocent.

Call it Crazy says

Does that make him guilty of rape?

Didn't suggest that. Just said he made some ill decisions.

I'm not one of those "always believe the rape victim. Convict and lock away for decades based on one person's assertion, even when it's far from beyond a reasonable doubt" rad fem / social justice warrior "allies'.

Just pointing out that a married man who works for the Sex Crimes division ought to exercise better judgement than to invite an alleged victim out for drinks and to a hotel room.

I find this cop guilty!.... Of having too few vowels in his name! Dang east Europeans .....

Call it Crazy says

Dan has gone off the rails... again...

I strongly disagree, you are implying that Dan was ever on the rails.

sbh says

Guys, guys, you're missing the point here. Identify what God's plan is in this event and go with it. This "he said/she said" stuff just muddies the waters of divine grace. Keep your eyes on the prize, now, everything else is just vanity.

God says these two should be stoned to death.

Anyone who thinks this cop behaved ethically is morally bankrupt.

There you go conflating again, ethics and morals are not the same thing.

indigenous says

There you go conflating again, ethics and morals are not the same thing.

No, but there is a lot of overlap. And I wasn't implying that anyway.

Implying and conflating are not the same thing either.

thunderlips11 says

Strategist says

thunderlips11 says

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

Reminds me of Clinton.

Who cares who sleeps with who.

Just saying that the cop isn't a Pure Saint in this case - he made some ill decisions.

That he did. He could jeopardize some legal issues while trying to prosecute the rapist,

Strategist says

thunderlips11 says

Strategist says

thunderlips11 says

And a married "Sex Crimes" (Special Victims) detective who invites a woman who is not his wife back to a hotel room is totally acting appropriately to both his marital and professional duties.

Reminds me of Clinton.

Who cares who sleeps with who.

Just saying that the cop isn't a Pure Saint in this case - he made some ill decisions.

That he did. He could jeopardize some legal issues while trying to prosecute the rapist,

Yup. Prosecutor and Police Chief are NOT going to be happy with him.

The Thug Union will fight hard on his behalf, though.

Dan8267 says

Anyone who thinks this cop behaved ethically is morally bankrupt.

You just described the whole damn country.

indigenous says

Implying and conflating are not the same thing either.

And neither applies to what I said.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Anyone who thinks this cop behaved ethically is morally bankrupt.

You just described the whole damn country.

Hardly

And coming from the guy who defended the cop who deliberately shot an unarmed, sleeping 9-year-old girl in the head, that really isn't convincing.

I know you can't read for jack-diddly-shit, CIC, so I'll dumb it down for you. The title of the original post is Cop gropes rape victim, not Cop rapes rape victim. The title is an accurate reflection of the article.

So your statement "you felt strongly enough that this woman was raped (by the cop)" is simply wrong as everything you always say.

The original post was always about ethics and abuse of power and trust. No Straw Man argument you make can change that.

Now, if you want articles about cops raping women, there are a multitude of them. Should I post some?

Dan8267 says

And coming from the guy who defended the cop who deliberately shot an unarmed, sleeping 9-year-old girl in the head, that really isn't convincing.

Can someone please tell me why a cop would deliberately shoot a sleeping 9 year old in the head? I can't think of any reason.

Call it Crazy says

Dan8267 says

The title of the original post is Cop gropes rape victim, not Cop rapes rape victim. The title is an accurate reflection of the article.

I'll dumb it down even more for you... She WASN'T a rape victim because she consented to having sex with him....

Plus, here's another piece to the article:

...."The two continued to talk on the phone after he left Seattle, until Skorzewski ended things,"

If she was raped, as you stated in the title of the thread, would she still CONTINUE to talk to the cop??

Dan8267 says

The original post was always about ethics and abuse of power and trust.

Really?? Go back and read the title YOU wrote in this thread!

Sorry Dan.... FAIL!!!!

I think you misread the order of events. From the story:

1. Girl alleges rape by someone.
2. Cop is assigned to investigate claim.
3. While investigating, cop goes drinking with girl.
4. Cop gropes girl
5. Cop (presumably) bangs girl & they call each other for a bit afterward.
6. Girl tells Press that #4 happened.
7. Press writes story of cop groping a girl whose rape claim he was investigating
8. Dan posts story here.

Strategist says

Can someone please tell me why a cop would deliberately shoot a sleeping 9 year old in the head?

Because it's not his kid and therefore to him her life isn't as important.

That cop deliberately discharged his firearm while pointing it at a the head of a human being who was not a threat to him. Whether or not he realized it was a child does not change that fact. It would not have been the right thing to do even if the person was over 18 or awake.

The bottom line is that anyone who deliberately discharges a firearm is 100% responsible for all consequences of that firearm being discharged.

Furthermore, the cop who shot the sleeping 9-year-old then committed perjury by falsely accusing the innocent grandmother of the victim of attacking him and grabbing his gun. These statements were proven to be false. Covering up the wrongful killing of the girl and making false testimony framing an innocent for a crime is itself several felonies.

Call it Crazy says

I'll dumb it down even more for you... She WASN'T a rape victim because she consented to having sex with him....

Like I said, I didn't accuse the cop of rape and your making a Straw Man argument.

Dan8267 says

Now, if you want articles about cops raping women, there are a multitude of them. Should I post some?

Ah, your strangely silent on this though... If you want to change this conversation into one about cops raping people, I've got plenty of news reports on that. You want to go there?

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

Can someone please tell me why a cop would deliberately shoot a sleeping 9 year old in the head?

Because it's not his kid and therefore to him her life isn't as important.

This is the most pathetic excuse for a motive I have ever heard in my whole life.
Shame on you.

Who said anything about a motive? You asked why. I gave you the correct reason. Human life means little to people like criminal cops and you because those people think that there are subhuman bad guys who lives don't matter. You expressed that opinion many times on this site yourself.

When a person doesn't value the life of "the enemy" that person is likely to shoot first, identify who's an actual combatant later. It's true in war, and it's true when cops act like soldiers in a war where the public is the enemy.

As for whether the cop who shot the girl is a criminal and a scumbag, well that was proved when he tried to frame an innocent grandmother and send her ass to the slammer for the rest of her life. Even ignore the slaying of the unarmed, sleeping, little girl, the cop committed several crimes by trying to frame the grandmother. End of story.

Dan, why do you want to live in a complex world of competing ideas, emotions, attitudes, and desires, when you can live in 'Merikin vs. The Other world?

Don't you realize whole classes of people are evil, and that we, as the good people, are only standing up for our exceptional 'Merikin Values?

Just like that all-'Merikin Sniper who bragged he loved to kill people and didn't give a shit about Iraqis.

Dan8267 says

Who said anything about a motive? You asked why. I gave you the correct reason. Human life means little to people like criminal cops

You make me sick. How can you even come up with such a conclusion?

Dan8267 says

Human life means little to people like criminal cops and you because those people think that there are subhuman bad guys who lives don't matter. You expressed that opinion many times on this site yourself.

I proudly expressed that opinion, and continue to do so. Terrorists ARE subhuman and killing them saves innocent lives. I would love to be the one that gets to shoot these scum. :)

Strategist says

You make me sick. How can you even come up with such a conclusion?

Well, the fact that the police have tortured people they think deserve it. The fact that police have hunted down and killed "cop killers" when they could have taken the perpetrator alive. The fact that police let a bank robber bleed to death when he could have easily been taken to a hospital and lived to stand trial.

And then there is everything you've said including

Strategist says

I proudly expressed that opinion, and continue to do so. Terrorists ARE subhuman and killing them saves innocent lives. I would love to be the one that gets to shoot these scum. :)

A perfect example of (reference)

Human life means little to people like criminal cops and you because those people think that there are subhuman bad guys who lives don't matter.

Sometimes when asshole like you go in guns blazing, whether as cops, soldiers, or vigilantes, you end up shooting 9-year-old girls and other innocent bystanders. But, of course, there is always a rationalization to absolve you of the guilt.

thunderlips11 says

Just like that all-'Merikin Sniper who bragged he loved to kill people and didn't give a shit about Iraqis.

I saw that movie on IMAX, and absolutely loved it. He shot those who were about to kill Americans. Isn't that what happens in war?
Hey, why can't they make little sniper drones the size of pigeons, with HD cameras that can fire a single shot and kill terrorists?

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

I proudly expressed that opinion, and continue to do so. Terrorists ARE subhuman and killing them saves innocent lives. I would love to be the one that gets to shoot these scum. :)

A perfect example of (reference)

Human life means little to people like criminal cops and you because those people think that there are subhuman bad guys who lives don't matter.

The difference between you and me is......you think cops are evil, while I think terrorists are evil. Keep in mind, if there were no cops our society would collapse. If there were no terrorists, our society would thrive.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/17/1358311/-A-Uniformed-Police-Officer-Entered-My-Home-Without-Knocking-And-You-Won-t-Believe-His-Justification

Sometimes police just does anything they feel like, including entering a house without knocking.

This is a damning conclusion.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

The difference between you and me is......you think cops are evil, while I think terrorists are evil. Keep in mind, if there were no cops our society would collapse. If there were no terrorists, our society would thrive.

FortWayne says

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/17/1358311/-A-Uniformed-Police-Officer-Entered-My-Home-Without-Knocking-And-You-Won-t-Believe-His-Justification

Sometimes police just does anything they feel like, including entering a house without knocking.

Thanks Fort Wayne.

Can't have any Molly Maguires running around these here parts. Problem is, them local police is sympathetic.

Strategist says

you think cops are evil, while I think terrorists are evil.

Correction. I think criminal cops do evil things and should be accountable to the law like any other person.

The word "terrorist" is simply a marketing term. One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter and vice-versa. For example, according to the USA Patriot Act, every single one of our founding fathers was a terrorist because they engaged in an illegal, armed revolt against the rightful government.

Now, of course, you're going to try to twist my words into a Straw Man argument like "Dan says the Muslims who were behind 9/11 aren't terrorists". Please do so, so I can shred your ass for making that stupid Straw Man.

The point is that simply labeling someone a terrorist is an excuse to people like you to treat them as subhuman rather than upholding the law and bringing them before open, honest court. I could just as easily label criminal cops as terrorists, but I'm not calling for them to be executed without trial. I'm explicitly calling for trials. So which one of us is really the lawful one?

Strategist says

Keep in mind, if there were no cops our society would collapse.

A stupid false dichotomy. Are you saying that 100% of cops are criminals. Even I don't go that far.

Getting rid of the criminal cops and holding police accountable to the law like everyone else would benefit society, not cause its collapse.

SoftShell says

This is a damning conclusion.

But that doesn't make it true. Sure, you want people to believe it. It gives you a conservative boner to think that people might actually believe such a lie about liberals. When you're done cumming, try to understand what your opponent's actual position is.