Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is just fro what she claimed in her filing. Noctice the blog name. If it were a report her proable cause affidavit by the poice is a public record and could have been included.Like this is from a reprt feed to media by the lawyer representing her. that is common as they feed reporters stories often.Same as any sources that they do this and then expect them to return the favor.
Did anyone click through to any of the links about updates to this case?
I did.
The City Attorney's mother became terminally ill, so he asked for a 2 week extension to file his answer and it was granted. One week later his mother died. A week after that a nephew died suddenly. He never handed the case over to a deputy and he never filed his answer.
The woman has filed a motion for a default judgment. The court then gave the City 10 days to respond as to why a default judgment shouldn't be entered. They responded with the City Attorney's sob story, and included the Answer to the underlying complaint. If their motion to set aside the default judgment isn't allowed, then their Answer to the complaint is irrelevant and the woman will walk away with $70 million.
Watch this video of a recent city council meeting. One councilman in particular, James Malone, is absolutely furious (I don't blame him!). And the City's Supervisor is a smart*** b!
Personally, I find most of the woman's alleged story to be so outrageous that it is truly not believable. I'm sure there are pieces that are partially true. But there was never a hearing, never a trial. She was never cross-examined and the City never had an opportunity to put on a defense to rebut her version of events. And because one guy was derelict in his duties, she's probably going to walk away a multimillionaire.
Well she technically hasn't won yet. She entered a request for a default judgment, which the judge gave the city an opportunity to respond to. The judge is now considering the city's motion not to enter said judgment. If the motion fails, she wins. If he grants the city's motion not to enter the default judgment, then I guess he'll consider their answer on the original filing. I'm betting that the "my dog ate my homework and my grandmother died" excuse isn't going to cut it with this judge.
Well she technically hasn't won yet. She entered a request for a default judgment, which the judge gave the city an opportunity to respond to. The judge is now considering the city's motion not to enter said judgment. If the motion fails, she wins. If he grants the city's motion not to enter the default judgment, then I guess he'll consider their answer on the original filing. I'm betting that the "my dog ate my homework and my grandmother died" excuse isn't going to cut it with this judge.
I'm very sorry for this man and his losses. But if you are a public official and you have familiy problems or tragedies, you bow out and default the job to someone else. You don't say sorry but I was occupied. City offices do not operate with only one employee per task or they are very badly run.
Given that the accusations are certainly in terms of blatent abuse and endangering the woman, and the feds didn't do anything, I suspect there was a problem coming up with a response. The failure of proper medical treatment and lack of seatbelt are certainly abuse and certainly something she can sue about. Also the missing money is somethng which they need to answer for. It was under their watch it was taken and they are responsible for the theft of her property.
while the cops might have gone a little far..remember.......
She had been told previously to not take pictures of the base: fact
She had an Assault Rifle and a Shotgun with 500 rounds of ammo: fact
She had $13,000 cash in her car: fact
(a deposit in a bank of more than $10,000 requires a CTR form which is filed with the IRS because that much cash is suspicious)
Think about it 1) she was taking photos in a NO photo Area 2) she had assault rifles and ammunition in her car and 3) she claims $13,000 in cash. If in fact they hadn't detained her and later placed her under arrest and she started shooting at the base and killing people after ALL the terrorist attempted attacks people whould be saying " the police didn't do their job. They let a terrorist go free". So with how the world is today it's better to be safe than sorry.
She was repeatedly warned NOT to engage in the behavior which got her arrested, questioned base personnel about matters of national security, and made herself known to not only base personnel as a potential threat, but to local law enforcement as well.
She was held for those five days, because of her "performance" at her araignment, and the judge ordered her held for "psychiatric observation".
The article fails to mention how she has been a 'visitor' to the base multiple times previous to this one and that is why she was detained. My personal favorite of the article is the line about the cameras on the car pointed towards her. I guess while at the range she's never heard of the license plate reader cars the SCPD and the SCSO use.
Is it a question of national security?
It was news to me, but military bases and nuclear facilities can restrict photographs – even from the outside area. Even if you’re not trespassing onto government land, taking pictures of these installations could be illegal.
Don’t even try. We’re not talking misdemeanor illegal. You might be shipped off and never seen again. Yep, crazy illegal!
First, there are two things here, who lied and her treatment. I suspect the lawsuit would never have been filed if she was lying. And it was only claimed by the police she had been warned repeatedly, with nothing to back it up after the fact. I do not call this a fact, but an attempted justification.
She was LEGALLY carrying an unloaded rifle. She did not carry it into the airport and it wasn't loaded. How many others who drive by that have guns on them or in their vehicles? Its a public road. It wasn't until after they pictures and this "interrogation" (false imprisonment?) by the road they found it by illegally searching her car. More attempted justification.
She had cash. Ok, a large amount but it is NOT illegal to have. And as she was forced to leave it in the car someone stole a part of it. The only ones who knew it was there were the cops so go figure. What better reason to invent other reasons why she was treated this way.
She took pictures of a shell of a helicopter put there for people to look at. It says photo op. It has areas to pull off. There seems to be serious doubt about it being a base...it seems to be a municipal airport. She wasn't on the property of said airport. Like I said, if they don't want pictures get rid of the display. I'm sure she is far from the only one with a picture or two.
As for the cops going a little far, they went way far into lawsuit territory. Keeping her by her car for that many hours? With an injury? Not reading her rights. Not stopping when she ask for a lawyer. Refusing medical attention and when given not looking away and not giving her the medicine allowing her to develop the staff infection. No seatbelt which is a FEDERAL law. The questionable stuff with the lawyer. The fact that the FBI wasn't interested but the cops had to justify it with something. Just everything about this is wrong. These cops deserve to be fired and her settlement come from whatever they are to get from leaving.
And that money... someone needs to explain where it went. Where was the purse and the money and the car. If it was in police custody at all times then the police have thieves working there and she can sue them for that.
When do we quit using the old excuse that it makes us safe when the police are acting like thugs? Safe from whom?
Couple of years ago I took a tour of the Boneyard, where they take the planes to be retired and stored. You had to show ID for the tour and were on a bus but they let you take ALL the pictures you wanted. US military base. It was fascinating I reccomend it. Just remember to bring your camera and enough batteries.
I'm sure its *justified* by the paranoia of the patriot act, but then so many other things which are out of control are also justified as we slip every so clearly into a police state.
Nothing in the Patriot Act justifies the abuse this woman was subjected to.
But then again, Daily Kos says she's a terrorist, so that's good enough for me.
Nothing in the Patriot Act justifies the abuse this woman was subjected to.
But then again, Daily Kos says she's a terrorist, so that's good enough for me.
Now all we need is for the paranoia to be justified and we're all peacy keen again I guess. I am SO tired of hearing how this or that is justified to "make us safe" but would like to know from whom.
You wanted the DHS and TSA and more and more tightening up of security.
That's what you wanted. Well now you have it with zero tolerance mob rule by our own government.
We didn't "want" any of this. We had to do it to keep everyone else safe. If we didn't, we would be having repeats of 9/11.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am SO tired of hearing how this or that is justified to "make us safe" but would like to know from whom.
