Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DariusBane

See item #22, defendant Rodriquez told him he was free to go before defendant Rodriquez was offend by him asking if he was indeed free to go when defendant Rodriquez continued to question him after releasing him.

(I was mistaken earlier I thought the other cop let him go)


70 posted on 11/05/2013 3:56:06 PM PST by null and void (I'm betting on an Obama Trifecta: A Nobel Peace Prize, an Impeachment, AND a War Crimes Trial...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: null and void

It also says the complainant at some point stopped answering them. Nothing will piss off a narcissist on a power trip quite like exercising first and fourth amendments simultaneously.

Another factor, these cops are paid hourly. I wonder how much OT these idiots accrued driving all over New Mexico with the perp in back?

Last factor. Police chief in his statement defended the officers actions (probably on advice of city council). In doing so, regardless of the financial interests of the city and county he is abrogating his responsibility to his job, the law, and the Constitution. All the chief did was give the cops the Nuremberg defense probably again on advice of council.

I think the biggest danger is to imagine the incident to be isolated. My guess is this kind of thing happens all over the country, but usually to the very poor who can’t afford to do anything about it.


75 posted on 11/05/2013 4:06:48 PM PST by DariusBane (Liberty and Risk. Flip sides of the same coin. So how much risk will YOU accept?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson