Replies

“I assume in your little smartassed tirade against me,”

Surely you are up to the intellectual challenge. Or is everyone who questions your opinion, your ‘authority’, a little smartass? And do you TASER them or SHOOT them when they smart off?

” in your attempt to some how discredit me (which, by the way you didn’t)”

I wasn’t attempting to discredit you. I was debating the issue of legality and procedure as set forth by the UTAH PD.

I was merely trying to discredit your arguments. Not you.
Or did you take it personal? (like you accuse Officer Gardner of doing)

“you were attempting to actually ask me that question.”

Yes. But your answer is a little difficult to parse.
FOR EXAMPLE:
“if he had not filed a lawsuit he wouldn’t have won.”
DUH.

And then it gets contradictory:
“he DID file a lawsuit, and didn’t “win” anything “
“Sorry, but he won, because the cop was wrong.”

Then this:
“They ADMIT that the cop was wrong by settling out of court. “
Funny, that is not what the UTAH PD said.

Finally:
“The fact is, had this gone to trial there would have been a JURY which would have been specifically selected having NEVER SEEN the freakin’ video.”

And can you guarantee that they would have found for the plaintiff?

Surely you are up to the intellectual challenge. Or is everyone who questions your opinion, your ‘authority’, a little smartass? And do you TASER them or SHOOT them when they smart off?

The only person I've ever tasered was myself, as part of training I had to go through to be "qualified and authorized" to use such a device on someone else.

By the way I wasn't calling YOU a "little smartass", I was referring to your personal attack on me.

I wasn’t attempting to discredit you. I was debating the issue of legality and procedure as set forth by the UTAH PD.

I was merely trying to discredit your arguments. Not you. Or did you take it personal? (like you accuse Officer Gardner of doing)

No, I didn't take it personally when you said, "You have certainly impressed us all with your ability to provide intelligent rebuttal, and your inclusion of profanity (though well disguised) is so impressive.

Or when you said, "Also noted is the fact that (just like Mr. Massey, ordering the cop around) you speak for everyone, you are the authority, and anyone who disagrees with you should be banned from ever posting on FR."

Should I have? LOL.

As for the laws of Utah - refusing to sign a ticket is something they CAN arrest you for, if you refuse, only to post bond. They consider (as do most states, and LE regions) a signature to be promise to go to court. Utah considers that if you don't sign, you can go post a monetary bond. This is not something to taser people over. Sorry, in America, you're STILL innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law. A police officer with a badge, gun and taser unit is not a judge and jury and the state of Utah is run by Judge Dread.

As to my phrasing... you are the one who initially phrased the question and set the scenario, not me. I simply stated the obvious, no had he not filed a lawsuit, he'd have gotten nothing out of it, but a fine and of course a good tasering....

On the other hand he DID file a lawsuit. It was dismissed and settle out of court, so he "won" that aspect of the fight. Does he have the right to drive faster than the speed limit? No. Does he deserve being tasered because some officer is pissed off, had a long day, or simply felt he needed to punish the guy? Hell no. Should be pay the fine for speeding? Yep. Should the court have heard the case? Absolutely IF the lawyers believed the Cop was in the right. They didn't, they settled out of court.

“They ADMIT that the cop was wrong by settling out of court. “ Funny, that is not what the UTAH PD said.

Funny, I read what the LAWYERS for the cop said... and they said "it was close"... meaning, quite plainly they do not necessarily agree with the Cop's actions.
And can you guarantee that they would have found for the plaintiff?

No more than you can guarantee the jury would have found in favor of the cop... so oh well.