Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

West Point reinstates cadet in LaBelle altercation
HOUSTON CHRONICLE ^ | 8/19/11 | ALLAN TURNER

Posted on 08/20/2011 6:45:00 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara

A West Point cadet from Houston will return to class Monday after military academy officials rescinded a suspension that came after he was embroiled in a March altercation with singer Patti LaBelle's entourage at a local airport.

Word from the New York military academy came as dueling lawsuits - one filed by cadet Richard King, the other by LaBelle - await resolution in local courts.

King's attorney, John Raley, said Houston police recently apprised academy officials that the 23-year-old cadet had not been implicated in wrongdoing in the March 11 incident at George Bush Intercontinental Airport.

(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: king; labelle; racism; westpoint
Finally!
1 posted on 08/20/2011 6:45:05 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara
I have never liked Patti LaBelle and this incident did nothing to raise her image in my eyes.

This is good news indeed for Cadet King.
I hope he is fully vindicated in the court system too.

2 posted on 08/20/2011 6:48:24 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (Deploy. Dominate. Disappear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Good


3 posted on 08/20/2011 6:49:09 AM PDT by svcw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara
Cadet in LaBelle guard tussle back at West Point
4 posted on 08/20/2011 6:51:34 AM PDT by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
The earlier AP story didn't have the important information that the Houston Police have exonerated Cadet King of any wrongdoing, which should help his case against LaBelle tremendously.
5 posted on 08/20/2011 6:55:43 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

The bigger issue is political correctness. West Point was too quick to pass judgement in the first place without all the facts. LaBelle and her bodyguards will get off too.


6 posted on 08/20/2011 7:19:49 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara
King's attorney, John Raley, said Houston police recently apprised academy officials that the 23-year-old cadet had not been implicated in wrongdoing in the March 11 incident at George Bush Intercontinental Airport.

When your attorney says the police have not implicated you, that's not the same as the police saying they have exonerated you.

7 posted on 08/20/2011 7:41:38 AM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Good news for a change!


8 posted on 08/20/2011 7:45:22 AM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

Who is Patti LaBelle???


9 posted on 08/20/2011 7:53:51 AM PDT by jesseam (Been there, done that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: heartwood

When the cops are out to screw with you, this is the equivalent of a formal declaration of sainthood.

It means they can’t even dream up something to charge you with.


10 posted on 08/20/2011 7:55:31 AM PDT by Eldon Tyrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: heartwood

“When your attorney says the police have not implicated you, that’s not the same as the police saying they have exonerated you.”

Of course, you are technically correct, but don’t you agree that things are definitely looking up for Cadet King’s lawsuit against LaBelle and her goons?


11 posted on 08/20/2011 7:57:02 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Yes, FINALLY. It took West Point and HPD far too long to deal with this properly. Too bad the consequence of telling West Point to pack sand would be enlistment.

West Point should hand their collective heads in shame for having passed such a harsh and wrong judgement against the Cadet. I will never think of West Point the same again.

Whoever made the decision to expel him from the Academy needs to be disciplined accordingly.


12 posted on 08/20/2011 8:00:35 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara
“Who is Patti LaBelle???”

Presuming that you honestly don't know (and forgot the sarcasm tag), Patti LaBelle is a formerly fairly famous singer.

You can see the altercation at the airport here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfbQdxi43J4

West Point cadet King is in the yellow shirt and was assaulted by LaBelle’s goons for daring to get too close to her luggage at the airport as he was wandering around talking on his cell phone.

13 posted on 08/20/2011 8:02:34 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101
It certainly was a rush to judgment by West Point. Presumably, they made the decision before they saw the video. Even if King was falling down drunk, it's clear from the video that his attention was on his cell phone call, not on LaBelle.

The fact that the cops took LaBelle’s word for what happened and then posed for pictures with her made things even worse. At least the cops responsible have been disciplined. Apparently there are also some eye witnesses to the events that back up Cadet King's story. I imagine that the one on the other side of the phone call would also have something helpful to say.

14 posted on 08/20/2011 8:08:31 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Maybe Mr. Allen Turner, the reporter, could have done something novel and done some research on the meaning of “suspended separation”.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/l/aadischarge3.htm

I believe that the Cadet in question has been under suspended separation since the incident and not was under suspended separation before the incident. The lame brain reporter implies that the Cadet was under disciplinary action even before the event. I do not believe this was the case at all.


15 posted on 08/20/2011 8:24:36 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Yeah, the cops were “reassigned”. Guess they sent them directly to the donut shop instead of just having to stop by.

See my post 15. It looks like the press are still ignorant or still trying to smear Cadet King.


16 posted on 08/20/2011 8:32:14 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

“See my post 15. It looks like the press are still ignorant or still trying to smear Cadet King.”

Of course, don’t you know that all crackers (especially men) are racist and therefore guilty of whatever is charged??

I am soooo tired of the racist card.


17 posted on 08/20/2011 8:37:19 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

It appears that there should not have been any negative action taken by West Point. That they took such actions based upon a situation caused by LaBelle’s employees means that his damages against her will be amplified.

If you watch the video you can see that she had no regard for the young mans condition. She could have cared less about him. She would be well advised to drop her action against him and make him an offer he can’t refuse.

The interesting point is that without a doubt Patti LaBell has made the majority of her money off people that are white because the majority are white. She apparently has disdain for the hand that feeds her...


18 posted on 08/20/2011 8:48:23 AM PDT by isthisnickcool (Sharia? No thanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara
Two police officers - who later were reassigned - are seen on the tape posing for photographs with the singer after the incident.

This was what really struck me when I first saw the video. These cops were not impartial in this situation.

And the rush to judgment on the part of the media and West Point were very reminiscent of the Duke University incident.

19 posted on 08/20/2011 8:51:35 AM PDT by Rocky (REPEAL IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
“If you watch the video you can see that she had no regard for the young mans condition. She could have cared less about him. She would be well advised to drop her action against him and make him an offer he can’t refuse.”

But, but, but.... LaBelle played the race card, which automatically shields her from any liability, don’tcha know????

20 posted on 08/20/2011 9:00:12 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
When your attorney says the police have not implicated you, that's not the same as the police saying they have exonerated you.

Under our Constitution, every American is innocent until proven guilty.

I am currently not implicated in any of hundreds of crimes that have recently been committed in the towns and cities I live near. If my attorney were to be asked, he would say that the police have not found any evidence implicating me in any of them.

I guess someone who plays with words, like you, could say I'm a suspect in every one of those crimes, because although the police haven't found any evidence implicating me, they also haven't yet released a statement exonerating me.

21 posted on 08/20/2011 10:57:04 AM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jesseam

>Who is Patti LaBelle???

A person of no talent - That is unless you are into shrieking.


22 posted on 08/20/2011 11:51:11 AM PDT by Blackhawk45 (The 2nd Amendment - the only ccw you need!!.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
When your attorney says the police have not implicated you, that's not the same as the police saying they have exonerated you.

You're conflating the USA and the old Soviet Union.

23 posted on 08/20/2011 12:02:07 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Eh. I was accusing the lawyer of playing with words, not playing with them myself.

Now I don’t think the cadet was guilty of anything more than at most wandering around aimlessly while under the influence, when he wandered into what Ms. LaBelle’s people perceived as her space.

The police saying “We don’t have any evidence that he picked a fight,” is not the same as saying, “The evidence shows that Ms. LaBelle’s bodyguards made an unprovoked attack upon him.” Which is what exoneration would be, and should be followed by criminal charges against the bodyguards.

We’re not really talking about the criminal law standard of presumed innocence here. We’re talking about West Point judging what conduct is befitting an officer and a gentleman, and their standards are not nearly so protective of the accused as criminal law is.

And that said, I think anti-white pro-black PC racism and Ms LaBelle’s celebrity influenced West Point’s original decision and I am glad the cadet has been reinstated. I just do not care for attorneys’ weasel wording even though that is their job.


24 posted on 08/20/2011 12:07:44 PM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom; Aunt Polgara

Re my previous reply: “Exonerated” was Aunt Polgara’s term, which I felt went rather too far.

The attorney said “not implicated,” and I shouldn’t have accused him of weasel wording.

Please note, AP, I’m not saying you were weasel wording, just taking it a little far.

Polgara - is that from that foot-thick multi-volume fantasy by Eddings?


25 posted on 08/20/2011 12:15:00 PM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
heartwood,

Please note, AP, I’m not saying you were weasel wording, just taking it a little far.

No offense taken. You are technically correct, but in common usage, I do believe that, in this case, it probably amounts to about the same thing.

Polgara - is that from that foot-thick multi-volume fantasy by Eddings?

Yup.. I identify with Polgara and her traditional ways and how she doesn't take guff from anyone. :-) I even used to have a streak of gray hair just like she does; but now, it's all gray. :-)

If you Google Aunt Polgara, I'm actually the second entry behind the actual book on Eddings site.

26 posted on 08/20/2011 12:24:49 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
Here's the first book in the Belgariad series:


27 posted on 08/20/2011 12:27:39 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

My brother had all the books - I might have gotten through three of them, but I did remember Polgara’s white streak. And nothing else, but that there was a boy and a chess theme.


28 posted on 08/20/2011 12:38:24 PM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
Eh. I was accusing the lawyer of playing with words, not playing with them myself.

Here's your original comment, the one I responded to:

When your attorney says the police have not implicated you, that's not the same as the police saying they have exonerated you.

Now you're saying that this statement was meant as an accusation against the attorney who made the statement. What are you accusing him of? You're not making sense.

We’re talking about West Point judging what conduct is befitting an officer and a gentleman, and their standards are not nearly so protective of the accused as criminal law is.

I'm wasn't talking about that. I was talking about what looked to me to be a statement of fact, written by you, to the effect that stating that someone is not implicated of wrongdoing is not identical to stating that the person is exonerated of the accusation of wrongdoing.

You may have been talking about something else, and you have a perfect right to do so. But you don't have the right to tell me what I was talking about, which is what you did when you made your condescending statement about "what we're talking about." More word play on your part.

29 posted on 08/20/2011 1:22:45 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom; heartwood

Now, now, children. It’s not important enough to act like refugees from DU. :-)


30 posted on 08/20/2011 2:01:16 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Polgara

Yes, auntie.


31 posted on 08/20/2011 7:22:17 PM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: heartwood

Good. I thought I might have to slap the two of you upside the head. :-)


32 posted on 08/20/2011 8:35:14 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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