Posted on 06/09/2015 4:14:16 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
This isn’t a laughing out loud situation. No FReeper should be cheering mob rule. I’ve read very reasoned comments showing both sides, but this officer deserves his due process rights. We’re not a mobocracy, but a republic.
What should have happened is a formal investigation should have been opened, an investigation conducted and then action taken. His resignation is a political act.
I am always skeptical of these reports, particularly when the Race-Baiting Grievance Club is involved. This whole White cops v. black ‘unarmed’ person meme is a Dem psyop to create chaos and retain blacks in their camp for the next election. It’s disgusting and you won’t find me laughing or cheering.
Order in all things. For a quick review of what America is and isn’t see this excellent video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI
As Christians we should be especially sensitive to mobocracy. It was a mob that ‘voted’ to kill Jesus. That’s not our system. That’s not order. We don’t know why he quit and your surmise is just that. There are a lot of lies out there. Don’t be so gleeful.
You’re Monday morning quarterbacking and cheering rule by mob. That’s not conservative.
I heard that and it’s a cancer that’s spreading.
Don’t be a dishonest, lying troll by making up total nonsense, “”No FReeper should be cheering mob rule. I’ve read very reasoned comments showing both sides, but this officer deserves his due process rights. We’re not a mobocracy, but a republic.””
You are doing what a lot of people do, refusing to see one thing as it is, because you are afraid that by admitting it, you dilute or disagree with some bigger argument that you are trying to make.
Regardless of the bigger points you want to sell about the nation etc. that single cop was caught out on film and instantly quit, with no union push back and his own lawyer repeatedly mentioning his out of control emotions that day.
As the chief said “Eleven of them performed according to their training,” Conley said. Casebolt did not, he said.
“He came into the call out of control and the video showed he was out of control during the incident,” Conley said.
As Christians we shouldn’t lie and try to make up totally fictitious arguments and positions for people posting about something else entirely, so quit doing it.
“”You’re Monday morning quarterbacking and cheering rule by mob. “”
That isn’t what he posted at all, quit lying, not only are you lying, but as is so typical of phonies, you even are claiming to be Christian while doing it, just to add that extra little zing to your con.
You, Conley and others are simply expressing an opinion and reveling in the political decision pushed by mob rule. Because you agree with it. Where’s the due process?
You’ll miss it when the mob comes for you. Christians shouldn’t defend chaos. God’s house is a house of order. Our country is founded on those principles and they should be followed. Letting this happen does what for the republic? Rewards the mob and racists who will use it to continue to harm our country. Think strategically.
You’d do well to watch the video, rather than defending the indefensible: mob rule.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygEEL57AcZs
My dear mind-reading FRiend,
I do not and will not support mob rule. Are you aware that chiefs of police just like the Joint Chiefs are political appointees? In Chicago, our chief will say whatever the mayor tells him to. He supports his mayor, because he’s the mayor’s appointee.
Don’t you see that this is the same thing? It’s just like the Ferguson indictments, etc. It’s a political game in which blind justice is the victim. We’re a republic and the mob shouldn’t get its way.
That just sets up a mob veto. You happen to agree with this decision, but what about the next time?
I’m not zinging anyone. I love and follow the Lord Jesus Christ and work to keep his commandments as he requested. You might not like it, but that doesn’t make you right.
Capisce?
Why don’t you wait until there is a thread supporting mob rule, or some posters supporting it, before you start doing that lying that you do, and pretending that someone is?
Man up, be a Christian, quit just making up things and lying.
For instance pretending that my laughing at your lying about the “shooting stance” was laughing at the entire pool incident, seriously, quit lying and mixing in “he Lord Jesus Christ and work to keep his commandments” while you do it.
It is disgusting behavior.
My shooting stance comment is an attempt to clarify that, despite what a video may show, it’s not all the facts, nor all the law. Was the cop justified in his actions? Yours is just an opinion.
You really don’t know. You’re siding with the mob in this case. I am siding with justice, the American system of justice, that requires and expects due process for everyone. That includes heinous murderers and cops and ansell12, too.
You’ve gotten caught up in the media frenzy and taken a side. That happens to the best of us and isn’t a fault. Recognize it and pull back. This cop deserves his due process.
Not letting him have it is a political solution and that’s detrimental to our republic. Justice must be blind, meted out calmly and only after due process has been followed.
What you’re watching isn’t an incident in isolation, but a broader political tactic used by the Left to undermine republics and America has a big target on her back. Look to any tyranny and you’ll see it preceded by mob rule, rioting, and calls for immediate justice outside of any due process.
The result of a due process hearing could be the same as what has occurred, but the how matters in a republic. You’re simply arming the Left in its war against America and it’s disturbing that conservatives cannot see that.
What Would Jesus Do is a reasonable approach to these kinds of things. The only time he used violence was when he cleared His Father’s House aka the temple and he did it twice. Otherwise, he used time and wisdom aka the American justice system. We should too.
Nor is condoning abuse of power, by police or anyone else.
I don’t and I have acted against police abuse of power. Get rid of them, but that’s a process, no?
So the result of this is one potentially bad cop is gone, but how did he get hired in the first place? What new procedures are in place to prevent this? It’s very common that bad cops just get let go and end up on other forces. I know of a corrupt cop who left here and is now on the Las Vegas Department. That’s not good.
We need systems and procedures to deal with this. That only comes through careful deliberation, collection of facts, giving of evidence, deponing of witnesses, etc. Republics are supposed to be ponderous, cautious and careful because liberty is so fleeting.
Stepping back from this particular case and looking at say Zimmerman or Ferguson, was the mob correct in it’s original ‘verdict’?
The Left wants us to drop the pretensions and use their tactics. Once both sides have abandoned the rule of law and our republic who wins?
I apologize if I sounded accusatory to you, but I am very concerned at the large number of allegedly conservative FReepers who regularly call for mob justice when it suits them. I try to follow Edmund Burke’s approach to government.
You are completely dishonest, and you contradict the cop himself, who instantly resigned for his hysteria, just as you lied by trying to claim the nonsense about the “shooting stance”, and that everyone like Mark Furhman who sees the cops hysteria accurately, is according to you doing it because their motivation is “siding with the mob”, whatever that even means in the context of evaluation of that cop’s obvious hysteria and incompetence, as Furhman describes.
You have lost it to the point where you deny reality completely, and want to fight something that is already decided and proven, the cop resigned instantly, you are merely arguing, to argue.
The cop wasn’t denied any “due process” so quit lying, he resigned, HE RESIGNED INSTANTLY UPON HIM AND THE UNION SEEING THAT VIDEO, the union and he could not defend what was revealed in that video, he isn’t suited for street work, he is too emotional.
Jesus would want you to quit lying and making up fake posts and positions for freepers, because you can’t respond to what they actually post, and their actual positions.
Here’s the video of his attorney. Stop falling for the lie.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/casebolts-lawyer-cop-apologies-offended-pool-video-31672217
“He is apologizing that his conduct offended,” Dallas lawyer Jane Bishkin said.
Bishkin said Casebolt didn’t intend to harm anyone and only wanted to investigate a violent assault. She said the 7-minute viral video doesn’t capture the totality of the incident, and said Casebolt also detained a white girl, but it wasn’t seen on the video.
Casebolt, who resigned Tuesday, did not attend the news conference at the Dallas Fraternal Order of Police Lodge. Bishkin said Casebolt, who could still face criminal charges, will speak to the media sometime in the future, but has been receiving death threats and didn’t feel safe showing up in public Wednesday. She said he and his family have left their home and are in “an undisclosed location.”
Bishkin said Casebolt was “disgusted” to hear he had been called racist. She said he was not racially motivated in his actions.
She said Casebolt’s “lifelong dream” was to be a police officer, so he’s not sure what to do next. Casebolt quit with “a heavy heart,” but decided to resign for the good of the city and the department, Bishkin said.
McKinney Fraternal Order of Police President Dan Malenfant said Casebolt, who was his vice president, was a top-performing officer in the department. He said the incident did not reflect Casebolt’s abilities or personality as an officer.
Police Chief Greg Conley said Tuesday that Casebolt’s actions were against policy and the training officers receive.
It’s a political lynching and not a due process investigation as it should have been. The New Black Panther party is there calling for ‘reforms’. Put your thinking cap on. Take a breath and think about where this will lead.
LOL, she apologized for his emotionalism, and tried to explain why he was so emotional that day, she mentions his emotions, repeatedly, as she should, since that is what we all saw in the video, a cop who was emotionally out of control, and hysterical.
There was no media lynching, no denial of due process, he and the union and his lawyer watched the video, and he quit instantly.
Good luck with your effort to reassemble everything to try and create a new reality, where you fight an imaginary case, that moved on from you and was ended, within the first day or two.
Just like the Chief, Mark Furhman can’t understand the cops behavior.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_DSU8ZP_bA
No, his lawyer made a political speech intended to appease the mob while not incriminating her client. She states the obvious, gives an excuse meant to calm emotions. Keep in mind that the police chief is more a political officer/party apparatchik than cop. He too, wants to appease the mob and calm emotions.
Can you think of any other reasons he might have resigned other than seeing himself at fault and worthy of firing?
Are there any repercussions or hidden agendas served by his resignation?
Sure, they are all part of the conspiracy, the cop is, his union is, his lawyer, Mark Furhman, the Chief, they are all trying to spite you, and frustrate your fantasy of pretending that this is not a simple case and over, rather than a conspiracy and a fight that will last for months.
Neither do I and please point out where I implied I did.
Are you aware that chiefs of police just like the Joint Chiefs are political appointees?
Are you saying the police chief in McKenney was lying about 11 of his officers when he said they did their job properly> And lied about the one when he said that officer did not?
That just sets up a mob veto. You happen to agree with this decision, but what about the next time?
What you ignore is that the mob was disbursed. Peace was restored. Nobody got hurt. The eleven other officers did their job without killing anyone. Without body-slamming anyone. WIthout drawing their weapons. Is that the part that bothers you?
You are quite the wordsmith as you’ve hammered my posts into something they didn’t say. How about a second go at showing you how bad this outcome is?
One simple way to understand if a public policy is a good or bad one is if you’d like all cases, such as this, to be resolved in the same way. Take it from the specific to the general.
That is, should the public determine the outcomes of events like this or should the res publica, our law, lead the way. If you give it due consideration you’ll see that one leads to tyranny and the other protects against it.
Do we want rule by whim?
You’re mixing up mob rule. Right now you have trial by public opinion. That is judgment by the political, not the lawful. What that means is judgment by whim. It’s bad policy and always wrong.
Sometimes public opinion is dead on.
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.