Former Atl. Cop Indicted For Murder

[The Sage version 2]

Atticus Finch wrote:

<quoted text>
Let me ask again, has anybody been charged for the check forgery yet?

Listen asshat, I asked YOU numerous times what SPECIFICALLY lead you to accuse this young man of being mentally retarded?? Where do YOU get off making such an accusation?? So before you get all indignant because I didn't answer your question (wait, yes I did!!) why don't YOU answer MY question??

And while you're at it, answer my question about providing links to public information!!:-) Or maybe you should just find another forum to annoy and harass.:-)

[Atticus Finch]

Why would I come to suspect that an individual (any individual) is retarded or autistic? The same reasons that you would come to the same conclusion (assuming that you can detect such a thing), The Sage. It is something you just know based on lots of little clues that are difficult to put into words. Sort of like how you might suspect that somebody is nervous or gay or high or whatever. I didn't answer your question because this answer is obvious and you should know what I just said without me having to tell you.

What is not obvious is the answer to my question:

have they brought any charges for check forgery based on that check forgery SWAT raid yet?

I am not telling, I am asking. Have they? Do you know? That kid they interviewed said that somebody in the house was guilty? Did he turn out to be right or was he confused somehow?

[Ocean56]

The Sage version 2 wrote:

<quoted text>
Please show me where I said cops are always right and are above reproach? Right is right and wrong is wrong. But it seems when cops are accused of anything, they are guilty, period.

Your ceaseless tirades against AtticusFinch gave me that impression, if you must know. I didn't get the impression from reading his posts that he was "bashing ALL cops" or that he "hates cops," yet you keep making that accusation when it doesn't appear to be the case.

Any citizen has the right to question and even disagree with police officers when their conduct comes into question. That is NOT automatically judging them as "guilty," it is merely questioning. I find it rather ironic that since a police officer in this case has been charged with a crime that he wants the benefit of the presumption of innocence, but when anyone ELSE is accused of a crime, the police officer or detective tends to judge that accused person as "guilty" simply because he/she has had an accusation made against him/her.

Whether Officer Bunn is actually guilty or not is a matter for a jury to decide, if the case goes to trial. If he is found not guilty, great. And in future, I hope he would be a lot more careful before deciding a person is "guilty" only because he has been ACCUSED of something. Accusation is NOT proof, a fact that too many law enforcement officials definitely have forgotten.

[The Sage version 2]

Atticus Finch wrote:

Why would I come to suspect that an individual (any individual) is retarded or autistic? The same reasons that you would come to the same conclusion (assuming that you can detect such a thing), The Sage. It is something you just know based on lots of little clues that are difficult to put into words. Sort of like how you might suspect that somebody is nervous or gay or high or whatever. I didn't answer your question because this answer is obvious and you should know what I just said without me having to tell you.
What is not obvious is the answer to my question:
have they brought any charges for check forgery based on that check forgery SWAT raid yet?
I am not telling, I am asking. Have they? Do you know? That kid they interviewed said that somebody in the house was guilty? Did he turn out to be right or was he confused somehow?

You're still not answering the question. You danced around it. Show me where in that interview that young man says or does something that indicates he is autistic! For a "lawyer" you sure are bad at addressing the issue at hand.

[The Sage version 2]

Ocean56 wrote:

<quoted text>
Your ceaseless tirades against AtticusFinch gave me that impression, if you must know. I didn't get the impression from reading his posts that he was "bashing ALL cops" or that he "hates cops," yet you keep making that accusation when it doesn't appear to be the case.
Any citizen has the right to question and even disagree with police officers when their conduct comes into question. That is NOT automatically judging them as "guilty," it is merely questioning. I find it rather ironic that since a police officer in this case has been charged with a crime that he wants the benefit of the presumption of innocence, but when anyone ELSE is accused of a crime, the police officer or detective tends to judge that accused person as "guilty" simply because he/she has had an accusation made against him/her.
Whether Officer Bunn is actually guilty or not is a matter for a jury to decide, if the case goes to trial. If he is found not guilty, great. And in future, I hope he would be a lot more careful before deciding a person is "guilty" only because he has been ACCUSED of something. Accusation is NOT proof, a fact that too many law enforcement officials definitely have forgotten.

You lack information, that is why you don't think Finch bashes all cops. Go back through this forum's history and you will see that is the case. If you're really good, you can find other forums where Finch does the same thing. If you're really really good, you can find Finchy in other forums bashing cops using several different names.:-) Finchy is obsessed. And it is ALL cops. He has never said anything positive about any cops. He even went so far in THIS forum as to accuse an injured officer of lying in his police report. See, the officer said he was run over by a perp trying to flee. Finchy said the officer was lying. Even when shown DASH CAM VIDEO that shows the rear end of the car bouncing almost 2 feet in the air after it runs over the officer, Finchy still denies it happened. THAT is f-ing pathetic. FInchy can't even admit a mistake when it is clear as crystal on the video!! That is why I take Finchy to task.

[The Sage version 2]

Oh, and Finchy you never answer my question about providing links to public information?? Any rules here on Topix against it or case law you want to misquote!?

Public information...what a wonderful thing!

[Atticus Finch]

I don't think TOPIX likes it when you try to figure out (correctly or incorrectly) someone's real world identity, or to try to hunt them down in the real world. Is that what you are threatening to try to do here? It kind of sounds like it is. A yes or no answer will do.

[The Sage version 2]

Atticus Finch wrote:

I don't think TOPIX likes it when you try to figure out (correctly or incorrectly) someone's real world identity, or to try to hunt them down in the real world. Is that what you are threatening to try to do here? It kind of sounds like it is. A yes or no answer will do.

There you go lying again. No one has threatened to hunt anyone down. Not me. Not anyone else. Why should I answer your questions when you don't answer mine? Fine, I'll be the better person here, as usual. NO! Not threatening to hunt you down! Wuss.

Posting links to public information isn't "hunting someone down." Public info is just that: information freely available to anyone any where for any reason.

[The Sage version 2]

Yeah, I looked into it. There are no rules or laws against using google or linking to google results.:-)

www.google.com

:-)