Police Chief: Flynn's DUI due to prescription drugs, not alcohol

[Randall Stone]

The nature of my work this week just so happens to permit me to jump in here in quick jaunts. Next week not so good. But July in the finance business is not exactly a barnstormer and real estate is very slow.

Consequently I have the final touches on a dev project this week...so I can step in here and there while I wait for the others to finish.

My religion might be that they can all be saved (from idiocy).

Actually I just couldn't stand to see bold faced lies on here. Besides, where it takes some 12 hours to think of a response, these take me but a few short seconds. And with an RSS feeder on my desktop, it all comes pretty quick. It's like answering my phone and placing a trade.

[Paradise resident]

Rin Tin Tin wrote:

<quoted text>
Read between the lines. The laws only apply to the average citizen. If your a judge, family member or some other person in the position of influence over the local yokels, then you get off, or actually you never have to face justice. It is a who's who justice system. They are highly paid to enforce the laws, but then operate in a dark dark way. While the good Christian people brag about who they know, the powers that be operate facist self-serving, anti-American political curtians closed to the public dirty deals, cover your butt system. The Chief is in charge of it, he knows what he is suppose to do, he knows how the system really works. Then they expect everyone else to respect the lawsw. Right! They work for the politicians, the afluent and the UNIONS.

So true. If you have money or "position" your pretty much exempt.

[Ditto]

Public Infindel number 1 wrote:

God do I hate people that defend DUIs.

It's really sick to see how many people on here think that what she did is okay. Thanks for summing it up nicely.

[Chef deano]

Here's some facts to consider.
The cop who "responded" to the 911 call about a impaired person in the parking lot who jumped the curb, ran over some landscaping and struck the building, something like that.
They probably did a field sobriety test,she failed, and was jailed.
Are you following me?
There was a point when she had to make a decision, should I go out and get something to eat? or should I exercise caution when operating a motor vehicle because the meds I'm on have warning labels telling me these facts?
Obviously her judgment was impaired.

[MAX]

Why did the Chief of Police even feel it was necessary to make a comment? He says she made a mistake------Everyone makes a mistake when they decide to drive impaired---doesn't matter if it is alcohol and/or prescribed drugs. I don't call it a mistake, it was her choice, she took her drugs then drove. A spade is a spade. Bet she walks. The officer would not have arrested if he hadn't had just cause. Chief makes it look like he is defending Mary instead of standing behind the arresting officer. Randall Stone just likes to see his name of the post all the time and doesn't like anyone to have an opinion that doesn't match his.

[Chico]

MAX wrote:

The officer would not have arrested if he hadn't had just cause.

LOL! MAX, you win the idiot of the day award. Yea, we all know that if you're arrested you're AUTOMATICALLY guilty, right? Hahahahahhaha!

Please, unplug your computer before you make a bigger ass of yourself.

[MAX]

Chico wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL! MAX, you win the idiot of the day award. Yea, we all know that if you're arrested you're AUTOMATICALLY guilty, right? Hahahahahhaha!
Please, unplug your computer before you make a bigger **** of yourself.

ROFLMAO!!! Who the F*** do you think you are to call anyone an idiot. Reread, I didn't say she was guilty, I said he had JUST CAUSE. Maybe you should unplug your computer and quit sitting on your face. HA HA HA HA HA

[Randall Stone]

I think the reason Haggerty made a statement was because it was erroneously reported that alcohol was involved. I said in an earlier post that *I* would've just had the media retract the statement. However, it might have made more sense to make the correction a larger issue and come out with a statement.

Opinions are fine. But restated incorrect details is not. How many times do I have to say this?

[Chico]

MAX wrote:

<quoted text>
Reread, I didn't say she was guilty, I said he had JUST CAUSE.</quoted text>

We don't know whether he had just cause or not, now do we? Were you there? That's just one more fact that will come out when she has her day in court.

You made your bias quite clear with this gem of a statement:

MAX wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't call it a mistake, it was her choice, she took her drugs then drove.</quoted text>

You have already concluded that she took drugs and then drove. That's the allegation, not proven in a court of law.

Again, idiot, walk away from the computer before you look like a bigger @$$.

[Chico]

know-it-all juanita wrote:

Hey Chief Hagarty, are Chico police officers allowed to work while under the influence of prescription drugs?

You better believe they are. They're on Claritan, Ambien, anti-depressants, Viagra, you name it.

[MAX]

Chico wrote:

<quoted text>
We don't know whether he had just cause or not, now do we? Were you there? That's just one more fact that will come out when she has her day in court.
You made your bias quite clear with this gem of a statement:
<quoted text>
You have already concluded that she took drugs and then drove. That's the allegation, not proven in a court of law.
Again, idiot, walk away from the computer before you look like a bigger @$$.

Is this how you get your jolly's off, by calling people names. So I don't agree with you, so you name call etc. You are the one making an A-- of yourself and I will not reply to any more of your posts. Maybe you should stay off the computer.