Family, store owner wonder if preacher knew the men who shot hi...

[Wildflower]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text>Your words from another thread::Some family and friends indicated that from the get go. Rev. Ayers simply did not have any one who indicated he was capable of hiring a prostitute or buying drugs" and "Even the best criminal, the most intelligent , best at hiding his deeds slips up to this closet to him. That did not happen here. There is no indicator that the Rev. is who you say he is. There is every indication that he was a straight up guy." Those are your words not mine. And in all seriousness why do you think they looked like thugs? They were wearing t-shirts and blue jeans, and were wearing badges. Except for the badge I would just about bet that describes your wardrobe on a lot of days. So Do you make it a habit to look like a thug when you walk around? Other than the clothing the video does little to show their appearance, and as I know both of the officers involved, I can tell you they do not look like "thugs".

Ah, let's see. Thugs - blacked out windows in the black Cadillac Escalade - jumping out of the vehicle with guns drawn, screaming and chasing a man who just went into draw money out to get tires for his wife's car. That looks like thugs to me.
And the badges - go to any store that sells Halloween costumes and you can buy a nice shiny badge to hang around your neck, too!
Thugs aren't so much what they wear but how they act. I wear jeans and t-shirts but I sure do not make it a habit of jumping out of my car waving a gun and chasing a car.
The video looks like thugs who were trying to rob someone.
Why can't you just be real Dub? I know you don't even believe the trash you are talking.

[Wildflower]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text> Again, the guns were not for questioning. The guns came out when he began to drive off, that much was clear on the bad video.

The guns were drawn as they jumped out of the $80,000 Cadillac Escalade for questioning a man that had talked to a woman who was sweet talked into selling a $50 bag of cocaine.

[Wildflower]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text>Do you think criminals drive their own cars to criminal activity...

Ah when you're talking about buying $50 worth of cocaine, yeah.

[Wildflower]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text>Nice left wing tactic there.... Got to hand it to you there.
Take an answer to one post and use it as a absolute statement. Sure all criminals use other people's car. And all priest are celibate, and all lawyers are thieves. Because it is not an absolute rule, and is common to find, criminals, especially in the drug world, use rented, borrowed, and stolen vehicles, it would be a normal assumption to believe that the car was not his. But of course, you can never let common sense get in your way.

You watch too much tv. Over a $50 sell? No, I'm pretty sure that small fries who deal with $50 bags do use their own car.
You have an overinflated idea of the "huge" drug problem up here in the hills. We don't need your drug task force that you preach about so much. We don't need tactics like that.
If we lived in Miami where boat loads come floating in, maybe I could see this kind of behavior.
A poor, hungry woman who sold two $50 bags of cocaine to Chance? No I don't think so. Be real, please. That would be refreshing.

Oh, and if anyone cares, my computer was pinged 12 times the last time I was online here - three times in one day for maybe an hour all together.
Is someone trying to find me? You got long law arms, Dub?

[DUB]

Wildflower wrote:

<quoted text>
You watch too much tv. Over a $50 sell? No, I'm pretty sure that small fries who deal with $50 bags do use their own car.
You have an overinflated idea of the "huge" drug problem up here in the hills. We don't need your drug task force that you preach about so much. We don't need tactics like that.
If we lived in Miami where boat loads come floating in, maybe I could see this kind of behavior.
A poor, hungry woman who sold two $50 bags of cocaine to Chance? No I don't think so. Be real, please. That would be refreshing.
Oh, and if anyone cares, my computer was pinged 12 times the last time I was online here - three times in one day for maybe an hour all together.
Is someone trying to find me? You got long law arms, Dub?

I will leave it on this fact....65% of all drugs sold on the east coast of the US come through north Georgia. It just happens to be the center of the hub. Miami has nothing on north Georgia. The Mexican cartels don't come through Miami. They come through Texas and right on through to Georgia then head north. This is a solid fact. In fact, if you go anywhere in the country, they can tell you that I985 and GA 365 are famous as drug and money pipelines.

[dld09]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text>Your words from another thread::Some family and friends indicated that from the get go. Rev. Ayers simply did not have any one who indicated he was capable of hiring a prostitute or buying drugs" and "Even the best criminal, the most intelligent , best at hiding his deeds slips up to this closet to him. That did not happen here. There is no indicator that the Rev. is who you say he is. There is every indication that he was a straight up guy." Those are your words not mine. And in all seriousness why do you think they looked like thugs? They were wearing t-shirts and blue jeans, and were wearing badges. Except for the badge I would just about bet that describes your wardrobe on a lot of days. So Do you make it a habit to look like a thug when you walk around? Other than the clothing the video does little to show their appearance, and as I know both of the officers involved, I can tell you they do not look like "thugs".

I believe that thread was in reference to your thread. You stated that he family was the last to know. SO show me where I said his family and friends said he was innocent from the get go. I never said the villains were the cops. No, I do not wear jeans and a tee everyday. Unless I am on the farm I dress professionally. I am 43. Yes, I think that if I were in that area and two men jumped out of their car and rushed me I would be afraid. I would not be thinking I was doing anything wrong because I never do break the law. I would be freaking out! Look it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out you are in law or retired. You need to realize mistakes are made in all professions. Teachers, doctors, lawyers and yes even law enforcement officials handle things poorly from time to time. From any angle pro or con, this could have been handled better. I hear of shoot outs, I see helicopters with guns hanging out the side over Big A. Do we want drugs gone? Yes, but at what expense? My friend was driving by this spot minutes after this occurred. What if a stray bullet had hit her child, What if a racing police car had hit her? This was not handled well and now our city, a family and a church have to suffer. Don't live in a box. Open your eyes to other possibilities.

[DUB]

dld09 wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe that thread was in reference to your thread. You stated that he family was the last to know. SO show me where I said his family and friends said he was innocent from the get go. I never said the villains were the cops. No, I do not wear jeans and a tee everyday. Unless I am on the farm I dress professionally. I am 43. Yes, I think that if I were in that area and two men jumped out of their car and rushed me I would be afraid. I would not be thinking I was doing anything wrong because I never do break the law. I would be freaking out! Look it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out you are in law or retired. You need to realize mistakes are made in all professions. Teachers, doctors, lawyers and yes even law enforcement officials handle things poorly from time to time. From any angle pro or con, this could have been handled better. I hear of shoot outs, I see helicopters with guns hanging out the side over Big A. Do we want drugs gone? Yes, but at what expense? My friend was driving by this spot minutes after this occurred. What if a stray bullet had hit her child, What if a racing police car had hit her? This was not handled well and now our city, a family and a church have to suffer. Don't live in a box. Open your eyes to other possibilities.

And what if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bust his butt when he hopped. And what if Mr. Ayers had stopped? And what if you were in charge? All questions, but things that will not happen.
You like a lot of your cop bashing buddies here, have missed my point through all of this even after I have said it plainly and clearly on a dozen occasions.
I believe that the officers and Mr. Ayers were all innocent. At least until someone shows me evidence to the contrary. And yes it could end up that they all acted legally on both sides. This is not a case where someone has to be wrong. But I also accept the fact that the officers may have been wrong. And I accept the fact Mr. Ayers may have been wrong. But, you will not accept these things. You refuse to accept the officers may be innocent. But until you stop second guessing the officers with information you are just making up or blatantly lying about, you can not make a valid argument. Yes, everyone in every profession makes mistakes. Yes police officers make mistakes. Yes, even pastors from Lavonia make mistakes. Yes, you even make mistakes. And of course so do I.
But one mistake you are making that I am not, presuming to know what anyone was thinking, acting as if you know the officers had done it differently Mr. Ayers would be alive today.
Think about this, honestly..... what would you feel if you had one chance to go back and change the one thing you harp on? What if you could go back and have a marked car stop Mr. Ayers after he left the parking lot? Now let's keep going because you have been what if'ing this to death. What if he was involved in something and still ran from a marked car, killed a family driving down the road, and then still died? Would you then think that it was ok that two undercover officers had a chance to stop him in the parking lot and didn't. I hazard to guess that you would be screaming from the rooftops that the officers were derelict for not stopping the man before he endangered the family and the rest of the people driving. But, you seem to have a power to look back in time and see exactly what would have been.

[DUB]

dld09 wrote:

<quoted text> Don't live in a box. Open your eyes to other possibilities.

Again, you need to do this more than I. Open your eyes to the possibility the officers were right and you have misjudged them. Can you?

[poopy doopy]

What if, instead of coming in wildly, jumping out of the vehicle screaming and waving guns, since they were watching him, they could have pulled up at the store and parked, walked in, explained who they were and asked the pastor to answer some question. Since they were watching, they could have contacted the powers that be, ran the tag number which would have told the make of vehicle and ownership. now if the car was in his wife's name, then they could have asked him for identification while he was in the store. But then again, Obama would say, the police acted stupidly when they.........

DUB wrote:

<quoted text> Again, you need to do this more than I. Open your eyes to the possibility the officers were right and you have misjudged them. Can you?

[DUB]

Ecce_Homo wrote:

<quoted text>There is no "what if". The law alows a person the defense of self-defense, even when that person's attacker is a police officer. Therefore, if a person feels like they are in grave danger of death or serious bodily injury, that person should shoot first and ask questions later.
The worst case scenario would be that the person would shoot their first attacker in the forehead, busting it like a ripe mellon and then suffer death at the hands of their second criminal attacker.
The next better scenario would be that the second criminal attacker may get one to their mellon as well.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. The Constitution does not allow that. What it does allow is for us to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. It mentions nothing about fighting back against the police if you think your life is in danger. What does allow fighting back against the police is state and federal laws written that allow a person to resist arrest using up to and including deadly force if it is unlawful. If you fear for your life and the arrest attempt is lawful, you are not permitted to use force to resist. Again, you read just enough to be a danger to yourself and anyone else who gets around you.

[dSTeVek]

DUB wrote:

Ohhh yeah... and there couldn't be any chance she is lying just a little. You know drug addicts and dealers never do that.

Actually, the cops are the one that got caught lying.

I hope that this will lead to changes in the laws to insure gun happy officers can do not shoot at someone they "think bought cocaine or sex".

I agree with a previous poster that the officers involved need to be drug and steroid tested. After the incident the officers were reported as boasting about the shooting - this is unacceptable and should not be tolerated.

Unforetuneately, the dept will continue to try to cover this up. I wish the the Feds would come in and monitor the GBI's investigation.

[dSTeVek]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text> ...Reasonable Articulable Suspicion which allows law enforcement officers to detain, by force if necessary, a person suspected of being involved in criminal activity.

Deadly force???

[dSTeVek]

DUB wrote:

Fact one:
Fact two:
Fact three:
Fact Four: The officers approached Mr. Ayers, identified themselves and showed their badges to him.
Fact Five:
Fact Five:

These are not Facts - it is clear that you are part of Shirley/Oxner's campaign to cover this up.

FACT Seven (and a true fact)- Police KILLED a man they beleive bought cocaine or sex!

That FACT can not be covered up!

[DUB]

dSTeVek wrote:

<quoted text>
These are not Facts - it is clear that you are part of Shirley/Oxner's campaign to cover this up.
FACT Seven (and a true fact)- Police KILLED a man they beleive bought cocaine or sex!
That FACT can not be covered up!

Fact: you have no evidence they have lied about anything and if you do let us hear it.
Fact: I have not tried to cover up anything nor have I condoned the officer's actions. What I have done is point out the fact that you and many, many others here have assumed the officers guilt with no evidence, and cleared Mr. Ayers with the same lack of evidence. You refuse to accept the possibility that the officers involved were justified. Not right, not correct, not perfect, but justified.
Last fact: You as many others refuse to fairly consider any information and accept the idea of Mr. Ayers being culpable in this. you also refuse to consider the officer's actions as justifiable because you have a prejudice toward the police. Why I wonder do you do that?

[DUB]

dSTeVek wrote:

<quoted text>
Deadly force???

If necessary. Remember the suspect is the one who dictates the officer's response. Not the other way around.

[dld09]

DUB wrote:

<quoted text> And what if a frog had wings, he wouldn't bust his butt when he hopped. And what if Mr. Ayers had stopped? And what if you were in charge? All questions, but things that will not happen.
You like a lot of your cop bashing buddies here, have missed my point through all of this even after I have said it plainly and clearly on a dozen occasions.
I believe that the officers and Mr. Ayers were all innocent. At least until someone shows me evidence to the contrary. And yes it could end up that they all acted legally on both sides. This is not a case where someone has to be wrong. But I also accept the fact that the officers may have been wrong. And I accept the fact Mr. Ayers may have been wrong. But, you will not accept these things. You refuse to accept the officers may be innocent. But until you stop second guessing the officers with information you are just making up or blatantly lying about, you can not make a valid argument. Yes, everyone in every profession makes mistakes. Yes police officers make mistakes. Yes, even pastors from Lavonia make mistakes. Yes, you even make mistakes. And of course so do I.
But one mistake you are making that I am not, presuming to know what anyone was thinking, acting as if you know the officers had done it differently Mr. Ayers would be alive today.
Think about this, honestly..... what would you feel if you had one chance to go back and change the one thing you harp on? What if you could go back and have a marked car stop Mr. Ayers after he left the parking lot? Now let's keep going because you have been what if'ing this to death. What if he was involved in something and still ran from a marked car, killed a family driving down the road, and then still died? Would you then think that it was ok that two undercover officers had a chance to stop him in the parking lot and didn't. I hazard to guess that you would be screaming from the rooftops that the officers were derelict for not stopping the man before he endangered the family and the rest of the people driving. But, you seem to have a power to look back in time and see exactly what would have been.

Please show me where I cop bashed? You keep saying I cop bash and I simply do not.
Hindsight is always clearer. Don't you think that even the officers involved would do some things differently? I bet they even "what if" on this one.

[steve]

Wildflower, please don't refer to Ayers as "an innocent pastor". The fat lady has not sung yet. Just because he walked around Stephens County thumping a Bible, doesn't make him innocent. Yes, this is a tragedy but I can't help but think that Ayers got caught "with his pants down", so to speak. Was this cocaine dealer not a prostitute also? I am so tired of turning on the news and watching pastor-after-pastor being arrested for sexual misconduct and drugs. There was a music minister, an associate pastor, in Greenville arrested last week for having sex with a 12 year old.
You think they should be tested for steroids??? Where did that come from? Too many TV shows I bet. I am a former police officer that has never taken steroids. But I have had to take the life of scumbag dope dealer. I sleep well every night knowing he won't get some pinko-liberal attorney to keep him out of jail.
I enjoyed reading these threads and yes, there may be more to what we can see or hear. But we need to let the facts rise to the surface before we start screaming "murderers".