The Dick Jones’s Legacy: Fullerton’s Ruined Reputation


YouTube Preview Image

More about

Email This Post To A Friend Email This Post To A Friend

  1. #1 by Anonymous on September 20, 2011

    Whatever happened to Blind Mice #1 Jones was supposed to resign? Or was he just BS all along?

    Mayor Jones probably wants a 21 gun salute if he resigns, but ain’t gonna get one.

    The day Mayor Jones and the other 2 blind mice are removed from the dais Fullerton can sing “Happy Days Are Here Again”!

  2. #2 by Anonymous II on September 20, 2011

    That wasnt going to happen.

    He’s going to stay in until he drops dead of a massive coronary …which should be in 2 mins or 3 years.

  3. #3 by LeRoy Murray on September 20, 2011

    Signed the recall petions yesterday, watching this tells me I did the right thing. Getting these guys out is just the first step though. A competent mayor and council need to be found, competent in being responsible to all the people, not just the rich. A citizens review board is needed to examine the police in every case where a weapon is drawn, as well as used. A review board with teeth. This is needed whether the FPD is kept or the Sheriff is brought in, their reputation for brutality is just as bad. If the Sheriff is brought in taking FPD officers aboard should be prohibited, otherwise the only thing that changes is the name.

  4. #4 by Sapporo on September 20, 2011

    Why is officer Hampton not suspended? Three incidents, one resulting in a death. WTF

  5. #5 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Every time I hear Kelly’s helpless, begging, tortured, dying cries for help as he is being murdered, I cry. And, I get angry. I don’t, and I will never, understand how the six could be anywhere nearby and not immediately do something to stop this frenzied murder and to save Kelly’s life.

    They are ALL ANIMALS with ABSOLUTELY NO COMPASSION, NO FEELINGS, NO CONCERN for the suffering of others, and they in no way value human life, unless it is their own.

    I SPIT on ALL FPD, until they root out ALL of the sociopaths and murderers among them. If the FPD, or other L.E. can watch this video, and not be completely horrified and sickened by it, and continue to make self-serving excuses for it, then they ALL must go.

  6. #6 by One for the books on September 20, 2011

    This is the kind of government you get when the people fall asleep! When people are distracted by all the garbage that is thrown at them, e.g., Dancing With The Stars, Monday Night Football, etc., they lose sight of things that are vitally important. Unfortunately, it took the brutal killing of Kelly Thomas to wake up the slumbering residents of Fullerton!! Pay more attention to the things that your elected leaders are doing, or the next Kelly Thomas might possibly be you!!

  7. #7 by One for the books on September 20, 2011

    Maybe you should go to the city council meeting tonight and ask them that question!

  8. #8 by Wrong Guy on September 20, 2011

    So true ‘One For The Books’. Been guilty of that myself for most of my life. It took this death beating of Kelly Thomas to get me up and at em. I will be steadfast from here on out in my knowledge and involvement with my local gov.

  9. #9 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    EVEN Susan Kang Schroeder on the DA,S TEAM said the viedo was HARD TO LOOK AT MURDER IS NOT nice to look at with all that BLOOD. Is now on the hand,s of DICK–BUTHEAD–& MCKILLER.

  10. #10 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    DR. DICK OPP,S I THROU THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER. SORRY PEOPLE,NOW I WILL GEST TAKE MY MONEY AND GO HOME YOU KNOW I GOT A BIG TV.AT HOME YES I DO AND A GATE TO KEEP ME SAFE !

  11. #11 by ziggy on September 20, 2011

    ?

  12. #12 by The Orange County Register on September 20, 2011

    New campaign fights Fullerton council recall

    http://www.ocregister.com/news/recall-317985-fullerton-council.html

  13. #13 by Wrong Guy on September 20, 2011

    DICK–BUTHEAD–& MCKILLER.
    Well said once again Tigermanlsu!
    I will be speaking at the Fullerton City Council meeting tonight about the removal/recall of these 3 dips and the corrupt FPD.
    I have an agenda, but I’m open for suggestions.
    Keep in mind, we each only have 3 minutes to speak.

  14. #14 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    Wrong-bring up “who ok’d the 900 grand offer to Ron thomas” liars if they continue to say they didnt do it

  15. #15 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Of all the times I’ve ever been stopped by police-whether as a motorist, pedestrian, or during my brief time being homeless-all encounters were positive, save one where I was stopped without cause.

    Guess where that was? Yep. Fullerton.

  16. #16 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    :) in agreeance JFA

  17. #17 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    you mean nazi SS, hampton

  18. #18 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    MUR-So, what did those gangsters say to you? nothing? they just stopped you and glared at you-or did they give you some madeup crap reason for stopping you? “uhh, your hair looked like it needs cutting”

  19. #19 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    It was the time honored, “you match the description of a robbery suspect earlier tonight.”

    I’m no expert on police procedure, but wouldn’t that be grounds for a “felony stop,” as opposed to the simple “Terry Stop” he did?

    I know if I were LE and I encountered a felony suspect I’d have called for backup prior to approaching alone. I damn sure wouldn’t allow the suspect to stand next to my car, as I ran his ID from inside it.

  20. #20 by Wrong Guy on September 20, 2011

    Meri: I think I will talk to Ron Thomas about that first, prior to me addressing Mr. Felz. Thanks for the suggestion.

  21. #21 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    From what I read on this blog, in retrospect I guess I’m “lucky” the cop let me go with a “stay out of trouble” after his bogus stop/fishing expedition turned up nothing.

  22. #22 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    JUSTICE FOR ALL,

    I concur.

  23. #23 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    MUR-as my fellow commenters have told me -former cops-if no probable cause they should not be stopping or searching or questioning anyone, that is a violation of your civil rights

    am I correct Fedup or 9c1?

    anyway thats what I am going to remember

  24. #24 by Fred Alcazar on September 20, 2011

    ABSOLUTELY!

    No one will admit the ugly truth. McPension told Sellers to make an offer.

    I honestly believe the civil authority (dim bulb Felz) knew nothing about it.

    Some one get up and ask who approved ANY contact between the City and Ron Thomas!!!

  25. #25 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Merijoe the actual standard is reasonable suspicion, I believe.

  26. #26 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Then of course they have their “waiver” to bypass the cause requirements for a stop and talk:

    “Hi, can I talk to you for a minute?”

  27. #27 by Guest on September 20, 2011

    Whatever happened to the guy who got attacked by Officer Cary Tong?

  28. #28 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    thats not probable cause for you to talk to them. reasonable suspicion – why?

  29. #29 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    nope

  30. #30 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    HELL NO

  31. #31 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    In theory you may refuse to talk and the cop should allow you to continue on your way unmolested.

    In practice what do you think would happen if you said no?

  32. #32 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Kelly talked to them and we all know what happened to him.

  33. #34 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Well I tested the theory once when stopped as a pedestrian in San Luis Obispo.

    “Hi, can I talk you you?”

    “Do I have to talk to you, officer?”

    “Yes.”

    “I’m confused now.”

    “About?”

    “Well you asked to talk to me-implying I had a choice. Then you told me I have to talk to you. Which is?”

    “SHUT UP AND GET ON THE CURB.”

  34. #35 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    “am I free to go? or are you detaining me” is the only thing that needs to come out your mouth

  35. #36 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    never get out of your car – Off course they are going to get loud – thats all they know, but its against your civil rights if they have no probable cause

  36. #37 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    In regards to the council meetings, is it difficult to get in or find seating? I’ve never been to one.

    Also where may one park?

  37. #38 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    MY USERNAME ROCKS,

    Oh how I wish I were there when that happened to you.

  38. #39 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    What became of the encounter?

  39. #40 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Great Advice, Go to
    You Tube Don’t talk to cops, Part 1
    and then go to
    You tube Don’t talk to cops, Part 2

  40. #41 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Oh? Why is that?

  41. #42 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    JUSTICE FOR ALL<

    I already posted this youtube site once. I am glad you posted it again. It helps those to know their rights.

  42. #43 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    because, he is the former cop I was telling you about, knows alot about this type of railroading by Cop -my new civilian code

  43. #44 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    When i get my PHD I will be in AGREEANCE also-jackhole!!!

  44. #45 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    It’s not as complicated as it may seem and there are a variety of factors considered in each incident.

    In basic terms, here are the definitions:

    Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof in United States law that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an “inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch’ ”;[1] it must be based on “specific and articulable facts”, “taken together with rational inferences from those facts”.[2] Police may briefly detain a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; such a detention is known as a Terry stop. If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained may be armed, they may “frisk” the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the “reasonable person” or “reasonable officer” standard,[3] in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous.

    In United States criminal law, probable cause is the standard by which an officer or agent of the law has the grounds to make an arrest, to conduct a personal or property search, or to obtain a warrant for arrest, etc. when criminal charges are being considered. It is also used to refer to the standard to which a grand jury believes that a crime has been committed. This term comes from the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution:
    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    “Probable” in this case may relate to actual statistical probability, or to a general standard of common behavior and customs. The context of the word “probable” here is not exclusive to community standards and does not predate statistics, as some have suggested.[1]

    So that’s the basic definitions.

    What does that mean in this case? Depends on the facts. The facts will eventually be known but could the cops contact Kelly? Could they detain Kelly? Could they arrest Kelly? Those are all questions that will be answered. If you ask a majority of the people here (Merijoe) they will tell you that the cops contacted Kelly sitting on a bench, had no reason to contact him, instigated the agitation causing him to run, and the end result.

    What if the phone call about a suspicious subject checking car doors turns out to be true? Do the cops have the right to contact Kelly? Yes. Can Kelly tell them they can’t contact him and he can leave? No.

    It all really depends on the exact facts related to the entire incident. I can walk up to anyone and talk to them. Can they leave? Depends on the situation. If someone calls and says that a subject is smoking crack, banging on cars, and acting nuts and he matches the description, then I can contact and detain that subject pending the outcome of my investigation.

    There are some other variables that come into play in some calls. Let’s say that someone calls and says this car is DUI and here is the plate and description. I get behind the car and everything matches. Can I just pull it over and start my investigation? I can but to make the probable cause solid, I should find my own probable cause for the traffic stop, i.e. no license plate light, swerving, no turn signal, etc.

    Same kind of variables come into play at times for subject contacts. Forming my own probable cause or reasonable suspicion just makes the case that much more solid.

    If I’m walking around and stop to talk to someone just to talk and I get the quick response of you can’t talk to me, can I leave, I will just smile and tell him to have a nice day.

    If I have the reasonable suspicion to talk to the subject, I will let him know and what he can and can’t do. If he fights my reply, then the investigation continues from there.

    Bottom line, I don’t want to talk to someone or detain someone for no reason, and I don’t want to talk to someone if I don’t have that reason, especially if they don’t want to talk to me.

    DUI checkpoints. I read something about tell them I don’t have to get out of my car so screw off. Well, I would be careful. It goes back to your actual rights and how you start the contact will usually dictate how your contact will end. If I have reason to take you out of the car, I will, no matter what you say. If you don’t have your license with you, you will pull into the work area. If I see signs of intoxication, I will remove you from the car and continue the investigation no matter what you say.

    I’ve said it many times. Verbal abuse to me or the police is not a good way to start a legal contact. Yes, I am very respectful and will have a reason to contact you. I will not be disrespected verbally or otherwise, just because you think you know it all or want to video my actions. Almost all police incidents escalate for one of two reasons. Alcohol or outright disrespect to the police. If you eliminate both of those, you will usually never ever have a problem in your contacts with the police.

    Yes, I believe in doing the right thing and I want all cops to do the right thing. If they don’t, they need to be punished. But if you want to tell me to fuck off, I’ll probably tell you something similar. If you clench your fists and threaten to kick my ass, I’m not going to stand there and listen to you tell me that you can do that because its your right. I will take you down before you have a chance to throw that clenched fist, and you will go to jail.

    Have a wonderful Tuesday. Is today the day to hear something? Never know.

  45. #46 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    Thank,s wrong guy-I want to know y 35.000 had to be paded to the lunch lady.DID SHE KNOW ABOUT THE KICKBACK,S was this hush money.

  46. #47 by Anonymous on September 20, 2011

    love these videos. everyone should watch.

  47. #48 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    RI ..No-I didnt say tell them to screw off or do I recommend that -you lying sack of horse doo-doo
    The fact is if there is no probable cause by any of these lying scrotums you do not have to get out of your car or talk to anyone and you can shove you “0utright disrepect” aspect up your ass-cops are not a different class that needs special kissing up to.
    Your civil rights are your civil rights and the gestapo has to abide by those.
    no, its not smart to yell and scream at a copper-or at a mugger that is holding a gun to your head, duh. Just offering your license, registration and asking if you are being detained or are you free to go, should be enough- if not, your rights are being violated especially if no probable cause can be offered by the nazi who stopped you. and be sure to bring you video camera.
    No they cant search you or your care if there is no probable cause and dont let them.

  48. #49 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    WHAT IS JFA ?

  49. #50 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    You just changed the facts.

    Copy lying scrotums.

    Copy up the ass cops.

    Kissing.

    Nazi. Gestapo.

    Copy.

    We just agreed on everything but your blathering of nonsense didn’t make you realize that.

  50. #51 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    My basic stance in each police stop has been to be respectful, clearly recognize my mistake, and be apologetic.

    I’ve almost always left with just a verbal warning.

  51. #52 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    REALITY IS,

    Did you say hi to me at the concert Saturday? If so, you should have announced who you were.

  52. #53 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    merijoe: “No they cant search you or your car if there is no probable cause and dont let them.”

    Wrong.

    The standard for legal brief detainment and a patdown is “reasonable suspicion” not “probable cause.” See Terry vs. Ohio or simply read the Wikipedia entry for “Terry Stop,” it’s simple and accurate in its explantion.

  53. #54 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    you are incorrect sir -respectfully

  54. #55 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    whatever. and i dont care what you think, be gone

  55. #56 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Reality Is stated, “…If you clench your fists and threaten to kick my ass, I’m not going to stand there and listen to you tell me that you can do that because its your right…” (sic)

    The irony of your statement seems to be completely lost on you.

    You don’t seem to realize that the ONLY person who made the above threat, “…these are the hands that are going to kick your ass..” was the COP who was threatening Kelly Thomas the night he was murdered. And, the cop DID expect Kelly to “stand there and listen to you tell me that you can do that because its your right.”

    Talk about an ego inflated, murderous, double standard. You say YOU won’t stand there, but yet you expected Kelly to stand there and let himself be murdered. And, he was. And, you want to know why we have lost respect for the likes of you.

    Every time you post a comment, you just dig your hole even deeper. Your PR job is a complete failure.

  56. #57 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    –Terry stop: In the United States, a Terry stop is a brief detention of a person by police[1] on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity but short of probable cause to arrest.–

    –A traffic stop is, for practical purposes, a Terry stop;[10] for the duration of a stop, driver and passengers are “seized” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.[11] In the interest of officer safety, drivers[12] and passengers[13] may be ordered out of the vehicle without additional justification by the officer. Drivers[14] and passengers[15] may be searched for weapons upon reasonable suspicion they are armed and dangerous. If police reasonably suspect the driver or any of the occupants may be dangerous and that the vehicle may contain a weapon to which an occupant may gain access, police may perform a protective search of the passenger compartment.[16] [17]–

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

  57. #58 by Stud Lee on September 20, 2011

    I want to know the following:

    (1) Has the attorney Bruce Praet followed through on his promise to Mr. Ron Thomas that he would “degrade Kelly Thomas and his relationships with his family?”

    (2) Have the city, any of the city attorneys or any attorneys representing the officers involved been actively involved in or financed a social media/blog campaign to degrade Kelly Thomas and his relationships with his family?

  58. #59 by merijoe on September 20, 2011

    Eye- Terry stops, “For their own protection, police may perform a quick surface search of the person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed.
    This reasonable suspicion must be based on “specific and articulable facts” and not merely upon an officer’s hunch”

  59. #60 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Justice for ALL

    And, please stop calling people names, (unless you are addressing Reality Is)

  60. #61 by Cindy Mc on September 20, 2011

    You two need to kiss and make-up:) (just kidding Merijoe). RI it’s not always what you say that causes problems. It’s that it always seems to be antagonistic. Over the last several days you’ve seemed to have tempered things a bit. ( May be some what due to the ass-whooping I gave you:) Couldn’t resist.) I don’t think we disagree on everything but the fact that there IS clear and convincing evidence to charge all involved NOW!!! Just be nice:)

  61. #62 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    I wasn’t talking about the Kelly case. That should clarify your mistake.

    I won’t stand there because you doing that is a crime. If the facts show that Kelly was legally detained and fled upon arrest, then yes, he had to stand there.

    Your opinion is yours.

    My hole is my hole. No PR here. Just the facts. :)

  62. #63 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    Oh and since most people are reasonably respecful and cooperative when pulled over, disrespect and noncooperation could be interpreted by the officer as ‘danger,’ providing all the ‘reasonable suspicion’ needed to conduct patdowns and a search of the vehicle.

    I’m not saying it’s right, or what the founding fathers intended (it’s not) but the courts have granted a lot of leeway here in the interest of officer safety.

  63. #64 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    :)

  64. #65 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    I don’t remember you kicking my ass. I probably liked it though.

    Yes, we disagree there. All shouldn’t and won’t be charged.

  65. #66 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Exactly.

    EyeNeverSayNo :
    Oh and since most people are reasonably respecful and cooperative when pulled over, disrespect and noncooperation could be interpreted by the officer as ‘danger,’ providing all the ‘reasonable suspicion’ needed to conduct patdowns and a search of the vehicle.
    I’m not saying it’s right, or what the founding fathers intended (it’s not) but the courts have granted a lot of leeway here in the interest of officer safety.

  66. #67 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Yep. No hunches. I can articulate a pat down very easily. Searching a car takes a little more.

  67. #68 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    Specific and articulatable facts such as “the driver and passengers were unusually uncooperative and somewhat combative in attitude, fearing for my safety I tried to conduct a patdown for weapons, when they resisted my legal right to do this they became suspects….”

    Again, I’m not saying it’s right, but that’s how it works.

  68. #69 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    Not much though. If you fear that there might be a weapon in the car within easy reach, that’s all the ‘reasonable suspicion’ you need to search the passenger compartment, right?

  69. #70 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    Kelly was expected to stand there, after he was threatened? And, he was expected not to cry out while he was being tortured? And, he was expected not to move at all while he was being beaten to death?

    Good luck on getting anyone to “stand there” and wait to be murdered in the future. You apparently don’t like threats, and neither does anyone else.

    And, now that we don’t trust L.E., and we know that the THUGS have huge egos, and we know that they are sociopaths, and we know that they get away with murder and excessive force, and we know that they cover for each other, and we know that they use any little excuse for murder and torture, and we know that they are above the law, well,… I think your murderous jobs just got a whole lot tougher.

  70. #71 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    RI, your posts seem to indicate that you are-or were-LE. Is this so?

  71. #72 by 9c1copcar on September 20, 2011

    REALITY IS,

    Still think I am lying like you stated in earlier blogs?

  72. #73 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Random side note: Dick Jones brings to mind his namsake, the corrupt official from Robocop:

    “DICK JONES! I WORK FOR DICK JONES! “

  73. #74 by LaRoo on September 20, 2011

    I feel the same way, my friend. It breaks my heart to hear the cries and to acknowledge that one day might be me or someone I know. And what I cannot grasp onto is if the cries affect you and I this way that these cries are NOT affecting our city council.

  74. #75 by newbie on September 20, 2011

    If I am at a bus stop and a cop detains me. Do I have to empty my pockets and produce an I D

  75. #76 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    If you are detained? Produce ID. Yes. Empty pockets? Depends on why you are detained. You could always say no and see how it goes.

  76. #77 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    As I under stand it you can be patted down without much in the way of suspicion or cause, officer safety being paramount, and if the officer feels something, say a pipe, he can then reach in your pocket and take it out. Now it’s game on. You better have a med card or you’re probably gonna lose your nug and your piece. It gets worse from there, dpeneding on what the officer finds.

  77. #78 by Jim Alexander on September 20, 2011

    I find this sight inflamatory and uninteresting.

  78. #79 by EyeNeverSayNo on September 20, 2011

    Let me be the first to say: Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on your way out.

  79. #80 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    That’s ok Jim, you may leave. Perhaps, you might find this SITE just a wee bit more interesting after someone YOU love has been murdered.

  80. #81 by TIGERMANLSU on September 20, 2011

    OK SORRY YOU R SOOOOO RIGHT!!!

  81. #82 by Cindy Mc on September 20, 2011

    Selective memory. Not surprised.

  82. #83 by Stud Lee on September 20, 2011

    Maybe he’s still running his background check on your name before he responds?

  83. #84 by Cindy Mc on September 20, 2011

    What was all that trash about “if anyone did anything wrong they should be punished”. SOOOOO…….since “no one should be charged”. means they didn’t do anything wrong???!!! You are truly in need of an ethical/moral overhall. Go away. We’re done with you. You live to antagonize. Perfect fit with the FPD.

  84. #85 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Oh yes master.

    Cindy Mc :
    What was all that trash about “if anyone did anything wrong they should be punished”. SOOOOO…….since “no one should be charged”. means they didn’t do anything wrong???!!! You are truly in need of an ethical/moral overhall. Go away. We’re done with you. You live to antagonize. Perfect fit with the FPD.

  85. #86 by Stud Lee on September 20, 2011

    You just have to ignore the heartless people like Reality Is and you’ll find this sight a lot less inflamatory. :)

  86. #87 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    You should learn to accept all types of people in life and here since no one is going anywhere. We should all help each other try to understand why we all think how we do. That middle ground might lead to progress instead of refusing to accept any of the other side.

  87. #88 by My Username Rocks on September 20, 2011

    Any news from the OCDA yet?

    I’m guessing no, I’m sure someone would’ve posted the second T-Rack opened his grill.

  88. #89 by Disgusted on September 20, 2011

    I remember it. She bitchslapped you from clear across the country! You didn’t have shit to say!

  89. #90 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Tomorrow. 11am.

    Word is neither side will be happy.

  90. #91 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Oh ok.

    cite=”#commentbody-58828″>
    Disgusted :
    I remember it. She bitchslapped you from clear across the country! You didn’t have shit to say!

    Disgusted :
    I remember it. She bitchslapped you from clear across the country! You didn’t have shit to say!

  91. #92 by Stud Lee on September 20, 2011

    Oh come on I was just joking around.

    I have accepted several things you’ve said. Starting with you pointing out that it is likely that not all 6 are involved. I think I’ve had my moments where I’m pretty middle ground.

    “We should all help each other try to understand why we all think how we do.”

    I agree. I have asked you several questions in attempt to do so that you’ve ignored (or maybe just missed, but I have reason to think mostly ignored). I’m trying to understand why you think the way you do…such as how you know certain things…but you always seem to avoid those particular questions.

    Some of these are:
    (1) How you know enough about Ron Thomas to have such a strongly negative opinion of him that you’ll publicly bash him just after his son died.

    (2) Have you seen the city video? How did you have access to it?

    There are other questions but I gotta run.

    I’d love to understand why you think the way you do.

  92. #93 by Justice for ALL on September 20, 2011

    We already “UNDERSTAND” that you are a NARCISSISTIC SOCIOPATH; we just don’t “ACCEPT,” and NEVER WILL accept that such heartless scum are members of the FPD, or other LE.

  93. #94 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Thank you for the diagnosis. I will seek treatment and meds.

  94. #95 by Reality Is on September 20, 2011

    Copy.

    I’ve tried to answer what I see. I miss alot I’m sure.

    I know of Ron Thomas through work. I base my opinion on first hand knowledge, and some 2nd hand via co workers of his at the time.

    I’ve answered the video stuff before.

    I’m undercover for now.

  95. #96 by Peaches on September 20, 2011

    Has “Dick” Jones’ military service ever been verified or is it based on what he has said? If never verified, I wonder if he would be willing to produced his DD214 (or equivalent documentation).

    And, are he and the City Attorney related? Would be interesting if they are…

  96. #97 by Peaches on September 20, 2011

    oops = that should be “produce”

  97. #98 by Stud Lee on September 20, 2011

    Reality Is :
    Copy.
    I’ve tried to answer what I see. I miss alot I’m sure.
    I know of Ron Thomas through work. I base my opinion on first hand knowledge, and some 2nd hand via co workers of his at the time.
    I’ve answered the video stuff before.
    I’m undercover for now.

    Why are you undercover? For what purpose? What is your goal, your endgame?

    You talk about “facts” and tell people they don’t know the facts and leave vague hints about who you might be and treat supposed “inside” information of yours as if it’s truth and expect others to do so as well. You seem to get angry or frustrated when other commentors on this blog don’t take you at your word. What is your evidence that you have inside information? Wanna make a difference? Convince us that you are believable. Step into the light. Maybe even tell us who you are. You’re going to eventually, so what’s the disadvantage of doing so now? You’d be surprised at how many people might actually believe you.

    It’s futile to attempt to correct people on the internet using a pseudonym while making jokes about the suffering family and honestly think you have a single shred of credibility or that anyone would possibly believe that you have inside information. If anything, things you’ve said have come across as intentionally inflamatory or even factually incorrect and/or disproven. How would you be any different than some random schmuck making stuff up out of their head and posting it on the internets?

    You know who IS credible to the average person? The John and Ken “insider.” So far nothing he said has been contradicted by police and/or the DA. He was right about who was involved, he was right about their being a video, he was right about the quality of the video, and he was right about the officers having watched the video before writing their reports. THAT is credibility and THOSE are all facts admitted to by officials, not “I know inside info so everyone should believe me and if they don’t their in trouble.” Why WOULDN’T we believe other things he said? In contrast why WOULD we believe things you’ve said? Because some random person on the internet said so?

    That being said, your tone as of late has been relatively more respectful, logical, and balanced. For what it’s worth, I appreciate it.

Comments are closed.