55
Comments (26)
sorted by:
4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
misterLahey 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thanks. I can't red Daily Mail articles due to their ad-wall.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
misterLahey 3 points ago +3 / -0

It worked. I can read the text just fine.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
ripturntle 4 points ago +4 / -0

They want the homeless to starve = more virus deaths

3
lavendarlady 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank you It works for me.

3
Lemongrass5 3 points ago +4 / -1

Trash stop. He wasnt driving nor was there any ras to ask for ID. Illegal detainment and the cop KNEW it was illegal because if you notice the guy never said the cop told him he was under arrest. An anyway what the heck is knowing who somebody is going to stop you from thinking they're illegally dumping?

These are the cops that earn the hate for all of them.

-1
BaeTard -1 points ago +1 / -2

you notice the guy never said the cop told him he was under arrest

No I didn't notice that. There isn't any audio.

what the heck is knowing who somebody is going to stop you from thinking they're illegally dumping?

Maybe bringing the items onto yours or someone else's property instead of tossing in on the sidewalk and in the street?

2
BaeTard 2 points ago +3 / -1

According to the article there were reports of illegal dumping in the neighborhood. The van is unmarked and looks shady AF. Missing hubcaps etc etc. The van looks out of place in the neighborhood. The items in the back of the van could easily be mistaken as garbage.

Had the Doctor provided his ID to the police, it would have confirmed he was unloading on his property and none of this would have happened.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
BaeTard 1 point ago +2 / -1

That's just it. We don't know what was said. Did you watch the full video?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
BaeTard 1 point ago +1 / -0

The article reported what the suspect said.

1
BaeTard 1 point ago +1 / -0

The article printed what the suspects interpenetration of the conversation. There is a difference in reporting what was said and what somebody claimed was said.

0
Lemongrass5 0 points ago +3 / -3

Suspicion is NOT a crime. Just because you think something is suspicious doesnt mean I might think it's suspicious.

According to the law the cop did not SEE the person breaking the law so there is no reason to need to provide ID as the guy was not detained or under arrest. An how would the cop knowing who the person was know it was his house? The cop got the deed?? To the property?

-1
BaeTard -1 points ago +1 / -2

The Doctor is unloading what appears to be trash onto the sidewalk. Without knowing who that person is or the circumstances, wouldn't it appear to be illegal dumping? Wouldn't it appear this person was committing a crime?

The cop wouldn't have the deed but could easily verify the Doctors address once he confirmed the identity of the Dr.

The whole altercation lasted under 2 minutes.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Lemongrass5 0 points ago +1 / -1

Under the laws the guy hasnt done anything wrong to have to provide ID. Unlawful order and detainm.

1
glasseye 1 point ago +4 / -3

Do you have to be a sadist to apply to be a policeman, or do they teach you that at the academy? Asking for a friend...

0
Lemongrass5 0 points ago +2 / -2

It's how they're taught in the academy. The "brothers," in blue. Everyone to them is considered a suspect and criminal.

1
glasseye 1 point ago +1 / -0

"There is NO situation so bad it cannot be make worse by the presence of a policeman".

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0