[quoteAdams County rancher shot and killed by deputies
The incident started after a car crashed into a bull on Highway 95.
KTVB, KTVB.COM 6:17 p.m. MST November 2, 2015 635820807026369769-rancher5 (Photo: Paul Boehlke/KTVB) CONNECT 178 TWEET LINKEDIN COMMENT EMAIL MORE COUNCIL, Idaho -- Idaho State Police are investigating after a Council rancher was shot and killed Sunday by deputies with the Adams County Sheriff's Office.
The incident began when a Subaru station wagon crashed into a bull on US 95 north of Council at about 6:45 p.m. Emergency responders and Adams County deputies responded and were working to extricate the two people inside the car. Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman said the bull, which was injured in the collision, started charging at emergency responders and other vehicles. "The bull was very agitated and was aggressive to emergency services, as well as the other cars coming up and down the highway," he said.
Deputies were getting ready to put the animal down when the bull's owner, 62-year-old Jack Yantis, arrived on the scene with a rifle. Zollman said dispatchers had called Yantis after the crash, telling him that the bull that was hit appeared to be his, and was down on the highway near his house.
What happened next is still under investigation, but Zollman said there was an altercation and Yantis and both deputies all fired their weapons.
Yantis was fatally wounded and died at the scene. One of the deputies suffered a minor injury.
An emotional Zollman said Monday that his thoughts went out to everyone involved, and that his office took the shooting very seriously. ISP has taken over the investigation to prevent a conflict of interest.
"This is going to be a big hit to this community," Zollman said. "The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It's just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community."
Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Sunday night. Paul Boehlke/KTVB Fullscreen Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Rancher Jack Yantis was shot and killed by deputies Next Slide The deputies who shot Yantis have been placed on paid leave. Their names have not yet been released.
"To the best of my knowledge, this is the first officer-involved shooting that Adams County has ever had," Zollman said.
Yantis' wife, Donna Yantis, suffered a heart attack after learning that her husband had been shot, family members said. She was taken to a Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise, where she was listed in critical condition Monday.
Both people inside the Subaru were taken to a Boise hospital by air ambulance. Their conditions are unknown. The bull was killed, although authorities are still investigating whether a bullet from Yantis' gun or one of the deputies' weapons killed the animal.
The area where the bull was hit is open range, Zollman said, and darkness had fallen by the time the Subaru crashed into the black bull in the roadway.
"It's not uncommon for us to have these kind of livestock versus vehicle accidents," he said. "Typically they don't turn out this way."[/quote]
Sooooo.....a cop is shot....or injured....or something. The rancher is shot and killed. The ranchers wife has a heart attack and lands in critical condition. The occupants of the car were injured and had to be extracted from their vehicle. The bull was hit a car....suffered....and eventually put down.
Any puppies get run over by the ambulance as it was leaving.
What a cluster....from where I stand.... the only winner in this deal is the couple that no longer have to drive a Subaru.
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
I very highly doubt the rancher was killed "over a wounded bull".
More likely than not, a person pointed a rifle at the Deputies.
What led up to the altercation is what is the question.
Understandably a livestock owner does not want to lose a large investment.
Also understandably, a Deputy does not want to have another collision, or someone get gored, or trampled by an injured/mad bull, and views public safety issues as more important than property loss.
Neither view point is wrong, but sometimes (especially when in the heat of the moment) people cannot come to an agreement, and bad things occur.
Remember,this happened in rural Idaho.
99% of the rural deputies I know don't even raise an eyebrow when a rancher shows up with a hunting rifle to put a vehicle struck animal down.
Heck, I have witnessed a couple times where a cattleman has asked an LEO to borrow their rifle to put the animal down.
While it was a HUGE policy violation, the cattleman was handed a rifle, the animal was dispatched, and the gun went back in the rack.
I very highly doubt the rancher was killed "over a wounded bull".
More likely than not, a person pointed a rifle at the Deputies.
What led up to the altercation is what is the question.
Understandably a livestock owner does not want to lose a large investment.
Also understandably, a Deputy does not want to have another collision, or someone get gored, or trampled by an injured/mad bull, and views public safety issues as more important than property loss.
Neither view point is wrong, but sometimes (especially when in the heat of the moment) people cannot come to an agreement, and bad things occur.
Remember,this happened in rural Idaho.
99% of the rural deputies I know don't even raise an eyebrow when a rancher shows up with a hunting rifle to put a vehicle struck animal down.
Heck, I have witnessed a couple times where a cattleman has asked an LEO to borrow their rifle to put the animal down.
While it was a HUGE policy violation, the cattleman was handed a rifle, the animal was dispatched, and the gun went back in the rack.
Condolences for all involved.
Mackay,
Thanks for a good post and presenting as clear a picture as any of us are likely to have. Bad deal all around. It doesn't even have to be all that rural of Idaho for LEs to expect folks to be showing up with or possessing firearms of one sort or another. Some might consider this akin to stepping back in time when guns were on school busses or in the gun racks of pickups in school parking lots, but it's still a way of life around here.
I'd not even conjecture who was right or wrong in this scenario, I'd just guess things got heated and out of hand. I know there are many on here who have this type of direct experience. I've only come real close one time, and that's enough for me.
PS - for those who don't know Idaho and other places in the West are still open range and it's common to encounter livestock on rural roads.
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
That's a lot of speculation. I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
At this point, there's just no telling what happened. Maybe it was all accidental. I can't imagine too many rural Idahoans getting crazy at the sight of a gun-LE included.
I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
When I was a kid we had a dog catcher scandal where it was found that many of the hired hands just enjoyed beating the dogs to death with a length of rebar rather than the usual gassing them to death. At some point in time I formed an opinion that some types of personalities need to be weeded out from certain jobs. I remain convinced that every police officer should have to take a psychological evaluation twice a year to see what frame of mind they are in, officers who develop anger issues, psychopathic issues, sociopaths behavior should be removed from the force. There are many many more good police officers in this country but there are indeed a good number of egocentric little gods with a gun.
It's pretty hard to develop such a test Jimmy. Most people can figure out right away what is being looked for and how to answer in order to fit the desired profile and eschew the undesirable traits.
Psychopaths/Sociopaths are usually continually amazed that it is so easy to put people on. If you ever get the chance, watch the movie American Psycho.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
I read a statistic recently that cops in the US kill more Americans in a few months than have all the cops in Great Britain killed Brits in the last one hundred years. Can't vouch for its accuracy, though.
We are living in a world where every local incident is national news. Twenty years ago you wouldnt even have heard about many of these things if you lived one county over. People do seen more braisen toward LEO and LEO does seem more on alert and rightly so. I agree more to this story.
It's pretty hard to develop such a test Jimmy. Most people can figure out right away what is being looked for and how to answer in order to fit the desired profile and eschew the undesirable traits.
Psychopaths/Sociopaths are usually continually amazed that it is so easy to put people on. If you ever get the chance, watch the movie American Psycho.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
I read a statistic recently that cops in the US kill more Americans in a few months than have all the cops in Great Britain killed Brits in the last one hundred years. Can't vouch for its accuracy, though.
Pretty sure the United States has been a more violent place ever since there was a United States. And that's how I like it.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
I read a statistic recently that cops in the US kill more Americans in a few months than have all the cops in Great Britain killed Brits in the last one hundred years. Can't vouch for its accuracy, though.
Pretty sure the United States has been a more violent place ever since there was a United States. And that's how I like it.
Travis
In the frontiers, for sure, but even that was overstated for the sake of sensationalism. When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
"It's not uncommon for us to have these kind of livestock versus vehicle accidents," he said. "Typically they don't turn out this way."
...one would certainly HOPE not.
Prayers for all involved, impacted, and affected by this very troubling event.
GTC
I don't know where you find these greg, had me in tears. I see my family in there, and my wife's. I had to call her in. One of those guys on a horse in there is the spitting image of her dead son.
In the frontiers, for sure, but even that was overstated for the sake of sensationalism. When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
I'm pretty GD sure the frontiers never held a candle to the slums of Philly, New York and Boston.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
I read a statistic recently that cops in the US kill more Americans in a few months than have all the cops in Great Britain killed Brits in the last one hundred years. Can't vouch for its accuracy, though.
Pretty sure the United States has been a more violent place ever since there was a United States. And that's how I like it.
Travis
In the frontiers, for sure, but even that was overstated for the sake of sensationalism. When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
The popularity of dime novels in the late 1800's greatly exaggerated the bloodshed in the west. A lot of our 'history' was manufactured by writers looking to sell a book or a story. For example - you might be familiar with Nez Perce Chief Joseph's famous surrender speech when he said "From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever". Fake. That was written by an army major for an article he wrote for Harpers magazine.
When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
So, we still don't know what went down--just how it started and how it ended. Until someone fills in the blanks, it's just speculation for your own entertainment.
So, we still don't know what went down--just how it started and how it ended. Until someone fills in the blanks, it's just speculation for your own entertainment.
Here's some interesting statistics. Traditionally, about 2/3 of all LEO's killed feloniously were in the South. In 2014, for the first time ever, the blue states are killing cops at a far greater pace. I guess Black Lives Matter is working.
_____
In 2013, 27 law enforcement officers died from injuries incurred in the line of duty during felonious incidents. Of the officers feloniously killed, 16 were employed by city police departments, including 4 who were members of law enforcement agencies in cities with 250,000 or more inhabitants. Line-of-duty deaths occurred in 16 states. By region, 15 officers were feloniously killed in the South, 6 officers in the West, 4 officers in the Midwest, and 2 officers in the Northeast. (UCR)
(2014) Preliminary statistics released today by the FBI show that 51 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty in 2014. This is an increase of almost 89 percent when compared to the 27 officers killed in 2013. (Note: From 1980–2014, an average of 64 law enforcement officers have been feloniously killed per year. The 2013 total, 27, was the lowest during this 35-year period.) By region, 17 officers died as a result of criminal acts that occurred in the South, 14 officers in the West, eight officers in the Midwest, eight in the Northeast, and four in Puerto Rico. (UCR)
In the frontiers, for sure, but even that was overstated for the sake of sensationalism. When everyone is carrying guns, and don't worry too much about being arrested for legitimate self-defense, bad guys tend to exercise a great deal of self-restraint.
I'm pretty GD sure the frontiers never held a candle to the slums of Philly, New York and Boston.
Travis
You have a point, but that would clear out pretty fast, I bet, if folks in those places could carry and weren't worried about the cops if they had to shoot someone in self defense. What we have is a system whereby the bad guys are made to feel safe from all but the police, and since the police cannot be everywhere, or even close to it, crime tends to run rampant in such places. The crooks rule the streets.
The popularity of dime novels in the late 1800's greatly exaggerated the bloodshed in the west. A lot of our 'history' was manufactured by writers looking to sell a book or a story. For example - you might be familiar with Nez Perce Chief Joseph's famous surrender speech when he said "From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever". Fake. That was written by an army major for an article he wrote for Harpers magazine.
So, we still don't know what went down--just how it started and how it ended. Until someone fills in the blanks, it's just speculation for your own entertainment.
That's every cop thread on the Campfire.
Travis
We do, however know how many Campfire members have swallowed the liberal, anti-cop, Obama philosophy though....
It plays out daily in the press and on capitol hill.
Here's some interesting statistics. Traditionally, about 2/3 of all LEO's killed feloniously were in the South. In 2014, for the first time ever, the blue states are killing cops at a far greater pace. I guess Black Lives Matter is working.
years with republican presidents, the average police caused fatalities is 361.
years with democrat presidents, the average police caused fatalities is 381.
I have had more than one incident of a wounded animal, and needing to put it down. 1. a deer, still alive, laying by a road. Being a new deputy at the time i knew legally only game and fish had authority to do that. So i called him out at 10pm at night. He said why didn't you shoot it? Went over what i was taught. He said next time just shoot it and call me and i will say i told you to do it.
A wounded black angus up on a trail, shot with an arrow. Pretty sure the mexicans camped below the trail did it. i got back in to cellphone range and called the sheriff's department. Told them about it and said it was still alive. He confirmed it belonged to the rancher i thought it did. Asked me why i didn't kill it. And i said i didn't have legal permission to do it. Answer was, that rancher would understand and don't worry about it. I don't know the whole story either. But i do know i would not have allowed a wounded bull to run around where there are rescue workers, just way too dangerous.
I like these anti cop threads/remarks. Mainly because i know the posters have never walked the walk. And had to fill the shoes. and edited to say they didn't have the nads to fill the shoes.
You get to shoot us for any reason, including you showing up at the wrong f'g house, without concern for repercussions. The very least you can do is let us complain about it.
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
That's a lot of speculation. I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
At this point, there's just no telling what happened. Maybe it was all accidental. I can't imagine too many rural Idahoans getting crazy at the sight of a gun-LE included.
I'm amazed that all these folks who live in cattle country don't know that most ranchers are insured for loss of animals on open range to vehicle collision.
I've handled many such claims over the years, probably over a hundred, and in every instance the scrawny dead animal was the rancher's prize bull or best calf producing heifer. They get paid well for the animal loss in most instances.
Also, in many States livestock on open range have the right of way on roads and highways.
I'm wondering whether the rancher surprised the cops on scene by shooting the injured bull, and they instinctively responded to the shot??
As many have stated, it's a sad situation for all involved.
You get to shoot us for any reason, including you showing up at the wrong f'g house, without concern for repercussions. The very least you can do is let us complain about it.
Surveyor's get to shoot you if we show up at the wrong house?
And all this time I've simply been looking for encroachments....
You get to shoot us for any reason, including you showing up at the wrong f'g house, without concern for repercussions. The very least you can do is let us complain about it.
Surveyor's get to shoot you if we show up at the wrong house?
And all this time I've simply been looking for encroachments....
I've had more guns pulled on me while surveying than I did as a cop.
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
That's a lot of speculation. I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
At this point, there's just no telling what happened. Maybe it was all accidental. I can't imagine too many rural Idahoans getting crazy at the sight of a gun-LE included.
I'm amazed that all these folks who live in cattle country don't know that most ranchers are insured for loss of animals on open range to vehicle collision.
I've handled many such claims over the years, probably over a hundred, and in every instance the scrawny dead animal was the rancher's prize bull or best calf producing heifer. They get paid well for the animal loss in most instances.
Also, in many States livestock on open range have the right of way on roads and highways.
I'm wondering whether the rancher surprised the cops on scene by shooting the injured bull, and they instinctively responded to the shot??
As many have stated, it's a sad situation for all involved.
Bruce- Does that mean the rancher is not responsible for the damage caused by his stock in a vehicle collision?
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
That's a lot of speculation. I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
At this point, there's just no telling what happened. Maybe it was all accidental. I can't imagine too many rural Idahoans getting crazy at the sight of a gun-LE included.
I'm amazed that all these folks who live in cattle country don't know that most ranchers are insured for loss of animals on open range to vehicle collision.
I've handled many such claims over the years, probably over a hundred, and in every instance the scrawny dead animal was the rancher's prize bull or best calf producing heifer. They get paid well for the animal loss in most instances.
Also, in many States livestock on open range have the right of way on roads and highways.
I'm wondering whether the rancher surprised the cops on scene by shooting the injured bull, and they instinctively responded to the shot??
As many have stated, it's a sad situation for all involved.
Bruce- Does that mean the rancher is not responsible for the damage caused by his stock in a vehicle collision?
From my understanding, in an open-range area, that is correct.
That's exactly what it means. Matter of fact....in some area's the vehicle's owner is actually liable for damages. When I worked on some company housing for the copper mine in BagDad AZ back in the 70's all the local's joked that the area "ranchers" made ten times the value of a scraggly old range cow when one got hit by a truck belonging to the contractor that hauled the concentrate than they ever could have at auction. Seems every cow they owned was a prize breeder....including the steers.
That's exactly what it means. Matter of fact....in some area's the vehicle's owner is actually liable for damages. When I worked on some company housing for the copper mine in BagDad AZ back in the 70's all the local's joked that the area "ranchers" made ten times the value of a scraggly old range cow when one got hit by a truck belonging to the contractor that hauled the concentrate than they ever could have at auction. Seems every cow they owned was a prize breeder....including the steers.
open range means exactly that, you hit one, you pay for it. you don't want to be hitting one of those cows, they do leave dents. And i am muy familar with those windy roads leading into and out of bagdad, and the concentrate trucks. Open range is open range, even in this day not everything is fenced, God bless.
You learn to slow down really quick and the free range areas are usually very well marked. Usually.
Worst I've ever seen was AZ on their reservations. Holy fugking schit.
Dave
i was gonna ad about the rez land in northern arizona. You can see a lot of fenced land, and horses grazing outside the fence along the freeway right of way. Rez indians don't take real good care of any animal, and i have seen many times horses with their ribs showing trying to get a bite of grass. I would not want to hit an animal up there and end up in the tribal court system. They don't like white people having guns on the rez either. Which means being darn careful if you pull off the freeway for any reason, make sure you stay on the right of way.
Pile into a black cow, at night, and be stuck for damages! That'd suck.
I'd be keeping my mouth shut and splitting a side of beef with the tow truck driver.
Reminds me of an interesting incident here.
Few years back, we moved some pairs down the road to our other place. I noticed a calf seemed a little sore.
A guy shows up later that day or maybe the next day asking where the cattle that had been in that pasture were and who's they were.
I said they were moved out and didn't tell him they were mine because I had a suspicion something wasn't right.
Seems he and a buddy hit a calf in the middle of the night and damaged his truck. He wanted to be paid for damages.
Now our area right here is not open-range and I was pretty sure he had hit a calf of mine. But, when the pieces were added up, things were amiss. Reality is/was, he had been drunk the night he hit the calf and didn't want to deal with the cops at that time. But, he wanted to come back after the incident and have me pay for it. No luck there. I told him to pack sand.
Couple weeks later, same guys rolled the same pickup after closing time. Seems like a gal was injured and they left her and took off afoot after the accident. Confirmed what I thought of the guy.
You learn to slow down really quick and the free range areas are usually very well marked. Usually.
Worst I've ever seen was AZ on their reservations. Holy fugking schit.
Dave
i was gonna ad about the rez land in northern arizona. You can see a lot of fenced land, and horses grazing outside the fence along the freeway right of way. Rez indians don't take real good care of any animal, and i have seen many times horses with their ribs showing trying to get a bite of grass. I would not want to hit an animal up there and end up in the tribal court system. They don't like white people having guns on the rez either. Which means being darn careful if you pull off the freeway for any reason, make sure you stay on the right of way.
And if a drunk Indian hits you on the rez, you have about zero recourse.
Yes, it was open range. Yes, an 1800lb bull will leave a LARGE dent in a Subaru, enough that they airlifted the car's 2 occupants to Boise. I've heard that they're hurt pretty bad. They'll likely get the bill for the bull in addition to their other problems. That's what liability insurance is for.
It probably went like this: "What, you aren't shooting my prize bull". "Sir, your bull is attacking people and is dangerous, we are going to have to put him down". As he raises his rifle to the deputies, "Over my dead body" and they obliged him.
That's a lot of speculation. I've lived in cattle country almost all my life and have put animals down myself. I can't imagine very many ranchers thinking twice about putting a "prize bull" down that was hurting folks. He'd have to be quite the [bleep]. And to do a little speculating of my own, his wife probably wouldn't be surprised into a heart attack if the old clown showed up dead and he'd been that much of an [bleep]. She'd more than likely fall over and break a hip from dancing a jig that the [bleep] was dead.
At this point, there's just no telling what happened. Maybe it was all accidental. I can't imagine too many rural Idahoans getting crazy at the sight of a gun-LE included.
I'm amazed that all these folks who live in cattle country don't know that most ranchers are insured for loss of animals on open range to vehicle collision.
I've handled many such claims over the years, probably over a hundred, and in every instance the scrawny dead animal was the rancher's prize bull or best calf producing heifer. They get paid well for the animal loss in most instances.
Also, in many States livestock on open range have the right of way on roads and highways.
I'm wondering whether the rancher surprised the cops on scene by shooting the injured bull, and they instinctively responded to the shot??
As many have stated, it's a sad situation for all involved.
I found this, from 8 hours ago from USA Today
"Deputies were getting ready to put the animal down when the bull's owner, 62-year-old Jack Yantis, arrived on the scene with a rifle.
Zollman said there was an altercation and Yantis and both deputies fired their weapons.
Authorities are interviewing witnesses and checking for any video or audio recordings that were captured during the incident, according to Zollman.
Idaho State Police are handling the investigation."[u][/u]
That's exactly what it means. Matter of fact....in some area's the vehicle's owner is actually liable for damages. When I worked on some company housing for the copper mine in BagDad AZ back in the 70's all the local's joked that the area "ranchers" made ten times the value of a scraggly old range cow when one got hit by a truck belonging to the contractor that hauled the concentrate than they ever could have at auction. Seems every cow they owned was a prize breeder....including the steers.
open range means exactly that, you hit one, you pay for it. you don't want to be hitting one of those cows, they do leave dents. And i am muy familar with those windy roads leading into and out of bagdad, and the concentrate trucks. Open range is open range, even in this day not everything is fenced, God bless.
Yea....I figured you knew that country.
I got to drinking with a couple of those truck drivers one night over in Yarnell....don't know if it's true or not but they swore that a couple of those "ranchers" never sold a single cow at auction...said they just branded em and turned em loose next to the road. I know one thing though...there was "almost" as many dead cows on the road as there were dead skunks...and if you know that road, you know you can't drive a mile without hitting a skunk.
I like these anti cop threads/remarks. Mainly because i know the posters have never walked the walk. And had to fill the shoes. and edited to say they didn't have the nads to fill the shoes.
You forgot to add they wouldn't pass the psych evals.
Considering who does pass the psych evals and what they do/become I don't think that is an honest representation of the effectiveness of "psych evals". In other words your "slam"=fail.
Having worked with and for police for a number of years and having passed their psych evals I have the unique perspective of knowing what I'm talking about.
If you live in Idaho you should be aware of open range laws. Here is the link from the Idaho statutes.
Idaho Statutes
TITLE 25 ANIMALS CHAPTER 21 ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE 25-2118. ANIMALS ON OPEN RANGE -- NO DUTY TO KEEP FROM HIGHWAY. No person owning, or controlling the possession of, any domestic animal running on open range, shall have the duty to keep such animal off any highway on such range, and shall not be liable for damage to any vehicle or for injury to any person riding therein, caused by a collision between the vehicle and the animal. "Open range" means all uninclosed lands outside of cities, villages and herd districts, upon which cattle by custom, license, lease, or permit, are grazed or permitted to roam.
History: [25-2118, added 1961, ch. 249, sec. 1, p. 415.]
More information, a facebook post by an eyewitness...
Appears to me trigger happy rookies really screwed up.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
This story came from Jack’s nephew and it was told to him by Rowdy. The sheriff wanted Rowdy to change his account. The bull (becoming aggressive) seems key to the story but it wasn’t even in the account I heard from Jack’s nephew. There was crew trying to get the people out of the car that hit the bull. This sounds like a big coverup to me (the news account). I just can’t understand how those cops could have done that. We seem to get the ex military rambos around here. I’ve heard plenty about these deputies being difficult. I don’t know how Donna is doing. I hate to bother the family. I am pretty close to her and I’m so worried she isn’t going to make it.(This is a post on FB)“
Not if it's open range, no. The person who hit the livestock is responsible for damages.
BUT...if the animal escaped private land from a private fence the livestock owner is responsible.
Now you know why rural NV is called the "cow-counties".
In rural western states there is a lot of fenced private ground/farms in open range districts. That does not matter, it is still open range.
The area around Council where this accident occurred, bordering Hiway 95 is all private fenced property. Most ranchers do not like the thought of folks getting killed because a black cow got out on the hiway at night. They like the thought of injured people a lot less than they like the thought of losing cattle.
That said, sometimes cows will jump any reasonable fence. All that is needed for a bull to jump a five foot barb wire fence is for him to smell a hot cow on the other side.
Just this week we had to separate the neighbors black angus bull from my small herd of longhorns. I had a heifer in heat....and a fence five feet high composed of two tightly stretched barb wires over woven wire fencing just does not stand a chance when an 1800 pound bull comes down on top of it.
Sometimes in very rural areas you see warning signs that you are in open range. I have never seen such a sign in Payette Co where I live. But the vast majority of the county is open range.
I loaned a horse to some young girls so they could go for a ride about twenty years ago. The horse managed to get untied in their yard and trotted out onto the hiway where he was hit by a car. Fortunately the driver was not injured. But damn, I hated putting a bullet into that fine little cow pony. And the drivers liability ins cut a check for the value of the horse.
While it sounds like a very plausible scenario. I kind of doubt the origins of the statement concerning the rancher trying to interfere with the deputies shooting his bull. Adams Co Sheriff's Dept is certainly not talking with ISP conducting an investigation of the incident. And if there were any witnesses other than the deputies involved, I have not seen where the news media has gotten a word out of them. News media specifically stated that the rancher's wife had a heart attack after hearing of her husband's death.
Concerning the account credited to face book. Outraged family members would have flocked to local media outlets It would be on the front page of every tabloid in the state as well as the feature story on every news channel through the northwest.
That sounds closer to the truth. The rancher was going to take care of what tweedle Dee and tweedle dumb couldn't/didn't and the 2 sh.itsticks took that as an affront to their manhood.
Idaho shooter- I'd read earlier that there were quite a few witnesses as the road was closed for quite some time. They also had a number posted to call even if the actual shooting wasn't witnessed
Council resident here, Jack was told by dispatch to come to the accident, came with a rifle to put the animal down, all the folks here think it was an overreaction by unexperienced young police officers. It is totally likely that it was a fast escalation over him having a gun, or how the animal was being handled, but folks around here are not a threat to cops. His wife, the heart attack victim, was cuffed. This is a small town where everyone hunts and carrys rifles. Extremely low crime rate. Big budget for the police and young guys on the force. Jack was very well known and liked. Not a nutcase. The state police are not specifying how the officer sustained his ‘minor injury’.
This seems to be about the same trip that is happening nationally, overreaction by cops. No way was Jack a threat to the police. I hope this being a rural white rancher the problem of overmilitarization will be brought out of the black/ white aspect and into a clearer view.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
Council resident here, Jack was told by dispatch to come to the accident, came with a rifle to put the animal down, all the folks here think it was an overreaction by unexperienced young police officers. It is totally likely that it was a fast escalation over him having a gun, or how the animal was being handled, but folks around here are not a threat to cops. His wife, the heart attack victim, was cuffed. This is a small town where everyone hunts and carrys rifles. Extremely low crime rate. Big budget for the police and young guys on the force. Jack was very well known and liked. Not a nutcase. The state police are not specifying how the officer sustained his ‘minor injury’.
This seems to be about the same trip that is happening nationally, overreaction by cops. No way was Jack a threat to the police. I hope this being a rural white rancher the problem of overmilitarization will be brought out of the black/ white aspect and into a clearer view.
Council's a pretty small town (gas station, motel, bar, and a mercantile). I wonder if the cops came down from McCall....which is basically Lake Tahoe/Sun Valley lite. Sad deal all the way around.
Council resident here, Jack was told by dispatch to come to the accident, came with a rifle to put the animal down, all the folks here think it was an overreaction by unexperienced young police officers. It is totally likely that it was a fast escalation over him having a gun, or how the animal was being handled, but folks around here are not a threat to cops. His wife, the heart attack victim, was cuffed. This is a small town where everyone hunts and carrys rifles. Extremely low crime rate. Big budget for the police and young guys on the force. Jack was very well known and liked. Not a nutcase. The state police are not specifying how the officer sustained his ‘minor injury’.
This seems to be about the same trip that is happening nationally, overreaction by cops. No way was Jack a threat to the police. I hope this being a rural white rancher the problem of overmilitarization will be brought out of the black/ white aspect and into a clearer view.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
In short, you're pissed at all the cops your wife has blown. Got it!
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
Trying to in some way fathom why anyone would think it is a GOOD idea to bring a rifle to a scene where the police are on the scene. If the bull needed to be put down, they were likely well equipped to do so.
If he wanted to be helpful, a "I have a rifle in my car, should I get it?" would have been infinitely more helpful (and safer for all) than the more likely "You ain't shooting my bull" while brandishing a rifle scenario which played out.
Council's a pretty small town. I wonder if the cops came down from McCall....which is a suburb of LA.
As you should know,Valley county(McCall/Cascade) and Adams county bounty on the little ski hill just out of McCall towards New Meadows.I have family still in McCall and it isn't quite as bad as you say,close compared to years ago.
A McCall officer did the lettering on my logging truck and he later became a Adams county deputy.One of our local officers here was also a Adams county deputy..That's the old crew for both Adams and Valley county.Locals being officers!
That's all changed since then,now the big city officers flock to the job openings in central Idaho..I doubt many were born or raised in Idaho these days.Coming from the big cities with the big city attitude in small logging towns doesn't go over well with the locals...
I logged and worked out of Council for years and know many of the locals there now..Just a bunch of good folk wanting to be left alone.
I lived in McCall for 40 some years and it has changed but it is far from a little LA..There are still a bunch of good folks there,alot of them are my friends and hunting buddies and ofcourse,some are family.
Although it may look like it on the 4th of July....
A lot of guessing going on when we were not there. If it were my bull and I was called I would show up prepared to put the bull down if needed. I think almost anyone who lives in open range country would do the same.
one thing i can think of is those two deputies probably had no idea of how to deal with a bull other than shooting it.
I've dealt with my share of bulls. Can't say I would know how to deal with one pissed off (although they are always pissed off, this one just really pissed off) and hurt bull, while trying to balance it with injured people.
Bottom line, the HUMANS (even if they were driving a Subaru) who were hurt, have precedence over the bull.
"If he wanted to be helpful, a "I have a rifle in my car, should I get it?" would have been infinitely more helpful (and safer for all) than the more likely "You ain't shooting my bull" while brandishing a rifle scenario which played out."
Cops and cop suck-ups are allowed this type of speculation. It would go over better if you referred to the dead Rancher as a "perp". Any family members present are also "perps".
Cop critics, OTOH, are supposed to wait until "all the facts are in". If the facts put the cops in the wrong, then the media reported it wrong.
If the cop's boss [another cop] thinks he did wrong and fires him, he "threw him under the bus" to appease us, who are still "waiting on all the facts to come in".
This is just a brief synopsis of Campfire Rules with regard to cop threads.
Since you are new, I thought you might find it helpful.
Cops and cop suck-ups are allowed this type of speculation. It would go over better if you referred to the dead Rancher as a "perp". Any family members present are also "perps".
Cop critics, OTOH, are supposed to wait until "all the facts are in". If the facts put the cops in the wrong, then the media reported it wrong.
If the cop's boss [another cop] thinks he did wrong and fires him, he "threw him under the bus" to appease us, who are still "waiting on all the facts to come in".
This is just a brief synopsis of Campfire Rules with regard to cop threads.
Since you are new, I thought you might find it helpful.
That's all changed since then,now the big city officers flock to the job openings in central Idaho..I doubt many were born or raised in Idaho these days.Coming from the big cities with the big city attitude in small logging towns doesn't go over well with the locals...
I logged and worked out of Council for years and know many of the locals there now..Just a bunch of good folk wanting to be left alone.
I know that's true.... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Quick question though.....do your friends in McCall wear a tie-dyed t-shirt's?
ETA....I'm far from a cop hater but my gut tells me this was NOT the ranchers doing.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
Trying to in some way fathom why anyone would think it is a GOOD idea to bring a rifle to a scene where the police are on the scene. If the bull needed to be put down, they were likely well equipped to do so.
Bull owner/responsible party knew this, how?
... midwesterner applying provincial thinking to western sensibilities.
"If he wanted to be helpful, a "I have a rifle in my car, should I get it?" would have been infinitely more helpful (and safer for all) than the more likely "You ain't shooting my bull" while brandishing a rifle scenario which played out."
Cops and cop suck-ups are allowed this type of speculation. It would go over better if you referred to the dead Rancher as a "perp". Any family members present are also "perps".
Cop critics, OTOH, are supposed to wait until "all the facts are in". If the facts put the cops in the wrong, then the media reported it wrong.
If the cop's boss [another cop] thinks he did wrong and fires him, he "threw him under the bus" to appease us, who are still "waiting on all the facts to come in".
This is just a brief synopsis of Campfire Rules with regard to cop threads.
Since you are new, I thought you might find it helpful.
Thanks for the advice. Not a suck up, I've walked the walk, and went home with their blood, and mine and my clothes. Have also dealt with cheesedicks like you who think they know what they are talking about, but are in reality keyboard warriors with no real grasp of reality, and pontificate from a lofty perch.
Cops and cop suck-ups are allowed this type of speculation. It would go over better if you referred to the dead Rancher as a "perp". Any family members present are also "perps".
Cop critics, OTOH, are supposed to wait until "all the facts are in". If the facts put the cops in the wrong, then the media reported it wrong.
If the cop's boss [another cop] thinks he did wrong and fires him, he "threw him under the bus" to appease us, who are still "waiting on all the facts to come in".
This is just a brief synopsis of Campfire Rules with regard to cop threads.
Since you are new, I thought you might find it helpful.
Nailed it my friend!
Unfortunately it isn't a problem limited to just the "Campfire."
Council's a pretty small town (gas station, motel, bar, and a mercantile). I wonder if the cops came down from McCall....which is basically Lake Tahoe/Sun Valley lite. Sad deal all the way around.
They were Adams County deputies. McCall is in Valley County.
An American should carry a rifle any place he (or she) needs to. Officers should be good with that as long as folks aren't stupid about it. American riflemen are what made this country free...
Thanks for the advice. Not a suck up, I've walked the walk, and went home with their blood, and mine and my clothes. Have also dealt with cheesedicks like you who think they know what they are talking about, but are in reality keyboard warriors with no real grasp of reality, and pontificate from a lofty perch.
Another pus.sy with the hero syndrome. I know you've done it all and nobody understands unless they've been there and done that. We've heard it before and I've got news for you sweetheart....some of us have been there and have the experience to know. You keep giving mustache rides and alibis for your blue brothers.
Thanks for the advice. Not a suck up, I've walked the walk, and went home with their blood, and mine and my clothes. Have also dealt with cheesedicks like you who think they know what they are talking about, but are in reality keyboard warriors with no real grasp of reality, and pontificate from a lofty perch.
Another pus.sy with the hero syndrome. I know you've done it all and nobody understands unless they've been there and done that. We've heard it before and I've got news for you sweetheart....some of us have been there and have the experience to know. You keep giving mustache rides and alibis for your blue brothers.
No hero syndrome for me, just did my job as best as I knew how, and tried to help a few people along the way, and lockup some deserving Aholes.
Just gotta wonder what your "experience" was, Armed Robbery, dope, child molesting? Clearly YOU have a whole lot of latent anger. Hope you can conquer your demons some day, and move forward, remember, YOU made your own bed.
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
Trying to in some way fathom why anyone would think it is a GOOD idea to bring a rifle to a scene where the police are on the scene. If the bull needed to be put down, they were likely well equipped to do so.
If he wanted to be helpful, a "I have a rifle in my car, should I get it?" would have been infinitely more helpful (and safer for all) than the more likely "You ain't shooting my bull" while brandishing a rifle scenario which played out.
Cv540...Another coward. Hope you make it home safe
Even when it’s not hunting season, it’s not uncommon for ranchers and other residents to have guns in their trucks.
“We assume everyone has a gun in their car at all times,” Zollman said. “We deal with firearms daily. These officers are very aware of that — that (Yantis) had a gun ... (is) not uncommon. That’s just common practice.”
Sure seems like cops are killing a lot more people than say 10-20 years ago. What up with that?
Stupid people, or ordinarily smart people acting stupid when having encounters with police have a strong likelyhood of getting killed.
Solution, dont be stupid, however, if you are, be gently stupid.
It's about stupid cops. It's about chicken sh.it cowards that have no right to a badge let alone a gun. The tide is turning and it's going to be painful for stupid, scared cops.
Trying to in some way fathom why anyone would think it is a GOOD idea to bring a rifle to a scene where the police are on the scene. If the bull needed to be put down, they were likely well equipped to do so.
If he wanted to be helpful, a "I have a rifle in my car, should I get it?" would have been infinitely more helpful (and safer for all) than the more likely "You ain't shooting my bull" while brandishing a rifle scenario which played out.
Cv540...Another coward. Hope you make it home safe
Even when it’s not hunting season, it’s not uncommon for ranchers and other residents to have guns in their trucks.
“We assume everyone has a gun in their car at all times,” Zollman said. “We deal with firearms daily. These officers are very aware of that — that (Yantis) had a gun ... (is) not uncommon. That’s just common practice.”
Gotta guess that the rifle wasn't in his truck, but who knows, neither of us were there.
Done with you. Good luck in reassembling your fugged up life.
We keep constantly hearing that a lack of training is what caused the "accident" or whatever. When are we going to face the fact that in some of these cases, the training is what caused the accident?
Have also dealt with cheesedicks like you who think they know what they are talking about, but are in reality keyboard warriors with no real grasp of reality, and pontificate from a lofty perch.
It is very obvious that you know nothing about this man.
Just a thought, City people and country people have different ideas about how to handle things. For country people, calling the cops ain't one of them, in most cases. They are used to solving their own problems. The old adage is too true, "when seconds count, the cops are minutes away", but in rural cases they may be hours away. miles
We keep constantly hearing that a lack of training is what caused the "accident" or whatever. When are we going to face the fact that in some of these cases, the training is what caused the accident?
Damn...... I'm glad somebody posted what a lot of us have thought.
I've always believed that the different motivations for choosing a career in L.E. set that group apart from the "general population". [I also believe the bad motivations outnumber the good ones, but hopefully, that's not reflected in the L.E. population due to a "weeding out" in the hiring process].
But even if there is no difference, the results are more dangerous when relying on common sense is replaced by "training".
Copying military training for cops is the problem, in my opinion.
In the military, the mission is paramount. Personal safety is obviously important, but it's secondary to accomplishing the mission. Casualties are expected in a large scale operation.
When Law Enforcement training adopts all the tactics of the military, but reverses the order of importance - where personal safety trumps all - a bad thing happens:
Each person encountered becomes the potential "enemy". Any action on his part other than surrender causes the "training" to kick in and "potential" becomes "actual".
It's not that complicated, group mentality does indeed drive human behavior.
So, if you dress up folks like Soldiers, in military gear, they will act like military and will in fact view the general public as the enemy versus their real role as peace keepers who are entrusted with the law and the Constitutional rights of this nations citizens.
EVERY SINGLE writer of the Bill of Rights DID NOT want the Federal Government to have an "Army" nor to have such power over this nations citizens, PERIOD.
It's not that complicated, group mentality does indeed drive human behavior.
So, if you dress up folks like Soldiers, in military gear, they will act like military and will in fact view the general public as the enemy versus their real role as peace keepers who are entrusted with the law and the Constitutional rights of this nations citizens.
EVERY SINGLE writer of the Bill of Rights DID NOT want the Federal Government to have an "Army" nor to have such power over this nations citizens, PERIOD.
The officers that shot the rancher were part of the federal government?
You better log onto Facebook and get that information circulating.
No information about what happened has been released. The Idaho State Police are investigating. Until they release their report, we will have no idea of who did what. Many of the above posts are pure conjecture.
Well,the one witness not in the hospital lawyer'd up.
Quote
At Yantis’ home Tuesday, a man introducing himself as a family member, Rowdy Paradis, said attorneys would release a statement soon on behalf of the family. He said he was 10 feet away when Yantis was shot.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” Paradis said.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
In short, you're pissed at all the cops your wife has blown. Got it!
You have no class whatsoever.
Why the [bleep] do you always feel like butting in like an old broad?
Ace's started the wife comments on ME LONG ago. He started, I will finish it.
It's not your history but you always feel compelled to get involved.
It is because I have a super-duper-man fetish and like the feel of the cape and tights, I seem to get off on fighting evil ignorant dickheads where-ever I see them...tag, I guess you are it for today.
No information about what happened has been released. The Idaho State Police are investigating. Until they release their report, we will have no idea of who did what. Many of the above posts are pure conjecture.
You better log onto Facebook and get that information circulating.
TFF...We had a dozer operator drive off a 30' bluff into a canal a couple of days ago, killing himself. Before we could get the mess cleaned up, it was reported by the local news that he had been scalded to death by faulty operations in the refinery he was working in.
Again, if your pea brain feels like you can puck with me then have at it, personally you and stupid head are amusing in that you both simply regurgitate the same lame shxt over and over.
Well,the one witness not in the hospital lawyer'd up.
Quote
At Yantis’ home Tuesday, a man introducing himself as a family member, Rowdy Paradis, said attorneys would release a statement soon on behalf of the family. He said he was 10 feet away when Yantis was shot.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” Paradis said.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
If recent police shootings have taught me anything, it's that family of those that have been killed are about as unbiased as you can get.
Well,the one witness not in the hospital lawyer'd up.
Quote
At Yantis’ home Tuesday, a man introducing himself as a family member, Rowdy Paradis, said attorneys would release a statement soon on behalf of the family. He said he was 10 feet away when Yantis was shot.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” Paradis said.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
Witnesses that lawyer up is big flag something they are saying is a lie.
Their account doesn't make any sense. No one would spin a guy with a rifle toward themselves. It's not in human nature to do that unless protecting innocent people.
Well,the one witness not in the hospital lawyer'd up.
Quote
At Yantis’ home Tuesday, a man introducing himself as a family member, Rowdy Paradis, said attorneys would release a statement soon on behalf of the family. He said he was 10 feet away when Yantis was shot.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” Paradis said.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
Well, there you go. That explains the "shoot out" that most sources refer to.
Again, if your pea brain feels like you can puck with me then have at it, personally you and stupid head are amusing in that you both simply regurgitate the same lame shxt over and over.
right, like waiting for the facts, not jumping to conclusions, etc.
Something a real chemist would know something about...
Witnesses that lawyer up is big flag something they are saying is a lie.
Or,maybe since the sheriff allegedly ask him to change his account of the incident,he lawyered up..Or,since he is the only witness to date to speak out and there are news crews begging for first dibs at an interview,he lawyered up..Or/or/or...
Doesn't mean he is lying..The wife whom had the heart attack is the other one on scene and I'm sure she has her account of what happened even tho biased as some would put it and another extra guilty vote.
Well,the one witness not in the hospital lawyer'd up.
Quote
At Yantis’ home Tuesday, a man introducing himself as a family member, Rowdy Paradis, said attorneys would release a statement soon on behalf of the family. He said he was 10 feet away when Yantis was shot.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” Paradis said.
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
Soooo.... an "unbiased" family member, who lawyered up, says the cops just executed the guy for no reason. Spun him around and used him for target practice. Makes sense to me since it was on facebook and all so it must be true.
I think I will sit back a while and let things run their course. I don't have an opinion either way right now. But, logcutter's facebook account is utter nonsense.
We keep constantly hearing that a lack of training is what caused the "accident" or whatever. When are we going to face the fact that in some of these cases, the training is what caused the accident?
Damn...... I'm glad somebody posted what a lot of us have thought.
I've always believed that the different motivations for choosing a career in L.E. set that group apart from the "general population". [I also believe the bad motivations outnumber the good ones, but hopefully, that's not reflected in the L.E. population due to a "weeding out" in the hiring process].
But even if there is no difference, the results are more dangerous when relying on common sense is replaced by "training".
Copying military training for cops is the problem, in my opinion.
In the military, the mission is paramount. Personal safety is obviously important, but it's secondary to accomplishing the mission. Casualties are expected in a large scale operation.
When Law Enforcement training adopts all the tactics of the military, but reverses the order of importance - where personal safety trumps all - a bad thing happens:
Each person encountered becomes the potential "enemy". Any action on his part other than surrender causes the "training" to kick in and "potential" becomes "actual".
Witnesses that lawyer up is big flag something they are saying is a lie.
Or,maybe since the sheriff allegedly ask him to change his account of the incident,he lawyered up..Or,since he is the only witness to date to speak out and there are news crews begging for first dibs at an interview,he lawyered up..Or/or/or...
Doesn't mean he is lying..The wife whom had the heart attack is the other one on scene and I'm sure she has her account of what happened even tho biased as some would put it and another extra guilty vote.
It's not that complicated, group mentality does indeed drive human behavior.
So, if you dress up folks like Soldiers, in military gear, they will act like military and will in fact view the general public as the enemy versus their real role as peace keepers who are entrusted with the law and the Constitutional rights of this nations citizens.
EVERY SINGLE writer of the Bill of Rights DID NOT want the Federal Government to have an "Army" nor to have such power over this nations citizens, PERIOD.
Exactly. It's a matter of semantics. The Founders would have no trouble at all identifying what we term "police forces" and armed "Federal Agencies/Bureaus" as professional, domestically deployed, standing armies, operating at the behest of various levels of government and exercising powers over the nation's populace. The only thing they feared more was a central bank issuing our nation's currency. We now have both. No wonder our steady progression towards tyranny and despotism.
I'm pretty sure the rancher didn't show up on the scene to threaten the cops with a rifle. We're not talking about an inner city crackhead here.
I'm also pretty sure the cops killed him. I guess it was all just a minor misunderstanding. Nothing to see here, move along, go on home.
How about this instead? The population there marches (with guns) on the local police department and drags them all out in the street and gives them a first class ass kicking?! That's what they deserve. This BS has gone far enough.
I'm pretty sure the rancher didn't show up on the scene to threaten the cops with a rifle. We're not talking about an inner city crackhead here.
I'm also pretty sure the cops killed him. I guess it was all just a minor misunderstanding. Nothing to see here, move along, go on home.
How about this instead? The population there marches (with guns) on the local police department and drags them all out in the street and gives them a first class ass kicking?! That's what they deserve. This BS has gone far enough.
Hopefully logcutter left a few trees standing so they can have a good ol' fashioned hangin'.
Dave
PS-You'd make a great lawyer. Very objective and fact based line of thinking you have here.
I'm pretty sure the rancher didn't show up on the scene to threaten the cops with a rifle. We're not talking about an inner city crackhead here.
I'm also pretty sure the cops killed him. I guess it was all just a minor misunderstanding. Nothing to see here, move along, go on home.
How about this instead? The population there marches (with guns) on the local police department and drags them all out in the street and gives them a first class ass kicking?! That's what they deserve. This BS has gone far enough.
Hopefully logcutter left a few trees standing so they can have a good ol' fashioned hangin'.
Dave
PS-You'd make a great lawyer. Very objective and fact based line of thinking you have here.
Enough's enough Dave. These people are salt of the earth ranchers, working people, people that raised their kids the American way. I respect the way they live their lives and contribute rather than bleed society. I've had it with city punks and SWAT mentality cops ruining the country. It's time for a cleansing to get America back where she belongs.
Witnesses that lawyer up is big flag something they are saying is a lie.
Or,maybe since the sheriff allegedly ask him to change his account of the incident,he lawyered up..Or,since he is the only witness to date to speak out and there are news crews begging for first dibs at an interview,he lawyered up..Or/or/or...
Doesn't mean he is lying..The wife whom had the heart attack is the other one on scene and I'm sure she has her account of what happened even tho biased as some would put it and another extra guilty vote.
Think about what you know about the witness. The only thing you know that he has been running his mouth. He wanted the attention until someone told him what could happen to him for saying things that he shouldn't be saying. A witness would not need a attorney unless he said something that was not true.
I doubt he needs a attorney for a lawsuit because he is pretty far down the list to receive a pay out.
In the few cases I have worked where victims/witnesses lawyer up right away it's because they weren't telling the truth.
Haven't spent much time around ranchers but you should change your handle to TheVirtualCleanser. Travis
No offense, but you really must be blind to not be able to see what's happening. Hot heads with guns and badges. Good formula for civic unrest. The more of this stuff that happens the more the American people will be sold the idea of a National, (better trained, better equipped) police force.
Bottom line, that rancher didn't show up to shoot cops, can we all agree on that? Or is this one of the extremely bizarre cases where he cracks and says, "I'm gunna go gun down some cops"? Seems damned unlikely but I'll admit it could happen, maybe it did.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the Rambo cops gunned this guy down because they reverted to some kind of autonomous "shoot everyone that somehow intimidates my man-child" syndrome.
The line in the sand is much bigger than any one specific case. America is going down and we're arguing about how much water it takes to drown her rather than how to get her head above water.
I'm pretty sure the rancher didn't show up on the scene to threaten the cops with a rifle. We're not talking about an inner city crackhead here.
I'm also pretty sure the cops killed him. I guess it was all just a minor misunderstanding. Nothing to see here, move along, go on home.
How about this instead? The population there marches (with guns) on the local police department and drags them all out in the street and gives them a first class ass kicking?! That's what they deserve. This BS has gone far enough.
Hopefully logcutter left a few trees standing so they can have a good ol' fashioned hangin'.
Dave
PS-You'd make a great lawyer. Very objective and fact based line of thinking you have here.
Enough's enough Dave. These people are salt of the earth ranchers, working people, people that raised their kids the American way. I respect the way they live their lives and contribute rather than bleed society. I've had it with city punks and SWAT mentality cops ruining the country. It's time for a cleansing to get America back where she belongs.
JFC...
You and safariman, ready to stand side-by-side in a firefight to the death, just to put America back on track.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the Rambo cops gunned this guy down because they reverted to some kind of autonomous "shoot everyone that somehow intimidates my man-child" syndrome.
Oh, me, me, I can play too.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the farmer decided his bull wasn't in that bad of shape after all, and didn't need to be put down. The cops disagreed, and then the ole guy went to protecting his investment.
(no I don't believe this. I'm just waiting for the investigation to conclude, and I can only jerk one load a day, so I needed to do something while I wait.)
Bottom line, that rancher didn't show up to shoot cops, can we all agree on that? Or is this one of the extremely bizarre cases where he cracks and says, "I'm gunna go gun down some cops"? Seems damned unlikely but I'll admit it could happen, maybe it did.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the Rambo cops gunned this guy down because they reverted to some kind of autonomous "shoot everyone that somehow intimidates my man-child" syndrome.
The line in the sand is much bigger than any one specific case. America is going down and we're arguing about how much water it takes to drown her rather than how to get her head above water.
I don't know who was at fault and the rest of you don't either. I do know cops are like ranchers, some good, some bad. I live in open range country, the county cops are mostly natives. The state cops, and we have a lot of them, are mainly new hires sent up here for training. Some are a little over .zealous . They bring their big city ideas to the country. Cows and timber are the major resources here. Most of these people no nothing of either. Most would be happy if only they had guns. Maybe it is a fear thing. Lol I know a few ranchers and a few cops that need shootings. I am sure Idaho will get it sorted out. I am sure the sheriff will try to protect his if he can, the family will try to protect theirs, it is human nature. I am not a cop hater in general. But there are some that should not be even dog catchers.
Bottom line, that rancher didn't show up to shoot cops, can we all agree on that? Or is this one of the extremely bizarre cases where he cracks and says, "I'm gunna go gun down some cops"? Seems damned unlikely but I'll admit it could happen, maybe it did.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the Rambo cops gunned this guy down because they reverted to some kind of autonomous "shoot everyone that somehow intimidates my man-child" syndrome.
The line in the sand is much bigger than any one specific case. America is going down and we're arguing about how much water it takes to drown her rather than how to get her head above water.
The sheriff of Adams County was one in that state that stood up for the 2nd Amendment when the liberals tried their gun grab.
He refused to enforce laws of gun control against the citizens in his county. Doesn't sound to me like his philosophy is that of a jackbooted thug...
Aside from that, it is impossible for you to guess what was in the mind of the rancher when he showed up with a rifle.
Did he start to shoot his bull and deputies just gunned him down?
Did deputies order him to drop the gun, and he pointed it at them instead?
These are the facts that need to be known before any guilt can be determined on either side of the question.
One fact that seems to be agreed upon is that both the rancher and the 2 deputies fired their weapons... Why and at whom/what is the relevant question.
I'm pretty sure the rancher didn't show up on the scene to threaten the cops with a rifle. We're not talking about an inner city crackhead here.
I'm also pretty sure the cops killed him. I guess it was all just a minor misunderstanding. Nothing to see here, move along, go on home.
How about this instead? The population there marches (with guns) on the local police department and drags them all out in the street and gives them a first class ass kicking?! That's what they deserve. This BS has gone far enough.
I'm pretty sure that no one has a damned clue what happened yet. All we know at this point are the following facts:
1) bull hit by car; 2) deputies called to scene; 3) deputies call rancher to tell him bull hit by car; 4) rancher shows up with rifle; 5) deputies readying to put bull down because of injuries/being aggressive; 6) BOTH rancher and deputies fire weapons (per news clip that logcutter put up); 7) rancher killed; 8) investigation ongoing.
That's it; that's all we know.
There was no "SWAT team" involved. There was no Federal agency involved. There were two county deputies and a rancher.
I'm pretty sure that no one has a damned clue what happened yet. All we know at this point are the following facts:
1) bull hit by car; 2) deputies called to scene; 3) deputies call rancher to tell him bull hit by car; 4) rancher shows up with rifle; 5) deputies readying to put bull down because of injuries/being aggressive; 6) BOTH rancher and deputies fire weapons (per news clip that logcutter put up); 7) rancher killed; 8) investigation ongoing.
That's it; that's all we know.
There was no "SWAT team" involved. There was no Federal agency involved. There were two county deputies and a rancher.
The rancher looked white...but the photo's need to be verified. Were either of the deputies black? What about the bull?
Once colors are confirmed we can throw everything else out and conjuncture correctly. Color pending this could turn into a federal investigation.
Seems a hell of a lot more likely the farmer decided his bull wasn't in that bad of shape after all, and didn't need to be put down. The cops disagreed, and then the ole guy went to protecting his investment.
(no I don't believe this. I'm just waiting for the investigation to conclude,
Actually, I think this is a pretty likely scenario.
Add in the fact that there were people critically injured in the car, and it's kind of hard to extricate people from a car when a pissed off bull is running around, and you could see how things could escalate quickly.
OK, I had a shower I'm all better now. 4ager has arrived to save the day. No cops were injured during the exchanges on this thread. Carry on.
Either way this plays out, cops go home, American citizen rancher does not.
I'll let the campfire, the sheriffs dept that did the shooting, and the media tell me what to conclude.
Some of us are actually waiting for silly little things called:
FACTS.
We're talking about a Sheriff's Office with a total salary budget of $600k for the year. Counting support/admin staff, that leaves about $400k in salaries, at most, for the Sheriff and all the deputies; maybe 10 total. Want to place any bets as to how many of them were born and raised there, and have family in that tiny little county, or right next door? Odds are you're talking about people who knew one another, and families know one another - it ain't some nameless and faceless "perp/cop" interaction in some city with SWAT involved. Then again, that'd require you actually THINK about the situation at hand.
How about waiting until the FACTS come in from the ISP investigation before blathering on about "Rambo-cops" or some other bullschit? Just a thought.
Glad you had a shower and feel better; that will help when you decide to start Armageddon along side safariman so you can put the nation back on track - all without any pesky facts to get in the way.
Just found this on the "Idaho New Republic" blog, sounds very credible:
"The entire operation was an ATF sting. All parties were undercover agents; the deputies, the occupants of the Subaru, and even the Bull... (he was REAL undercover) all agents. The entire thing was staged to draw the rancher out of his house to assassinate him. The wife set it up, and her "heart attack" is just a ruse to protect her true identity...yep, she is a long term undercover agent who married the rancher 27 years ago when the investigation started..."
He deserved to die. That's how this'll go. Wait and see.
pre-emptive. Good. Well met.
It takes away from everyone saying repeatedly that we should wait for the facts.
You really can't make this schit up.
Only on the Campfire can you find idiots that will "stand with safariman in a firefight to the death", who readily give out their personal information willy-nilly to unknown people for the most ridiculous of reasons, and yet who believe that facts aren't needed to determine what happened in an incident like this situation.
Waiting for the facts seems far beyond the pale and perhaps beyond comprehension around here.
Despite the annual number of fatalities caused by police remaining the same since Ford, with only a fluctuation depending on whether or not the President is R or D (360 per year versus 380 per year, average), what really matters is inciting total dumbphuckery based on social media drama that all of them are caused by jack boots, and the number - despite being the same - is rising exponentially.
"Somebody said he was the kind of guy that wouldn't back down, and I think that would be a good euphemistic way to put it," said Dale Fisk, who said he had known Yantis his whole life. Fisk is also the editor of the local paper, the Adams County Record.
Hmmm, kinda sounds like the "you ain't shooting my prized bull, I don't care about no Subaru driving folks bleeding" scenario fits more and more.
ISP investigating. Emergency crews on the scene; likely witnesses there. Possible other witnesses if any other vehicles were around.
Can't wait for those pesky little facts, though; HAVE to assume that a county with maybe 10 deputies that has never had an officer-involved fatal shooting is somehow home to "Rambo-cops" and "SWAT teams" that are just itching to kill someone over any perceived slight at all.
IDAHO CODE GENERAL LAWS TITLE 25. ANIMALS CHAPTER 21. ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE
25-2118. Animals on open range -- No duty to keep from highway No person owning, or controlling the possession of, any domestic animal running on open range, shall have the duty to keep such animal off any highway on such range, and shall not be liable for damage to any vehicle or for injury to any person riding therein, caused by a collision between the vehicle and the animal. "Open range" means all uninclosed lands outside of cities, villages and herd districts, upon which cattle by custom, license, lease, or permit, are grazed or permitted to roam.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Looks like this 2 me. If I wanted my bull moved....cowdogs,horses,birdshot,ropes, stock trailer would be needed. To euthanize bull, 22 mag to 30 30 would be needed. To piss off cops high powered rifle, wife, nephew and or what not. Risk of richochet too great with high velocity weapons. Obviously he should've stayed home.
Looks like this 2 me. If I wanted my bull moved....cowdogs,horses,birdshot,ropes, stock trailer would be needed. To euthanize bull, 22 mag to 30 30 would be needed. To piss off cops high powered rifle, wife, nephew and or what not. Risk of richochet too great with high velocity weapons. Obviously he should've stayed home.
With a handle of "Angus" I would have thought you would have sided with the bull.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
Yep. Good point.
But probably a civilian dispatcher being paid 11 bucks an hour reacting to the initial call, with no way of knowing what the situation at the scene was, just trying to be helpful.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
Yep. Good point.
But probably a civilian dispatcher being paid 11 bucks an hour reacting to the initial call, with no way of knowing what the situation at the scene was, just trying to be helpful.
I'm sure that's it. Small town/county. 'Hey, one of Bob's cows got hit, I'll call him'
If the sheriff's department was called because of the accident, let the sheriff's department tend to it, period.
I've never seen MORE people at an accident site help the situation.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
Yep. Good point.
But probably a civilian dispatcher being paid 11 bucks an hour reacting to the initial call, with no way of knowing what the situation at the scene was, just trying to be helpful.
I'm sure that's it. Small town/county. 'Hey, one of Bob's cows got hit, I'll call him'
If the sheriff's department was called because of the accident, let the sheriff's department tend to it, period.
I've never seen MORE people at an accident site help the situation.
Yep.
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions; likely another sad example of that old truth.
I'm pretty sure that no one has a damned clue what happened yet. All we know at this point are the following facts:
1) bull hit by car; 2) deputies called to scene; 3) deputies call rancher to tell him bull hit by car; 4) rancher shows up with rifle; 5) deputies readying to put bull down because of injuries/being aggressive; 6) BOTH rancher and deputies fire weapons (per news clip that logcutter put up); 7) rancher killed; 8) investigation ongoing.
That's it; that's all we know.
There was no "SWAT team" involved. There was no Federal agency involved. There were two county deputies and a rancher.
There is no room for facts in this conversation.
The car ran into a field and ran down the bull. The bull was carrying concealed and drew on the rancher. The officers shot through the rancher to kill the bull before the bull could shoot the rancher. The wife had a heart attack because she was having an affair with the bull.
For those who haven't read the Herriot books, you really need to. His account of his first attempt at collecting semen will leave you in tears from laughter.
For those who haven't read the Herriot books, you really need to. His account of his first attempt at collecting semen will leave you in tears from laughter.
The dead rancher was not at fault for the accident and the liability for the bull is with the car driver. This is the West, not like east of the Rockies.
I have had cows in open range. You hurt one because you are to stupid to read signs, watch where you are driving, and drive to fast for the conditions you pay the damages.
Police are not eager to put down wounded animals. It caused a mound of paperwork for most officers. They call the livestock owner if they can. Livestock owners usually know how to asses the injury and take approbate action. In my part of the world ranchers are almost always armed of have firearms readily available for emergencies. This did not happen in NJ or NYC.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
Yep. Good point.
But probably a civilian dispatcher being paid 11 bucks an hour reacting to the initial call, with no way of knowing what the situation at the scene was, just trying to be helpful.
In a County of 4K, everyone pretty much knows everybody and their business. Some of the responses from people East of the Rockies are pretty ignorant on how things are done out West.
I'm pretty sure that no one has a damned clue what happened yet. All we know at this point are the following facts:
1) bull hit by car; 2) deputies called to scene; 3) deputies call rancher to tell him bull hit by car; 4) rancher shows up with rifle; 5) deputies readying to put bull down because of injuries/being aggressive; 6) BOTH rancher and deputies fire weapons (per news clip that logcutter put up); 7) rancher killed; 8) investigation ongoing.
That's it; that's all we know.
There was no "SWAT team" involved. There was no Federal agency involved. There were two county deputies and a rancher.
There is no room for facts in this conversation.
The car ran into a field and ran down the bull. The bull was carrying concealed and drew on the rancher. The officers shot through the rancher to kill the bull before the bull could shoot the rancher. The wife had a heart attack because she was having an affair with the bull.
"The wife had a heart attack because she was having an affair with the bull."
Another selling point for artificial insemmenination. Prize genetics in a straw can't stand up 2 a subaru.
I have worked on a ranch with five thousand range cows. Most would think nothing of stomping you into a muddy mush. You can AI them all, I will let the bulls do it the honest way.
For those who haven't read the Herriot books, you really need to. His account of his first attempt at collecting semen will leave you in tears from laughter.
I remember that, it was funny as hell.
Yes it was. Made me laugh again just remembering it.
Only on the Campfire can you find idiots that will "stand with safariman in a firefight to the death", who readily give out their personal information willy-nilly to unknown people for the most ridiculous of reasons, and yet who believe that facts aren't needed to determine what happened in an incident like this situation.
Waiting for the facts seems far beyond the pale and perhaps beyond comprehension around here.
You literally bore me with your predictability. Like some retard bangin on a drum.
Only on the Campfire can you find idiots that will "stand with safariman in a firefight to the death", who readily give out their personal information willy-nilly to unknown people for the most ridiculous of reasons, and yet who believe that facts aren't needed to determine what happened in an incident like this situation.
Waiting for the facts seems far beyond the pale and perhaps beyond comprehension around here.
You literally bore me with your predictability. Like some retard bangin on a drum.
More like banging on someone being a retard and beating them like a drum.
Wait on the facts; this schit is only as hard as you make it, but by God you're trying to make it a Herculean endeavor.
You literally bore me with your predictability. Like some retard bangin on a drum.
The same predictability of citing the increasing number of rambo cop killings becoming epidemic, before we know what happened AND despite the fact that the number of officer involved homicides haven't really increased in over 30+ years?
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
Generally, when it happens around here, the sheriff tries to find the owner to have them help resolve the situation. So I don't find it unusual that the dispatcher asked the owner to come out. I have seen cops try to move, capture, roundup loose cattle before. Doesn't go well usually. Even at an accident scene, I'd rather have a couple people who know how to deal with pissed of cattle work to get a bull etc. out of the way rather than asking deputies and first responders to do it.
Now, asking the guy to bring a rifle? If that truly happened. Hindsight definitely shows that wasn't the smartest thing to do.
If that bull was working...the calves would be born Aug 15. Wonder if he had a fall calving herd. What I said is if you are willing to die 4 it corral it. GFY.
Now, asking the guy to bring a rifle? If that truly happened. Hindsight definitely shows that wasn't the smartest thing to do.
That is an asinine statement. A rifle is a tool. This is IDAHO. The only thing wrong with asking a cattleman to bring a rifle (during hunting season), is that it is redundant.
If having a rifle with you in rural Idaho is an inherent problem, the world has truly gone to hell.
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Question: who is liable in this type of accident in Idaho?
The rancher who owned the bull for failure to have it fenced in, or the driver of the auto for failure to avoid it?
That was covered earlier, driver.
ok, thanks. Couldn't really bring myself to go through all 3 pages of this.
Yet you could bring yourself to post repeatedly in the thread?
Yeah, I posted my opinions about a different subject.
Was kind of a simple question. Sorry if it bothered you to read the answer to it again. I'll reimburse you for your lost time, just give me your hourly rate and PM me your info.
Now, asking the guy to bring a rifle? If that truly happened. Hindsight definitely shows that wasn't the smartest thing to do.
That is an asinine statement. A rifle is a tool. This is IDAHO. The only thing wrong with asking a cattleman to bring a rifle (during hunting season), is that it is redundant.
If having a rifle with you in rural Idaho is an inherent problem, the world has truly gone to hell.
Here you go Dutch, you seem to need a refresher with some regularity:
If I had a prize bull, and such bull was really a "prize", I would have had him confined.
If I were a deputy at the scene of an accident that involved a wounded bull charging first responders, I would have promptly shot the bull between the eyes, then instructed the dispatcher to notify the owner that his dead bull could be retrieved after the scene of the accident was cleared.
But, as SH said... hindsight is 20/20.
But as long as we are Monday morning quarterbacking...
As far as the open range laws, it ONLY applies in areas without fences. Like on OPEN RANGE If there is a fence, it's not open range, and the cattle owner is responsible for any damage caused by their property.
I've been around a couple of events of horses getting out of fenced areas in designated "open range", and the horse owners got to call their insurance agents to cover the damage to the cars.
I was curious what really happened here, but with people lawyering up the truth probably won't get out for a while. It sounds like a tragic mistake, but the rancher could have done something foolish to trigger the shooting. If two different officers fired, it suggests that something was going on, that gave them concern - not just one cop deciding to shoot.
Or maybe international corporate mason Jews wanted his ranch, and staged an elaborate death so they could buy it cheap.
Newborn black calves born in early august in over 100 degree Temps that fall asleep in full sun will spike Temps over 106 degree f. Some die some get permanent neurological damage. Most fall calves shoot 4 mid sept start date. I doubt the bull was "working". I also doubt there are November grazing allotments. But I am ASS U MING.
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Yes. Public land should be reserved for Fireball's recreational activities and Fireball's recreational activities only.
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Keep posting crap out of your bunghole. Bet you are a real popular hunter with the landowners in your area.
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Keep posting crap out of your bunghole. Bet you are a real popular hunter with the landowners in your area.
Yeah, even that kinda schidt don't fly in Oregon... (expect for downtown Portland)
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Keep posting crap out of your bunghole. Bet you are a real popular hunter with the landowners in your area.
Late in the year,...Fb2 is trying to pull out of the back of the pack and win KOTY by a nose, or so it would appear.
......the stuff he's posted today goes WAY beyond his usually turgid missives, opens up whole new territories and areas of stupidity.
As far as the open range laws, it ONLY applies in areas without fences. Like on OPEN RANGE If there is a fence, it's not open range, and the cattle owner is responsible for any damage caused by their property.
I've been around a couple of events of horses getting out of fenced areas in designated "open range", and the horse owners got to call their insurance agents to cover the damage to the cars.
That first part is definitely not true everywhere. It can very well be considered 'open' range even with fences along the road.
I doubt this bull was coming off of a public lands grazing allotment considering the time of year and place. That said, I bet there are cattle on public lands in Idaho everday of the year. Many desert/semi-desert areas are used as winter allotments.
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Yes. Public land should be reserved for Fireball's recreational activities and Fireball's recreational activities only.
Dave
See Dave, it's really not hard to come to a consensus if all parties are being reasonable.
Having a high old time, spitting coffee through your nose, crackin' jokes, ....what a great party.....
Somewhere along the line I missed being issued the capacity to JOKE about this sorta' thing.
Whoever commented about your superimposing midwestern mindset on a WESTERN issue was bang on, mister (small m)
Don't really see it as a "Western Issue." Someone decided to show up where the police were, brandished and discharged a firearm, and got himself killed. Don't care if he was from Idaho, Wisconsin, or New York. Don't care if he was white or black, a rancher or a dope dealer.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Having a high old time, spitting coffee through your nose, crackin' jokes, ....what a great party.....
Somewhere along the line I missed being issued the capacity to JOKE about this sorta' thing.
Whoever commented about your superimposing midwestern mindset on a WESTERN issue was bang on, mister (small m)
Don't really see it as a "Western Issue." Someone decided to show up where the police were, brandished and discharged a firearm, and got himself killed. Don't care if he was from Idaho, Wisconsin, or New York. Don't care if he was white or black, a rancher or a dope dealer.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Not sure exactly you call home but in this part of the world showing up without a gun would be unusual. I carry one all day every day in the states I can do so legally. I had a rifle with me 99% of the time I lived in Central Oregon.
Having a high old time, spitting coffee through your nose, crackin' jokes, ....what a great party.....
Somewhere along the line I missed being issued the capacity to JOKE about this sorta' thing.
Whoever commented about your superimposing midwestern mindset on a WESTERN issue was bang on, mister (small m)
Don't really see it as a "Western Issue." Someone decided to show up where the police were, brandished and discharged a firearm, and got himself killed. Don't care if he was from Idaho, Wisconsin, or New York. Don't care if he was white or black, a rancher or a dope dealer.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Not sure exactly you call home but in this part of the world showing up without a gun would be unusual. I carry one all day every day in the states I can do so legally. I had a rifle with me 99% of the time I lived in Central Oregon.
I don't think carrying the gun was the problem, I think it was when he deployed, brandished it, and fired it, that things went bad.
Where you live, if you show up at an accident scene where the police are on scene, and you deploy your firearm of choice, while interfering with rescue operations, what do you think might happen?
So the police call him to the scene then shoot him when he arrives ready to defend his property? I hate to, but I could agree with Steelhead on this one. Why call him there at all?
So the police call him to the scene then shoot him when he arrives ready to defend his property? I hate to, but I could agree with Steelhead on this one. Why call him there at all?
I've never seen an accident involving livestock that didn't involve the owner of the livestock being notified as quickly as possible. Especially if there is a downed fence.
I guess we don't know whose decision it was to call him, whether the deputies on scene, or the dispatcher.
I guess we don't know if it was a fluid situation. Possibly initially it looked like the bull could be contained, and they summoned him to the scene to do so, and then the bull became more of a problem.
Bottom line is it seems that he placed the value of the bull above the lives of the others involved in the accident, the first responders, the other traffic that the bull was charging, and ultimately above his own life.
Because in those links with information about open range laws I do not see any mention of liability falling on the driver. It just states that the animals owner shall not be held liable. Seems like liability is determined in court, but hell, what do I know...
I have 4 good cow dogs, tough sons of bitches. A bull that is hurt and mad will stand and fight, pretty sure my dogs couldn't move him unless they ate him and went off the road to [bleep].
I have 4 good cow dogs, tough sons of bitches. A bull that is hurt and mad will stand and fight, pretty sure my dogs couldn't move him unless they ate him and went off the road to [bleep].
I figure heelers could, headers not so much. miles
Mss I gotta say it could be true what you say. But if it is that hurt and standing it's ground why are there reports of it charging? I have found if the dogs can get em to spin, and then bite em in the nose then heel em the majority of em will break loose and run Bellering the whole way. Bird shot also helps.
I'm curious why the rancher's friend claims there were problems between the locals and the cops for quite a while. What's the history?
Maybe the police are a problem for them in that area.
Dave
I thought only blacks had problems with the police and they earned it so it's ok? And white guys are supposed to support cops because it's just right and all.
I'm having trouble tracking all this. Maybe I smoke too much dope.
I don't care that he brought a gun. I don't care if anyone carries a gun. I carry a gun.
I just don't whip it out without reason. I sure as heck don't whip it out around other armed persons who may not be sure of my intentions, whether they are cops or anyone else.
The fact that he brought a gun, if he had left it in the truck wouldn't have been a factor.
Gotta wonder why he chose to deploy it. Most likely scenario was to make his point that he thought the bull shouldn't be put down.
Miles, My dogs work both ends, one is a quarter pit. Healers are tough little bastards and I have had a few, lol they are good for getting you bucked off. Most bulls would turn to face if they are hurt and mad. I am seventy years old and have been handling cattle my whole life. Seen many pissed off bulls, have shot a couple due to car wrecks.
We have about 9 miles of fence that borders either gravel or highway.
I have the county sheriff dispatch on speed dial and they have my parent's phone numbers on hand.
Small pastures close to town.
Part of the reason I rarely go anywhere is the simple fact that you never know when some idiot is gonna drive through the ditch and take out the fence.
This was about 3 weeks ago.
The big pastures out in the hill are all open range and it's all gravel roads with warning signs etc..
Fireball is either trolling or is maybe just very ignorant.
Believe me, the last thing we want to happen is for someone to hit a critter.
No way to say what happened out in Idaho so it would be foolish to comment on that.
I thought only blacks had problems with the police and they earned it so it's ok? And white guys are supposed to support cops because it's just right and all.
I'm having trouble tracking all this. Maybe I smoke too much dope.
No idea. None of my black friends have problems with the police.
Gruff thinks I'm black and I honestly don't have any problems with them either.
I don't care that he brought a gun. I don't care if anyone carries a gun. I carry a gun.
I just don't whip it out without reason. I sure as heck don't whip it out around other armed persons who may not be sure of my intentions, whether they are cops or anyone else.
The fact that he brought a gun, if he had left it in the truck wouldn't have been a factor.
Gotta wonder why he chose to deploy it. Most likely scenario was to make his point that he thought the bull shouldn't be put down.
I am guessing here and I really don't like to guess without facts but I think the reason they called him in the first place was to come and put the bull down. I also don't see that calling him to come was in any way ignoring the folks who were hurt in the car.
This article won't stop the rampant speculation on here, mostly from folks who probably don't have a clue where Idaho is and surely don't know where Adams county, where the incident occurred, is located. Lighten up folks the facts will come out eventually, if there were misdeeds the facts are a lot harder to cover up in a place like Adams county than they are in some other places.
Having a high old time, spitting coffee through your nose, crackin' jokes, ....what a great party.....
Somewhere along the line I missed being issued the capacity to JOKE about this sorta' thing.
Whoever commented about your superimposing midwestern mindset on a WESTERN issue was bang on, mister (small m)
Don't really see it as a "Western Issue." Someone decided to show up where the police were, brandished and discharged a firearm, and got himself killed. Don't care if he was from Idaho, Wisconsin, or New York. Don't care if he was white or black, a rancher or a dope dealer.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Oh, you've made that quite evident,...hell you think this situation's FUNNY.
Quote
Don't really see it as a "Western Issue."
No, again it's QUITE evident what you see and don't,....you've identified yourself for what you really are quite handily, and in some specific detail.
Because in those links with information about open range laws I do not see any mention of liability falling on the driver. It just states that the animals owner shall not be held liable. Seems like liability is determined in court, but hell, what do I know...
Linking this death to the Ft Worth homeowner killed in his garage by cops at the wrong address, and the former Marine killed by Tucson SWAT, the obvious lesson to be learned is that if you have a firearm when cops show up, and you didn't send for them...... shoot fast and straight.
Being the only survivor has obvious advantages when compared to being the victim of a wrongful death by cops.
I sure as hell wouldn't roll up and hop out with a gun if the cops were already there. That's just asking for trouble.
Not saying cops are trigger happy idiots but you don't always know who you're dealing with and vice versa from the cops perspective.
I'd just as soon let the cops shoot the critter anyway.
Pretty spot on Sam, but then it seems that you operate with a modicum of common sense and logic. Seems not all of the speculators do - hence some of the comments.
Linking this death to the Ft Worth homeowner killed in his garage by cops at the wrong address, and the former Marine killed by Tucson SWAT, the obvious lesson to be learned is that if you have a firearm when cops show up, and you didn't send for them...... shoot fast and straight.
Being the only survivor has obvious advantages when compared to being the victim of a wrongful death by cops.
Damn witnesses wreck everything,,,,wreck a good story as well. Remember, 2 people can keep a secret....as long as one of them is dead.....
Linking this death to the Ft Worth homeowner killed in his garage by cops at the wrong address, and the former Marine killed by Tucson SWAT, the obvious lesson to be learned is that if you have a firearm when cops show up, and you didn't send for them...... shoot fast and straight.
Being the only survivor has obvious advantages when compared to being the victim of a wrongful death by cops.
Damn witnesses wreck everything,,,,wreck a good story as well. Remember, 2 people can keep a secret....as long as one of them is dead.....
Gotta pry, what was your experience that so jaded you? Lots and lots of anger.
I answered this last night in a fairly wordy response but it has disappeared overnight. The abridged version I'll indulge you now.
I worked for a local PD many years back and witnessed some truly disgusting and illegal behaviors by several "officers". One sgt put a ladder to the 2nd story master bedroom in his old house and raped his ex wife. Flat out undeniable RAPE! Since our department couldn't investigate one of our own the case went to another metropolis to investigate with instructions that it never happened. Well the other dept owed ours a favor because a few months earlier a couple of their detectives got in a serious accident after partying -our department never charged them and they kept their jobs. So the metropolis investigating the rape paid our department and specifically, Sgt. Rapist back. The entire thing was swept under the rug. Not another word and an unofficial memo to never talk about it again. After all this guys job and freedom could be in jeopardy because he was a good guy, one of "us". A year later a different cop more senior was fired for a different rape. The rape of someone in his custody.
My anger stems from the daily abuse that happens by some cops but is defended by virtually all cops. If a 63 year old white, well respected cattle rancher isn't safe from being blown away in front of his wife who is. Those are just 2 cases from 1 department.
I'm not anti cop, in fact my oldest son is an MP in the USMC and may make LE a career. I raised him to be an honest, kind, moral man and I'm afraid that LE, the way it's going, will not accept those qualities. I know that good, moral men exist in LE as I worked with some. They were old school guys that were just counting their days till retirement. They thought that the new group of young cops with heads shaved and always looking for a fight made the job tough.
For those who haven't read the Herriot books, you really need to. His account of his first attempt at collecting semen will leave you in tears from laughter.
i lost part of my life at an elk camp in colorado one year talking about artificial insemination with a brother in law who was running about 600cows at the time. I do not want that job.
Another selling point for artificial insemmenination. Prize genetics in a straw can't stand up 2 a subaru.
I have worked on a ranch with five thousand range cows. Most would think nothing of stomping you into a muddy mush. You can AI them all, I will let the bulls do it the honest way.
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
Gotta pry, what was your experience that so jaded you? Lots and lots of anger.
I answered this last night in a fairly wordy response but it has disappeared overnight. The abridged version I'll indulge you now.
I worked for a local PD many years back and witnessed some truly disgusting and illegal behaviors by several "officers". One sgt put a ladder to the 2nd story master bedroom in his old house and raped his ex wife. Flat out undeniable RAPE! Since our department couldn't investigate one of our own the case went to another metropolis to investigate with instructions that it never happened. Well the other dept owed ours a favor because a few months earlier a couple of their detectives got in a serious accident after partying -our department never charged them and they kept their jobs. So the metropolis investigating the rape paid our department and specifically, Sgt. Rapist back. The entire thing was swept under the rug. Not another word and an unofficial memo to never talk about it again. After all this guys job and freedom could be in jeopardy because he was a good guy, one of "us". A year later a different cop more senior was fired for a different rape. The rape of someone in his custody.
My anger stems from the daily abuse that happens by some cops but is defended by virtually all cops. If a 63 year old white, well respected cattle rancher isn't safe from being blown away in front of his wife who is. Those are just 2 cases from 1 department.
I'm not anti cop, in fact my oldest son is an MP in the USMC and may make LE a career. I raised him to be an honest, kind, moral man and I'm afraid that LE, the way it's going, will not accept those qualities. I know that good, moral men exist in LE as I worked with some. They were old school guys that were just counting their days till retirement. They thought that the new group of young cops with heads shaved and always looking for a fight made the job tough.
Fair enough, thanks.
Really kind of pointless to accuse or defend much more without further details as to this case.
Just found this on the "Idaho New Republic" blog, sounds very credible:
"The entire operation was an ATF sting. All parties were undercover agents; the deputies, the occupants of the Subaru, and even the Bull... (he was REAL undercover) all agents. The entire thing was staged to draw the rancher out of his house to assassinate him. The wife set it up, and her "heart attack" is just a ruse to protect her true identity...yep, she is a long term undercover agent who married the rancher 27 years ago when the investigation started..."
Well we now have two undisputed facts in this thread.
First the police and other individual fired shots
Second: we now know TRH posts on the Idaho New Republic blog
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
I have 4 good cow dogs, tough sons of bitches. A bull that is hurt and mad will stand and fight, pretty sure my dogs couldn't move him unless they ate him and went off the road to [bleep].
long time ago i was helping unload some stock for a prescott rodeo that belongd to eddie belmas, i think you know of him. The brama's were coming out of the truck down a chute with i swear six foot railroad tie beams. I was sitting on one drinking a beeer. Until one of those bulls decided he didn't want to go down the chute and jumped the wall so close to me i could have scratched his chin. I suppose it could be done but i can think of a lot of things i would use to put on down other than a ar15, might just tend to tick him off.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
Clearly you want to continue to argue. Ok, I'll bite.
I believe what I believe, based on somewhat limited information, but trying to draw logical conclusions based on what we know. I have read the articles, but it appears ISP is holding details while they investigate, which seems like a good idea.
I guess when the rancher showed up with his "never back down" attitude as quoted by those who knew him, and he deployed a rifle, the deputies should have yelled to the injured people in the Subaru "just apply direct pressure, you probably won't bleed out" and let him do the whole Bull Whisperer thing for 10 or 15 minutes.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
you're giving him crap for going off without knowing for sure what happened?
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
Yup, and he hasn't danced around about proving that, with a whole goddam BARRAGE of stupid, unfeeling, unwarranted and ignorant commentary. I gotta say that the fascistic undertones evident leave me in doubt of he and I EVER seeing eye to eye.
Sam just mentioned the almost unbelievable SADNESS radiating outward and about from this tragic event.
Gotta pry, what was your experience that so jaded you? Lots and lots of anger.
I answered this last night in a fairly wordy response but it has disappeared overnight. The abridged version I'll indulge you now.
I worked for a local PD many years back and witnessed some truly disgusting and illegal behaviors by several "officers". One sgt put a ladder to the 2nd story master bedroom in his old house and raped his ex wife. Flat out undeniable RAPE! Since our department couldn't investigate one of our own the case went to another metropolis to investigate with instructions that it never happened. Well the other dept owed ours a favor because a few months earlier a couple of their detectives got in a serious accident after partying -our department never charged them and they kept their jobs. So the metropolis investigating the rape paid our department and specifically, Sgt. Rapist back. The entire thing was swept under the rug. Not another word and an unofficial memo to never talk about it again. After all this guys job and freedom could be in jeopardy because he was a good guy, one of "us". A year later a different cop more senior was fired for a different rape. The rape of someone in his custody.
My anger stems from the daily abuse that happens by some cops but is defended by virtually all cops. If a 63 year old white, well respected cattle rancher isn't safe from being blown away in front of his wife who is. Those are just 2 cases from 1 department.
I'm not anti cop, in fact my oldest son is an MP in the USMC and may make LE a career. I raised him to be an honest, kind, moral man and I'm afraid that LE, the way it's going, will not accept those qualities. I know that good, moral men exist in LE as I worked with some. They were old school guys that were just counting their days till retirement. They thought that the new group of young cops with heads shaved and always looking for a fight made the job tough.
Your story reminds me of the novel Bonfire of the Vanities. That favor system was prominent among cops, judges, prosecutors, etc... Pretty much exactly as you described it.
This article won't stop the rampant speculation on here, mostly from folks who probably don't have a clue where Idaho is and surely don't know where Adams county, where the incident occurred, is located. Lighten up folks the facts will come out eventually, if there were misdeeds
Quote
the facts are a lot harder to cover up in a place like Adams county than they are in some other places.
I don't care that he brought a gun. I don't care if anyone carries a gun. I carry a gun.
I just don't whip it out without reason. I sure as heck don't whip it out around other armed persons who may not be sure of my intentions, whether they are cops or anyone else.
The fact that he brought a gun, if he had left it in the truck wouldn't have been a factor.
Gotta wonder why he chose to deploy it. Most likely scenario was to make his point that he thought the bull shouldn't be put down.
I am guessing here and I really don't like to guess without facts but I think the reason they called him in the first place was to come and put the bull down. I also don't see that calling him to come was in any way ignoring the folks who were hurt in the car.
Time will tell if we ever get all the facts.
I don't know about Idaho, but here that would abolsolutely be the last thing I want the landowner doing. It would put way to much liability on our agency.
Example
pd: call randy rancher " hey come take care of your wonder cow in the road"
RR shows up and says I'm gonna shoot my Cow be a use it is suffering to.much, we say ok, Randy takes out his trusty rusty 30-06 and pokes plants one between the eyes of said cow, bullet traverses through the skull of the animal and angles off something hard, travels out into the field and strikes and kills the passenger of the vehicle that hit the cow.
Now who do you think the family of that passenger is going to Sue? Dead broke and bankrupt Randy, or a municipality?
Well this posting has again proven the love of gossip and argument. An if you don't have facts, well you are free to make them up because the position you want to argue is the important thing.
A man died, and no matter the circumstances in that crowded moment, not deserving of going so soon. A pity and a waste.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
Yup, and he hasn't danced around about proving that, with a whole goddam BARRAGE of stupid, unfeeling, unwarranted and ignorant commentary. I gotta say that the fascistic undertones evident leave me in doubt of he and I EVER seeing eye to eye.
Sam just mentioned the almost unbelievable SADNESS radiating outward and about from this tragic event.
Compliments to him for bringing it back up.
Some quiet and focused reflection seems timely.
GTC
-People are injured in a vehicle following a car/cow accident. -The injured bull is charging other cars and preventing first responders from attending to the injured. -The bull's owner shows up with his "never back down" attitude, deploys, brandishes, and discharges a rifle, possibly in an attempt to prevent the bull from being put down.
After a period of quiet reflection, you being the deputy, how would you have resolved the situation?
COUNCIL — A Council man was killed Sunday when deputies attempted to control one of his bulls that was running at large.
Adams County Sheriff’s Office responded to a report of a motor vehicle crash involving a Subaru station wagon and a bull on U.S. 95, just north of Council Sunday evening, according to a news release from Idaho State Police. Emergency medical personnel arrived on the scene and began to extricate the driver and passenger of the vehicle.
During the extrication, the injured bull got up and began charging at emergency responders
“The bull was very agitated and was aggressive to emergency services, as well as the other cars coming up and down the highway,” Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman said.
Deputies prepared to put the bull down as he presented a further threat to the injured and the responders. At the same time, Jack Yantis, the bull’s owner, arrived with a rifle. There was an altercation, and Yantis and two deputies all fired their weapons, state police said.
It is unclear exactly what happened during the next few moments.
“At this time, it is believed that two deputies and Mr. Yantis all fired their weapons,” the release states.
Yantis died at the scene, and one deputy suffered a minor injury. The bull also was shot and killed.
The two deputies involved in the incident are currently on paid administrative leave in accordance with agency policy.
Both people inside the Subaru were taken to a local hospital by air ambulance. Their conditions and names were not known Monday.
“To the best of my knowledge, this is the first officer-involved shooting that Adams County has ever had,” Zollman said. “This is going to be a big hit to this community. The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It’s just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community.”
“The Adams County Sheriff’s Office takes matters involving any use of force very seriously,” Zollman added. “We have requested detectives with the Idaho State Police to conduct the investigation into this incident.”
On another note, anyone know where I can find a 5-40 brass bead front sight for a old shotgun I have? Brownells and Midway are out of stock, and so is everywhere else I have found.
I guess when the rancher showed up with his "never back down" attitude as quoted by those who knew him, and he deployed a rifle, the deputies should have yelled to the injured people in the Subaru "just apply direct pressure, you probably won't bleed out" and let him do the whole Bull Whisperer thing for 10 or 15 minutes.
What is your theory as to what happened?
I think the rancher showed up to take care of the bull and fix fence.
And maybe Rambo the cop got confused and shot the old rancher.
I can't imagine in a million years that an old rancher would shoot me over a bull so why in the hell would I shoot him?
But that is just a GUESS.
How in the hell it got to the point of shooting people rather than communicating is beyond me.
My dad is 65(?) and has been self employed for over 40 years. Cows and farm.
He doesn't like to be [bleep] with but still knows better than to [bleep] with the police.
Take your chit and if need be, get even later in court or however else but NEVER get violent with an officer of the law.
One doesn't get old by being a dumbass and I highly doubt that Jack had any intention of causing harm to anyone.
I know my dad sure as hell wouldn't but then again none of us have met Jack or the cops. Somebody got goofy and someone died because of it, that is all we know.
Sad deal.
And I hope the people that hit the bull are going to be okay.
We check (highway)fence all the time, I would feel terrible if someone hit a cow and got seriously hurt or killed.
COUNCIL — A Council man was killed Sunday when deputies attempted to control one of his bulls that was running at large.
Adams County Sheriff’s Office responded to a report of a motor vehicle crash involving a Subaru station wagon and a bull on U.S. 95, just north of Council Sunday evening, according to a news release from Idaho State Police. Emergency medical personnel arrived on the scene and began to extricate the driver and passenger of the vehicle.
During the extrication, the injured bull got up and began charging at emergency responders
“The bull was very agitated and was aggressive to emergency services, as well as the other cars coming up and down the highway,” Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman said.
Deputies prepared to put the bull down as he presented a further threat to the injured and the responders. At the same time, Jack Yantis, the bull’s owner, arrived with a rifle. There was an altercation, and Yantis and two deputies all fired their weapons, state police said.
It is unclear exactly what happened during the next few moments.
“At this time, it is believed that two deputies and Mr. Yantis all fired their weapons,” the release states.
Yantis died at the scene, and one deputy suffered a minor injury. The bull also was shot and killed.
The two deputies involved in the incident are currently on paid administrative leave in accordance with agency policy.
Both people inside the Subaru were taken to a local hospital by air ambulance. Their conditions and names were not known Monday.
“To the best of my knowledge, this is the first officer-involved shooting that Adams County has ever had,” Zollman said. “This is going to be a big hit to this community. The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It’s just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community.”
“The Adams County Sheriff’s Office takes matters involving any use of force very seriously,” Zollman added. “We have requested detectives with the Idaho State Police to conduct the investigation into this incident.”
On another note, anyone know where I can find a 5-40 brass bead front sight for a old shotgun I have? Brownells and Midway are out of stock, and so is everywhere else I have found.
I don't know what kind of cattle production the rancher was in, but if he was raising registered cattle and planned to sell bulls, AI isn't permitted. Only the progeny from naturally bred cows can be registered.
I guess when the rancher showed up with his "never back down" attitude as quoted by those who knew him, and he deployed a rifle, the deputies should have yelled to the injured people in the Subaru "just apply direct pressure, you probably won't bleed out" and let him do the whole Bull Whisperer thing for 10 or 15 minutes.
What is your theory as to what happened?
I think the rancher showed up to take care of the bull and fix fence.
And maybe Rambo the cop got confused and shot the old rancher.
I can't imagine in a million years that an old rancher would shoot me over a bull so why in the hell would I shoot him?
But that is just a GUESS.
How in the hell it got to the point of shooting people rather than communicating is beyond me.
My dad is 65(?) and has been self employed for over 40 years. Cows and farm.
He doesn't like to be [bleep] with but still knows better than to [bleep] with the police.
Take your chit and if need be, get even later in court or however else but NEVER get violent with an officer of the law.
One doesn't get old by being a dumbass and I highly doubt that Jack had any intention of causing harm to anyone.
I know my dad sure as hell wouldn't but then again none of us have met Jack or the cops. Somebody got goofy and someone died because of it, that is all we know.
Sad deal.
And I hope the people that hit the bull are going to be okay.
We check (highway)fence all the time, I would feel terrible if someone hit a cow and got seriously hurt or killed.
Not knowing first hand guessing , but think Sam has it right, prayers for the family. I have had cattle get out, how about anybody else??
I think the rancher showed up to take care of the bull and fix fence.
And maybe Rambo the cop got confused and shot the old rancher.
I can't imagine in a million years that an old rancher would shoot me over a bull so why in the hell would I shoot him?
But that is just a GUESS.
How in the hell it got to the point of shooting people rather than communicating is beyond me.
One doesn't get old by being a dumbass and I highly doubt that Jack had any intention of causing harm to anyone.
You think I'm ignorant or trolling then you agree with my point of view?
You're not smart enough to realize that Sam is saying "someone" got stupid and is still considering that the rancher is included in that assessment. That part you've never done.
Registered angus can be AI ed. Thoroughbred horses nope. No one I know calves in the treasure valley in early august.(except dairies with shade. ) If one moves cattle with a rifle one will not get much done the rest of the day. It is a sad deal no doubt. Who knows? Prayers sent to all involved. But I think lessons could be learned from mistakes. Common sense should give us conclusions.
Registered angus can be AI ed. Thoroughbred horses nope. No one I know calves in the treasure valley in early august.(except dairies with shade. ) If one moves cattle with a rifle one will not get much done the rest of the day. It is a sad deal no doubt. Who knows? Prayers sent to all involved. But I think lessons could be learned from mistakes. Common sense should give us conclusions.
A couple articles mentioned that a dispatcher calledYantis to inform him he had a bull out in the road that was hit. At least one article stated the dispatcher requested he come and help take care of the situation.
One might have even intimated that the dispatcher asked him to help put the bull down.
Obviously 20/20 here, but I have to question the decision to call the rancher. If people were hurt, cows going crazy etc etc, I'm not sure how adding more people, and armed people, to the equation would make things better.
It is pretty standard around here to call the owner of the livestock. Nobody is better equipped to handle and contain said livestock than the rancher with his knowledge and equipment. Every rancher I know has a lariat behind the seat of his truck.
City folks and ranch folks have a whole different opinion of what constitutes aggressive behavior on the part of livestock. The rancher is a far better judge of that.
But the deputy has the obligation to protect the public from perceived threats. If, in his mind, the bull was a threat, he has a duty to put it down. The rancher will just have to seek compensation in court, which by state law he will receive from the driver of the vehicle.
I think the rancher arguing that he can contain the animal safely, and refusing to back down is a more likely scenario for this event than the one popularized over the internet.
As far as the open range laws, it ONLY applies in areas without fences. Like on OPEN RANGE If there is a fence, it's not open range, and the cattle owner is responsible for any damage caused by their property.
I've been around a couple of events of horses getting out of fenced areas in designated "open range", and the horse owners got to call their insurance agents to cover the damage to the cars.
Did not happen that way in the case of my horse as previously mentioned.
Nor in the case of a neighbors cow here in Payette Co.
Though, at the time the insurance agent paying out the claim said we had to prove negligence on the part of the driver. Which was not hard to do as he hit a horse in broad daylight and in full view of his car for more than a 1/4 mile.
I had a call from the sheriffs office last Sunday morning about stock on a secondary road 5 miles from here. Not mine but they call everyone with cows Russ
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
Yup, and he hasn't danced around about proving that, with a whole goddam BARRAGE of stupid, unfeeling, unwarranted and ignorant commentary. I gotta say that the fascistic undertones evident leave me in doubt of he and I EVER seeing eye to eye.
Sam just mentioned the almost unbelievable SADNESS radiating outward and about from this tragic event.
Compliments to him for bringing it back up.
Some quiet and focused reflection seems timely.
GTC
Yep. I think it's doubtful that weasel and I would agree on much in fact my decision to switch careers earlier in life was because of the preponderance of that kind of callous stupidity. I seriously doubt I'd cross paths with him , unless perhaps I'm pumping out a septic tank, but I dam sure know the type of ego involved. Used to be another one here...but he's gone.
Yeah I don't get why the damn things are in the road anyway, if on open range and not just escaped from private land. Oh yeah, cattlemen association's political power.
If you're going to be stupid and let your big black sheit walk around in the highway at night, do you have any responsibility to the rest of humanity to 1) not do it 2) paint the suckers florescent yellow 3) not do it. let me think- How about not do it?
I never did get the whole public range thing. Lots of fun hunting elk where the cows run on public land. Does anybody think the use of public land to run your personal cows on isn't the direct result of Cattleman Associations political power?
It is actually a result of a policy called multiple use. There are no more bison in the country to control the growth of forage so we use cattle today.
Cattle make the range better and reduce the risk of fire.
You don't like what cattle do to the forest, you sure as hell would not like what free ranging bison used to do.
Newborn black calves born in early august in over 100 degree Temps that fall asleep in full sun will spike Temps over 106 degree f. Some die some get permanent neurological damage. Most fall calves shoot 4 mid sept start date. I doubt the bull was "working". I also doubt there are November grazing allotments. But I am ASS U MING.
I was told the accident happened six miles N of Council. I travel that road frequently. That section is fenced but is only a mile or two from a bunch of private property which is not fenced as those property owners do not own cattle.
But the private property lies in a narrow band about a mile wide between the hiway and USFS grazing alottments. Deer hunters frequently cut the fence between the private and public lands. Such has happened twice this fall in that immediate area that I know about.
When that fence is cut the cows have free access to those unfenced properties and onto the hiway. I am frequently amazed that I do not see dead cows on that stretch of hiway on every trip through.
We had an exceptionally hot October in this area. Our grazing allotments do expire in early Oct. But the heat has made it exceedingly difficult to gather this year.
By late summer the cows are grazing at 7000 to 8000 ft altitude and we usually get snows in early to mid October which naturally push the cows out of the high country. Those snows have not happened yet, and the ranchers are still finding a few stragglers.
No one has actually stated so yet, but I strongly suspect this bull jumped a fence considering the exact area where the accident occurred.
And as for still having bulls on cows right now that is no big deal.
Our 'marked open' calving cutoff date when preg testing is June/July which is 9 months from now. And the bulls have been out since mid-June so if something was gonna get bred it's already had plenty of time.
And generally bulls are all pretty wore out this time of year and are way easier to handle compared to spring time.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
You don't know sh.it about what happened, haven't read the articles with any meaningful comprehension, admitted you don't know and this is your response? He deserved it and the only thing better would have been if you could have killed him yourself.
You are a real sh.itbag!
Yup, and he hasn't danced around about proving that, with a whole goddam BARRAGE of stupid, unfeeling, unwarranted and ignorant commentary. I gotta say that the fascistic undertones evident leave me in doubt of he and I EVER seeing eye to eye.
Sam just mentioned the almost unbelievable SADNESS radiating outward and about from this tragic event.
Compliments to him for bringing it back up.
Some quiet and focused reflection seems timely.
GTC
Yep. I think it's doubtful that weasel and I would agree on much in fact my decision to switch careers earlier in life was because of the preponderance of that kind of callous stupidity. I seriously doubt I'd cross paths with him , unless perhaps I'm pumping out a septic tank, but I dam sure know the type of ego involved. Used to be another one here...but he's gone.
Still surprised at the level of anger and personal insults, but hey, whatever gets you through the night.
Disagree with you strongly, but respect your right to state it.
You think you can categorize people based on your past dealings but that has vast possibilities of error.
One of the proudest moments of my career was when I arrested another member of my agency who desperately needed it. His last moment of freedom was looking at me pointing a rifle at him while he decided how to play it.
At that point, they make all the decisions as to whether you shoot or not.
What I was getting at Sam is two fold. If the whole deal or disagreement was about the "value" of the bulls genetic potential or being a " prize" ( as it is merely speculation). ....you can have a lot more value stored in the semen tank than on the hoof. If it was so valuable the owner was willing to die for it,it should have been better secured. I think livestock owners are no different than the rest of the population...good,bad, and ugly. It seems investment in facilities and containment is a low priority for some producers and the animals they own suffer from the decisions and behaviors made by their owners. I am in no way saying this is the absolute case here. I am only making my posted observations from the thread and 27 years as a bovine veterinarian. I appreciate your insight on this topic and others and hope to visit with you in the future about less tragic situations. I only hope too plant the seed in my posts on this matter is this " if you own em take care of em." To have good neighbors be a good neighbor. Good fences=Good neighbors. It is sad and perhaps I better STFU.
callous remarks about a man you'll not shed a tear over and a situation you have no clue about.
Two points:
-You have a clue about the situation?? Do you have a mole in ISP? "Hey fireman Ace, let me tell you what the REAL story is."
-I'll save my tears for the deputies that have to endure the nightmares for years to come.
...even if it turns out they were at fault? I have no idea who started the cluster, but to state that at this point seems to reveal your character, or your lack of character.
The only side I'm taking is the truth, however it plays out. You might consider trying that yourself.
I only hope too plant the seed in my posts on this matter is this " if you own em take care of em." To have good neighbors be a good neighbor. Good fences=Good neighbors.
and we wonder how the original incident could have got so wrong Lets conduct ourselvs in a way that genuinely shows our intent if not ability to carry out a intelegent conversation. My goodness I know we are better than what has recently been out for display for all of us popcorn and entertainment fans.
Lets worry and ask ourselves how the unfortunate incident that started this thread could have got so wrong. Now look at ourselves and ask what we could do to prevent such an unfortunate incident if it were materializing before our eyes.
Or in a worst casescenario what would one do to promote such an unfortunant set of events.
Is this the kind of thing you want to promote or prevent?
Lets see some positive action, or keep it to ourselvs please.
There is a good bit of open range in ID and OR. Folks who live in open range country understand they can legally be livestock on the roads. In open range country it is up to drivers to look out for livestock. You hit it, you pay for it. That is just the way it is.
I have read here where some seem to think the rancher showed up with an attitude. I do not see anything in the reports that indicate he did anything wrong. He was called to come to the scene and deal with his injured bull, he came armed to put his bull down if necessary. CV540 seems to think if anyone shows up armed he should be killed. If that is his attitude I am glad I do not live in his AO. If I was called to take care of an animal hurt in an accident I would show up armed and ready to do what needed to be done. Sounds like that would get me killed in his part of the country. I am glad he doesn't live where I do.
I have stood next to LEOs while carrying openly and I have stood next to them with a rifle. That sure as hell does not mean I am out to harm anyone. It is a sick world when it is LEO elite against just normal people.
Just to clarify, no I dont think just showing up armed is a problem. I dont think open carry is a problem. If anything in any of my previous posts could be misconstrewed that way, I should have been clearer.
At some point it went beyond that. Exactly how, or whose fault it was no one here really knows. I think it unlikely he was shot when he got the rifle out to shoot the bull, doesnt fit.
I think it likely he was shot because he either pointed the rifle at the officers to prevent them from putting the bull down, or discharged it to accomplish the same thing. To me that fits better. To others, maybe not.
Guns arent bad, acting stupidly with guns has consequences, sometimes higher than others
I think this fellows actions caused his own death. I could be wrong, but that is my read. I have sympathy for his friends and family, not for him, I think it likely he was a fool.
I wont insult you for disagreeing. Make your point, maybe back it up with your reasoning, and defend your position.
In that case I misread what you posted. So far I see nothing to cause the shooting of anything but the bull. Maybe someday we will know what really happened. Maybe the truth will never come out.
Seems strange that some who are awaiting "facts" are completely ignoring at least two eyewitness accounts. You will never get the facts this side of Heaven. You will only get accounts. Then you've got guys continuing to comment after admitting to not having time to read through the thread. This is the real-world equivalent of not having time to listen, but having plenty of time to talk.
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
I have 4 good cow dogs, tough sons of bitches. A bull that is hurt and mad will stand and fight, pretty sure my dogs couldn't move him unless they ate him and went off the road to [bleep].
long time ago i was helping unload some stock for a prescott rodeo that belongd to eddie belmas, i think you know of him. The brama's were coming out of the truck down a chute with i swear six foot railroad tie beams. I was sitting on one drinking a beeer. Until one of those bulls decided he didn't want to go down the chute and jumped the wall so close to me i could have scratched his chin. I suppose it could be done but i can think of a lot of things i would use to put on down other than a ar15, might just tend to tick him off.
Many years ago I was at a rodeo in Caldwell, ID. They had an 8' gate of solid wood, it looked like a wall. After a bull ride, the hazer was trying to get the bull through a gate when it charged this high gate and went right over it - 8' high - and right into the fairgrounds midway. Several cowboys on horses headed out to herd him back as there were 1000's of people out there. A couple minutes later, here came Ferdinand, right back over the same gate into the arena.
Seems strange that some who are awaiting "facts" are completely ignoring at least two eyewitness accounts. You will never get the facts this side of Heaven. You will only get accounts. Then you've got guys continuing to comment after admitting to not having time to read through the thread. This is the real-world equivalent of not having time to listen, but having plenty of time to talk.
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
This, and of course, all we have of the "eyewitness accounts" are snippets and incomplete statements that do little more than sell news.
Seems strange that some who are awaiting "facts" are completely ignoring at least two eyewitness accounts. You will never get the facts this side of Heaven. You will only get accounts. Then you've got guys continuing to comment after admitting to not having time to read through the thread. This is the real-world equivalent of not having time to listen, but having plenty of time to talk.
Yup, and talking about uniform standards and codes that should apply coast to coast, and injecting the fact that he's with, or has been with some unidentified and at this time indeterminate "Agency". Believes in what he believes, mind made up, case closed,....now get in the damned box car,...etc.
Remind you of someone that posted here years ago, pard ?
Seems strange that some who are awaiting "facts" are completely ignoring at least two eyewitness accounts. You will never get the facts this side of Heaven. You will only get accounts. Then you've got guys continuing to comment after admitting to not having time to read through the thread. This is the real-world equivalent of not having time to listen, but having plenty of time to talk.
Yup, and talking about uniform standards and codes that should apply coast to coast, and injecting the fact that he's with, or has been with some unidentified and at this time indeterminate "Agency". Believes in what he believes, mind made up, case closed,....now get in the damned box car,...etc.
Remind you of someone that posted here years ago, pard ?
GTC
Thankfully, I think I've missed all that "secret squirrel" schit.
At this point, I think we've seen enough of these incidents where the lynch mob wants to go get the cop (Ferguson anyone?), but as the facts finally come out, it turns out that it was at best just a schitshow that NO ONE wanted and at worst the dead guy precipitated it. Eyewitness accounts have been... problematic as well.
All we know is very little, and it all centers around a damned small community (4,000 people) in the middle of an area most couldn't find with a map and assistance. The known facts are few, and don't really do much to help figure things out one way or the other - though we've got plenty that think the cops were either "Rambo" or saints, and the rancher either a martyr or a nutcase. In the end, the odds are that neither one will be either, but right now we just don't know.
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
The point you and others are ignoring is that y'all are speculating just as much as the persons condemning the cops, seemingly relying on the eyewitness accounts of the cops themselves whilst ignoring the accounts of others. I'm not saying who is at fault, if anybody.
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
The point you and others are ignoring is that y'all are speculating just as much as the persons condemning the cops, seemingly relying on the eyewitness accounts of the cops themselves whilst ignoring the accounts of others. I'm not saying who is at fault, if anybody.
I just read the latest report from the Idaho Statesman. Here's what's been released so far:
The rancher was shot dead and a deputy slightly injured. The rancher's wife's condition from her heart attack has been upgraded from critical to serious. No info on the car's occupants has been released other than that they were flown to a trauma center. It's unknown who killed the bull. It's unknown how the argument started or how it escalated. It's unknown who brandished a weapon or shot first. We have 12 pages of posts condemning everyone and anyone based on only the above information.
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
The point you and others are ignoring is that y'all are speculating just as much as the persons condemning the cops, seemingly relying on the eyewitness accounts of the cops themselves whilst ignoring the accounts of others. I'm not saying who is at fault, if anybody.
This is some quality humor. I mean whether you're from the west, midwest or like...I dunno, Mindanao or wherever, the reader has to admit this is damned funny. lolol
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
The point you and others are ignoring is that y'all are speculating just as much as the persons condemning the cops, seemingly relying on the eyewitness accounts of the cops themselves whilst ignoring the accounts of others. I'm not saying who is at fault, if anybody.
I have not speculated anything, notwithstanding some knowledge, training and experience pertaining to police practices in a Wyoming farming and ranching setting and in the rules of evidence and the rationale behind them. While I could offer some perspective of some factors that may be relevant to the current situation, it still would not be necessarily be relevant to the exact fact situation of this case. The details reported on this thread are so sketchy, and the probative value of the “accounts” so unknown, that it just isn’t worth it wading into it after the lynch mob has formed.
Without proper vetting (ability to determine veracity or probative value) and/or consequences for being untruthful (perjury, obstruction of justice, 1983 action or criminal charges), “accounts” don’t really mean much.
The point you and others are ignoring is that y'all are speculating just as much as the persons condemning the cops, seemingly relying on the eyewitness accounts of the cops themselves whilst ignoring the accounts of others. I'm not saying who is at fault, if anybody.
I have not speculated anything, notwithstanding some knowledge, training and experience pertaining to police practices in a Wyoming farming and ranching setting and in the rules of evidence and the rationale behind them. While I could offer some perspective of some factors that may be relevant to the current situation, it still would not be necessarily be relevant to the exact fact situation of this case. The details reported on this thread are so sketchy, and the probative value of the “accounts” so unknown, that it just isn’t worth it wading into it after the lynch mob has formed.
here is some thing that nobody has proposed , rancher is carring his gun ,wife beside him , he is close to the bull or standing over him cops comes up behind him and either say something or put a hand on his shoulder AUTOMATICLY he swings around gun swings with him , it's now pionted at the cop who gets wounded,
so as the rifle swings around [ ] fill in the blank.
I saw the censored TV version when I was a kid and didn't know what was going on. I can see where it would disturb you though since you do favor Ned Beatty.
We have 12 pages of posts condemning everyone and anyone based on only the above information.
No, we have 12 pages of the usual suspects stirring crap and everybody else allowing them to show their ass.
If by "the usual suspects" you mean the same folks that can't wait to blame cops for all of society's problems and the "usual" past and present LEO's that rush in to defend their brothers in blue no matter what, then I agree with you 100%.
I'd just add that as with most of these pissing matches....the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.
I'm on a roll as far as predictions.... the Royals winning the final game in extra innings and a bomb in the tail of the airliner that just crashed..... I'll offer THIS on the Rancher's death:
An Old Cowman wouldn't shoot ANYONE over a bull, or even threaten to.
If he thought a man was belittling him in front of his wife, or otherwise "pushing" him off a place he figured he had a right to be, doing something he thought he had a right to do, he ain't apt to show subservience to ANYBODY, even armed Deputies.
I'm on a roll as far as predictions.... the Royals winning the final game in extra innings and a bomb in the tail of the airliner that just crashed..... I'll offer THIS on the Rancher's death:
An Old Cowman wouldn't shoot ANYONE over a bull, or even threaten to.
If he thought a man was belittling him in front of his wife, or otherwise "pushing" him off a place he figured he had a right to be, doing something he thought he had a right to do, he ain't apt to show subservience to ANYBODY, even armed Deputies.
The "bull" is likely just a symbol.
So, your guess is that boils down to dick-waving over a damned bull and an incident where emergency responders were dealing with two seriously injured people on a public road?
UFB.
How about we just wait for the actual facts to come out?
I'm on a roll as far as predictions.... the Royals winning the final game in extra innings and a bomb in the tail of the airliner that just crashed..... I'll offer THIS on the Rancher's death:
An Old Cowman wouldn't shoot ANYONE over a bull, or even threaten to.
If he thought a man was belittling him in front of his wife, or otherwise "pushing" him off a place he figured he had a right to be, doing something he thought he had a right to do, he ain't apt to show subservience to ANYBODY, even armed Deputies.
The "bull" is likely just a symbol.
So, your guess is that boils down to dick-waving over a damned bull and an incident where emergency responders were dealing with two seriously injured people on a public road?
UFB.
How about we just wait for the actual facts to come out?
How about you just let my words speak for themselves and quit playing "cross examination"?
I'm on a roll as far as predictions.... the Royals winning the final game in extra innings and a bomb in the tail of the airliner that just crashed..... I'll offer THIS on the Rancher's death:
An Old Cowman wouldn't shoot ANYONE over a bull, or even threaten to.
If he thought a man was belittling him in front of his wife, or otherwise "pushing" him off a place he figured he had a right to be, doing something he thought he had a right to do, he ain't apt to show subservience to ANYBODY, even armed Deputies.
The "bull" is likely just a symbol.
So, your guess is that boils down to dick-waving over a damned bull and an incident where emergency responders were dealing with two seriously injured people on a public road?
UFB.
How about we just wait for the actual facts to come out?
How about you just let my words speak for themselves and quit playing "cross examination"?
That's exactly what I did; no cross examination necessary.
I'm on a roll as far as predictions.... the Royals winning the final game in extra innings and a bomb in the tail of the airliner that just crashed..... I'll offer THIS on the Rancher's death:
An Old Cowman wouldn't shoot ANYONE over a bull, or even threaten to.
If he thought a man was belittling him in front of his wife, or otherwise "pushing" him off a place he figured he had a right to be, doing something he thought he had a right to do, he ain't apt to show subservience to ANYBODY, even armed Deputies.
"That's exactly what I did; no cross examination necessary."
"So, your guess is........".
Quit bothering me.
You did guess, since you don't know what happened any more than anyone else on here does.
Your words spoke for themselves.
If that bothers you, well...
Why the Hell you have your ass on your shoulders about every thread these days is beyond me. God forbid the thread involves a cop and anything at all you and a bunch of others can spin up guesses and conjecture about, or you're in there like a bunch of old women trying to "guess" and "imagine" your ways all the way to the truth in your own minds, without any facts at all.
Whatever happened is a damned tragedy for a small community of 4,000 people in a place none of us know or will ever know. Waiting for the facts won't kill any of us, though you're Hell bent on seeming that way. Heaven forbid that I actually bring that up; seems you're almost as horned up over anything I might post as anything a cop might possibly do. The reasons for that are just as vague.
An officer-involved shooting that left a longtime Adams County rancher dead Sunday has shocked the community and brought a tidal wave of recriminations for the county’s small sheriff’s department.
The Adams County Sheriff’s Office has been bombarded with angry calls and hate mail from people upset by the shooting, which left 62-year-old Jack Yantis dead on U.S. 95 in front of his home north of Council.
Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman has lived in Council since 2000. Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman said people in the office are being called “murderers” and said the calls coming in forced one emergency dispatcher to leave her post Tuesday. “She was so upset,” he said.
Yantis was one of two ranchers summoned Sunday night to a highway car crash that injured a bull; deputies were unsure whose animal it was, Zollman said. The bull was reportedly charging at first responders working to extricate two people from the Subaru station wagon that hit him.
As deputies prepared to kill the bull, Yantis showed up — with a rifle. What transpired to cause Yantis and the two deputies to all fire their weapons is under investigation by Idaho State Police. On Tuesday, ISP said that anyone who was in the area around the time of the shooting should contact them at 208-884-7110.
The community is roiling with speculation, with many using social media sites to swap theories about what happened.
“Some of the comments on there are pretty negative towards what we try to do,” Zollman said. “They say time heals all wounds. This wound will be a festering wound for not weeks, or months, but years or decades.”
The department’s head dispatcher has arranged for a crisis management team to provide support to the Sheriff’s Office.
“We’re all going to get through this,” Zollman said.
UPDATE ON VICTIMS
Yantis’ wife, Donna, who reportedly suffered a heart attack after hearing about the shooting, was listed in serious condition Wednesday morning at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise. She had previously been listed in critical condition. A hospital spokesman said Wednesday that the family has asked that no more status updates be released to the media.
The names of the Subaru driver and passenger, a man and woman who were transported by air ambulance from Council to Boise, have not been released by police, and their medical condition has not been disclosed.
One of the two deputies involved in the shooting suffered minor injuries, according to Idaho State Police. The names of the deputies and how long they have worked for the department have not been released.
Zollman said the Yantis family and the deputies are grieving.
“They are pretty upset and distraught,” the sheriff said.
Adams County Coroner Susan Warner could not be reached Wednesday. An autopsy on Yantis was conducted by a pathologist in Boise, Ada County Coroner Dotti Owens said. The results will be sent to the Adams County coroner in four to six weeks, she said.
The bull eventually was shot but it’s unclear who put the animal down, Zollman said.
“When I arrived on scene, it was dead by the side of the road,” he said.
‘PEOPLE BEING PEOPLE’
The dark storm clouds that hung over Council this week were almost a reflection of the human drama unfolding below.
“It’s a supreme tragedy,” Council Schools Superintendent Murray Dalgleish said. “It’s a tragedy for the town. It’s a tragedy for the families. It’s inexplicable, and you’re trying to find some rationality. This is difficult, very difficult.
“There are so many unresolved questions.”
Grief counselors were made available to students on Monday, he said.
One of Yantis’ friends said in a television interview that the community has had longstanding issues with the Sheriff’s Office. Zollman was elected in 2012.
“Zollman is new to the job. People being people, they already blame him for being one thing or another,” said Dale Fisk, a Council native and editor of the Adams County Record newspaper. “I don’t think there’s any movement or people having a hard-core vendetta ... It’s a small town, a sheriff is always a target of anybody’s gripes.
“I don’t think there’s been any longstanding animosity.”
Fisk is very familiar with Yantis. Just a year apart in age, the men both grew up near Fruitvale, north of Council.
“We grew up on cattle ranches a mile apart,” said Fisk, 63.
Fisk, who said he had not seen Yantis much in the past few years, called him a progressive rancher who was using state-of-the-art technologies to maximize herd genetics.
Yantis was also an expert logger, according to friend Buck Rekow.
“Jack was probably about the best faller in this part of the country. The Forest Service still came to him to deal with problem trees,” said Rekow, a 36-year-old Emmett man who got to know Yantis while working for his son-in-law about a decade ago.
Rekow said he admired the way Yantis lived.
“He made his living from the ground and the woods,” Rekow said. “What he didn’t raise, he shot. He was an avid outdoorsman. He had a great deal of skill and knowledge about life on the farm and in the woods. That is truly an example of what an Idahoan should be.”
Just to clarify, no I dont think just showing up armed is a problem. I dont think open carry is a problem. If anything in any of my previous posts could be misconstrewed that way, I should have been clearer.
At some point it went beyond that. Exactly how, or whose fault it was no one here really knows. I think it unlikely he was shot when he got the rifle out to shoot the bull, doesnt fit.
I think it likely he was shot because he either pointed the rifle at the officers to prevent them from putting the bull down, or discharged it to accomplish the same thing. To me that fits better. To others, maybe not.
Guns arent bad, acting stupidly with guns has consequences, sometimes higher than others
I think this fellows actions caused his own death. I could be wrong, but that is my read. I have sympathy for his friends and family, not for him, I think it likely he was a fool.
I wont insult you for disagreeing. Make your point, maybe back it up with your reasoning, and defend your position.
Ritter says he feared something like this would happen.
"I guess I wasn't surprised that eventually something like that happened because there's been a fair amount of bad feelings towards law enforcement in that county for quite some time now," said Ritter.
I think it is interesting that we see nothing about this incident on the mainstream media outlets. I hope this isn't just because the victim wasn't (a) black, (b)a drug dealer or pimp, (c)wearing a hoody. I'm kind of pro-wildlife and anti-cow but I can't help but side with Yantis here. In a way, this is a bit of a sign of the times. I was involved in a situation many years ago where I was awakened in the middle of the night by my dog going crazy. I got up and went out the door carrying an old Krag rifle. For whatever reason, a deputy sheriff was in the area and rolled up and suggested I hand over the rifle. I suggested he mind his own business, everything was under control. In the end, the deputy rolled up his window and drove away. Today, under the same circumstances, I would be lucky to get away with only being tazered. That particular deputy and I had a bit of history and I think he showed restraint and a sensible attitude. He is one of those people from my past to whom I owe an apology. By the way, this was in Idaho too. Anyway, I really hope we can get the whole story but doubt that the story which comes out will not be given a significant amount of spin; regardless of the source. GD
I'm not considered a rancher, but I have raised a lot of cows and a few horses in my life, and I've been to a couple of cow/horse/car collisions. I can't imagine that a rancher, that has dealt with cattle his entire life, shows up at a scene where one of his bulls had been hit, and just gets so aggressive with law enforcement that they feel the need to shoot him. None of us know the facts yet, but I'd put money that if the truth comes out, and that's a big "if", a couple a yahoo's shot a man that didn't need to be shot.
I think it is interesting that we see nothing about this incident on the mainstream media outlets. I hope this isn't just because the victim wasn't (a) black, (b)a drug dealer or pimp, (c)wearing a hoody. I'm kind of pro-wildlife and anti-cow but I can't help but side with Yantis here. In a way, this is a bit of a sign of the times. I was involved in a situation many years ago where I was awakened in the middle of the night by my dog going crazy. I got up and went out the door carrying an old Krag rifle. For whatever reason, a deputy sheriff was in the area and rolled up and suggested I hand over the rifle. I suggested he mind his own business, everything was under control. In the end, the deputy rolled up his window and drove away. Today, under the same circumstances, I would be lucky to get away with only being tazered. That particular deputy and I had a bit of history and I think he showed restraint and a sensible attitude. He is one of those people from my past to whom I owe an apology. By the way, this was in Idaho too. Anyway, I really hope we can get the whole story but doubt that the story which comes out will not be given a significant amount of spin; regardless of the source. GD
The Rancher made his reputation. I'd be a fool not to go by it.
Rural Deputies have made their reputation,generically speaking, with me. I'd be a fool not to go by it.
There's also this: In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
When L.E. releases a bare minimum of information on the event, even after several days, we almost always find that their actions are questionable at best, criminal at worst.
As far as YOU are concerned.... you ain't that important to me.
There's also this: In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
B.S.
You have documented the times that this has happened?
There's also this: In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
B.S.
You have documented the times that this has happened?
Have you documented the times where it DIDN'T work out that way?
The Rancher made his reputation. I'd be a fool not to go by it.
Rural Deputies have made their reputation,generically speaking, with me. I'd be a fool not to go by it.
There's also this: In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
When L.E. releases a bare minimum of information on the event, even after several days, we almost always find that their actions are questionable at best, criminal at worst.
As far as YOU are concerned.... you ain't that important to me.
You are akin to a pesky mosquito.
You're guessing again, Gene; exactly what you admonished others for doing.
You don't "know" that ranchers reputation any more than you "know" the deputies involved, or anything else about that area. You sure as Hell don't know any more facts than anyone else here.
Your history with cops is what it is, but you conveniently leave out every bit of it that you might have done or any parts about why exactly your were stopped and arrested multiple times over. That schit gets old, and it's no mystery either.
You make every thread on cops all about you and how you were "done wrong", and always you were a "dindonuffin" (which is false). God forbid I comment, as you immediately make it about me instead of anything else. Why? I haven't a clue.
But, at least you're consistent and never need any facts, right?
Matter of fact, I can think of TWO high profile cases where L.E. released BOGUS info immediately after the shootings. Info that they later had to correct.
Matter of fact, I can think of TWO high profile cases where L.E. released BOGUS info immediately after the shootings. Info that they later had to correct.
Betcha that can be matched by at least as many where "eyewitnesses" released BS that was against both law enforcement and facts as well.
Thus the reason to WAIT until the facts are in; as in, after the investigation. Works better than guessing.
"You make every thread on cops all about you and how you were "done wrong", and always you were a "dindonuffin" (which is false). God forbid I comment, as you immediately make it about me instead of anything else. Why? I haven't a clue."
You are a damned Liar and the proof is in this thread.
"You make every thread on cops all about you and how you were "done wrong", and always you were a "dindonuffin" (which is false). God forbid I comment, as you immediately make it about me instead of anything else. Why? I haven't a clue."
You are a damned Liar and the proof is in this thread.
And I'm done with you.......... again.
You're right; the proof is in the thread. Be careful about wanting the same to paint someone as a liar, though. That picture might not turn out how you think it will.
I'm not calling you a liar, and in fact I can't recall ever calling you an insult, but I will let your own words and posts thanks for themselves, just like you wanted them to do in an earlier comment.
Matter of fact, I can think of TWO high profile cases where L.E. released BOGUS info immediately after the shootings. Info that they later had to correct.
...In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
When L.E. releases a bare minimum of information on the event, even after several days, we almost always find that their actions are questionable at best...
In this case LE have gone so far as to publicly ask for any witnesses when they know good and well the names and addresses of every single individual present. Like they are so confused as to what happened that they're really hoping someone they couldn't see had observed the incident, so they could get at the real truth. And no dash cam footage. Come on.
...In LEO shootings where the Officers are blameless, all the evidence supporting that conclusion is released before the blood is dried.
When L.E. releases a bare minimum of information on the event, even after several days, we almost always find that their actions are questionable at best...
In this case LE have gone so far as to publicly ask for any witnesses when they know good and well the names and addresses of every single individual present. Like they are so confused as to what happened that they're really hoping someone they couldn't see had observed the incident, so they could get at the real truth. And no dash cam footage. Come on.
You know that SO of 10 officers has dash cams? You know there were no other cars in the area or turning around at any roadblock?
Matter of fact, I can think of TWO high profile cases where L.E. released BOGUS info immediately after the shootings. Info that they later had to correct.
That was the Ferguson shooting, right?
Oops, wait a minute...
Jose Guerno in Tucson. Swat claimed he fired at them. Next day they admitted his rifle was still on "Safe".
The 72 YO Homeowner in Ft Worth the two rookie cops shot when THEY were at the wrong address. Initial claim was that he was killed in his DETACHED garage after they saw lights in it. It took a week before they admitted that he was only a couple steps outside his backdoor, which opened into his ATTACHED garage........ basically an extension of his home.
FYI.... I supported the cop in the Ferguson shooting since it was IMMEDIATELY reported that the guy's blood was found INSIDE the cruiser.
You need to quit believing everything 4ager says about other members.
I don't jump into the cop bashing threads mainly because I'm a Kentuckian and the police here generally behave in a manner that I deem appropriate. In many ways Kentucky is a closed society and the police in Kentucky are a part of it.
But this one sounds like a stinker.
I'd say that small rural communities need to make a special effort to comprise their police force from members of the community.
Doing so would go a long way towards eliminating situations like this.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Matter of fact, I can think of TWO high profile cases where L.E. released BOGUS info immediately after the shootings. Info that they later had to correct.
That was the Ferguson shooting, right?
Oops, wait a minute...
Jose Guerno in Tucson. Swat claimed he fired at them. Next day they admitted his rifle was still on "Safe".
The 72 YO Homeowner in Ft Worth the two rookie cops shot when THEY were at the wrong address. Initial claim was that he was killed in his DETACHED garage after they saw lights in it. It took a week before they admitted that he was only a couple steps outside his backdoor, which opened into his ATTACHED garage........ basically an extension of his home.
FYI.... I supported the cop in the Ferguson shooting since it was IMMEDIATELY reported that the guy's blood was found INSIDE the cruiser.
You need to quit believing everything 4ager says about other members.
Hmm.... What was my point earlier about you making threads about yourself and about me? How about words proving someone a liar?
I don't jump into the cop bashing threads mainly because I'm a Kentuckian and the police here generally behave in a manner that I deem appropriate. In many ways Kentucky is a closed society and the police in Kentucky are a part of it.
But this one sounds like a stinker.
I'd say that small rural communities need to make a special effort to comprise their police force from members of the community.
Doing so would go a long way towards eliminating situations like this.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Completely agree. Yet, we don't know whether that was or was not the case here, yet.
prior to that, it was just the officer's "account" and we know what lying mother f'ers they are.
Quote
Forensic tests have found the blood of Michael Brown on the gun, uniform and police cruiser belonging to Officer Darren Wilson, who fatally shot the unarmed teen two months ago in Ferguson, Missouri, The New York Times reported.
The revelation, provided by unnamed government officials familiar with a federal civil rights investigation, marked the first public account of Wilson's testimony to investigators.
That it could potentially serve as exculpatory evidence -- or at the very least, used by Wilson's supporters to back the officer's account of what transpired on Canfield Drive on August 9 -- immediately drew suspicion and anger from leading activists who portended an ominous reaction from Brown supporters.
I don't jump into the cop bashing threads mainly because I'm a Kentuckian and the police here generally behave in a manner that I deem appropriate. In many ways Kentucky is a closed society and the police in Kentucky are a part of it.
But this one sounds like a stinker.
I'd say that small rural communities need to make a special effort to comprise their police force from members of the community.
Doing so would go a long way towards eliminating situations like this.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
They probably suspected the rancher was a constitutionalist, which in the minds of the police means dangerous. That's what they teach them nowadays.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Were the deputies involved in this incident hired away from NYPD or something? I can see a basis for some cultural differences and/or misunderstandings in that event.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Were the deputies involved in this incident hired away from NYPD or something? I can see a basis for some cultural differences and/or misunderstandings in that event.
I don't know. Earlier, some of the discussion seemed to indicate that the deputies were not from the area.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Were the deputies involved in this incident hired away from NYPD or something? I can see a basis for some cultural differences and/or misunderstandings in that event.
I don't know. Earlier, some of the discussion seemed to indicate that the deputies were not from the area.
No info known on the deputies at all at this point.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
They probably suspected the rancher was a constitutionalist, which in the minds of the police means dangerous. That's what they teach them nowadays.
All police or just some? Where?
Where does that subject get taught? The Academy in your area, I assume? When did you see their syllabus?
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
They probably suspected the rancher was a constitutionalist, which in the minds of the police means dangerous. That's what they teach them nowadays.
All police or just some? Where?
Where does that subject get taught? The Academy in your area, I assume? When did you see their syllabus?
George
They and Them = Jews and Masons.....or a Jew named Mason, not sure.
The only information released about the deputies is that they "both fired" and that they're "livestock smart" and they can "throw a rope around a horse and get it into an open gate."
Add to that it's in Idaho, and a county of 4,000 residents. And I'd say it's a relatively safe bet that they're locals.
Example..Living in Coeur d'Alene while working I saw a guy pull into an RV spot from New York city and immediately went down and got Idaho plates then calling himself a local.
Living now in Idaho county(largest county in Idaho) that connects to Adams county just south of here and having lived in Valley county for 40 years also connecting to Adams county I can say with ease and accuracy that police departments do more hiring "out" then they do hiring locals.
I used to live in Idaho county. Lots of washed out big city cops end up there.
The Sheriff saying they were "cow smart" is different than a rancher saying they were cow smart. Saying "shu, cow" is not being cow smart, let alone bull smart.
...I'd say that small rural communities need to make a special effort to comprise their police force from members of the community.
Doing so would go a long way towards eliminating situations like this.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that...
There's know work in Council and since the Boise-Cascade mill closed down years ago most of the working force moved on except for a few loggers and ranchers of course, and those retired.
Not much of a pool to draw from for local employment unless hiring out!They(Adams county) could and have hired from New Meadows(Adams county) to the north or McCall(Valley county) not much south except Cambridge(Adams county)...
I spend alot of time at my best buddy's place I helped build at Pine Ridge(Adams county) where he pays Adams county taxes with a Council phone number that saved my bacon in a snowmobile wreck.
Not much down there in Adams county for employment other than Forest service or county work.
Unless of course, you happen to be that fella's family.
It'd probably take a downturn if they started posting.
Dave
You mean like this one from family who was actually there..
Quote
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
That is the "ONLY" account from "ANYONE" who was there when it happened..Like it or not, there is know buddy else that was there's account of this,only his.
Unless of course, you happen to be that fella's family.
It'd probably take a downturn if they started posting.
Dave
You mean like this one from family who was actually there..
Quote
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
That is the "ONLY" account from "ANYONE" who was there when it happened..Like it or not, there is know buddy else that was there's account of this,only his.
He doesn't post here. He posts on Facebook. Apparently.
I don't jump into the cop bashing threads mainly because I'm a Kentuckian and the police here generally behave in a manner that I deem appropriate. In many ways Kentucky is a closed society and the police in Kentucky are a part of it.
But this one sounds like a stinker.
I'd say that small rural communities need to make a special effort to comprise their police force from members of the community.
Doing so would go a long way towards eliminating situations like this.
In the big cities, you've got big city stuff and the police are necessarily going to have to be hard asses to do what they're called upon to do. Occasionally, bad things are going to happen as a result of that.
But these little rural communities need to work hard and pay what it costs to have police who understand the society,..who know that society that they're working in, and to react in an appropriate manner.
Bristol I agree with with you on this one. It generally works better in smaller communities. Look at the community reaction to the situation in Richmond. What tragedy.
We could start at the top with Mark Fuhrman..Him and his crew from LA are flocking to Idaho to retire..They frequented a hideaway bar I went to up north.Lot's of out of state cops in Idaho working..Lot's...
Unless of course, you happen to be that fella's family.
It'd probably take a downturn if they started posting.
Dave
You mean like this one from family who was actually there..
Quote
“Jack, Donna and Rowdy, Donna’s nephew, showed up to take care of their bull. Jack was bent down and a second from shooting the bull when a cop grabbed him from the back and spun him around. He shot Jack in the stomach and the other cop shot him 4 times in the chest. The cops were standing behind Jack.
Donna and Rowdy rushed down to Jack and the cops threw them face down on the ground and had guns to their head. Between what happened to her husband and the rough treatment, she had a massive heart attack. She was life flighted to Boise. She had another last night.
That is the "ONLY" account from "ANYONE" who was there when it happened..Like it or not, there is know buddy else that was there's account of this,only his.
No offense, but "buddy" accounts have been proven not very credible in recent shooting incidents. Not saying that this guy is or isn't credible, but I'll still tend to wait on the rest of the facts.
No offense, but "buddy" accounts have been proven not very credible in recent shooting incidents. Not saying that this guy is or isn't credible, but I'll still tend to wait on the rest of the facts.
Myself also..It wasn't a buddy account it was a family account.They were all family.
The end result could most likely be the officers feared for there lives, therefor a justifiable shooting.
The end result was a schitshow. That much is known. WHY it turned into a schitshow is still unknown.
What else is known is that a small community of about 4,000 is currently being torn apart; several lives will never be the same; and no one has all the answers yet.
Godspeed to the entire community and all those affected.
The request for witnesses is in regards to drivers who may have gone by. Just an FYI..
Quote
MERIDIAN - Idaho State Police detectives are asking for anyone that may have been witness to events leading up to, or after, the shooting incident on US95 in Adams County on Sunday, November 1st to contact them.
The incident started at approximately 6:45 p.m. when the Adams County Sheriff's Office received a report of a motor vehicle crash involving a Subaru station wagon and a cow bull on US95 at milepost 142, north of Council. Emergency medical services, fire department personnel and Adams County Sheriff's deputies responded to the scene and traffic on US95 was stopped. It was during this time until approximately 7:45 p.m. that detectives believe that there were a number of motorists stopped near the scene of the crash before the shooting incident involving Adams County Sheriff's deputies and Mr. Jack Yantis, that may have information useful to their investigation. The witnesses did not have to actually see the shooting incident to be helpful to the investigation.
If you were in the area and did not already provide your information to Idaho State Police troopers or detectives, please call the Idaho State Police District 3 Investigations at 208-884-7110.
We could start at the top with Mark Fuhrman..Him and his crew from LA are flocking to Idaho to retire..They frequented a hideaway bar I went to up north.Lot's of out of state cops in Idaho working..Lot's...
You're saying that the counties in Idaho are hiring Mark Fuhrman and his crew from LA to work as deputies?
You're saying that the counties in Idaho are hiring Mark Fuhrman and his crew from LA to work as deputies?
Well Ya..
That was an example of out of state officers in Idaho as you would not recognize the other names of officers from there.My favorite was steroid Bob...
The point being there are a lot of foreign officers working in Idaho-Valley and Adams county.When my wife was on the police force in Valley county her sergeant was from California.What a dicccc.
You're saying that the counties in Idaho are hiring Mark Fuhrman and his crew from LA to work as deputies?
Well Ya..
That was an example of out of state officers in Idaho as you would not recognize the other names of officers from there.My favorite was steroid Bob...
The point being there are a lot of foreign officers working in Idaho-Valley and Adams county.When my wife was on the police force in Valley county her sergeant was from California.What a dicccc.
That's good to know. What county does Mark Fuhrman and his crew work for?
We could start at the top with Mark Fuhrman..Him and his crew from LA are flocking to Idaho to retire..They frequented a hideaway bar I went to up north.Lot's of out of state cops in Idaho working..Lot's...
What did Mark Fuhrman ever do wrong?
His investigation of the Martha Moxley cold case led to Michael Skakel being charged and convicted of killing Moxley on 10/30/75.
This is interesting about the out of area officers.. Come to think of it most of our officers are not from this area.. The only difficulty I would see in this is a Calif. officer would probably have a far different view of law than those who have lived in a rural area all their lives.. Not always true I know, but the officers in this area that seem most difficult to talk to are from bigger cities..
I always felt when I drove though Idaho and Montana the officers would be folks that are local.. Guess not..
Where does that subject get taught? The Academy in your area, I assume? When did you see their syllabus?
George
George, I see it all the time. It's one of the classes of people cops are warned to look out for due to their supposed heightened danger to cops. It took me a few seconds to find an example for you, but I hear essentially this same thing from the mouths of cops all the time on these kinds of videos, and even on videos meant for training police, e.g., "We've been told that these guys could be constitutionalists, so we're taking no chances. We're going in with carbines at the ready," etc..
Check out this one starting at 3:30. This is very typical of cops' questions when they're trying to determine if they need to have a heightened concern for their lives. I guess they don't realize that they are supposed to be constitutionalists, too.
Where does that subject get taught? The Academy in your area, I assume? When did you see their syllabus?
George
George, I see it all the time. It's one of the classes of people cops are warned to look out for due to their supposed heightened danger to cops. It took me a few seconds to find an example for you, but I hear essentially this same thing from the mouths of cops all the time on these kinds of videos, and even on videos meant for training police, e.g., "We've been told that these guys could be constitutionalists, so we're taking no chances. We're going in with carbines at the ready," etc..
Check out this one starting at 3:30. This is very typical of cops' questions when they're trying to determine if they need to have a heightened concern for their lives. I guess they don't realize that they are supposed to be constitutionalists, too.
In other words, you haven't a clue, yet again.
Pretending to be a "constitutionalist" and a "sovereign citizen" while living in Mom & Dad's house in FL, on the funds they set aside for you, has to get tiring. Even more so now that your schtick here is so old that it hardly even merits anyone giving it more than passing consideration.
It's old, Chriss. You need new bait. Perhaps going back to pretending to be a teacher is a good next step?
Reading through that thread, I think I can finally answer Dink question about what aciepoo, did for the PD...
He was the meter reader that couldn't pass the academy entrance test, I'll bet before that he was a school janitor that got stuffed into lockers by freshmen....girls
Cops Call Rancher for Help with a Bull, When He Showed Up the Cops Killed Him
Adams County, ID — Jack Yantis, a 62-year-old rancher from Council, Idaho, received a call from the Adams County Sheriff’s Office on November 1 informing him that one of his bulls had been struck by a car on the nearby interstate. Yantis arrived at the scene a few minutes later, armed with a rifle to put down the wounded animal, which had turned aggressive and was threatening emergency responders trying to treat two people injured in the collision.
Within a few minutes, Yantis was dead – shot by deputies on the scene. Upon hearing the news, his wife Donna suffered a heart attack. She was taken to Saint Alphonsus Hospital in Boise. As this is written she reportedly remains in critical condition.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” declared Rowdy Paradis, who says he was standing ten feet from the rancher when he was killed.
Sheriff Ryan Zolland describes Yantis as a well-known and widely respected figure in Adams County. “This is going to be a big hit to this community,” a visibly shaken Zolland told Boise’s NBC affiliate, KTVB. “The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It’s just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community.”
Sheriff Zolland insisted that his department “takes matters involving any use of force very seriously and we have requested detectives with the Idaho State Police to conduct the investigation into this incident.” The deputies involved – one of whom reportedly suffered an unspecified “minor injury,” are on paid leave.
Assuming that the investigation proceeds in familiar fashion, the “incident” will not be treated as a suspected criminal homicide, but as an “assault on law enforcement.” Taking its cues from law enforcement sources, the Idaho Statesman newspaper in Boise – the state’s most influential media organ – referred to Yantis’s death as the result of a “shootout.”
That expression has connotations of an encounter between law enforcement and a violent criminal, rather than an eminently avoidable death that apparently occurred through miscommunication or, possibly, the panic-stricken reaction of deputies to the presence of an armed citizen. It should not be forgotten that Yantis was responding to a message from the sheriff’s dispatch, and trying to assist the first responders, when he was fatally shot.
The Idaho State Police, which is investigating the incident, is currently facing lawsuits from two troopers and one former sergeant who claim to have faced official retaliation for refusing to participate in an official cover-up in a previous law enforcement-related fatality. ISP Corporals Quinn Carmack and Brandon Eller, along with former Sergeant Fred Rice, were involved in the investigation of former Payette County Deputy Scott Sloan, who killed 65-year-old New Plymouth resident Barry Johnson by plowing his police vehicle into the side of Johnson’s jeep at an estimate speed of 115 miles per hour.
On the basis of evidence produced by Carmack, Eller, and Rice, Sloan was fired by Sheriff Chad Huff and charged with vehicular manslaughter by special prosecutor Richard Linville. That case was sabotaged through the perjured testimony of ISP Trooper Justin Klitch, who had secretly collaborated with Sloan’s defense team while working in the official investigation.
Discarding the findings of its own investigators, the ISP tried to craft a narrative blaming Johnson for his own death by claiming that alcohol was involved in the October 18, 2011 crash. During an April 2012 preliminary hearing in the case, Trooper Sam Ketchum sent a text message to Lt. Col. Ralph Powell (who is now ISP Director), complaining that Carmack and Eller had “laid us out” by testifying truthfully, rather than endorsing the officially sanctioned fiction. One issue examined at that hearing was whether the original ISP report faulted Sloan for “unsafe operation of an emergency vehicle.”
In his surprise testimony for the defense, Klitch perjured himself by denying that the phrase had been in the original document. In a letter to the ISP written following the hearing, prosecutor Linville pointed to an email in which Klitch – before the official story had changed – “specifically requested” that the phrase be included in the report, based on the available evidence.
Revising his testimony to suit the official line was not the only favor Klitch did on behalf of Sloan, and for his own superiors at the ISP.
“When I initially asked Trooper Klitch to meet with me to discuss filing the case, he made a recording of out meeting without my knowledge or consent,” Linville recalls. “I don’t know why Trooper Klitch would make such a recording. His duty at the time was to present to me all of the evidence he had collected regarding the Sloan case. He was meeting with me to present evidence, not to create it.”
“Never in my 25 years as a prosecuting attorney have I had a law enforcement officer secretly record discussions during case preparation that are otherwise privileged and protected work product, then hide the existence of such a recording from me,” Linville protested.
Klitch’s perjury earned him a place on the “Brady list” – a roster of law enforcement officers whose testimony cannot be trusted in court. However, for testifying truthfully in court, corporals Carmack and Eller were summoned by their ISP superiors and told that “because of their testimony [they] could not be trusted….” Sgt. Rice, who had conducted a professional and conscientious investigation, was reprimanded for supposedly “withholding exculpatory evidence” – meaning that his original report was later contradicted by Klitch’s perjured testimony. Subjected to a punitive transfer, Rice was told by his new supervisor that he was “not being a team player” and that “he needed to stop more cars and write more tickets and that if he did not make the changes it would be reflected in his 2013 evaluation.” Rice has since resigned from the ISP.
The perjurer Klitch, according to his supervisor, remains “a valued member of the ISP” — despite being inscribed on the “Brady list” and a growing collection of lawsuits by motorists who have suffered abuse at his hands in pretext stops conducted for the purpose of asset forfeiture.
Jackie Raymond, the only surviving child of the man killed by Deputy Sloan, has filed a tort claim describing the ISP’s behavior as that of a criminal “enterprise or conspiracy …[to] conceal evidence, harbor and protect Sloan from criminal and civil liability, and intimidate, influence, impede, deter, threaten, harass and obstruct witnesses … to protect fellow Idaho law enforcement officers from the consequences of their criminal misconduct.”
The death of Jack Yantis may have been the product of tragic miscalculation, misunderstanding, or mishap. Now that the investigation is being conducted by a “criminal enterprise” with a documented history of suppressing and misrepresenting evidence, the truth of the matter will remain elusive.
(Article by William N. Grigg; from The Free Thought Project)
The end result was a schitshow. That much is known. WHY it turned into a schitshow is still unknown.
What else is known is that a small community of about 4,000 is currently being torn apart; several lives will never be the same; and no one has all the answers yet.
Godspeed to the entire community and all those affected.
Cops Call Rancher for Help with a Bull, When He Showed Up the Cops Killed Him
Adams County, ID — Jack Yantis, a 62-year-old rancher from Council, Idaho, received a call from the Adams County Sheriff’s Office on November 1 informing him that one of his bulls had been struck by a car on the nearby interstate. Yantis arrived at the scene a few minutes later, armed with a rifle to put down the wounded animal, which had turned aggressive and was threatening emergency responders trying to treat two people injured in the collision.
Within a few minutes, Yantis was dead – shot by deputies on the scene. Upon hearing the news, his wife Donna suffered a heart attack. She was taken to Saint Alphonsus Hospital in Boise. As this is written she reportedly remains in critical condition.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” declared Rowdy Paradis, who says he was standing ten feet from the rancher when he was killed.
Sheriff Ryan Zolland describes Yantis as a well-known and widely respected figure in Adams County. “This is going to be a big hit to this community,” a visibly shaken Zolland told Boise’s NBC affiliate, KTVB. “The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It’s just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community.”
Sheriff Zolland insisted that his department “takes matters involving any use of force very seriously and we have requested detectives with the Idaho State Police to conduct the investigation into this incident.” The deputies involved – one of whom reportedly suffered an unspecified “minor injury,” are on paid leave.
Assuming that the investigation proceeds in familiar fashion, the “incident” will not be treated as a suspected criminal homicide, but as an “assault on law enforcement.” Taking its cues from law enforcement sources, the Idaho Statesman newspaper in Boise – the state’s most influential media organ – referred to Yantis’s death as the result of a “shootout.”
That expression has connotations of an encounter between law enforcement and a violent criminal, rather than an eminently avoidable death that apparently occurred through miscommunication or, possibly, the panic-stricken reaction of deputies to the presence of an armed citizen. It should not be forgotten that Yantis was responding to a message from the sheriff’s dispatch, and trying to assist the first responders, when he was fatally shot.
The Idaho State Police, which is investigating the incident, is currently facing lawsuits from two troopers and one former sergeant who claim to have faced official retaliation for refusing to participate in an official cover-up in a previous law enforcement-related fatality. ISP Corporals Quinn Carmack and Brandon Eller, along with former Sergeant Fred Rice, were involved in the investigation of former Payette County Deputy Scott Sloan, who killed 65-year-old New Plymouth resident Barry Johnson by plowing his police vehicle into the side of Johnson’s jeep at an estimate speed of 115 miles per hour.
On the basis of evidence produced by Carmack, Eller, and Rice, Sloan was fired by Sheriff Chad Huff and charged with vehicular manslaughter by special prosecutor Richard Linville. That case was sabotaged through the perjured testimony of ISP Trooper Justin Klitch, who had secretly collaborated with Sloan’s defense team while working in the official investigation.
Discarding the findings of its own investigators, the ISP tried to craft a narrative blaming Johnson for his own death by claiming that alcohol was involved in the October 18, 2011 crash. During an April 2012 preliminary hearing in the case, Trooper Sam Ketchum sent a text message to Lt. Col. Ralph Powell (who is now ISP Director), complaining that Carmack and Eller had “laid us out” by testifying truthfully, rather than endorsing the officially sanctioned fiction. One issue examined at that hearing was whether the original ISP report faulted Sloan for “unsafe operation of an emergency vehicle.”
In his surprise testimony for the defense, Klitch perjured himself by denying that the phrase had been in the original document. In a letter to the ISP written following the hearing, prosecutor Linville pointed to an email in which Klitch – before the official story had changed – “specifically requested” that the phrase be included in the report, based on the available evidence.
Revising his testimony to suit the official line was not the only favor Klitch did on behalf of Sloan, and for his own superiors at the ISP.
“When I initially asked Trooper Klitch to meet with me to discuss filing the case, he made a recording of out meeting without my knowledge or consent,” Linville recalls. “I don’t know why Trooper Klitch would make such a recording. His duty at the time was to present to me all of the evidence he had collected regarding the Sloan case. He was meeting with me to present evidence, not to create it.”
“Never in my 25 years as a prosecuting attorney have I had a law enforcement officer secretly record discussions during case preparation that are otherwise privileged and protected work product, then hide the existence of such a recording from me,” Linville protested.
Klitch’s perjury earned him a place on the “Brady list” – a roster of law enforcement officers whose testimony cannot be trusted in court. However, for testifying truthfully in court, corporals Carmack and Eller were summoned by their ISP superiors and told that “because of their testimony [they] could not be trusted….” Sgt. Rice, who had conducted a professional and conscientious investigation, was reprimanded for supposedly “withholding exculpatory evidence” – meaning that his original report was later contradicted by Klitch’s perjured testimony. Subjected to a punitive transfer, Rice was told by his new supervisor that he was “not being a team player” and that “he needed to stop more cars and write more tickets and that if he did not make the changes it would be reflected in his 2013 evaluation.” Rice has since resigned from the ISP.
The perjurer Klitch, according to his supervisor, remains “a valued member of the ISP” — despite being inscribed on the “Brady list” and a growing collection of lawsuits by motorists who have suffered abuse at his hands in pretext stops conducted for the purpose of asset forfeiture.
Jackie Raymond, the only surviving child of the man killed by Deputy Sloan, has filed a tort claim describing the ISP’s behavior as that of a criminal “enterprise or conspiracy …[to] conceal evidence, harbor and protect Sloan from criminal and civil liability, and intimidate, influence, impede, deter, threaten, harass and obstruct witnesses … to protect fellow Idaho law enforcement officers from the consequences of their criminal misconduct.”
The death of Jack Yantis may have been the product of tragic miscalculation, misunderstanding, or mishap. Now that the investigation is being conducted by a “criminal enterprise” with a documented history of suppressing and misrepresenting evidence, the truth of the matter will remain elusive.
(Article by William N. Grigg; from The Free Thought Project)
"Free Thought Project"?
Also, it seems this "article" contradicts supposedly "eyewitness" accounts that have the wife at the scene, which certainly would have reinforced the thrust of the "article".
The "article" is short on facts and long on speculation.
How about we wait until some more real facts are known?
Nope, just waiting to see if any real facts come out and feeling for all who got hurt like the folks in the car. Also realizing we will probably never know what really happened.
The Idaho State Police, which is investigating the incident, is currently facing lawsuits from two troopers and one former sergeant who claim to have faced official retaliation for refusing to participate in an official cover-up in a previous law enforcement-related fatality. ISP Corporals Quinn Carmack and Brandon Eller, along with former Sergeant Fred Rice, were involved in the investigation of former Payette County Deputy Scott Sloan, who killed 65-year-old New Plymouth resident Barry Johnson by plowing his police vehicle into the side of Johnson’s jeep at an estimate speed of 115 miles per hour.
On the basis of evidence produced by Carmack, Eller, and Rice, Sloan was fired by Sheriff Chad Huff and charged with vehicular manslaughter by special prosecutor Richard Linville. That case was sabotaged through the perjured testimony of ISP Trooper Justin Klitch, who had secretly collaborated with Sloan’s defense team while working in the official investigation.
Discarding the findings of its own investigators, the ISP tried to craft a narrative blaming Johnson for his own death by claiming that alcohol was involved in the October 18, 2011 crash. During an April 2012 preliminary hearing in the case, Trooper Sam Ketchum sent a text message to Lt. Col. Ralph Powell (who is now ISP Director), complaining that Carmack and Eller had “laid us out” by testifying truthfully, rather than endorsing the officially sanctioned fiction. One issue examined at that hearing was whether the original ISP report faulted Sloan for “unsafe operation of an emergency vehicle.”
In his surprise testimony for the defense, Klitch perjured himself by denying that the phrase had been in the original document. In a letter to the ISP written following the hearing, prosecutor Linville pointed to an email in which Klitch – before the official story had changed – “specifically requested” that the phrase be included in the report, based on the available evidence.
Revising his testimony to suit the official line was not the only favor Klitch did on behalf of Sloan, and for his own superiors at the ISP.
“When I initially asked Trooper Klitch to meet with me to discuss filing the case, he made a recording of out meeting without my knowledge or consent,” Linville recalls. “I don’t know why Trooper Klitch would make such a recording. His duty at the time was to present to me all of the evidence he had collected regarding the Sloan case. He was meeting with me to present evidence, not to create it.”
“Never in my 25 years as a prosecuting attorney have I had a law enforcement officer secretly record discussions during case preparation that are otherwise privileged and protected work product, then hide the existence of such a recording from me,” Linville protested.
Klitch’s perjury earned him a place on the “Brady list” – a roster of law enforcement officers whose testimony cannot be trusted in court. However, for testifying truthfully in court, corporals Carmack and Eller were summoned by their ISP superiors and told that “because of their testimony [they] could not be trusted….” Sgt. Rice, who had conducted a professional and conscientious investigation, was reprimanded for supposedly “withholding exculpatory evidence” – meaning that his original report was later contradicted by Klitch’s perjured testimony. Subjected to a punitive transfer, Rice was told by his new supervisor that he was “not being a team player” and that “he needed to stop more cars and write more tickets and that if he did not make the changes it would be reflected in his 2013 evaluation.” Rice has since resigned from the ISP.
The perjurer Klitch, according to his supervisor, remains “a valued member of the ISP” — despite being inscribed on the “Brady list” and a growing collection of lawsuits by motorists who have suffered abuse at his hands in pretext stops conducted for the purpose of asset forfeiture.
Jackie Raymond, the only surviving child of the man killed by Deputy Sloan, has filed a tort claim describing the ISP’s behavior as that of a criminal “enterprise or conspiracy …[to] conceal evidence, harbor and protect Sloan from criminal and civil liability, and intimidate, influence, impede, deter, threaten, harass and obstruct witnesses … to protect fellow Idaho law enforcement officers from the consequences of their criminal misconduct.”
(Article by William N. Grigg; from The Free Thought Project)
Irrelevance objection sustained. Oh wait, this is the Kampfire Kourt, and those rules don't apply. Never mind. Let's get some more accounts and lay opinion testimony.
How does a county of 4000 hire people that aren't local? Surely they can't afford to pay good enough to have officers moved there.
Dink
I was discussing this with a friend who owns property just two miles north of where this incident occured. He does not reside on the property, but spends about half of his weekends, vacation, and holidays there. He is friends with several full time residents of the same area, and has spoken with Jack Yantis on several occasions.
The brunt of our conversation was: Where does Adams County get their deputies. He stated that most are hired right out of academy. Adams County pay scale is too low to attract any seasoned officers, and pretty much excludes the cream of the academy crop.
That said, we still do not know the names of the deputies involved or any of their particulars.
I was informed of information online from an eye witness in the next car behind the Subaru. I have not been able to find this via internet search and would surely appreciate any one who could point me to it.
But this account apparently backs up the statement by Rowdy Paradis.
A couple of facts I have been able to ascertain. The bull was struck within a few tens of yards from Jack Yantis's barn. Jack and his wife had very little distance to travel to the scene. It was practically in their front yard.
I understand there are two eyewitness accounts that Jack never pointed his weapon at the deputies. One account, I have been told, states that Jack actually shot the bull. And was killed immediately after.
A couple of other items which I find disturbing: It has been several days and we have yet to hear the nature of one deputy's "wound". Nowhere has it been stated that Jack wounded the deputy, and I think that would have been stated if true.
The second item is the nature in which the sheriff stated that Jack's wife became ill after being informed of the death. The sheriff intentionally leads us to believe she was not on the scene.
It appears the sheriff is making factual statements, but making them in such a way as to lead his audience into untruthful conclusions.
I have believed the police mindset which might have led these deputies to over react and murder this rancher only existed in Chicago, Los Angeles, and other such schitholes of humanity.
I had a difficult time believing that this played out this way in rural Idaho, with the cops in egregious error. But it certainly appears that the facts are beginning to come out and it is not looking good for the Adams County deputies.
I sincerely doubt the sheriff will be sheriff after the next election cycle. And if the Adams County Prosecutor does not hang these two deputies out to dry, his job will not survive the election cycle either.
How does a county of 4000 hire people that aren't local? Surely they can't afford to pay good enough to have officers moved there.
Dink
I was discussing this with a friend who owns property just two miles north of where this incident occured. He does not reside on the property, but spends about half of his weekends, vacation, and holidays there. He is friends with several full time residents of the same area, and has spoken with Jack Yantis on several occasions.
The brunt of our conversation was: Where does Adams County get their deputies. He stated that most are hired right out of academy. Adams County pay scale is too low to attract any seasoned officers, and pretty much excludes the cream of the academy crop.
That said, we still do not know the names of the deputies involved or any of their particulars.
I was informed of information online from an eye witness in the next car behind the Subaru. I have not been able to find this via internet search and would surely appreciate any one who could point me to it.
But this account apparently backs up the statement by Rowdy Paradis.
A couple of facts I have been able to ascertain. The bull was struck within a few tens of yards from Jack Yantis's barn. Jack and his wife had very little distance to travel to the scene. It was practically in their front yard.
I understand there are two eyewitness accounts that Jack never pointed his weapon at the deputies. One account, I have been told, states that Jack actually shot the bull. And was killed immediately after.
A couple of other items which I find disturbing: It has been several days and we have yet to hear the nature of one deputy's "wound". Nowhere has it been stated that Jack wounded the deputy, and I think that would have been stated if true.
The second item is the nature in which the sheriff stated that Jack's wife became ill after being informed of the death. The sheriff intentionally leads us to believe she was not on the scene.
It appears the sheriff is making factual statements, but making them in such a way as to lead his audience into untruthful conclusions.
I have believed the police mindset which might have led these deputies to over react and murder this rancher only existed in Chicago, Los Angeles, and other such schitholes of humanity.
I had a difficult time believing that this played out this way in rural Idaho, with the cops in egregious error. But it certainly appears that the facts are beginning to come out and it is not looking good for the Adams County deputies.
I sincerely doubt the sheriff will be sheriff after the next election cycle. And if the Adams County Prosecutor does not hang these two deputies out to dry, his job will not survive the election cycle either.
I passed by Jack's barn three hours before the accident occured.
I hate pointing fingers at the cops. They are doing a tough job for little compensation. At least that is true of small town police and deputies around here.
Please, let's not make this a Deliverance, Where are They now? thread.
Who would of thought the inbred banjo player would now look less freakish than Reynolds?
Until more information is made available, my only comment on the thread subject is that it's a tragic and unnecessary waste, and should have been avoidable. I can't begin to imagine what all involved are going through.
On the other hand, I just downloaded Dueling Banjos for my phone ringtone and have been listening to it while reading the remainder of this thread. My wife thinks I'm nuts and I think it's awesome - I can listen to that tune for hours
I passed by Jack's barn three hours before the accident occured.
I hate pointing fingers at the cops. They are doing a tough job for little compensation. At least that is true of small town police and deputies around here.
I almost bought a shop in Weiser once, it's hard to countenance it being almost a quarter century ago ...spent more than a fair bit of time just hanging out in that general area,...and ran the road up to McCall MANY times. Strikes me that I remarked about folks were driving TOO FAST, at that time. Can't imagine that anybody slowed down much,....
We've been told that a "never back down" attitude is (in some circles) an outmoded, and somehow FROWNED UPON attitude.
I'll only comment that I've never seen it more strongly reflected in a nicer bunch of solid folks than those I met , during that all too brief sojourn there.
Can't see Cochise County as being a whole lot different, either.
There's something VERY wrong when hard working folks start to feel "cornered"
I'd have said / posted little or nothing here,...were it not for getting a strong whiff of the sort that aspire to corner.
Best for them that they realize that their smell can't wash off, and that their time's drawing to a close.
Cops Call Rancher for Help with a Bull, When He Showed Up the Cops Killed Him
Adams County, ID — Jack Yantis, a 62-year-old rancher from Council, Idaho, received a call from the Adams County Sheriff’s Office on November 1 informing him that one of his bulls had been struck by a car on the nearby interstate. Yantis arrived at the scene a few minutes later, armed with a rifle to put down the wounded animal, which had turned aggressive and was threatening emergency responders trying to treat two people injured in the collision.
Within a few minutes, Yantis was dead – shot by deputies on the scene. Upon hearing the news, his wife Donna suffered a heart attack. She was taken to Saint Alphonsus Hospital in Boise. As this is written she reportedly remains in critical condition.
“They took a family man from the dinner table and slaughtered him,” declared Rowdy Paradis, who says he was standing ten feet from the rancher when he was killed.
Sheriff Ryan Zolland describes Yantis as a well-known and widely respected figure in Adams County. “This is going to be a big hit to this community,” a visibly shaken Zolland told Boise’s NBC affiliate, KTVB. “The gentleman involved, Mr. Yantis, was a well-known cattle rancher around here. It’s just a sad deal for everybody involved, for the whole community.”
Sheriff Zolland insisted that his department “takes matters involving any use of force very seriously and we have requested detectives with the Idaho State Police to conduct the investigation into this incident.” The deputies involved – one of whom reportedly suffered an unspecified “minor injury,” are on paid leave.
Assuming that the investigation proceeds in familiar fashion, the “incident” will not be treated as a suspected criminal homicide, but as an “assault on law enforcement.” Taking its cues from law enforcement sources, the Idaho Statesman newspaper in Boise – the state’s most influential media organ – referred to Yantis’s death as the result of a “shootout.”
That expression has connotations of an encounter between law enforcement and a violent criminal, rather than an eminently avoidable death that apparently occurred through miscommunication or, possibly, the panic-stricken reaction of deputies to the presence of an armed citizen. It should not be forgotten that Yantis was responding to a message from the sheriff’s dispatch, and trying to assist the first responders, when he was fatally shot.
The Idaho State Police, which is investigating the incident, is currently facing lawsuits from two troopers and one former sergeant who claim to have faced official retaliation for refusing to participate in an official cover-up in a previous law enforcement-related fatality. ISP Corporals Quinn Carmack and Brandon Eller, along with former Sergeant Fred Rice, were involved in the investigation of former Payette County Deputy Scott Sloan, who killed 65-year-old New Plymouth resident Barry Johnson by plowing his police vehicle into the side of Johnson’s jeep at an estimate speed of 115 miles per hour.
On the basis of evidence produced by Carmack, Eller, and Rice, Sloan was fired by Sheriff Chad Huff and charged with vehicular manslaughter by special prosecutor Richard Linville. That case was sabotaged through the perjured testimony of ISP Trooper Justin Klitch, who had secretly collaborated with Sloan’s defense team while working in the official investigation.
Discarding the findings of its own investigators, the ISP tried to craft a narrative blaming Johnson for his own death by claiming that alcohol was involved in the October 18, 2011 crash. During an April 2012 preliminary hearing in the case, Trooper Sam Ketchum sent a text message to Lt. Col. Ralph Powell (who is now ISP Director), complaining that Carmack and Eller had “laid us out” by testifying truthfully, rather than endorsing the officially sanctioned fiction. One issue examined at that hearing was whether the original ISP report faulted Sloan for “unsafe operation of an emergency vehicle.”
In his surprise testimony for the defense, Klitch perjured himself by denying that the phrase had been in the original document. In a letter to the ISP written following the hearing, prosecutor Linville pointed to an email in which Klitch – before the official story had changed – “specifically requested” that the phrase be included in the report, based on the available evidence.
Revising his testimony to suit the official line was not the only favor Klitch did on behalf of Sloan, and for his own superiors at the ISP.
“When I initially asked Trooper Klitch to meet with me to discuss filing the case, he made a recording of out meeting without my knowledge or consent,” Linville recalls. “I don’t know why Trooper Klitch would make such a recording. His duty at the time was to present to me all of the evidence he had collected regarding the Sloan case. He was meeting with me to present evidence, not to create it.”
“Never in my 25 years as a prosecuting attorney have I had a law enforcement officer secretly record discussions during case preparation that are otherwise privileged and protected work product, then hide the existence of such a recording from me,” Linville protested.
Klitch’s perjury earned him a place on the “Brady list” – a roster of law enforcement officers whose testimony cannot be trusted in court. However, for testifying truthfully in court, corporals Carmack and Eller were summoned by their ISP superiors and told that “because of their testimony [they] could not be trusted….” Sgt. Rice, who had conducted a professional and conscientious investigation, was reprimanded for supposedly “withholding exculpatory evidence” – meaning that his original report was later contradicted by Klitch’s perjured testimony. Subjected to a punitive transfer, Rice was told by his new supervisor that he was “not being a team player” and that “he needed to stop more cars and write more tickets and that if he did not make the changes it would be reflected in his 2013 evaluation.” Rice has since resigned from the ISP.
The perjurer Klitch, according to his supervisor, remains “a valued member of the ISP” — despite being inscribed on the “Brady list” and a growing collection of lawsuits by motorists who have suffered abuse at his hands in pretext stops conducted for the purpose of asset forfeiture.
Jackie Raymond, the only surviving child of the man killed by Deputy Sloan, has filed a tort claim describing the ISP’s behavior as that of a criminal “enterprise or conspiracy …[to] conceal evidence, harbor and protect Sloan from criminal and civil liability, and intimidate, influence, impede, deter, threaten, harass and obstruct witnesses … to protect fellow Idaho law enforcement officers from the consequences of their criminal misconduct.”
The death of Jack Yantis may have been the product of tragic miscalculation, misunderstanding, or mishap. Now that the investigation is being conducted by a “criminal enterprise” with a documented history of suppressing and misrepresenting evidence, the truth of the matter will remain elusive.
(Article by William N. Grigg; from The Free Thought Project)
"Free Thought Project"?
Also, it seems this "article" contradicts supposedly "eyewitness" accounts that have the wife at the scene, which certainly would have reinforced the thrust of the "article".
The "article" is short on facts and long on speculation.
How about we wait until some more real facts are known?
Police work involves coming up with an idea of what happened and then investigating that angle. If it doesn't work out, you move on to something else. That involves speculating on what happens-which is all that's going on here. I haven't even speculated like some others are. It seems odd that some here want to shut down "free thought" when all people are doing are discussing what might have went down.
Sounds like what I posted, which was just a story from the internet and not held up to be anything else or more, trues right up with the account posted by Idaho Shooter-very close to boots on the ground.
I passed by Jack's barn three hours before the accident occured.
I hate pointing fingers at the cops. They are doing a tough job for little compensation. At least that is true of small town police and deputies around here.
I almost bought a shop in Weiser once, it's hard to countenance it being almost a quarter century ago ...spent more than a fair bit of time just hanging out in that general area,...and ran the road up to McCall MANY times. Strikes me that I remarked about folks were driving TOO FAST, at that time. Can't imagine that anybody slowed down much,....
We've been told that a "never back down" attitude is (in some circles) an outmoded, and somehow FROWNED UPON attitude.
I'll only comment that I've never seen it more strongly reflected in a nicer bunch of solid folks than those I met , during that all too brief sojourn there.
Can't see Cochise County as being a whole lot different, either.
There's something VERY wrong when hard working folks start to feel "cornered"
I'd have said / posted little or nothing here,...were it not for getting a strong whiff of the sort that aspire to corner.
Best for them that they realize that their smell can't wash off, and that their time's drawing to a close.
Makes it damned tough to get out of the driveway and onto the road with a loaded pickup and trailer when there is a blind corner 100 yds in either directi0n.
Also makes it tough to stop in time when a black cow is standing in the road at dark thirty PM.
Greg, as you are familiar with this stretch of hiway 95, you will remember a straight stretch of road for six miles going North out of Council. Just as you hit the first curve, right at the Fruitvale turnoff is a big red barn which has been there for decades. That is Jack and Donna's barn. This accident occurred right beside the barn.
Make note of that corral. Living in the country, I know what bad fences look like. Guys that constantly have cattle out on the road have bad fences because they are sick or they just don't gaf whether their cows get out. That ain't a bad fence.
Everybody who has cows has them get out, but when you let your fences go, they get out more often. I'm guessing that isn't where the cows got out but...generally if a man keeps his corral up like that, he's got good fences everywhere.
It also speaks to his character, keeping a place up like that.
How does a county of 4000 hire people that aren't local? Surely they can't afford to pay good enough to have officers moved there.
Dink
I was discussing this with a friend who owns property just two miles north of where this incident occured. He does not reside on the property, but spends about half of his weekends, vacation, and holidays there. He is friends with several full time residents of the same area, and has spoken with Jack Yantis on several occasions.
The brunt of our conversation was: Where does Adams County get their deputies. He stated that most are hired right out of academy. Adams County pay scale is too low to attract any seasoned officers, and pretty much excludes the cream of the academy crop.
That said, we still do not know the names of the deputies involved or any of their particulars.
I was informed of information online from an eye witness in the next car behind the Subaru. I have not been able to find this via internet search and would surely appreciate any one who could point me to it.
But this account apparently backs up the statement by Rowdy Paradis.
A couple of facts I have been able to ascertain. The bull was struck within a few tens of yards from Jack Yantis's barn. Jack and his wife had very little distance to travel to the scene. It was practically in their front yard.
I understand there are two eyewitness accounts that Jack never pointed his weapon at the deputies. One account, I have been told, states that Jack actually shot the bull. And was killed immediately after.
A couple of other items which I find disturbing: It has been several days and we have yet to hear the nature of one deputy's "wound". Nowhere has it been stated that Jack wounded the deputy, and I think that would have been stated if true.
The second item is the nature in which the sheriff stated that Jack's wife became ill after being informed of the death. The sheriff intentionally leads us to believe she was not on the scene.
It appears the sheriff is making factual statements, but making them in such a way as to lead his audience into untruthful conclusions.
I have believed the police mindset which might have led these deputies to over react and murder this rancher only existed in Chicago, Los Angeles, and other such schitholes of humanity.
I had a difficult time believing that this played out this way in rural Idaho, with the cops in egregious error. But it certainly appears that the facts are beginning to come out and it is not looking good for the Adams County deputies.
I sincerely doubt the sheriff will be sheriff after the next election cycle. And if the Adams County Prosecutor does not hang these two deputies out to dry, his job will not survive the election cycle either.
Good God...
I truly hope that isn't the case, only because if it is true then that community is going to be further ripped apart than it already is and the families involved will suffer far more than they already have.
Idaho_Shooter, thanks for doing the very unpleasant task you're doing.
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
BTW, 4ager, do you ever get out of the house?
Your first line says a Hell of a lot about you and what you find important in all this.
As to the second - going hunting (again) this weekend and have likely already spent more hours afield chasing game this fall than you have, since you asked but not that it matters.
I'm getting a lot of calls concerning my cousin Jack's murder Sunday. Google your favorite news station and get the news story; just type in Jack Yantis, every station in the country is reporting it! The problem is, they're just reporting the Idaho State Police's version and it's very misleading. The news reports said there was an altercation between Jack and the cops before Jack was shot. It turns out that the disagreement stemmed from Jack insisting that the bull be killed in such a way that the family could use the meat. Jack's wife Donna and her nephew were with him when he was murdered and Donna was also roughed up, had a massive heart attack, and was life flighted to Boise where she remains in critical condition. I've read several first hand accounts and they are all the same. The bull was hit, the cops called Jack and asked him to come take care of things. Jack took his rifle, in case he needed to shoot the bull, and hurried to the crash area. The deputies had already shot the bull with a pistol before Jack got there but it didn't kill it. They argued and Jack was shot four times in the chest and once in the belly. The deputies are now on a paid vacation.
I like to think I take a balanced, open minded view on any subject that comes up here I say that because the relatives/eye witness accounts just seem to be too "incredible" and beggars belief that LEO's could behave that way.
Had this been "just" a tragic accident, it would still be bad, but no wonder the family is in deep trauma if the events outlined are true and accurate..
All in all very sad, and I hope for all those involved that a clear and transparent investigation takes place which results in an appropriate outcome...
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
Are you [bleep] serious?
Because if you are you are one ungodly piece of [bleep].
A man dies under these circumstances, and ultimately it comes down to whether or not you were right and whether you will rub people's noses in it? People whose only concern was to wait on the facts.
If you're not serious, then you are an ungodly piece of [bleep], just the same.
Nice that you treat it like a game.
Put your wife back on the account. At least she seemed a little more grounded in what really matters.
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
Are you [bleep] serious?
Because if you are you are one ungodly piece of [bleep].
A man dies under these circumstances, and ultimately it comes down to whether or not you were right and whether you will rub people's noses in it? People whose only concern was to wait on the facts.
If you're not serious, then you are an ungodly piece of [bleep], just the same.
Nice that you treat it like a game.
Put your wife back on the account. At least she seemed a little more grounded in what really matters.
Fireball can fight his own battles, but you berating somebody over essentially not taking a thread seriously is just rich as hell.
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
Are you [bleep] serious?
Because if you are you are one ungodly piece of [bleep].
A man dies under these circumstances, and ultimately it comes down to whether or not you were right and whether you will rub people's noses in it? People whose only concern was to wait on the facts.
If you're not serious, then you are an ungodly piece of [bleep], just the same.
Nice that you treat it like a game.
Put your wife back on the account. At least she seemed a little more grounded in what really matters.
Fireball can fight his own battles, but you berating somebody over essentially not taking a thread seriously is just rich as hell.
Right.
There's a time and a place for levity.
Harnessing a man's death on remote Idaho asphalt as a tool to private satisfaction is bullshit.
The fact that you can't see that difference speaks loads about you.
Well, now that stuff is starting to come out, the guys that believe no cop ever did wrong will bash the guy that called bullsheit on the cops, rather than bashing the cops. Same story, different thread. If Jack was wrong and deserved to be shot, so be it, if the cops were wrong, and Jack died because of it, then those two deserve to die. We all know that will never happen, and a lot of you will still support them no matter how wrong they turn out to be.
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
Are you [bleep] serious?
Because if you are you are one ungodly piece of [bleep].
A man dies under these circumstances, and ultimately it comes down to whether or not you were right and whether you will rub people's noses in it? People whose only concern was to wait on the facts.
If you're not serious, then you are an ungodly piece of [bleep], just the same.
Nice that you treat it like a game.
Put your wife back on the account. At least she seemed a little more grounded in what really matters.
Fireball can fight his own battles, but you berating somebody over essentially not taking a thread seriously is just rich as hell.
Right.
There's a time and a place for levity.
Harnessing a man's death on remote Idaho asphalt as a tool to private satisfaction is bullshit.
The fact that you can't see that difference speaks loads about you.
This ain't Kansas.
(levity added, just for you...)
I've seen you yuck it up on other threads that were as somber as this one and you probably did on this one too, although I usually just skip your posts. Adding that it's not Kansas alluding to your recent successful troll pretty much says how seriously you take any of this. Personally, I don't care because I know you're a dickweasling idiot anyway. I just wanted to point out for the audience how much of a hypocrite you are.
I passed by Jack's barn three hours before the accident occured.
I hate pointing fingers at the cops. They are doing a tough job for little compensation. At least that is true of small town police and deputies around here.
I almost bought a shop in Weiser once, it's hard to countenance it being almost a quarter century ago ...spent more than a fair bit of time just hanging out in that general area,...and ran the road up to McCall MANY times. Strikes me that I remarked about folks were driving TOO FAST, at that time. Can't imagine that anybody slowed down much,....
We've been told that a "never back down" attitude is (in some circles) an outmoded, and somehow FROWNED UPON attitude.
I'll only comment that I've never seen it more strongly reflected in a nicer bunch of solid folks than those I met , during that all too brief sojourn there.
Can't see Cochise County as being a whole lot different, either.
There's something VERY wrong when hard working folks start to feel "cornered"
I'd have said / posted little or nothing here,...were it not for getting a strong whiff of the sort that aspire to corner.
Best for them that they realize that their smell can't wash off, and that their time's drawing to a close.
GTC
A real good post, followed by an excellent response.
"Not backing down", and "feeling cornered" are especially apropos to a LOT of these "bad" L E encounters, I'm thinking.
I passed by Jack's barn three hours before the accident occured.
I hate pointing fingers at the cops. They are doing a tough job for little compensation. At least that is true of small town police and deputies around here.
I almost bought a shop in Weiser once, it's hard to countenance it being almost a quarter century ago ...spent more than a fair bit of time just hanging out in that general area,...and ran the road up to McCall MANY times. Strikes me that I remarked about folks were driving TOO FAST, at that time. Can't imagine that anybody slowed down much,....
We've been told that a "never back down" attitude is (in some circles) an outmoded, and somehow FROWNED UPON attitude.
I'll only comment that I've never seen it more strongly reflected in a nicer bunch of solid folks than those I met , during that all too brief sojourn there.
Can't see Cochise County as being a whole lot different, either.
There's something VERY wrong when hard working folks start to feel "cornered"
I'd have said / posted little or nothing here,...were it not for getting a strong whiff of the sort that aspire to corner.
Best for them that they realize that their smell can't wash off, and that their time's drawing to a close.
GTC
A real good post, followed by an excellent response.
"Not backing down", and "feeling cornered" are especially apropos to a LOT of these "bad" L E encounters, I'm thinking.
Now Gene, take this serious and don't be speculating. You know we got to wait until all the "facts" are made up.
The brunt of our conversation was: Where does Adams County get their deputies. He stated that most are hired right out of academy. Adams County pay scale is too low to attract any seasoned officers, and pretty much excludes the cream of the academy crop.
We have this same problem in rural Arkansas and get a lot of Barney Fife's along with a few good ones. Most of the Barney's don't last long, but are usually replaced with the same kind. The State Police seem to be good at weeding these out, even though their pay scale is not what it should be. The larger towns seem to have less problems with this that do the smaller ones. More available money seems to be the answer. miles
There were - myself included - some folks who asked to wait until the facts were known before jumping to conclusions. What, exactly, would or has that hurt? Perhaps a few feelings for not being able to say "toldja so" right off the bat (though that seems to be the case now).
As it is, one family has lost a man already, an entire community is being torn apart, if the things coming out now are true then two other families should be dealing with their sons on trial for murder, and somehow this is grounds for people to be congratulating themselves and "rubbing others noses in it" for being "right" vs people who wanted to wait for facts to come out?
Think about that for a second - wtf is wrong with us? Yes, I said "us".
Keep going, we've almost come full circle. I will try not to rub everyone's nose in it.
Are you [bleep] serious?
Because if you are you are one ungodly piece of [bleep].
A man dies under these circumstances, and ultimately it comes down to whether or not you were right and whether you will rub people's noses in it? People whose only concern was to wait on the facts.
If you're not serious, then you are an ungodly piece of [bleep], just the same.
Nice that you treat it like a game.
Put your wife back on the account. At least she seemed a little more grounded in what really matters.
Fireball can fight his own battles, but you berating somebody over essentially not taking a thread seriously is just rich as hell.
Right.
There's a time and a place for levity.
Harnessing a man's death on remote Idaho asphalt as a tool to private satisfaction is bullshit.
The fact that you can't see that difference speaks loads about you.
This ain't Kansas.
(levity added, just for you...)
I've seen you yuck it up on other threads that were as somber as this one and you probably did on this one too, although I usually just skip your posts. Adding that it's not Kansas alluding to your recent successful troll pretty much says how seriously you take any of this. Personally, I don't care because I know you're a dickweasling idiot anyway. I just wanted to point out for the audience how much of a hypocrite you are.
I take it serious enough to wait for the facts. In the interim, I can't take you and the other "fist raised against tyranny" sabre rattlers seriously, mainly because of your lockstep initial condemnation of everything involving "the man"
Having a few yuks in the middle of a "somber thread" sure isn't close to making it all about who's right in the end, which ultimately, is what you, and the rest are concerned with - keeping score.
And it won't matter once its all said and done if the cops are at fault, because unlike the others who are crying for a lynching, all I ask is that they are treated in accordance with the fullest extent of the law, so I'll still be an ass.
If it turns out any different, then the facts are "made up", right? Or you've already planted the seed that Idaho State Police are fact hiding jack boots. Righteous move.
Pick another fictional movie character as a screen name and continue to fight the good fight.
There were - myself included - some folks who asked to wait until the facts were known before jumping to conclusions. What, exactly, would or has that hurt? Perhaps a few feelings for not being able to say "toldja so" right off the bat (though that seems to be the case now).
Think about that for a second - wtf is wrong with us? Yes, I said "us".
I can't stop speculating if I haven't speculated in the first place. I just posted some info I found. But if I decide to speculate, I will.
As far as what is wrong with us? There is nothing wrong with me. I can't speak for you. I would suggest that you not worry so much about what others are posting, that might help.
I didn't make any predictions about how this will all shake out and won't be saying, "I told you so," and wouldn't have if I had. It's just not how I roll.
It seems more and more likely that Mrs. Yantis WAS at the scene.
That's adding tragedy on top of tragedy.
The info thus far certainly seems to indicate that the cops didn't just cause the heart attack by killing her husband but actually put their hands on her.
My prediction is that this thread will become very quiet in the next few days, probably gonna get more and more no shows from here on out.
You mean when the facts that some folks were advocating to wait for start coming out?
Do you feel "vindicated" because you were "right" and this incident is shaping up to among the worst possible scenarios, or because you jumped to that conclusion?
I'll ask the question again: wtf is wrong with us?
It seems more and more likely that Mrs. Yantis WAS at the scene.
That's adding tragedy on top of tragedy.
The info thus far certainly seems to indicate that the cops didn't just cause the heart attack by killing her husband but actually put their hands on her.
If that's the case, and God I hope not, then try them for first degree murder and attempted murder.
It seems more and more likely that Mrs. Yantis WAS at the scene.
That's adding tragedy on top of tragedy.
The info thus far certainly seems to indicate that the cops didn't just cause the heart attack by killing her husband but actually put their hands on her.
If that's the case, and God I hope not, then try them for first degree murder and attempted murder.
I seen an unconfirmed report that they had cuffed the family members that came with the deceased, but at the time, along with a lot of other research I've done, I didn't gossip it out.
Contrary to popular belief, I actually research as much as I can on this stuff, knowing that the last sheriff election was a real contest, with a spoiler 3rd candidate possibly causing the difference, and that a number of people quit when the incumbent was not re-elected, possibly causing the need for new hires.
I noticed that some reported issues with the department were actually from the previous sheriff, and not with the current one; and that for a small population, the department has a big concern with child exploitation, as far as education and other training. Odd.
But then again, I'm just a cop suck up according to Gene, and others, and not really interested in what really happened...
"I can't stop speculating if I haven't speculated in the first place. I just posted some info I found. But if I decide to speculate, I will."
These are the same members who are so quick to speculate about the victims of cop shootings. These in the present conversation will be quick to point out that they, personally, didn't do the following, but the mindset is the same:
Speculated that Jose Guerno's widow wuld go to the pen for drug dealing. [She was awarded 2.4 million for the wrongful death shooting by Tucson SWAT Team of her former Marine husband.]
Speculated that the Ft Worth Homeowner was at fault when two rookie cops at the wrong address shot him dead, because,"He knew they were cops because of the flashing lights on their cruiser, so he had no business coming out of his front door with a revolver in hand". [The cops were on foot, in his backyard, and his wife saw their flashlights. He stepped into his attached garage and was raising the door when they killed him.]
One would think that Ruby Ridge and Waco would have opened people's eyes as to the propensity to "cover up" by L E when they screw up, but "sheeple" still abound.
Might have been doubled up to help deal with livestock...just a guess.
Rough stuff all the way around. IMHO, the only situation I can imagine the officers being justified was if the rancher pointed the rifle at one of them. ...but I'm doing nothing but guessing...
"I can't stop speculating if I haven't speculated in the first place. I just posted some info I found. But if I decide to speculate, I will."
These are the same members who are so quick to speculate about the victims of cop shootings. These in the present conversation will be quick to point out that they, personally, didn't do the following, but the mindset is the same:
Speculated that Jose Guerno's widow wuld go to the pen for drug dealing. [She was awarded 2.4 million for the wrongful death shooting by Tucson SWAT Team of her former Marine husband.]
Speculated that the Ft Worth Homeowner was at fault when two rookie cops at the wrong address shot him dead, because,"He knew they were cops because of the flashing lights on their cruiser, so he had no business coming out of his front door with a revolver in hand". [The cops were on foot, in his backyard, and his wife saw their flashlights. He stepped into his attached garage and was raising the door when they killed him.]
One would think that Ruby Ridge and Waco would have opened people's eyes as to the propensity to "cover up" by L E when they screw up, but "sheeple" still abound.
Which members are you talking about, Gene? Don't be coy.
If there's someone who thinks the cops didn't screw the pooch and commit all manner of crimes at Waco and Ruby Ridge, they need their damned heads examined. Not sure how that relates to actually waiting for facts to come out before passing judgment, though.
Seems odd with as much area as there is that they have people doubled up.
I don't know that but I do know, it is common practice for reserve officers to ride with a patrol officer.These smaller communities rely on reserve officers often.In McCall as an example,they ride with the duty officers for training and experience before going to POST if that is there goal..They also patrol on the 4th of July with the regular officers and are certified with a firearm/hand to hand etc.
My prediction is that this thread will become very quiet in the next few days, probably gonna get more and more no shows from here on out.
You mean when the facts that some folks were advocating to wait for start coming out?
Do you feel "vindicated" because you were "right" and this incident is shaping up to among the worst possible scenarios, or because you jumped to that conclusion?
I'll ask the question again: wtf is wrong with us?
I answered that with an edit to the other post, but to summarize, there is nothing wrong with me. As to you, I wouldn't want to speculate. lol
Seems odd with as much area as there is that they have people doubled up.
I don't know that but I do know, it is common practice for reserve officers to ride with a patrol officer.These smaller communities rely on reserve officers often.
My prediction is that this thread will become very quiet in the next few days, probably gonna get more and more no shows from here on out.
You mean when the facts that some folks were advocating to wait for start coming out?
Do you feel "vindicated" because you were "right" and this incident is shaping up to among the worst possible scenarios, or because you jumped to that conclusion?
I'll ask the question again: wtf is wrong with us?
No sir, I don't feel vindicated at all, I feel sorry for the man and his family. I do believe there are some posters on this thread that would refuse to feel the same way as I do for him, because they believe that a "Officer of the Law" could do any wrong.
Seems odd with as much area as there is that they have people doubled up.
I don't know that but I do know, it is common practice for reserve officers to ride with a patrol officer.These smaller communities rely on reserve officers often.In McCall as an example,they ride with the duty officers for training and experience before going to POST if that is there goal..They also patrol on the 4th of July with the regular officers and are certified with a firearm/hand to hand etc.
A Reserve Officer in Tulsa was charged after he killed a guy by shooting him when he supposedly thought he was going for his Taser. I don't remember if it has been mentioned much on here. The Tulsa County Sheriff was forced to resign basically over that and related incidents and is under indictment for two misdemeanors. There were other incidents of misconduct besides the indictments though. Oklahoma is pro-law enforcement, so you know this isn't just bs.
My prediction is that this thread will become very quiet in the next few days, probably gonna get more and more no shows from here on out.
You mean when the facts that some folks were advocating to wait for start coming out?
Do you feel "vindicated" because you were "right" and this incident is shaping up to among the worst possible scenarios, or because you jumped to that conclusion?
I'll ask the question again: wtf is wrong with us?
No sir, I don't feel vindicated at all, I feel sorry for the man and his family. I do believe there are some posters on this thread that would refuse to feel the same way as I do for him, because they believe that a "Officer of the Law" could do any wrong.
I believe everyone shares the same opinion on the former. I hope you're wrong about the latter; certainly can't understand who that might be or why they'd feel that way - or why you'd think that of them.
My prediction is that this thread will become very quiet in the next few days, probably gonna get more and more no shows from here on out.
You mean when the facts that some folks were advocating to wait for start coming out?
Do you feel "vindicated" because you were "right" and this incident is shaping up to among the worst possible scenarios, or because you jumped to that conclusion?
I'll ask the question again: wtf is wrong with us?
I answered that with an edit to the other post, but to summarize, there is nothing wrong with me. As to you, I wouldn't want to speculate. lol
Seems odd with as much area as there is that they have people doubled up.
I don't know that but I do know, it is common practice for reserve officers to ride with a patrol officer.These smaller communities rely on reserve officers often.In McCall as an example,they ride with the duty officers for training and experience before going to POST if that is there goal..They also patrol on the 4th of July with the regular officers and are certified with a firearm/hand to hand etc.
A Reserve Officer in Tulsa was charged after he killed a guy by shooting him when he supposedly thought he was going for his Taser. I don't remember if it has been mentioned much on here. The Tulsa County Sheriff was forced to resign basically over that and related incidents and is under indictment for two misdemeanors. There were other incidents of misconduct besides the indictments though. Oklahoma is pro-law enforcement, so you know this isn't just bs.
I recall hearing about that one. F'k up of epic proportions.
"I can't stop speculating if I haven't speculated in the first place. I just posted some info I found. But if I decide to speculate, I will."
These are the same members who are so quick to speculate about the victims of cop shootings. These in the present conversation will be quick to point out that they, personally, didn't do the following, but the mindset is the same:
Speculated that Jose Guerno's widow wuld go to the pen for drug dealing. [She was awarded 2.4 million for the wrongful death shooting by Tucson SWAT Team of her former Marine husband.]
Speculated that the Ft Worth Homeowner was at fault when two rookie cops at the wrong address shot him dead, because,"He knew they were cops because of the flashing lights on their cruiser, so he had no business coming out of his front door with a revolver in hand". [The cops were on foot, in his backyard, and his wife saw their flashlights. He stepped into his attached garage and was raising the door when they killed him.]
One would think that Ruby Ridge and Waco would have opened people's eyes as to the propensity to "cover up" by L E when they screw up, but "sheeple" still abound.
Which members are you talking about, Gene? Don't be coy.
If there's someone who thinks the cops didn't screw the pooch and commit all manner of crimes at Waco and Ruby Ridge, they need their damned heads examined. Not sure how that relates to actually waiting for facts to come out before passing judgment, though.
I can think of a number of adjectives to describe Curdog, but "coy" is not one of them. I find it difficult to believe you don't know who he is talking about, but if you really don't and wish to, just look back at some of his posts and all the name-calling and mocking that he's endured-specifically on threads dealing with those two incidents.
"I can't stop speculating if I haven't speculated in the first place. I just posted some info I found. But if I decide to speculate, I will."
These are the same members who are so quick to speculate about the victims of cop shootings. These in the present conversation will be quick to point out that they, personally, didn't do the following, but the mindset is the same:
Speculated that Jose Guerno's widow wuld go to the pen for drug dealing. [She was awarded 2.4 million for the wrongful death shooting by Tucson SWAT Team of her former Marine husband.]
Speculated that the Ft Worth Homeowner was at fault when two rookie cops at the wrong address shot him dead, because,"He knew they were cops because of the flashing lights on their cruiser, so he had no business coming out of his front door with a revolver in hand". [The cops were on foot, in his backyard, and his wife saw their flashlights. He stepped into his attached garage and was raising the door when they killed him.]
One would think that Ruby Ridge and Waco would have opened people's eyes as to the propensity to "cover up" by L E when they screw up, but "sheeple" still abound.
Which members are you talking about, Gene? Don't be coy.
If there's someone who thinks the cops didn't screw the pooch and commit all manner of crimes at Waco and Ruby Ridge, they need their damned heads examined. Not sure how that relates to actually waiting for facts to come out before passing judgment, though.
I can think of a number of adjectives to describe Curdog, but "coy" is not one of them. I find it difficult to believe you don't know who he is talking about, but if you really don't and wish to, just look back at some of his posts and all the name-calling and mocking that he's endured-specifically on threads dealing with those two incidents.
I figure Gene can, because he has before, name names.
Don't recall those two thread specifically, though I've no doubt they were rankerous and needlessly so. Might have been a better idea to have actually waited for the facts to emerge, eh?
Hell, I recall a recent thread (this year) when I was right there calling for the cop's head - before the facts came out. Learned my lesson.
Mirage made a good suggestion, even if he didn't realize it.
A break from all this for a while, perhaps for a bunch of us.
Say more than a few prayers for Mrs. Yantis and the rest of that family, for the entire community up there, and for the families of the officers involved (looks like they may lose their sons, too). After that, go hunting or fishing or work outside or something else.
Entirely unrelated to the thread, having met the man, Gene's got my vote, I don't really GAF if he agrees with me about stuff or not.
As to the tragic incident, seems like all we can infer at this point is that it happened after dark, there was some sort of disagreement between Mr Yantis and the deputies regarding the issue of dispatching the bull, and that Mr Yantis did shoot the bull.
At least two witnesses have spoken up stating the actions of the deputies were egregious, OTOH, I seriously doubt the deputies originally arrived at the crash scene that evening intending to employ deadly force.
"Which members are you talking about, Gene? Don't be coy."
Since you asked a civil question, I'll respond:
I was speaking to a general mindset that usually divides the forum membership on this topic.
But... Our friend Bob [isaac] was the one leading the charge against Jose Guerno and his wife. To his credit, months later, he was the one who,privately, told me of the financial settlement.[To MY credit, I didn't open an "I told you so" thread about it ]
I'm not going to research either of the two threads to assemble the list of "team members".
The length of the threads tells the story. Most members posted one time, allowing that that the cops' actions were questionable, or abhorrent,even.
Those members supporting the cops, or,"wait on the facts" types, are few in number, but because each of them respond to each contrary post, it gives the appearance of a forum equally divided on the question.
It's not.
When something smells, most members know there is something rotten causing it, but they are content to only post one time.
I said, many years ago, that I post on all contentious threads as a student of human nature. That hasn't changed, whether the topic is religion, or whatever.
It is amazing how the cameras never seem to be working when these things happen, the delay in releasing any of the facts is not helping the police or the community at all. A bad wreck with entrapment and angry bull chasing people around, why record any of that?
It is amazing how the cameras never seem to be working when these things happen, the delay in releasing any of the facts is not helping the police or the community at all. A bad wreck with entrapment and angry bull chasing people around, why record any of that?
My assumption is that it was all recorded. The story they made up to explain not having the video was that they forgot to turn the camera on. Covering error is pretty standard practice, and the brotherhood is almost always cooperative on such things.
dark night light had to be on ,WHY not the dash cam????????????????
and for the other idoit a 9mm will kill a bull SHOT PLACEMENT we regularly do cows and steers with a 22 cal,to the brain , body shots do not work. norm
No, not every call. Policy stated it had to be on for vehicle stops, streets idea field interviews and DUI arrests
Personally I activated it every time I transported someone
As far as the camera being on at an accident, it would depend. .I would suspect that their Emergency lights were on, but I have no idea how there cameras were set up to acticlvate, and I have no idea of knowing whether the vehicles were positioned to see anything even if they were on.
As far as me, lots of times at accident I didn't turn my overheads on, usually just my rear flashers, and usually if I did turn them on it wasn't by the pursuit switch which would also activate wig wags and every other flasher on the vehicle...that simply wasn't needed for most accident scenes in which the lights were more of a visual alcautionary aid than anything.
It was mentioned the bull was agitated. Depending on how "agitated" it was that shot placement to the brain might not be so easy, especially at night and if it was a dark bull. A 9mm to the face/nose/jaw/neck is going to make for an unhappy bull.
No, not every call. Policy stated it had to be on for vehicle stops, streets idea field interviews and DUI arrests
Personally I activated it every time I transported someone
As far as the camera being on at an accident, it would depend. .I would suspect that their Emergency lights were on, but I have no idea how there cameras were set up to acticlvate, and I have no idea of knowing whether the vehicles were positioned to see anything even if they were on.
As far as me, lots of times at accident I didn't turn my overheads on, usually just my rear flashers, and usually if I did turn them on it wasn't by the pursuit switch which would also activate wig wags and every other flasher on the vehicle...that simply wasn't needed for most accident scenes in which the lights were more of a visual alcautionary aid than anything.
Your rational and detailed explanations are not helpful.
It was mentioned the bull was agitated. Depending on how "agitated" it was that shot placement to the brain might not be so easy, especially at night and if it was a dark bull. A 9mm to the face/nose/jaw/neck is going to make for an unhappy bull.
I had a untorunate opportunity to put down a handful of both cows and horses, if the situation allowed I opted for a shotgun and slug for the reason you outlined...that sometimes the handgun was the best choice for the situation
It is amazing how the cameras never seem to be working when these things happen, the delay in releasing any of the facts is not helping the police or the community at all. A bad wreck with entrapment and angry bull chasing people around, why record any of that?
My assumption is that it was all recorded. The story they made up to explain not having the video was that they forgot to turn the camera on. Covering error is pretty standard practice, and the brotherhood is almost always cooperative on such things.
for the other idoit a 9mm will kill a bull SHOT PLACEMENT we regularly do cows and steers with a 22 cal,to the brain , body shots do not work. norm
A few years back we had a bull escape from a cattle market in a small rural town. The animal went a balistic and could not be caught up safely, so the police were called and they responded with an Armed Response Unit.
One or more LEO's then shot the animal over a dozen times with their 9mm MP5's. This went on for several minutes with the bull charging about the place before it finally fell.
Sometimes it's good to put a face on those deceased and nearly deceased do to unusual circumstances like this.
Jack's wife is doing much better and supposed to get out of the hospital this weekend after 3-stents..
RIP Jack...
Jack was a lumberjack for most of his life as well as a rodeo cowboy and rancher. Jack was loved by everyone that knew him. He was good hearted, down to earth and would have done anything for anybody.
for the other idoit a 9mm will kill a bull SHOT PLACEMENT we regularly do cows and steers with a 22 cal,to the brain , body shots do not work. norm
A few years back we had a bull escape from a cattle market in a small rural town. The animal went a balistic and could not be caught up safely, so the police were called and they responded with an Armed Response Unit.
One or more LEO's then shot the animal over a dozen times with their 9mm MP5's. This went on for several minutes with the bull charging about the place before it finally fell.
As you say, shot placement is everything..
Yep. Typical 9mm police load is a hollowpoint, which will probably not have great penetration on a bull muscle.
Head shots or spine shots would work, but a bit difficult if it is running around, and if you miss, that round has to go somewhere.
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
Sometimes it's good to put a face on those deceased and nearly deceased do to unusual circumstances like this.
Jack's wife is doing much better and supposed to get out of the hospital this weekend after 3-stents..
RIP Jack...
Jack was a lumberjack for most of his life as well as a rodeo cowboy and rancher. Jack was loved by everyone that knew him. He was good hearted, down to earth and would have done anything for anybody.
It was mentioned the bull was agitated. Depending on how "agitated" it was that shot placement to the brain might not be so easy, especially at night and if it was a dark bull. A 9mm to the face/nose/jaw/neck is going to make for an unhappy bull.
i killed a 900# Santa Gertrudis steer i hit with my car, shot it in the eye (at night)with a 22 rifle then called the sheriff and told him i wanted the steer.
for the other idoit a 9mm will kill a bull SHOT PLACEMENT we regularly do cows and steers with a 22 cal,to the brain , body shots do not work. norm
A few years back we had a bull escape from a cattle market in a small rural town. The animal went a balistic and could not be caught up safely, so the police were called and they responded with an Armed Response Unit.
One or more LEO's then shot the animal over a dozen times with their 9mm MP5's. This went on for several minutes with the bull charging about the place before it finally fell.
As you say, shot placement is everything..
Yep. Typical 9mm police load is a hollowpoint, which will probably not have great penetration on a bull muscle.
Head shots or spine shots would work, but a bit difficult if it is running around, and if you miss, that round has to go somewhere.
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
I wonder if the bull became agitated and posed a threat to the "first responders" before, or after, the Deputies shot him with handguns, if, in fact, the reports that they did that are true.
I wonder if the bull became agitated and posed a threat to the "first responders" before, or after, the Deputies shot him with handguns, if, in fact, the reports that they did that are true.
Don't forget that it had already been bit by a vehicle, so it was likely to be agitated to start with..If the bull was then wounded again, its mood was not likely to improve.
I am sure the bull was pissed before they screwed with him. Subarus are not good things to wack bulls with, a Kenworth does a better job. I can picture the cops rushing to him to put him down, which pissed him off more. Lots of times it is better to leave them be till you have something better than a rock to put them down. Bulls can take a lot of abuse and dea out a lot.
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just mosey on down to the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
I am sure the bull was pissed before they screwed with him. Subarus are not good things to wack bulls with, a Kenworth does a better job. I can picture the cops rushing to him to put him down, which pissed him off more. Lots of times it is better to leave them be till you have something better than a rock to put them down. Bulls can take a lot of abuse and dea out a lot.
a friend of my dad hit a bull going over 70 in a triumph sport car down near Rivera beach (kingsvilleTX) back in the 70s (navy guy) lived to talk about it.
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just step out into the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just step out into the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
you not of what you speak.
I've seen many cattle of all sizes (including bulls) butchered in my life. The first step of the process was a shot between the eyes with a 22lr. They all fell over and quivered a little before they were drug over to the hoist.
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just step out into the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
you not of what you speak.
I've seen many cattle of all sizes (including bulls) butchered in my life. The first step of the process was a shot between the eyes with a 22lr. They all fell over and quivered a little before they were drug over to the hoist.
Were any of them running around in a town when you shot them between the eyes?
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just mosey on down to the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
Improvise ?
Mister, you don't know a bull from your behind, and I seriously doubt you've ever shot or BUTCHERED one.
Quote
not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
The fact that the Two deputies only had 9mm handguns in their units or immediately available while working in that particular area's a bit of a head shaker, too. Like they didn't have the first clue at what can be encountered there , by way of livestock and native wildlife.
"pointless",.....ya' know, that's a better handle for you than some esoteric aircraft designator....
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC [/quote]
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just step out into the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
[/quote]you not of what you speak. [/quote]
I've seen many cattle of all sizes (including bulls) butchered in my life. The first step of the process was a shot between the eyes with a 22lr. They all fell over and quivered a little before they were drug over to the hoist. [/quote]
Were any of them running around in a town when you shot them between the eyes? [/quote]
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just mosey on down to the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
Improvise ?
Mister, you don't know a bull from your behind, and I seriously doubt you've ever shot or BUTCHERED one.
Quote
not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
The fact that the Two deputies only had 9mm handguns in their units or immediately available while working in that particular area's a bit of a head shaker, too. Like they didn't have the first clue at what can be encountered there , by way of livestock and native wildlife.
"pointless",.....ya' know, that's a better handle for you than some esoteric aircraft designator....
....suits ya'.
GTC
"Mister, you don't know a bull from your behind, and I seriously doubt you've ever shot or BUTCHERED one."
Wrong...steers and hogs, and shot in the head with a .22.
"The fact that the Two deputies only had 9mm handguns in their units or immediately available while working in that particular area's a bit of a head shaker, too. Like they didn't have the first clue at what can be encountered there , by way of livestock and native wildlife."
I think it quite likely they had some type of long gun in their squads, don't know.
The post I made, that you jumped on was regarding a bull shot in England with an MP5. Probably all they had, or had trained with, and they made do with what they had.
Guess they could have said, "Wait here Nigel, and cover him with that Bloody Unsuitable MP5 while I drive back and get the trusty .303."
I don't much care about the advisability of trying to put down a bull with a 9mm pistol (although I think it's a dumb move). I think there are two issues which affect people in the northwest. The first is, of course, the possibility of overreaction on the part of deputies which resulted in the killing of an innocent, law abiding, citizen. The second issue is the danger posed by free ranging cattle on a major highway (and hwy 95 is a major highway by Idaho standards). Al though the owner of livestock has no obligation to do so, I think I would be inclined to try and make my cattle more visible if they were going to be on the road. A black cow on a black roaf, especially on a rainy night, might be on your hood before you see it. The owner is compensated but the driver can be killed and there is no compensation for that. Still, ranchers, generally speaking, do not want to lose cattle. As traffic levels increase, it may be time to re-visit the whole open range concept. Another point is, while locals are likely to be on the lookout, travellers passing through might be a little surprised to see cattle on the highway. In a situation like this, I think it is a good idea to try and identify the root cause. In this case, the root causes may have been (a) cattle on the road or (b) inattentive driving. Of course, the police response, commencing at the time of Yantis' arrival at the scene, seems to be the cause of his death but if the bull had not been hit and the passengers in the car seriously injured, none of the rest of the tragedy would have occurred. On another aspect: Reporters who reported this incident as a "shootout between armed rancher and police" should be taken out and flogged. There should at least be an effort made to report facts. A question for those who live in the area: It is plain, from the photos, that the barn is right next to the highway; how far back is the house? Also, what is the usual response time for emergency responders? GD
Little know fact from the Deliverance scene below:
Here, the Reynold's character (the one most relied on by the others for their initial survival) suffers a compound fracture.
The original script had him saying, "I ain't got time to bleed." That line fell victim to a second rewrite.
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Guess the bigger question Crossfire, is do you ever make a post where you don't insult or make unfounded assumptions about the person you disagree with?
Little know fact from the Deliverance scene below:
Here, the Reynold's character (the one most relied on by the others for their initial survival) suffers a compound fracture.
The original script had him saying, "I ain't got time to bleed." That line fell victim to a second rewrite.
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
I thought that line was from The Bodies character in Predator?
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Before he became a dick, Jesse uttered those words in Predator.
Little know fact from the Deliverance scene below:
Here, the Reynold's character (the one most relied on by the others for their initial survival) suffers a compound fracture.
The original script had him saying, "I ain't got time to bleed." That line fell victim to a second rewrite.
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Didn't Jesse Ventura say that line in Predator, too?
I don't much care about the advisability of trying to put down a bull with a 9mm pistol (although I think it's a dumb move). I think there are two issues which affect people in the northwest. The first is, of course, the possibility of overreaction on the part of deputies which resulted in the killing of an innocent, law abiding, citizen. The second issue is the danger posed by free ranging cattle on a major highway (and hwy 95 is a major highway by Idaho standards). Al though the owner of livestock has no obligation to do so, I think I would be inclined to try and make my cattle more visible if they were going to be on the road. A black cow on a black roaf, especially on a rainy night, might be on your hood before you see it. The owner is compensated but the driver can be killed and there is no compensation for that. Still, ranchers, generally speaking, do not want to lose cattle. As traffic levels increase, it may be time to re-visit the whole open range concept. Another point is, while locals are likely to be on the lookout, travellers passing through might be a little surprised to see cattle on the highway. In a situation like this, I think it is a good idea to try and identify the root cause. In this case, the root causes may have been (a) cattle on the road or (b) inattentive driving. Of course, the police response, commencing at the time of Yantis' arrival at the scene, seems to be the cause of his death but if the bull had not been hit and the passengers in the car seriously injured, none of the rest of the tragedy would have occurred. On another aspect: Reporters who reported this incident as a "shootout between armed rancher and police" should be taken out and flogged. There should at least be an effort made to report facts. A question for those who live in the area: It is plain, from the photos, that the barn is right next to the highway; how far back is the house? Also, what is the usual response time for emergency responders? GD
It's been years, but as I recall the road that's just below the Yantis Barn is the "New Highway" and all along that valley, lower down there are ( or were back in '93) vestiges of the original narrow track wagon and model A road evident.
Little know fact from the Deliverance scene below:
Here, the Reynold's character (the one most relied on by the others for their initial survival) suffers a compound fracture.
The original script had him saying, "I ain't got time to bleed." That line fell victim to a second rewrite.
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Didn't Jesse Ventura say that line in Predator, too?
proving that once you place people on ignore, you end up repeating the very same post from the previous 3 responses, because your a candy-ass...
I for one, have seen a Bull where the hide was too thick on his forehead for a .22 long rifle to penetrate, at point blank range, had to use a 30-30. I also saw a sow that was brought to us to butcher, the had been shot multiple times in the head with .22 shorts, and they finally killed her with a claw hammer. The shorts had penetrated the hide and fat and were against the skull. My cousin that worked for a long time at a packing house, on the kill floor, told of numerous times that the blank powered knocker would not stun a bull and they had to get the sledge back out. miles
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Before he became a dick, Jesse uttered those words in Predator.
You want me to believe a guy that has Jack Black pole vaulting over a possum for an avatar, or, Detective John McClane?
I don't much care about the advisability of trying to put down a bull with a 9mm pistol (although I think it's a dumb move). I think there are two issues which affect people in the northwest. The first is, of course, the possibility of overreaction on the part of deputies which resulted in the killing of an innocent, law abiding, citizen. The second issue is the danger posed by free ranging cattle on a major highway (and hwy 95 is a major highway by Idaho standards). Al though the owner of livestock has no obligation to do so, I think I would be inclined to try and make my cattle more visible if they were going to be on the road. A black cow on a black roaf, especially on a rainy night, might be on your hood before you see it. The owner is compensated but the driver can be killed and there is no compensation for that. Still, ranchers, generally speaking, do not want to lose cattle. As traffic levels increase, it may be time to re-visit the whole open range concept. Another point is, while locals are likely to be on the lookout, travellers passing through might be a little surprised to see cattle on the highway. In a situation like this, I think it is a good idea to try and identify the root cause. In this case, the root causes may have been (a) cattle on the road or (b) inattentive driving. Of course, the police response, commencing at the time of Yantis' arrival at the scene, seems to be the cause of his death but if the bull had not been hit and the passengers in the car seriously injured, none of the rest of the tragedy would have occurred. On another aspect: Reporters who reported this incident as a "shootout between armed rancher and police" should be taken out and flogged. There should at least be an effort made to report facts. A question for those who live in the area: It is plain, from the photos, that the barn is right next to the highway; how far back is the house? Also, what is the usual response time for emergency responders? GD
It's been years, but as I recall the road that's just below the Yantis Barn is the "New Highway" and all along that valley, lower down there are ( or were back in '93) vestiges of the original narrow track wagon and model A road evident.
GTC
It's a damn good road, lots of 65 MPH and that is a safe speed where posted.
Of course as we all know, Hollywood scriptwriters later recycled those words and they found legendary movie fame uttered by Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series.
Before he became a dick, Jesse uttered those words in Predator.
You want me to believe a guy that has Jack Black pole vaulting over a possum for an avatar, or, Detective John McClane?
The trick to killing any animal with a 22 is the angle of the skull, if the bulls nose is up the skull plate will cause the bullet to deflect up and under the hide, you need to shoot from an elevated height or throw a hand full of grain on the ground, then shoot when the bulls head goes down and the skull is perpendicular to the shooter, obviously this is not possible on a rainy night along the side of the road, in this case a shot from the side with a 22 will be just as effective.
I would much rather use a 22 than a 9 mm, but thats another story.
But a bad experience is so very much more unforgettable.
No chit......Like the first porker I hadta kill. My 4-H pig. He was my highly-trained, housebroken pet/buddy. Dad said, your hog, your kill. I tooked careful aim, looked him in the eyes and my heart melted.... I turned my head and pulled the trigger. Got him right in that little round thing with 2 holes in it, on the end of his face. He squealed like a banshee,non-stop,(that really shook me up) and run into a farrowing shed, on the fight. Dad had to go in after him with a .38 pistol..... Never since.
The two animals you filmed yourself shooting are not what I think of when I read about a BULL on the prod.
I neighbored a pretty large ranch for 25 years and was friends with the Manager.They had a real rough pasture of about 2500 acres and a couple old rogue bulls had taken up residence there.
Everytime they went to gather yearlings out of that pasture, some would take off with the old bulls.
The Manager and his son are real cowboys, and they kept a pen full of Border Collies, Lacys, and Blackmouth Curs that were as good a cowdogs as any that walked.
Trampas, the son, came over one day and asked what was the biggest rifle I had. At that time, the answer was a 416 Rigby, and he borrowed it and come cartridges.
His dad had finally gotten fed up with the two bulls and that morning, in preparation for a gather, he decided to shoot them and leave 'em lay. He had driven into the pasture and located the bulls, running with some yearlings.
David was a good shot, and maybe he was anxious to get 'em both at one settin', but he emptied the magazine on his 270 Win. into one of 'em and it still made it the half mile to the thicket where they always hid.
Trampas waited until the next day and went into the pasture horseback, located the remaining bull, and stalked close enough for a broadside shot with the Rigby, which downed the bull in his tracks.
The wounded bull evidently died back in that thicket.
You could google "Cox Mountain in Jack County Tx" and look at the North end of it. There IS a fence, but it got lost in that thicket at least by 1950 when my Grandpa worked on the ranch.
A riled up bull, or big hog like Miles mentioned, take a lot of killin'.
A friend of my uncles made the mistake of placing a bucket of grain in the center of the barn, where the block and tackle were set up, with the idea that a quick shot to the head of the feeding steer was all of the preparation they needed to butcher it.
That was a terrible idea and after they finally got it killed, and surveyed the damage that 1500 Lbs of mad cow can do in a minute or two they understood why my grand father insisted on chaining them to the draw bar of a tractor before any of the shooting started.
But a bad experience is so very much more unforgettable.
No chit......Like the first porker I hadta kill. My 4-H pig. He was my highly-trained, housebroken pet/buddy. Dad said, your hog, your kill. I tooked careful aim, looked him in the eyes and my heart melted.... I turned my head and pulled the trigger. Got him right in that little round thing with 2 holes in it, on the end of his face. He squealed like a banshee,non-stop,(that really shook me up) and run into a farrowing shed, on the fight. Dad had to go in after him with a .38 pistol..... Never since.
My Stepfather had fattened a couple of shoats. Came time to kill them, he let my brother and I each shoot one.
We all three went into the pen and Bill put feed in the trough. My brother took the SS 22 and dropped his, not even a squeal.
The second hog went right on eatin' and I shot him.... low in the snout.
The only time it is OK to leave the hog pen gate open is when you go in to kill them. Out the gate he went.
Our place bordered the Brazos River and down there he went. Bill finally cornered him and killed him.
and for the other idoit a 9mm will kill a bull SHOT PLACEMENT we regularly do cows and steers with a 22 cal,to the brain , body shots do not work. norm
Did you tell that to the Barney Mini-Rambo's before they went off half cocked?
I'll paint a scenario.
It's dark. One of the first cold nights of the year. Bull gets out, as cattle get a little restless this time of year as feed quality goes down.
Bull gets whacked, maybe even knocked out. Deputies arrive on the scene, call in EMT's, direct traffic. Probably not dressed for the cold, they are very uncomfortable.
Bull comes to his senses, and starts doing what agitated bulls do. Rookies are faced with a 2,000 lb perp, and have no frame of reference on how to deal with a pissed off bull. They lose complete control of the situation and revert to training. I.E. empty the magazine.
Yantis shows up and tells them what idiots they are. Feelers are hurt. Yantis is yelled at as if he's the one being a dumb-ass. Yantis ignores the panicked Dudley's and shoots the bull properly. Leos are still in "control at all cost mode" and now shoot Yantis.
I've seen those HEAVY, and razor sharp pointed trocars BEND on bullhide, and have helped a vet use a big rawhide mallet to get one of the things between a bull's ribs.
Quote
So lots of shots to the chest where they won't over-penetrate kind of makes sense.
with 9 mm hollow points ?
.....having a hard time believing I just read that.
real head shaker, that one.
GTC
Sometimes you have to improvise with what you are equipped with, at the time. Not ideal, but probably not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
(But maybe you and I should just mosey on down to the Pointless Arguments and Insult thread, cuz I think I see where this is going)
Improvise ?
Mister, you don't know a bull from your behind, and I seriously doubt you've ever shot or BUTCHERED one.
Quote
not an option to say, "wait here" while I drive back to the station and get something different and more suited to the job.
The fact that the Two deputies only had 9mm handguns in their units or immediately available while working in that particular area's a bit of a head shaker, too. Like they didn't have the first clue at what can be encountered there , by way of livestock and native wildlife.
"pointless",.....ya' know, that's a better handle for you than some esoteric aircraft designator....
....suits ya'.
GTC
"Mister, you don't know a bull from your behind, and I seriously doubt you've ever shot or BUTCHERED one."
Wrong...steers and hogs, and shot in the head with a .22.
"The fact that the Two deputies only had 9mm handguns in their units or immediately available while working in that particular area's a bit of a head shaker, too. Like they didn't have the first clue at what can be encountered there , by way of livestock and native wildlife."
I think it quite likely they had some type of long gun in their squads, don't know.
The post I made, that you jumped on was regarding a bull shot in England with an MP5. Probably all they had, or had trained with, and they made do with what they had.
Guess they could have said, "Wait here Nigel, and cover him with that Bloody Unsuitable MP5 while I drive back and get the trusty .303."
...Bull comes to his senses, and starts doing what agitated bulls do. Rookies are faced with a 2,000 lb perp, and have no frame of reference on how to deal with a pissed off bull. They lose complete control of the situation and revert to training. I.E. empty the magazine.
Yantis shows up and tells them what idiots they are. Feelers are hurt. Yantis is yelled at as if he's the one being a dumb-ass. Yantis ignores the panicked Dudley's and shoots the bull properly. Leos are still in "control at all cost mode" and now shoot Yantis.
Speculation, but I am taking bets.
Something along those lines was my bet, too.
If cover-up mode wins, it'll include a phrase like "...failed to comply with the Officer's lawful order to drop the gun...", which Dep. Fife has learned gives him license to murder in 2015. Just wild uninformed speculation on my part, of course. But that's my bet.
(And this is an argument for a whole 'nother thread, but the modern notion that a cop has any authority to issue orders is total BS from a Constitutional standpoint.)
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
You're done diddling the little neighbor kids awfully early today aren't you?
When I was a little kid we were going to butcher a hog and split it with the neighbor. My Dad got a pan of grain and lead the hog into a side shed. The neighbor wanted to shoot it so my Dad gave him the .22 but the shot went low in the throat. The pig was running laps around the shed, squealing and bleeding. My Dad yelled for me to jump in the manger, grabbed the gun and put it down then chewed the neighbors ass. 50ish years later the memory is still vivid.
I think a broad brush is necessary when talking about police corruption and misconduct. Based upon the standard answers by the cops here there are a lot of them that I believe represent all that I abhor. When the time comes if the "good" cops haven't been part of the solution they are part of the problem.
A big obstacle in fixing police corruption or misconduct is the silence taken by ordinarily good cops in order to protect a "brother in blue". As far as I'm concerned that silence or protection offered is tacit acceptance of a major problem. They'll be sorted out in the end.
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
You're done diddling the little neighbor kids awfully early today aren't you?
Same old sh.it from you John...you are a fat, balding little nobody that finally found an old hag to shack up with. Like I said no tears will be shed when your time comes. And it's coming...
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
You're done diddling the little neighbor kids awfully early today aren't you?
Same old sh.it from you John...you are a fat, balding little nobody that finally found an old hag to shack up with. Like I said no tears will be shed when your time comes. And it's coming...
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
Congratulations. Inferring my wife's a cow.
Trying to figure out why you even brought me into the cow talk, as I haventreally addressed the livestock angle.
All I can see is that anyone differing in opinion to your extreme bullshit is somehow a threat?
Confirming that you won't shed a tear when my way of thinking causes my death only confirms that.
By rights, anyone with a sense of decency would shun your crap, but it appears you've already picked up a few "+1's".
Anyway. Well done on your quest for rule. You certainly aren't looking for truth.
Well, this thread has resolved nothing save one thing.
That being it reminded me of a couple members character that I had forgot about.
Gruff initially brought up the old Dallas thread to help rattle my memory. For that I am thankful.
I'll admit to stirring the pot occasionally with a provocative post, but if the posts on this thread are sincerely held beliefs? Well I'll just let the members read and interpret for themselves. Hunter1960 was an [bleep], but even Crossfire with whom I think he talked the most shidt let it go when the man died.
Is there any more real information coming out? So far, it seems like the real info on this situation could be posted on one or two pages. The rest is just like dogs barking. GD
Sometimes it's good to put a face on those deceased and nearly deceased do to unusual circumstances like this.
Jack's wife is doing much better and supposed to get out of the hospital this weekend after 3-stents..
RIP Jack...
Jack was a lumberjack for most of his life as well as a rodeo cowboy and rancher. Jack was loved by everyone that knew him. He was good hearted, down to earth and would have done anything for anybody.
RIP. Prayer sent. Salt of the earth family.
Do you know them personally? Figured you did to know them as "salt of the earth".
Good to see Fecesneights has come up for air long enough to post more bullsheit. I bet he's eaten 18 different loads from his wife's cunny in the last week.
No good cuckold, SOB. There is NO way he's not the little dick in that household.
Nope. And I use the same terms you do. Also FIBPAB (pulling a boat) or FIBPAT (pulling a trailor)[/quote] You sure? you sound like someone from Rockford or Elgin.
The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
And that's where you lost me.....while I think a couple of the guys you mentioned are biased and predictable...when you bring wives/children/parents etc into the conversation........ahhhh...never mind....you wouldn't get it anyway....
Or that maybe the cops were way off base and murdered him?
Funny how you guys get all bent out of shape with me, then find yourself agreeing. Gotta shake my head. Whatever, I quit caring about trying to get along with everyone here. The vast majority of guys make it easy, some make it impossible. The trick is knowing which is which, and which one's aren't worth trying.
Maybe you all should get out more. Last day of deer season here. Now or tag soup. This one still had velvet in November. One of those worn out 99's Shrapnel is so fond of, in 250-3000.
Or that maybe the cops were way off base and murdered him?
Funny how you guys get all bent out of shape with me, then find yourself agreeing. Gotta shake my head. Whatever, I quit caring about trying to get along with everyone here. The vast majority of guys make it easy, some make it impossible. The trick is knowing which is which, and which one's aren't worth trying.
Maybe you all should get out more. Last day of deer season here. Now or tag soup. This one still had velvet in November. One of those worn out 99's Shrapnel is so fond of, in 250-3000.
nice deer Roy! still on crutches , makes chasing bambi tough. guess I am going to miss the season, first missed in 48 years. sigh.
Man I hate to hear that. Maybe you could sponsor a kid. (a good strong kid to drag deer for you!) Can you set in your truck somewhere and watch some ground?
Doesn't surprise me to see a bunch of east of the Rockies cops and their boyfriends saying stupid sh.it about things they know nothing about. The closest these folks like cv540,,RWE, dink, gitem and the various others get to a cow is rolling over and giving her a kiss goodbye on the way out the door.
I still don't expect the chickensh.its to realize that their attitudes are going to get them hurt or killed. Maybe that's for the best.
I didn't shed a tear for the POS hunter1960 and I won't when they meet their demise.
I'll save my sadness for innocent men and their families when the state sponsored thugs gun them down. I'll let my anger simmer until collectively we decide it's time for a change in the way we allow police to rule over the populace.
I am doubtful that this tragedy will do anything to change the us against them mentality. Just based upon the appalling remarks made by the cops on here I fear that any changes are going to mean a lot of blood spilled. Eventually, when they bleed more than those they are sworn to protect only then will change happen. There are a lot of cowards in the average rank and file and as the tide turns they'll be easy pickings for a populace that refuses to be ruled over.
What exactly did you do when worked at the police department?
nice deer Roy! still on crutches , makes chasing bambi tough. guess I am going to miss the season, first missed in 48 years. sigh.
I went on crutches in 1989. Never got over 100 yds from the truck. With assistance from a friend tagged a doe. Could have not done it without his help. All it takes to deter me now is, wind, rain, or below freezing temps. My old bones have seen to many opening mornings.gw
What is it about having a front row seat to a 24hr bromance in full bloom bothers you so?
Exactly. The worst part about these threads is the cyber make-up sex that happens when they're over.
Good grief guys, grow a set and hold a grudge like a real man.
If all the posts saying the same thing, by the same group on each thread, were taken out, the thread length would be reduced by half.
"You need to wait on all the facts before posting".
Damn control freaks.
In all sincerity, nobody will know the facts on this unless they were there. I'm not bragging but just stating a "fact" when I say that I don't remember one time that I've had to revise what I initially thought on something like this.
Some resent the fact that some among us can "read sign".
Too many times the "facts" that come out after most have lost interest and moved on are stuff like the dash cam happened to be turned off and the witnesses recanted.
In a sparsely populated rural county, the likelihood of a wrongful death lawsuit against the county helps keep the lid on those facts. It's not a conspiracy as much as County Officials, local media, etc., having a common interest.
I saw it unfold when the Archer County Sheriff was accused of sexually assaulting a female prisoner.
I really feel for Mr. Yantis' family, both for their loss and their frustration with the "investigation" of his death.
I don't know why anybody gets upset about anything somebody says... I don't know why you would get mad about what somebody says on the internet... How's that go?
I think you've seen the light my friend. No fun being attacked.
There is not going to be anything good that comes from this investigation, I don't believe there are three people on the earth that believe that Mr Yantis had any intention to harm anyone but the bull in question, to of those people being the idiots that killed him. We will never know the words that transpired that led up to the shooting, and there are probably fewer than three people that aren't cops that will believe a word of what the police reported findings of this incidence are.
Every day that passes without any of the findings being released, along with the fact that the camera's were disabled just adds to the distrust of the whole community.
"Troubling" is about the only way I can describe the whole mess and how its being handled, the rumors and innuendos will become bigger and more trusted as fact and truth, the longer the state takes to fully answer some of the serious questions surrounding this case.
There is not going to be anything good that comes from this investigation, I don't believe there are three people on the earth that believe that Mr Yantis had any intention to harm anyone but the bull in question, to of those people being the idiots that killed him. We will never know the words that transpired that led up to the shooting, and there are probably fewer than three people that aren't cops that will believe a word of what the police reported findings of this incidence are.
Every day that passes without any of the findings being released, along with the fact that the camera's were disabled just adds to the distrust of the whole community.
"Troubling" is about the only way I can describe the whole mess and how its being handled, the rumors and innuendos will become bigger and more trusted as fact and truth, the longer the state takes to fully answer some of the serious questions surrounding this case.
After the report comes out, and they find these douchebags of no wrong doing, there will be several members on this website that will say, " see, "they didn't do nuffin' wrong"
I just thank God they didn't kill my father, and if this is washed away as a "good shoot" then I would guess they have a real hard time finding any one dumb enough to wear a badge in that county again.
To serve and Protect just doesn't seem to fit much any more.
And I'm not saying these cops went out there with the intent to kill this men, but there is certainly something wrong with the training or the mindset or both that these cops are so tightly wired, or piss their pants scared that shooting a citizen is the first thing that crosses their mind. We have a problem in this supposedly to be "free country" when we accept the killing of our neighbors by an out of control police force that feels that their spoken words, are all of the justification they need to kill you.
And I'm not saying these cops went out there with the intent to kill this men, but there is certainly something wrong with the training or the mindset or both that these cops are so tightly wired, or piss their pants scared that shooting a citizen is the first thing that crosses their mind. We have a problem in this supposedly to be "free country" when we accept the killing of our neighbors by an out of control police force that feels that their spoken words, are all of the justification they need to kill you.
And I'm not saying these cops went out there with the intent to kill this men, but there is certainly something wrong with the training or the mindset or both that these cops are so tightly wired, or piss their pants scared that shooting a citizen is the first thing that crosses their mind. We have a problem in this supposedly to be "free country" when we accept the killing of our neighbors by an out of control police force that feels that their spoken words, are all of the justification they need to kill you.
We are entering a dangerous place.
You must have a lot of schitty cops in your area. All the ones I deal with are very professional.
And I'm not saying these cops went out there with the intent to kill this men, but there is certainly something wrong with the training or the mindset or both that these cops are so tightly wired, or piss their pants scared that shooting a citizen is the first thing that crosses their mind...
This was published about Jack Yantis "...Jack was a lumberjack for most of his life as well as a rodeo cowboy and rancher. Jack was loved by everyone that knew him. He was good hearted, down to earth and would have done anything for anybody..."
To help offset all the discrediting done to Mr Yantis by forum LE/groupies, I can imagine that his murderers had to have pissed their pants upon finding themselves in the presence of a real man.
And I'm not saying these cops went out there with the intent to kill this men, but there is certainly something wrong with the training or the mindset or both that these cops are so tightly wired, or piss their pants scared that shooting a citizen is the first thing that crosses their mind...
This was published about Jack Yantis "...Jack was a lumberjack for most of his life as well as a rodeo cowboy and rancher. Jack was loved by everyone that knew him. He was good hearted, down to earth and would have done anything for anybody..."
To help offset all the discrediting done to Mr Yantis by forum LE/groupies, I can imagine that his murderers had to have pissed their pants upon finding themselves in the presence of a real man.
Interesting. I've read the same about Safariman not but a year or two ago.
The aspect of this incident I find disturbing is the blanket thrown over the available evidence, apparently until all known witnesses can be identified and questioned.
Now, that sequence could be completely innocuous.
However, it could be done for the reason that, once the witnesses are committed to their observations, the officers involved have the opportunity to form their version of the events that exculpates them, while at the same time conforming to the witness observations as much as possible.
Compare this case with the shooting of the 6 year old in LA.
Reports came out with much more detail in a much quicker manner.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that the reports of the officers involved would be available fairly quickly after the incident, and certainly should be written by the officers as quickly after the incident as possible, while details are fresh in memory.
Unless some coordination is necessary.
And if those reports are made, they should be available to the public through the department in a rapid manner. After all, they're the *truth*, and they ain't gonna change.
If the reports aren't for some reason made, that information should be made available also.
The aspect of this incident I find disturbing is the blanket thrown over the available evidence, apparently until all known witnesses can be identified and questioned.
Now, that sequence could be completely innocuous.
However, it could be done for the reason that, once the witnesses are committed to their observations, the officers involved have the opportunity to form their version of the events that exculpates them, while at the same time conforming to the witness observations as much as possible.
Compare this case with the shooting of the 6 year old in LA.
Reports came out with much more detail in a much quicker manner.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that the reports of the officers involved would be available fairly quickly after the incident, and certainly should be written by the officers as quickly after the incident as possible, while details are fresh in memory.
Unless some coordination is necessary.
And if those reports are made, they should be available to the public through the department in a rapid manner. After all, they're the *truth*, and they ain't gonna change.
If the reports aren't for some reason made, that information should be made available also.
The aspect of this incident I find disturbing is the blanket thrown over the available evidence, apparently until all known witnesses can be identified and questioned.
Now, that sequence could be completely innocuous.
However, it could be done for the reason that, once the witnesses are committed to their observations, the officers involved have the opportunity to form their version of the events that exculpates them, while at the same time conforming to the witness observations as much as possible.
Compare this case with the shooting of the 6 year old in LA.
Reports came out with much more detail in a much quicker manner.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that the reports of the officers involved would be available fairly quickly after the incident, and certainly should be written by the officers as quickly after the incident as possible, while details are fresh in memory.
Unless some coordination is necessary.
And if those reports are made, they should be available to the public through the department in a rapid manner. After all, they're the *truth*, and they ain't gonna change.
If the reports aren't for some reason made, that information should be made available also.
Available to investigators from ISP yes, general public not necessarily until they conclude there investigation.
The aspect of this incident I find disturbing is the blanket thrown over the available evidence, apparently until all known witnesses can be identified and questioned.
Now, that sequence could be completely innocuous.
However, it could be done for the reason that, once the witnesses are committed to their observations, the officers involved have the opportunity to form their version of the events that exculpates them, while at the same time conforming to the witness observations as much as possible.
Compare this case with the shooting of the 6 year old in LA.
Reports came out with much more detail in a much quicker manner.
It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect that the reports of the officers involved would be available fairly quickly after the incident, and certainly should be written by the officers as quickly after the incident as possible, while details are fresh in memory.
Unless some coordination is necessary.
And if those reports are made, they should be available to the public through the department in a rapid manner. After all, they're the *truth*, and they ain't gonna change.
If the reports aren't for some reason made, that information should be made available also.
Available to investigators from ISP yes, general public not necessarily until they conclude there investigation.
Mike
Those same witnesses SHOULD be free to tell their stories to a curious news reporter......... who, apparently... is missing in action.
Of course, there is the possibility that they have been warned that an internet forum exists where they will be branded as liars, or worse, if their story is unfavorable to the cops.
Those same witnesses SHOULD be free to tell their stories to a curious news reporter......... who, apparently... is missing in action.
Of course, there is the possibility that they have been warned that an internet forum exists where they will be branded as liars, or worse, if their story is unfavorable to the cops.
Civilian witnesses are free to disclose their recollection of the event, or not, as they alone decide. As it should be.
My inquiry is directed at the government side of things, i.e., officer reports.
If they are considering presenting this to a grand jury, they likely do not want to release much prior to that happening.
Jury members are supposed to assess the testimony of a witness, not the published reports ahead of time.
The smaller the population, the harder it is to get untainted grand jury members.
But wouldn't the grand jury get to see the police report anyway?
Never prior to testimony. Witnesses testify first. Also likely to have some expert witnesses prepare assessments, which can take a while.
Very likely there is some type of district or states attorney involved in this investigation, with their own investigators. They would control the dissemination of info at this point.
The Idaho Statesman is a pretty squared away and ethical publication. ...Wondering if the byline Steely links will get ink in the larger metropolitan rags and fish wraps.
....this has stunk from the get go, and indeed is getting worse by the day.
The Idaho Statesman is a pretty squared away and ethical publication. ...Wondering if the byline Steely links will get ink in the larger metropolitan rags and fish wraps.
....this has stunk from the get go, and indeed is getting worse by the day.
GTC
Greg,
Regarding the Idaho Statesman and using the term "squared away." They have become increasingly a liberal rag and they've worn out my tolerance for them with their slant and liberal positions. They've even imported a Calikookistan editor. We only get a weekend paper and that's only because the wife wants the ads and the coupons. They're going to be told to take a hike once the Christmas season is done.
That said, I have not had an issue with the accuracy of their reporting. It's probably not the paper you remember.
The Statesman puts a pretty liberal slant on everything they write. Fortunately, in this case, they had to yield to pressure from social media and multiple eye witness accounts.
The Sheriff's history was included early in this thread and has been mentioned in many reports. Without searching through this entire thread I think he has lived in the area about 12 years.
Most of the local kids either grow up to work on and continue the family ranch, in logging, or if they want to make more than 30-40 K per year, they move to populous areas.
I think one of the earlier posts did include the median income for the county.
It is not unusual around here for families to subsist on a $2000/month full time employment wage. The majority of jobs around here pay nowhere near $12/hour. But families get by working overtime or sometimes two jobs. I have known quite a few guys who worked day shift with us at the factory 40hr/week and then worked swing shift somewhere else for 40 hr/week.
Do a bit of research on the pay scale for our local deputies and rural "city" police forces.
The Sheriff's history was included early in this thread and has been mentioned in many reports. Without searching through this entire thread I think he has lived in the area about 12 years.
Most of the local kids either grow up to work on and continue the family ranch, in logging, or if they want to make more than 30-40 K per year, they move to populous areas.
I think one of the earlier posts did include the median income for the county.
It is not unusual around here for families to subsist on a $2000/month full time employment wage. The majority of jobs around here pay nowhere near $12/hour. But families get by working overtime or sometimes two jobs. I have known quite a few guys who worked day shift with us at the factory 40hr/week and then worked swing shift somewhere else for 40 hr/week.
Do a bit of research on the pay scale for our local deputies and rural "city" police forces.
Would you wear a badge for those wages?
Thank you for the information. No I wouldn't wear a badge for those wages, but to add, I'm not law enforcement material. I'm in health care. Your statements though, dovetailed into my implied questions. Rural communities need to review their LE payscales and qualifications for employment. It would improve the community as well as possibly recruit folks from the immediate area. Police work is dangerous demanding work. It should pay accordingly and demand high qualifications of the hires.
Another point. Its sad that a community doesn't socially accept a new resident often even after several years of residency. Implied in your statement, handful= 12 years. The lack of an emotionall connection of an officer, or anybody, does impact how he regards those in the community. LE and community could make more effort to connect on a larger scale. This in no way excuses the horrific acts of those officers in this case. But when a community is clannish in its attitude, it does affect its future.
Rural communities need to review their LE payscales andqualifications for employment.
indeed,...the item bolded in red IN PARTICULAR. I see some VERY disturbed people given WAY to much authority, based on their "prior experience." Without getting too elaborate, let's just say that treating well grounded and patriotic AMERICANS as though they were Afghani villagers in mud huts,a populace to be DISARMED, or potential "insurgents", e.g. the enemy, is a train wreck in progress,... seems all most of us can do is watch it unfold, in dismay and unfathomable sadness.It is undeniably the stuff from which battle lines are drawn.
Thank you all posting here, and sending candid updates on other channels regarding this matter. As I previously pointed out, it is precisely BECAUSE of the small population base, and the sort of community that this took place in that leads one to venture that sweeping this one under the rug is NOT going to be a successful effort.
Prayer and quiet invocations for a resolution founded in honor and good principles.
Some of the text put up in the early pages of this thread are an absolute disgrace. Let those who put them up wear that mantle,...one thing to note about this 'Fire crew is that there are clearly defined lines that aren't crossed, should one expect any shred of respect ahead.
...still trying to figure out how this incident could be perceived an opportunity to yuk it up, and generally show one's azz.
A community, in the wake of this horrible incident, could begin to invest in their own youth, by having raffles etc, to send a few local kids to community college, police academy or supply partial scholarships. Attach to it, a few years commitment to be LE in the kid's own community. Rural communites have done this to supply the community with healthcare workers. Why not try it for LE? it would be investing in the future of the community.
With folks being emotionally charged, put that energy to a more positive endeavor, with a future.
Rural communities need to review their LE payscales and qualifications for employment. It would improve the community as well as possibly recruit folks from the immediate area. Police work is dangerous demanding work. It should pay accordingly and demand high qualifications of the hires.
A county can only pay out what it brings in through its tax base. We do not operate like the feds with a deficit that could only be paid back over the course of several centuries.
Originally Posted by Wyogal
Another point. Its sad that a community doesn't socially accept a new resident often even after several years of residency. Implied in your statement, handful= 12 years. The lack of an emotionall connection of an officer, or anybody, does impact how he regards those in the community. LE and community could make more effort to connect on a larger scale. This in no way excuses the horrific acts of those officers in this case. But when a community is clannish in its attitude, it does affect its future.
A handful = 12 yrs as apposed to those who have lived on the same property for sixty or seventy years.
I would certainly not say that Adams county is unwelcoming to outsiders.
A close friend purchased property there and only spends weekend in the county. But he has been welcomed warmly by neighbors and local residents. I go up with him on the occasional weekend. Again I am welcomed warmly.
But we are both of country origins with country values and we welcome the locals' advances.
People from the city usually bring city attitudes with them and are difficult to approach.
Country folk look each other in the eye, smile, and nod hello as they pass, even if total strangers.
City folk avert their eyes and look at the ground as they walk past. It is as if they think we are not even human, and certainly not fit to be considered as an equal.
Jack lived a few yards from the hiway six miles from the Sheriff's office. He was frequently seen about town or found working in the countryside.
Jack stopped in at my buddy's place while horse back and visited several times.
Even though the Sheriff stated he could recognize the pickup Jack drove and pick Jack's face out of a crowd, he had never spoken to the man.
I am not so sure it is the longtime local residents who are clannish.
Some of the text put up in the early pages of this thread are an absolute disgrace...
What is a disgrace is to have certain LE/groupies immediately try to discredit the victim murdered by LE. This death by cop is a national plague not limited to small, rural communities. And it will only get worse if we allow LE to police itself, something so far out of their reach.
Takes a little more than a smile and a nod. But since focus is on the longetivity of the community's residents, and I DO understand what you are saying, why not invest in the community's youth? Yes it takes money, and may be a long time coming before the town realizes the benefits. But obviously something has to change. And looking for solutions, while the sad memory is fresh may be the best time.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the philosophies underlying the training of LEO's in this country. There is nothing wrong with going home safe every night to one's family. But when gaining and keeping the upper hand at all costs, "officer safety", and saying anything regardless of veracity, rule the day, then you'll keep ending up with dead bodies that happen to be good folks.
Once again, review the average annual income of local residents. There is not a lot of free cash floating around.
I understand. But don't stop looking at possibilities. Right now the community likely has a brain drain of talented smart kids, to the big cities. There is a pool of possibilities.
I think the Sherriff's perceived "newcomer" status only surfaces after a situation like this. He was plainly considered to be resident enough to get elected. Having said this, I also have to point out, even in rural counties, what passes for an urban vote still elects officials. In many places in rural Idaho, as in rural communities throughout the northwest, new residents are outnumbering those with lomgtime roots in the community. In many cases, these residents are in no way invested in the community as they are retired or are employed outside thecommunity. This can explain why there is such a disconnect between law enforcement and longtime residents. In addition, much of the contact rural people have with county officials is of an adversarial nature. The so-called "rural" background of the deputies can also be a matter of perception. To a reporter from New York, someone who grew up in Moscow, Idaho might be considered to be of a "rural" background. To someone living outside Princeton, Idaho, not so much. In the end it's all sociological BS but it does play a part. In Idaho, if your grandfather was born in California, that's a stain which will never be washed away (just kidding,sort of)! GD
I could give 2 flying fu.cks about how long the sheriff has reigned over his subjects. It's his deputies that need shooting and I'm sure I wouldn't be the first in line. All the sheriff is doing is figuring out..
1) how to save his own hide 2)how to word his report so as to give his "brothers" an out.
i can add one perspective, don't know if it is applicable up there as it is here. LAW jobs are in some agencies pretty good deals these days in arizona, 20 year retirements, cola adjusted benefits, chances to make some pretty good coin off duty. But the major bucks are with agencies like phoenix, tucson and so on. often you will find newbies in the rural areas, pay grade lower trying to gain experience and resume to transfer to the big time. Was doing that even in my time back in the 70's. couple of years ago down on the desert but still in yavapai country maybe 50miles or more from prescott, county seat, i was dove hunting, couple of deputies showed up looking for a older guy reported missing while dove hunting. They drove up to where we were cleaning dove. I asked them if they had ever been in that area before. No. I mentioned those dirt roads would go all the way north to kingman in the middle of nothing, they had no clue. In actuality, the guy went off the road of a paved highway, they drove right passed him. He was found by family in a airplane. Now i would suspect that a big city boy working a rural department doesn't have much in common with the guy with the cows. And would hardly know one end of a bull from another. Thus the reported use of ar15's and not placing shots where they needed to go does have a certain ring to me. They put down range steers with .22wmr, but under controlled situations and aimpoints. One of the biggest shocks i had going to work on a rural department even then, was most of the time was spent around populated areas. They only had a few that really specialized in the outlying areas. now those in the outlying areas often had stock of their own and the popo stuff was a way to supplement income.
What has happened to the Constitutional rights of guilty until proven innocent, the right to a fair trial, due process, etc?
This is spouted all the time and is not the case in reality. If it were true when there was a hung jury, the accused would walk. They don't. The state has another trial.
I heard about a case the other day. A young lady and her fiance went kayaking in some harsh conditions. He drown because he didn't have a life jacket on. She was wearing one. She dialled 911 to get help. And yet she was accused immediately of murder and has been in jail for about two years; without a trial.
Most of the Constitution is dead; overwhelmed by bureaucracy.
Ron, that is absolutely true about padding resumes and building experience.
Even in Payette county where I live with its much higher median income and comparatively HUGE tax base, a GOOD deputy will only be around a couple of years before he moves over to Canyon or Ada Co, Boise, Caldwell, or Nampa city police, or the dream job of many young cops the Idaho State Patrol.
It is a far cry when we had three deputies in Payette Co and we knew them by name because they had been there for many years.
When cops suspend the law and the Constitution by executing lawful citizens then they should be afforded no consideration of those "illustrious" privileges. I think the inner city negroes got one thing right....when there is a problem you want to bring attention to-Riot. Until law abiding white Americans gets fed up with the police abuse and starts shooting back killing cops and burning down police stations I don't think anything will change. There certainly won't be any meaningful reforms initiated by the police themselves. Nor by the unions that protect them.
Little facts on what it takes to be a deputy in a rural setting..Here are a couple..The Sheriff/Police chief can hire whom ever they want as long as they qualify,then train them on the job and they have 6 months before they have to go to POST.
The Sheriff/Police chief can hire out of his reserve unit also.These are usually locals with minimal training and they also have to go to POST within 6 months after there designated for that position.My wife started as a Valley county sheriffs reserve officer under John Lions.The last police chief in McCall that was a women was hired out of the reserve unit as well as the sergeant and others.
This is going down just as it started with just one witness speaking out,now there are more with the same basic story.This should have never happened with cops and a chip on there shoulder not bending for anything or anyone...There way or the hiway..Boom Boom.Sick/Sick/Sick
One dynamic most here seem to agree on is that local boys turned cop would probably do better in regards to protecting their friends and neighbors than would a deputy from out of the area.
This applies on a large scale to any occupying force in any land. In that vein, do you think UN troops on our soil would would be advantageous to the enforcement of our Constitution and Bill of Rights? Being from a foreign country, they don't even have a clue we have rights!
What about a national police force in place of local or state units?
The answers are obvious. The founders gave much power and oversight to the states and minimized the power of the fed gov. It's the abuses of the fed gov that have taken it back. Those abuses are filtering back to the local level. We have a fight to look forward to.
Little facts on what it takes to be a deputy in a rural setting..Here are a couple..The Sheriff/Police chief can hire whom ever they want as long as they qualify,then train them on the job and they have 6 months before they have to go to POST.
The Sheriff/Police chief can hire out of his reserve unit also.These are usually locals with minimal training and they also have to go to POST within 6 months after there designated for that position.My wife started as a Valley county sheriffs reserve officer under John Lions.The last police chief in McCall that was a women was hired out of the reserve unit as well as the sergeant and others.
This is going down just as it started with just one witness speaking out,now there are more with the same basic story.This should have never happened with cops and a chip on there shoulder not bending for anything or anyone...There way or the hiway..Boom Boom.Sick/Sick/Sick
i was a reserve too, and probably because everybody knew me from the first day i was carrying a gun. The first weekend i was backing up a city cop on a man with a gun call. I was NOT allowed to be by myself till i got what you called post certification. The first weekend after i got a robbery in progress call. We had a huge difference in experience. Some of the guys had retired off phoenix p.d. and other agencies then moved up north to semiretire. They were mostly my trainers. Then there were the barney fifes, they usually didn't last long.
There was a lot of the same sorta' yukking it up going on when Rob was killed. Hell,....the Brian Terry slaying was quite the high horse for bloviating windbags to climb up on,...
Some of the text put up in the early pages of this thread are an absolute disgrace.
Why are you being vague about it?
Travis
Oh, ...look, a prosecuting attorney, ...cross examining me...
Bugger off, Mate.
GTC
No really. Why be vague?
And aren't you the guy that couldn't hold his liquor at a Campfire get together and tried to fight somebody?
I think maybe you drink too much.
Dave the Bugger
Wow, now THAT is a juicy little piece of news...
If you think that an old fart tuning up a younger sprout that's completely chitfaced on the cheapest beer available, SPITTING between said old fart's boots, while lipping him off while enjoying the hospitality of his home is trying to fight, you're well on your way to whatever "Best Campfire's Old Lady's Gossip Award" is up for grabs. Not my department, I don't keep up with that sorta' jive.
Talk's cheap, and I think maybe you believe half of the chit you post. And if the incident I discuss above is any indicator, you also believe half of what you here.
And aren't you the guy that couldn't hold his liquor at a Campfire get together and tried to fight somebody?
I think maybe you drink too much.
Dave the Bugger
Wow, now THAT is a juicy little piece of news...
If you think that an old fart tuning up a younger sprout that's completely chitfaced on the cheapest beer available, SPITTING between said old fart's boots, while lipping him off while enjoying the hospitality of his home is trying to fight, you're well on your way to whatever "Best Campfire's Old Lady's Gossip Award" is up for grabs. Not my department, I don't keep up with that sorta' jive.
Talk's cheap, and I think maybe you believe half of the chit you post. And if the incident I discuss above is any indicator, you also believe half of what you here.
Say hi to the girls at bingo tonight for me.
GTC
Based upon a lot of the cops opinions here you'd have been justified shooting and killing him. But only if you're a cop and he isn't.
If you think that an old fart tuning up a younger sprout that's completely chitfaced on the cheapest beer available, SPITTING between said old fart's boots, while lipping him off while enjoying the hospitality of his home is trying to fight, you're well on your way to whatever "Best Campfire's Old Lady's Gossip Award" is up for grabs. Not my department, I don't keep up with that sorta' jive.
Talk's cheap, and I think maybe you believe half of the chit you post. And if the incident I discuss above is any indicator, you also believe half of what you here.
Say hi to the girls at bingo tonight for me.
GTC
Well, hell,....we need a thread about alla this.
The forum has been fairly boring here lately anyway.
Just so you will stop taking the rest of us to task for violating a cop's Constitutional Rights when we speculate that he is guilty, I'm instituting this rule:
Campfire Juries henceforth will render their individual verdicts in accordance with the rules in Civil trials, rather than Criminal.
There is no presumption of guilt or innocence and verdicts are rendered at a time of the individual juror's choosing.
Preponderance of evidence is the standard, rather than reasonable doubt.
If you think that an old fart tuning up a younger sprout that's completely chitfaced on the cheapest beer available, SPITTING between said old fart's boots, while lipping him off while enjoying the hospitality of his home is trying to fight, you're well on your way to whatever "Best Campfire's Old Lady's Gossip Award" is up for grabs. Not my department, I don't keep up with that sorta' jive.
Talk's cheap, and I think maybe you believe half of the chit you post. And if the incident I discuss above is any indicator, you also believe half of what you here.
Solicit all the details from the Campfire Lady's Auxiliary, let them spin it right up, and MAYBE than I'd tell ya' what actually happened, and get a few folks that were THERE comment, as well.
Ya' know I'd be more than willing to bet that the azzwhole spreading this particular windy wasn't even THERE that night,....and heard it from an azzwhole who was.
Than and again, maybe he heard it from an azzwhole that heard it from an azzwhole who was there....an azzwhole buddies kinda' play.
Solicit all the details from the Campfire Lady's Auxiliary, let them spin it right up, and MAYBE than I'd tell ya' what actually happened, and get a few folks that were THERE comment, as well.
Ya' know I'd be more than willing to bet that the azzwhole spreading this particular windy wasn't even THERE that night,....and heard it from an azzwhole who was.
Than and again, maybe he heard it from an azzwhole that heard it from an azzwhole who was there....an azzwhole buddies kinda' play.
GTC
awww,...if it's not your account, I'd just as soon not hear it.
It doesn't seem as if you could get a law enforcement organization much farther from the Federal level and much closer to the people who they serve and defend than when the law enforcement agency is led by a locally elected sheriff.
The sheriff is quoted as having said that all of the deputies were raised on ranches, have owned cattle themselves, or both, which suggests that he expects them to know how to handle themselves around cattle.
Legion of Merit,....no casualties, fighting ships across both oceans, in WW2
I wasn't raised in an environment where physical size, race, or religious creed held a lot of sway.
I'll tell ya' what,...I don't own a "scale",...whatever's here right now, ....the stringy and fit frame carrying my mind and soul around , can probably work,think, or fight your sorry azz into the ground,....drunk, sober, or in any intermediate condition.
Balls in your court, Miss Hedda,...what else of a juicy nature do you have for the fruity / gay side of the fire this evening?
THAT means that you don't have to respond to this post.
Legion of Merit,....no casualties, fighting ships across both oceans, in WW2
I wasn't raised in an environment where physical size, race, or religious creed held a lot of sway.
I'll tell ya' what,...I don't own a "scale",...whatever's here right now, ....the stringy and fit frame carrying my mind and soul around , can probably work,think, or fight your sorry azz into the ground,....drunk, sober, or in any intermediate condition.
Balls in your court, Miss Hedda,...what else of a juicy nature do you have for the fruity / gay side of the fire this evening?
THAT means that you don't have to respond to this post.
Well hells bells, my .02 for the parade if anyone is interested.
What happened up there in Idaho has the appearance of malfeasance in the extreme, but it's just that at the moment, appearance. He said, she said means bupkis. Forensics will be done, statements analyzed and the legal system will do what it always does for the most part.
Thinking that given the circumstances it might serve all to kick back, move on and wait for the coroner's report or maybe a read by the Grand Jury. Until then all y'all need to take a break. Pokin' folks in the eyes with sharp sticks serves no benefit.
Looking at a circumstance where by all accounts one of the community pillars was put to death w/o good cause. That's enough grief.
Jeez Travis, give the guy a break. You know he's always the most objective guy on the fire.
FWIW.... Two of the guys on my "I want to meet" bucket list are Greg and Bristoe. I even went to the Quemado gathering a couple years ago because Ken Howell and Greg were to be there.
Ken made it, but Greg had to back out at the last minute. I still have intentions in that direction.
For those of you who criticize or disparage Greg, I offer some Kipling:
......
......
and if sometimes our conduct ain't just what your fancy paints
well, single men in barracks don't grow into plaster saints."
I would also love to stand in front of Ken Howell, Bristoe, and Crossfirewhateverthefugk, and ask them to express their opinions on a variety of subjects.
I would also love to stand in front of Ken Howell, Bristoe, and Crossfirewhateverthefugk, and ask them to express their opinions on a variety of subjects.
Travis
I doubt you'll find them different than what they've posted here.
I know enough dull people. I like to meet interesting ones.
He weighs more than 100pounds In probably ten or fifteen years at a number of ocasions at his house i have never seen him drunk. I am sure i will be acused of bootlicking, not true at all. I have got ticked at him a few times. So what. He is a multitalented guy that does a lot of things most couldn't even begin to do. From only what i have read on here, if he had ocasion to light somebody up, i would have to think there was reason. And i would want witnesses to it, that i knew. Funny, i know most of the people that have been to his home for some of these gettogethers, and i have never heard a word of it. Could not have been too important.
Jeez Travis, give the guy a break. You know he's always the most objective guy on the fire.
FWIW.... Two of the guys on my "I want to meet" bucket list are Greg and Bristoe. I even went to the Quemado gathering a couple years ago because Ken Howell and Greg were to be there.
Ken made it, but Greg had to back out at the last minute. I still have intentions in that direction.
For those of you who criticize or disparage Greg, I offer some Kipling:
......
......
and if sometimes our conduct ain't just what your fancy paints
well, single men in barracks don't grow into plaster saints."
The same can be said for Merchant Marines,etal.
In person, I'd just be the guy standing around the fire having a drink and laughing at the antics going on. I might add a little bit every now and then, but I'm not an overly outgoing person.
He weighs more than 100pounds In probably ten or fifteen years at a number of ocasions at his house i have never seen him drunk. I am sure i will be acused of bootlicking, not true at all. I have got ticked at him a few times. So what. He is a multitalented guy that does a lot of things most couldn't even begin to do. From only what i have read on here, if he had ocasion to light somebody up, i would have to think there was reason. And i would want witnesses to it, that i knew. Funny, i know most of the people that have been to his home for some of these gettogethers, and i have never heard a word of it. Could not have been too important.
Seems as though my eyewitness account may be disputed by another.
In person, I'd just be the guy standing around the fire having a drink and laughing at the antics going on. I might add a little bit every now and then, but I'm not an overly outgoing person.
In person, I'd just be the guy standing around the fire having a drink and laughing at the antics going on. I might add a little bit every now and then, but I'm not an overly outgoing person.
Don't talk as much in-person as you do online?
Travis
I guess it depends.
In a social gathering I wouldn't be nearly as inclined to discuss politics. Political discussions are better in "other than social" gatherings.
On the other hand,...if the topic swung around to getting crabs from a barmaid during ones youthful encounters, I might feel compelled to give an account of my experiences on the matter.
The darker side of my nature would kinda' RELISH having you look me in the eye, on my ground and call me a bitch,...you pathetic LITTLE grandstanding punk.
My life experience has determined that the best puzzy has the crabs.
That may or may not be correct. But memory is a peculiar thing.
For quite a while, every time I encountered a particularly vocal, creative, energetic woman, I started thinking about which drug stores had the best prices on crab dope.
It never happened but once,...but once is enough to establish a precedent on a man's perspective.
The woman'll start in with that "Take it daddy!,..reach back and spank ya on the ass,...and I'm thinkin', "Well chit,...this bitch got the crabs".
A Psychiatrist could probably fix it,..but I'm too old and monogamous to worry about it now.
I doubt you'll find them different than what they've posted here.
I know enough dull people. I like to meet interesting ones.
You're interesting.
I don't need somebody as stupid as you to tell me I'm interesting.
I'd be inclined to believe that Dirtbag Howell, Pacifist Bristoe, and CrossfireIdrinktoomuchretard would get real different, real quick, if I was standing in front of them.
Just 'cause I ain't in favor of killin' everybody on the planet that doesn't have a Hillary bumper sticker doesn't make me a pacifist.
,...and by the way,...you said you're 38. Sometime between now and the time you reach 48, you need to learn to communicate in a way that requires more than one or two idiotic lines of bullshit.
"See Dick run" is good for first graders and clap sufferers,....but it's damn sorry fare for internet forums.
Learn to put your thoughts down in alphabetic form or go the fug away.
Your one line thread contaminations make you look like a damn fool.
Everybody take a deep breath and walk it back a bit. Let the investigation proceed. No use in eating our own here until the facts play out.
Nice gesture, but they like to beat each other up. Besides, its November, the fightin' month. Watch for it to happen again after hunting season, like in March, when its cold and there's nothing left to legally kill.
He weighs more than 100pounds In probably ten or fifteen years at a number of ocasions at his house i have never seen him drunk. I am sure i will be acused of bootlicking, not true at all. I have got ticked at him a few times. So what. He is a multitalented guy that does a lot of things most couldn't even begin to do. From only what i have read on here, if he had ocasion to light somebody up, i would have to think there was reason. And i would want witnesses to it, that i knew. Funny, i know most of the people that have been to his home for some of these gettogethers, and i have never heard a word of it. Could not have been too important.
I have been to his home too. I found him to be a great host and a generous man.
I doubt you'll find them different than what they've posted here.
I know enough dull people. I like to meet interesting ones.
You're interesting.
I don't need somebody as stupid as you to tell me I'm interesting.
I'd be inclined to believe that Dirtbag Howell, Pacifist Bristoe, and CrossfireIdrinktoomuchretard would get real different, real quick, if I was standing in front of them.
Then again, I could be wrong. Again.
Travis
you know, i have nothing against you at all, and you don't know me. but why howell's name, an old man, keeps getting dragged into these things is beyond me. Is it fun to pick on an 80 year old man?
I doubt you'll find them different than what they've posted here.
I know enough dull people. I like to meet interesting ones.
You're interesting.
I don't need somebody as stupid as you to tell me I'm interesting.
I'd be inclined to believe that Dirtbag Howell, Pacifist Bristoe, and CrossfireIdrinktoomuchretard would get real different, real quick, if I was standing in front of them.
Then again, I could be wrong. Again.
Travis
you know, i have nothing against you at all, and you don't know me. but why howell's name, an old man, keeps getting dragged into these things is beyond me. Is it fun to pick on an 80 year old man?
He ever "gets real different" around Doc Howell down in this neck of the woods, his guts, bones and hair will decorate fencelines and gateposts from California all the way over into Texas. ...and that would be by way of a community effort. Take that to the bank
It doesn't seem as if you could get a law enforcement organization much farther from the Federal level and much closer to the people who they serve and defend than when the law enforcement agency is led by a locally elected sheriff.
The sheriff is quoted as having said that all of the deputies were raised on ranches, have owned cattle themselves, or both, which suggests that he expects them to know how to handle themselves around cattle.
A sad situation for all involved.
Right They've shown you don't dispatch animals by gut shooting them . Wonder how they learned that.
Just so you will stop taking the rest of us to task for violating a cop's Constitutional Rights when we speculate that he is guilty, I'm instituting this rule:
Campfire Juries henceforth will render their individual verdicts in accordance with the rules in Civil trials, rather than Criminal.
There is no presumption of guilt or innocence and verdicts are rendered at a time of the individual juror's choosing.
Preponderance of evidence is the standard, rather than reasonable doubt.
It doesn't seem as if you could get a law enforcement organization much farther from the Federal level and much closer to the people who they serve and defend than when the law enforcement agency is led by a locally elected sheriff.
The sheriff is quoted as having said that all of the deputies were raised on ranches, have owned cattle themselves, or both, which suggests that he expects them to know how to handle themselves around cattle.
A sad situation for all involved.
Right They've shown you don't dispatch animals by gut shooting them . Wonder how they learned that.
Maybe if sitting one's deputies through endless federally MANDATED (assuming you want the sugar tit grant money)...."Seminars" and "Courses" on:
*Gay and trans gender sensitivities, sorting its from shes and hes, etc. * Accommodating and welcoming ILLEGAL "Migrants" with cultural decorum and other fuggin sensitivities,... * Doing all of your goddam PAPERWORK properly, entering into your personal E-account. * BRAINWASHING em' with low life political jive azz nonsense about WHO actually has authority in a REAL American County, ...etc., etc,...
Wouldn't a rural Sheriff's department maybe better mobilize time / resource to have an old school country vet come in and talk to these young boys and girls ,....hand out some diagrams ?
Yes the "forensics" and final "reports" are gonna' be welcomed.
Yes the "forensics" and final "reports" are gonna' be welcomed.
I want to see the forensics on that BULL !
Dash cams turned off...not forthcoming with their side of the story...I'm GUESSING-ASSUMING-SPECULATING that particular piece of evidence has been ground up and fed to the local homeless at the shelter or is rotting at the county rendering plant.
Yes the "forensics" and final "reports" are gonna' be welcomed.
I want to see the forensics on that BULL !
Dash cams turned off...not forthcoming with their side of the story...I'm GUESSING-ASSUMING-SPECULATING that particular piece of evidence has been ground up and fed to the local homeless at the shelter or is rotting at the county rendering plant.
Jesus,....
VERY bad call from the "Investigative" honcho if that's the case.
Trust, Mistrust,....and hence into a downward spiral.
I know, let's all clown around, prosecute petty personal agendas, and show our AZZES
you know, i have nothing against you at all, and you don't know me. but why howell's name, an old man, keeps getting dragged into these things is beyond me. Is it fun to pick on an 80 year old man?
I just figured I'd throw his name in the hat since I was discussing the scrawny, old, and unsuccessful.
He ever "gets real different" around Doc Howell down in this neck of the woods, his guts, bones and hair will decorate fencelines and gateposts from California all the way over into Texas. ...and that would be by way of a community effort. Take that to the bank
We'd need the jaws-of-life to get Bristoe's mouth off his dick.
Dave
I don't know if there are 12 step groups for guys suffering from a fascination with male genitalia, but you and Steelhead could start one.
One more thing for the both of you to think about:
Given all the years y'all have fed at the Gov't trough, it's too late for you ever to match mine, Bristoe's, and Greg's accomplishments. But one day you will be older than we are now.
Unless your smart mouths forget one day that you are in the real world, not cyberspace, and some guy brings your cuteness to a sudden halt.
We'd need the jaws-of-life to get Bristoe's mouth off his dick.
Dave
I don't know if there are 12 step groups for guys suffering from a fascination with male genitalia, but you and Steelhead could start one.
One more thing for the both of you to think about:
Given all the years y'all have fed at the Gov't trough, it's too late for you ever to match mine, Bristoe's, and Greg's accomplishments. But one day you will be older than we are now.
Unless your smart mouths forget one day that you are in the real world, not cyberspace, and some guy brings your cuteness to a sudden halt.
I know. Why do you think I left your hunting camp early? [bleep] driving around with loaded/chambered rifles on 4 wheelers. You walking around showing me stuff with a chambered rifle on your shoulder and the muzzle swinging by my head a couple of times.
Didn't take long to realize what an unsafe bunch you were.
Of course you are GREAT at reading sign, that's why you have 5 ex-wives, TFF.
You truly can't make this stuff up. But you are correct, I aspire to be divorced 100 times, kicked out of the military and be such a [bleep] up mess of a drunk that the only one that will talk to me is Jesus.
Only then can I be a TRUE Christian solider such as you!
You left my hunting camp with a barely legal DINK buck you killed at a feeder the first or second day. And after killing a big hog by following my exact instructions. And leaving him lay.
And after being invited to hunt for free, given the EXACT same status as the paying members. IOW, you could come hunt deer, hogs, varmints, and turkeys, from the first Sat. in Dec until the first Mon in Jan. Myself, and my lease partners paid 750 bucks for what you were given for free.
I offered you this free hunt because you were the only Active Duty Serviceman I knew of on this forum. You were only too quick to accept.
I don't know of a Texan who hunts with an empty chamber. And you never mentioned being bothered by it while you were in camp.
And now... you say this, which YOU KNOW TO BE A BALD FACED LIE
"You truly can't make this stuff up. But you are correct, I aspire to be divorced 100 times, kicked out of the military..."......... .
I served my four year hitch and was a Corporal [E4] when I was HONORABLY discharged. You have zero reason to believe anything differently.
You know me and I know you. Despite all the BS you may spout off in response to this post, there is no doubt in your mind that THIS 74 YO former Marine CAN, AND WILL, stomp your little puny ass into the ground as soon as I ever lay eyes on you again, you slandering little son of a bitch.
I've been on the usual three day weekend deer hunt. Man...they're running. What did I miss here?
Quick synopisis?
Bad deal hapoened, and the investigation should have been completed, statements and evidence released to the public by now, because it only takes an hour on TV....,oh and the cops must be guilty because the dash cam wasn't on
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Actually, The only reason I look at the campfire is Travis/Flave/Dave cuz he can say in three words what it takes most of the rest of the respondents a full page of drivel. Jus say'n
And I am a Broncos fan.
W. Bill Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
Did the deputies use that supper high powered 9mm to shoot that bull 89 times?
I've been on the usual three day weekend deer hunt. Man...they're running. What did I miss here?
A bull shot and killed a rancher, sat on a car full of people, and maybe killed them, then shot three cops. The bull is black so no charges will be filed.
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Probably, but then again in some 19 pages, 32,000 views and over 900 post, no one has said anything about the officers involved... surely in such a small town they must be known and their reputations, not to mention whether they were locals or from some distant planet?
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Phil
It takes longer when you have to make stuff up.
They have to get their stories straight.
Par for the course for the biggest anti-LEO poster here.
Convenient for you to ignore that although the dash cam was not activated BOTH officers wore body cameras. So if the body cams shows that the families story is BS will you admit to being wrong.
Do you really think the ISP will tamper with the body cam footage to twist the truth? Do you not think that footage in its entirety will be subject to scrutiny during any pending litigation.
Everyone agrees body cams are good for getting the truth out and showing liability but posters here want to flame the LEOs before all the info is even out.
Everyone agrees something stinks here but the piling on against the police where the only story out is the families is assinine and grade school at best.
Wore, yes. Recording, we don't know. No mention of that.
After 8 days if there was something to exonerate the officers, I'd think it would have came out, but maybe the State Patrol just takes their time with things like this.
Seems like there were enough witnesses around to lend some credibility to one account or the other. I guess time will tell, but if I was the dead ranchers kin, it would tick by maddeningly slow.
As to the dash cam, could be that it was a traffic accident, not a criminal call. I would prefer that they have all cams on at all times (except when they drop a deuce).
After more than a week still nothing released. There's an easy way to overcome speculation....honest dissemination of information!
Simple. Why shouldn't they supply that information to the people that employ them? Are the police the only ones exempt from the reasonable expectations of those they swore to protect?
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Phil
It takes longer when you have to make stuff up.
They have to get their stories straight.
Par for the course for the biggest anti-LEO poster here.
Convenient for you to ignore that although the dash cam was not activated BOTH officers wore body cameras. So if the body cams shows that the families story is BS will you admit to being wrong.
Do you really think the ISP will tamper with the body cam footage to twist the truth? Do you not think that footage in its entirety will be subject to scrutiny during any pending litigation.
Everyone agrees body cams are good for getting the truth out and showing liability but posters here want to flame the LEOs before all the info is even out.
Everyone agrees something stinks here but the piling on against the police where the only story out is the families is assinine and grade school at best.
Two tight-nit groups (the dead man's family and friends, law enforcement) so far only one side heard from. Would be nice to hear from other than someone associated with one side or the other...
Phil
It takes longer when you have to make stuff up.
They have to get their stories straight.
Par for the course for the biggest anti-LEO poster here.
Convenient for you to ignore that although the dash cam was not activated BOTH officers wore body cameras. So if the body cams shows that the families story is BS will you admit to being wrong.
Do you really think the ISP will tamper with the body cam footage to twist the truth? Do you not think that footage in its entirety will be subject to scrutiny during any pending litigation.
Everyone agrees body cams are good for getting the truth out and showing liability but posters here want to flame the LEOs before all the info is even out.
Everyone agrees something stinks here but the piling on against the police where the only story out is the families is assinine and grade school at best.
No offense, but you're fos.
Funny a quick Google search pulled up several articles that stated the Deputies were wearing body cams
Ah heck, I think my blood pressure has finally come down from this whole thing. I'm finally willing to concede that I don't really care at this point. It just feels like another discouraging situation in life that we'll never know the truth of, one way or another.
I'm upset that the cops killed this rancher, and his wife almost died from the shock. I'm ready to sit back and shut up. If I've been wrong you guys can crucify me, if I was right, so what? Jacks family is devastated, community trust ruined. That's the real story.
I've been on the usual three day weekend deer hunt. Man...they're running. What did I miss here?
let's review:
some people on the campfire think cops can do no wrong
some people on the campfire think cops can do no right
some people on the campfire think ranchers can do no wrong
so a subaru hit a bull in Idaho, then all 3 groups starting posting about it, and there isn't much new information, so they are all busy cussing each other out.
I've been on the usual three day weekend deer hunt. Man...they're running. What did I miss here?
let's review:
some people on the campfire think cops can do no wrong
some people on the campfire think cops can do no right
some people on the campfire think ranchers can do no wrong
I've yet to find a way to blame this on Joe Arpaio, but will continue to try.
so a subaru hit a bull in Idaho, then all 3 groups starting posting about it, and there isn't much new information, so they are all busy cussing each other out.
After more than a week still nothing released. There's an easy way to overcome speculation....honest dissemination of information!
Simple. Why shouldn't they supply that information to the people that employ them? Are the police the only ones exempt from the reasonable expectations of those they swore to protect?
Very likely, a prosecutor is involved at this point, and they would be the one compiling the information, and they would be the one to disseminate it.
They are concerned with the integrity of a possible prosecution, and don't want to do anything to jeopardize that.
Remember the DA in Baltimore that rushed to hold a news conference, and now she is now having to try to defend all kinds of pretrial motions that may jeopardize the eventual outcome?
I'm finally willing to concede that I don't really care at this point.
No offense to the dead dude, but I can't understand the amount of care everyone has invested up to this point. Everybody's righteous indignance over this is hypocrisy at its finest.
If you really care about the dead rancher, have you done anything to help support the family in their time of grief?
If you really care about bad cops, have you done anything to make sure this doesn't happen in your community?
52 pages of arguing only proves that people really care about arguing, or that they really enjoy drama.
I'm finally willing to concede that I don't really care at this point.
No offense to the dead dude, but I can't understand the amount of care everyone has invested up to this point. Everybody's righteous indignance over this is hypocrisy at its finest.
If you really care about the dead rancher, have you done anything to help support the family in their time of grief?
If you really care about bad cops, have you done anything to make sure this doesn't happen in your community?
52 pages of arguing only proves that people really care about arguing, or that they really enjoy drama.
I heard on the news today there is a peaceful protest planned for this weekend in Council, ID. So I guess if someone wants to go support the family and protest the killing, they can point the vehicle in that direction.
What part of the is FOS sir? It's common knowledge from various media outlets that both officrs had body cameras on them.
Do you really think the ISP will try to sweep this away with all of the media coverage it has received?
Do you also propose that said footage will some how be made inadmissable in court or do you elude it will all just "disappear".
Again too much media coverage already, whatever that footage shows will be public knowledge in time. Whether its to exonerate the officers or convict them.
Everybody's righteous indignance over this is hypocrisy at its finest.
Ummmmm...
If you really care about the dead rancher, have you done anything to help support the family in their time of grief?
Like?
If you really care about bad cops, have you done anything to make sure this doesn't happen in your community?
Should I have a talk with them, would that help?
52 pages of arguing only proves that people really care about arguing, or that they really enjoy drama.
It's called passionate. People are passionate about their beliefs. This is an internet forum, where people come to express things they're passionate about. If you don't like that, maybe you should join a quilting club or take up croquet.
"Do you really think the ISP will try to sweep this away with all of the media coverage it has received?"
Speaking of which.... each time I've glanced up at, or passed by, a TV turned to Fox News the last couple of days, there is an update on the shooting death of the little boy in La.
There is NO news coming out of Idaho about this, other than the initial report, in which the Sheriff made misleading remarks, and news from the widow.
And the question about the integrity of the ISP in investigating LEO actions has already been answered.
As to the dash cam, could be that it was a traffic accident, not a criminal call. I would prefer that they have all cams on at all times (except when they drop a deuce).
It could be the 2 cops were taking a deuce in their jeans when they kept shootin and the bull was still alive.
What part of the is FOS sir? It's common knowledge from various media outlets that both officrs had body cameras on them.
Do you really think the ISP will try to sweep this away with all of the media coverage it has received?
Do you also propose that said footage will some how be made inadmissable in court or do you elude it will all just "disappear".
Again too much media coverage already, whatever that footage shows will be public knowledge in time. Whether its to exonerate the officers or convict them.
It's pretty much all fos. Evidently unlike you, I read the whole thread before posting. I do know the ISP are already in deep [bleep] over another investigation. Given that, I think it's pretty stupid to bloviate about how transparent and honest this whole "investigation" is going to go. Seems awfully trusting to assume an outfit already in trouble is going to do a bang up job on this.
After 8 days if there was something to exonerate the officers, I'd think it would have came out, but maybe the State Patrol just takes their time with things like this.
One problem with releasing video (if you are referring to video) is that the media will alter it to fit their story.
So often times departments simply tell the media to fugk off when it comes to evidence.
After 8 days if there was something to exonerate the officers, I'd think it would have came out, but maybe the State Patrol just takes their time with things like this.
One problem with releasing video (if you are referring to video) is that the media will alter it to fit their story.
So often times departments simply tell the media to fugk off when it comes to evidence.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
Dave
Lets say the worst of the cop haters are correct, and for what ever reason the cops just decided to shoot the rancher and the video supports this...
So wouldn’t releasing it into the public domain jeopardise the chances of a conviction? I would imagine in that scenario the Defence team would raised a stink saying their clients couldn’t get a fair trial ect???
Lets say the worst of the cop haters are correct, and for what ever reason the cops just decided to shoot the rancher and the video supports this...
So wouldn’t releasing it into the public domain jeopardise the chances of a conviction? I would imagine in that scenario the Defence team would raised a stink saying their clients couldn’t get a fair trial ect???
OK. Rancher X responds to POLICE DEPT request to come take care of his bull, which has been hit by a car. Rancher X does not go home that night, because he's DEAD. Oh, and neither does his wife.
OK. Rancher X responds to POLICE DEPT request to come take care of his bull, which has been hit by a car. Rancher X does not go home that night, because he's DEAD. Oh, and neither does his wife.
What part of that is hard to follow?
What transpired when he got there? You obviously saw it.
What transpired when he got there? You obviously saw it.
Well, wouldn't we all love to hear Jack's perspective. Oh wait, HE'S DEAD. I guess that leaves us with the eyewitness accounts, which are already being discredited because "eyewitnesses are unreliable".
UNLESS, you happen to be a cop, then your testimony is golden. Let's wait for the cops to determine if the cops were guilty of wrongdoing.
What transpired when he got there? You obviously saw it.
Well, wouldn't we all love to hear Jack's perspective. Oh wait, HE'S DEAD. I guess that leaves us with the eyewitness accounts, which are already being discredited but "eyewitnesses are unreliable".
UNLESS, you happen to be a cop, then your testimony is golden. Let's wait for the cops to determine if the cops were guilty of wrongdoing.
Only in YOUR mind. I don't know all the facts and you don't either, and maybe we will never know them. Killing two cops, even if they are guilty of murder, manslaughter , stupity or whatever isn't a wise thing to do.
The cops shot a guys bull a whole bunch of times. Then they shot the rancher and killed him. Then the wife had a heart attack and almost died. Other than that, I'd say it was a clean stop.
The cops shot a guys bull a whole bunch of times. Then they shot the rancher and killed him. Then the wife had a heart attack and almost died. Other than that, I'd say it was a clean stop.
Second half of this article is all the public has to go n so far.
Quote
BOISE, Idaho (AP) — The family of an Idaho rancher who was shot and killed by sheriff's deputies after one of his bulls was hit by a car and charged emergency crews said his death was not justified.
Jack Yantis, 62, died a week ago after an altercation with two Adams County deputies along a highway just north of the tiny town of Council, Idaho State Police said. The deputies planned to shoot the injured animal when Yantis arrived with a rifle. All of them fired their weapons, investigators said.
Deputies are to blame for Yantis' death, family members said in statements provided to the Idaho Statesman (http://bit.ly/1PwmzGK ) by attorneys hired after the Nov. 1 shooting. The newspaper also interviewed relatives who say they saw the shooting and received a video statement from Yantis' wife, who was also at the scene.
"Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations," said Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the Yantis' who says he was a witness. "In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man."
Idaho State Police declined to comment to The Associated Press. Sheriff Ryan Zollman did not return a request for comment.
"We are committed to doing a meticulous investigation and that's why we can't comment," Idaho State Police spokeswoman Teresa Baker said. Dispatchers had called Yantis while he was at dinner, telling him to take care of his 2,500-pound Gelbvieh bull after the crash, his family said. In the state's rural areas, it is common for vehicles to strike livestock, and Yantis had put down animals before, according to relatives.
Yantis rode to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle, and his wife, Donna, picked up the family's .204-caliber rifle and met him on the highway.
Paradis said Yantis asked him to bring a small front-end loader to transport the animal once they were finished. The family says the deputies had shot the bull before Yantis arrived.
When he got there, his wife handed him the rifle and he aimed the gun at the animal lying on the pavement. The deputies stood behind him as he put the barrel a few feet from the bull's head with his finger on the trigger, his family said. Paradis said he did not see Yantis or the deputies speak.
That's when a deputy grabbed Yantis' shoulder from behind, turned him around and pushed the rancher. Relatives think the gun might have gone off accidentally and then the deputies opened fire. The family says Yantis was shot in the chest and abdomen.
"There was no shootout. It was a senseless murder," said Yantis' daughter, Sarah.
Donna Yantis said she and Paradis tried to run to the rancher but the deputies threw them to the ground.
"And then they threatened me and my nephew ... threw us on the middle of Highway 95, searched us and handcuffed us, and wouldn't let us go take care of Jack," she said in a video statement.
Donna Yantis had a heart attack at the scene and had to be flown to a local hospital, where she recorded video, the family said.
You gonna go down the "DINK road" and post this behind every post he makes?
Nah...... you got better things to do.
If all of Y'all would leave us be, let us get on with the hangin', this thread would have died out long ago.
No matter what the ISP comes up with, a majority of the forum members will believe the shooting was not justified, and the LEO community and groupies will still think it might have been.
The cops' actions re the Widow will condemn them in OUR eyes and y'all will find them acceptable "under the circumstances" because "y'all have 'been there', and we haven't".
See how predictable both sides are?
At the wind-up, NOBODY is gonna say;"Y'all were right, I was wrong".
But..... we all 'know' each other a little better, so it's not a pointless exercise.
At the wind-up, NOBODY is gonna say;"Y'all were right, I was wrong".
But..... we all 'know' each other a little better, so it's not a pointless exercise.
This is why you bumped the Louisiana thread with the 6 year old getting shot in order for people that had expressed sympathy for the shooters to retract their posts?
Not just bumped the thread with the new info, but specifically:
Originally Posted by curdog4570
I didn't count how many of you "feel sorry for the officers", but your words are above mine if you want to reconsider and post accordingly.
The two cops have been charged in the death of the boy and the wounding of his father.
It appears the cops doing the investigation into this couldn't work up the same sympathy displayed by the forum cops and cop suck ups.
I think we know each other a little better now....
No matter what the ISP comes up with, a majority of the forum members will believe the shooting was not justified, and the LEO community and groupies will still think it might have been.
Well sure, I don't believe any right thinking person believes this was a case of cop-kills-bad-guy. Unfortunately, some real idiots have opened themselves up as whining malcontents by assuming they know something they don't.
Well sure, I don't believe any right thinking person believes this was a case of cop-kills-bad-guy. Unfortunately, some real idiots have opened themselves up as whining malcontents by assuming they know something they don't.
Seems they more akin to Michael Brown supporters than conservative constitutionalists...
No matter what the ISP comes up with, a majority of the forum members will believe the shooting was not justified, and the LEO community and groupies will still think it might have been.
I thought that everyone learned a lesson from Ferguson.
That lesson being that the truth and the facts ring loud and clear. And that some people can be lead to even commit violence if pushed in the right direction by non-facts.
But as you said, why wait for the facts when most everyone has their minds made up anyway? It won't make any difference to them.
I'll wait for the facts and to hear from the special prosecutor assigned to the case.
I know I get flamed for comparing this scenario to Ferguson, but the truth is, a bunch of people were deceived (or not) by the supposed facts of THAT case. Then the truth came out, and it didn't matter to those already worked up into a frenzy.
As I've said, I'll lead the lynching if everything happened the way they said in the lawyer written account. I just want that statement backed up by an official investigation by the 3rd party in charge of said investigation.
I've waited a while before speaking, and I'm sure that many will disagree! But, we have had far too many questionable incidents involving LEO's. I worked law enforcement for a short time many years ago, and while many officers are good,conscientious people there are also many not deserving to be in law enforcement. While,my suggestion will not eliminate all incidents such as this,I believe that it would reduce them. We should increase the salaries( by several 100%) of LEO's and have a strenuous "vetting " of prospective officers. We have many qualified people,who would make good officers, that will not put their families through the financial sacrifice to represent their community. These "qualified" people simply go into the labor force and work at a much higher wage! Yes, our taxes may go up to pay the salary increases, but I think that we'll have an improved LEO community! JMO. memtb
The cops shot a guys bull a whole bunch of times. Then they shot the rancher and killed him. Then the wife had a heart attack and almost died. Other than that, I'd say it was a clean stop.
The two offending deputies, sobbing major crocodile tears in unison/stereovision/Technicolor/Kodachrome/Blu-ray:
"We just wanted to go home to our families!!!! Waaaaaa!!!!!!!"
The two offending deputies, sobbing major crocodile tears in unison/stereovision/Technicolor/Kodachrome/Blu-ray:
"We just wanted to go home to our families!!!! Waaaaaa!!!!!!!"
That didn't go well for them..There on a kinda witness protection program eating McDonalds burgers somewhere.
The two deputies are on paid administrative leave for now and are currently outside the county, he said. They are under security being provided by the law enforcement agencies in those undisclosed areas, the sheriff said.
...We should increase the salaries( by several 100%) of LEO's and have a strenuous "vetting " of prospective officers...
Just ridiculous.
Right.
We should be able to have strenuous vetting and weeding of undesirables, and only employment of top notch people without any additional financial expenditures.
There is no excuse for this on unarmed victims who just watched as they shot her husband and relative to death.
"Even as the incident was occurring you have Donna, who was thrown down on the pavement, gun to her head, she has no weapon, she had just seen her husband shot to death," Taylor said. "And that’s what gave her a heart attack."
"You have Rowdy with an AR-15 pointed at him and he believes if he would have moved he would have been shot and killed as well," Taylor added.
...We should increase the salaries( by several 100%) of LEO's and have a strenuous "vetting " of prospective officers...
Just ridiculous.
I don't know that "several 100%" is appropriate across the board and I'm guessing taxes would have to go up to pay the increased salaries, but I think it is a necessary first step.
I believe we would end up being better served with a lot fewer officers, but ones that were professionals in their attitude and actions.
One result might be forcing a solution to a problem Bluedreaux has mentioned: many of the small town Police Departments would cease to exist since they couldn't afford the increased wages.
Unless it has changed, a law in Texas requires that ALL County employees be on the same pay scale. The guy on the maintainer grading the road is paid on the same scale as the Deputies.
I know that my County would be much better off with fewer, but significantly better,Deputies.
We would not have to absorb ALL the increased cost of higher salaries by raising taxes.
Or, we could just expect the "good" LEO's to help the public identify the "bad" LEO's.....
Oh, never mind....... silly suggestion
Makes you wonder what the good to bad ratio could be when the scene of cops beating handcuffed prisoners, followed by other cops showing up (and the prisoner presumedly thanking God that the beating will now be stopped) and the newly arrived cops (to the dismay of the victim) join in on the fun. That scene plays itself out quite a lot on video, but I don't recall seeing one where the arrival of the other cops results in the first cop being pulled off and reprimanded. You'd think that would be the usual outcome, but more typically just the reverse.
Or, we could just expect the "good" LEO's to help the public identify the "bad" LEO's.....
Oh, never mind....... silly suggestion
Makes you wonder what the good to bad ratio could be when the scene of cops beating handcuffed prisoners, followed by other cops showing up (and the prisoner presumedly thanking God that the beating will now be stopped) and the newly arrived cops (to the dismay of the victim) join in on the fun. That scene plays itself out quite a lot on video, but I don't recall seeing one where the arrival of the other cops results in the first cop being pulled off and reprimanded. You'd think that would be the usual outcome, but more typically just the reverse.
Cops around here make damn good money, have excellent benefits so it's not pay. At least not around here, except for WSP which is spending hundreds of thousands on a study they already know the results of.
What they need is better vetting system, one that weeds out the type of person they currently look for.
They also need to encourage the good cops to speak up. The union protection needs to go and random urinalysis should be routine. Around here the cops are so righteous and beyond reproach that they aren't subject to random UAs. Unbelievable!
Jerry Spence is going to be on the legal team for the Yantis family....Good
Jacks daughter just gave her statement from the scene,still covered in blood, emphasizing her father was never given medical treatment in any way and they would not finish the bull off which we new....
There having an in house tonight in Council for residents only with the Sheriff.He married a local, is how he ended up there.I doubt we will learn anything from that because he is bound to be tight lipped...
I'm staying away from that place..Wise people would also.I'm sure there are alot of eyes looking for out of the area people after all the threats.
Thanks for the heads up on spelling names correctly, Wajeslave.
Yea...I was just curious....it would have been nice to hear about it from someone other than the media. I'm to sick to go anywhere even if I wanted to....which I don't.
Hmm, Spence will be turning 87 in January. Hopes he's up to it.
Gerry Spence is a man of many contradictions, all of which he's had the grace and good luck to overcome. There are many volumnes of tales by former neighbors and associates, that speak to Gerry's appetite for liquor and wild times. Stories that come out of the Wind River reservation, where he had a big ol' house, tell of days and days of crazy parties, a big hot tub, and numerous women. But he was loved and protected by them that knew him personally, and those he professionally represented as a lawyer. He must have been a good friend, and he was known as a good friend by many here in Wyoming. His nonprofit Trial Lawyers College is just outside Dubois, WY. He donated ENORMOUS tracts of land on the East Fork as a trust for public hunting and fishing. Mr. Spence has alot of associates who work for his firm, and I'm sure they will do right by this family.
Cops around here make damn good money, have excellent benefits so it's not pay. At least not around here, except for WSP which is spending hundreds of thousands on a study they already know the results of.
What they need is better vetting system, one that weeds out the type of person they currently look for.
They also need to encourage the good cops to speak up. The union protection needs to go and random urinalysis should be routine. Around here the cops are so righteous and beyond reproach that they aren't subject to random UAs. Unbelievable!
Who is "they"...... What type, exactly, are "they" looking for?
I ask because, I guess, I'm "they" and would imagine I seek a different "type" than WSP or many of your metro areas. I know exactly what "type" I want to hire and that has served my community well, historically speaking.
I'm in the midst of a background for a candidate. I know the guy.....he's also well known/respected by a lot of folks I listen to (he's not currently an LEO). None of that changes the fact that I'm going to invest a significant portion of this week and next digging.
Contrary to some "experts" there is no national hiring standard or"type". If an AO has a problem with schit cops than that AO has to clean it's process......
"They" is the department currently, someday maybe the community would have a voice in who the community chooses to pay to protect them. Not unlike citizen review boards or a fire commission.
I understand there may not be a "national hiring standard"....the change must happen post hiring. Probably isn't complete until after the probation period.
WSP has good troopers and a good reputation their problem is they don't pay as well as municipal cops.
Contrary to some "experts" there is no national hiring standard or"type". If an AO has a problem with schit cops than that AO has to clean it's process......
I don't like to compare the Police to military, but I suspect that the quality of the boots on the ground is very much a reflection on the quality of the management.
Have the wrong NCO's and SNCO's with wrong mindset/attitude and you will never get the ful potential from the officers underneath them..
WSP has good troopers and a good reputation their problem is they don't pay as well as municipal cops.
While paying a livable wage is of course critical, studies in education have shown that it ain't money that motivates good teachers. Hardly surprising when you consider how few go into teaching for the money. What motivates good teachers is an innate sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and tbe freedom in the classroom to do that job.
The only thing I have to add here is that the LEO should be trained to put a cripple down, Ive put dozens of ton cancer eyed Hereford Bulls down with a single shot from a .218BEE, 46 gr HP, you draw a cross( or imagine) horn to opposite eye a cross more or less ( center X marks the spot) and put the bullet in flat, not at an angle that can deflect. each and every one went down like a sack of cowfeed! If a rear shot is all you have you brainstem the beast, sounds like these guys were just plain trigger happy and had a pack mentally.... very sad, my heart goes out for this rancher and his family!Im the first to admit we need law but none of this story is adding up!!!! very best winpoor
WSP has good troopers and a good reputation their problem is they don't pay as well as municipal cops.
While paying a livable wage is of course critical, studies in education have shown that it ain't money that motivates good teachers. Hardly surprising when you consider how few go into teaching for the money. What motivates good teachers is an innate sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and tbe freedom in the classroom to do that job.
I expect you could draw parallels with good Cops.
Birdwatcher
That's why you start, but not why you stay. I could take half as many cops, pay them twice as much, do an infinitely better job and still save the public 50% by reduced equipment and benefit costs. But government doesn't work that way.
The only thing I have to add here is that the LEO should be trained to put a cripple down, Ive put dozens of ton cancer eyed Hereford Bulls down with a single shot from a .218BEE, 46 gr HP, you draw a cross( or imagine) horn to opposite eye a cross more or less ( center X marks the spot) and put the bullet in flat, not at an angle that can deflect. each and every one went down like a sack of cowfeed! If a rear shot is all you have you brainstem the beast, sounds like these guys were just plain trigger happy and had a pack mentally.... very sad, my heart goes out for this rancher and his family!Im the first to admit we need law but none of this story is adding up!!!! very best winpoor
While it does sound like the Deputies botched putting the bull down, it pays to remember that dealing with an animal thats been an RTA is a lot different to dealing with one thats in a crush or otherwise nice and calm..
Hopefully the Deputies body cams will give us an idea where things went wrong soi that measures can be taken to stop it happening it again in future..
Not much really new at the meeting last night other than only 1 deputy is out of the county..1 has 15 years experience and the other 5..Sheriff says he has had ad out for employment for a few weeks with only 3 applicants.Said he asked ISP for an update and was declined..Mostly just nit picking and dodging question with..I don't know!
The Lt Gov had more to say than the sheriff.
“I’m hypothesizing that those cops didn’t know how to kill that bull, and having had experience, you can’t hardly knock one down if you don’t know exactly where to put that bullet,” Little said. “And Jack (Yantis) showed up and said, ‘I’ll take care of this.’ “I’ve been involved in it many, many times,” Little said. Authorities call “and we — my foreman, my son, the guys at the ranch — we get called out at night all the time.”
He discussed the state’s open range laws, which make motorists financially responsible in case of an accident involving livestock.
“I tell my cattleman friends, ‘You have a school bus hit a bull, you’re not going to like the way the open range laws in Idaho are changed.’”
Everything is on the State now,the investigation and prosecution!Adams County is basically out of it.
WSP has good troopers and a good reputation their problem is they don't pay as well as municipal cops.
While paying a livable wage is of course critical, studies in education have shown that it ain't money that motivates good teachers. Hardly surprising when you consider how few go into teaching for the money. What motivates good teachers is an innate sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and tbe freedom in the classroom to do that job.
I expect you could draw parallels with good Cops.
Birdwatcher
You can "study" all you want, but the facts are that where you have higher paid teachers you have higher achievement. The correlation is not necessarily one-to-one but it is there nonetheless. It is also a lot more objective than surveys querying teachers about their own motivation.
That said, a lot of this stuff came about after Clinton demanded more cops on the street and got them. This was right after he got elected bragging about how he'd taken on the NRA in Arkansas...and won. Also about the time the AWB passed, etc.
You also had the Rodney King riots which cause a lot of bad things to happen. Many times when bad things happen the response will be a sort of duality where two opposing sides and their respective philosophies BOTH get what they want as opposed to one winning and the other losing. In that case it was both appeasement of a minority by rewarding lawbreakers for doing what they do while at the same time militarizing the police that the decent people from that minority saw as causing the problem.
You see the same thing in the schools when a normal problem happens and a group which has been advocating for change suddenly either comes into power or is empowered and has the opportunity to make the changes they want. Those changes fail miserably and two years later (which is almost at the same time in terms of organizations) their opposing numbers get empowered to change things the other way. You never go back to where you were.
Getting back to the issue...an area with 4000 population and probably no tax base to speak of, if it's like around here, doesn't have the money to pay for higher salaries. So unless you want to take more money from the state or Feds, neither of which has it, then you adjust in places other than salary.
"Vetting" is not gonna work. If anything, cops are over-vetted now. It is identical to problems in the schools. Your schools and police are reflections of your community regardless of whether in this case, those cops were hired locally or from Cali or wherever. You elect people from your community and they call the shots. That is where you have your say and that is where you are usually [bleep]. Most community leaders are out for themselves NOT to serve their community. You can't expect people like that to hire good people either to teach or police. And if good people are hired, how can you trust scumbags to retain them or pay them more even if the money is available. You think the excellent teacher who doesn't give the school board member's kid A's is gonna get rehired next year? Same with the cop who pulls the County Commissioner over and hauls his ass to the calabozo for DUI. In bigger venues, things are not necessarily better, they are just on a bigger level with more visibility and scrutiny. So sometimes you have less of this but it still goes on.
As soon as a good person gets elected to one of these boards, they have longtime board members both sucking up to them and at the same time, bullying them to go along to get along. And if a person has no allies on a board, how will they do anything but cast protest votes all the time? In the case of small town police, these communities are frickin' BROKEASSED! What is a source of revenue? The new highway running through the edge of town, not arresting the Mayor's forty-year-old Meth dealing son. When you can't be a "real" cop by kicking ass on real problems and all you get to do is be a freak on a leash writing tickets to anybody with out-of-county tags, then your attention turns to the harmless pot-head who moved in from the city or some local yokel whose goats keep eating the Town Councilmen's petunias.
More militarized cops who see all the public as lawbreakers deserving of punishment to one degree or another, just isn't the answer, regardless of pay, vetting or what-have-you.
WSP has good troopers and a good reputation their problem is they don't pay as well as municipal cops.
While paying a livable wage is of course critical, studies in education have shown that it ain't money that motivates good teachers. Hardly surprising when you consider how few go into teaching for the money. What motivates good teachers is an innate sense of satisfaction from a job well done, and tbe freedom in the classroom to do that job.
I expect you could draw parallels with good Cops.
Birdwatcher
That's why you start, but not why you stay. I could take half as many cops, pay them twice as much, do an infinitely better job and still save the public 50% by reduced equipment and benefit costs. But government doesn't work that way.
You can "study" all you want, but the facts are that where you have higher paid teachers you have higher achievement.
It ain't my studies, but published ones.
I will say that the best predictor of student achievement is how much money the parents make. Generally speaking, in America how much money you make reflects how much emphasis you put on education. Maybe better paying districts got a wealthier population and hence more educated parents.
This is readily observable where I live.
Bugs the crap out of me when they persist in breaking education stats down by "race", just feed parents' income into the model and you get a much better fit, irrespective of ethnicity.
You can "study" all you want, but the facts are that where you have higher paid teachers you have higher achievement. The correlation is not necessarily one-to-one but it is there nonetheless. It is also a lot more objective than surveys querying teachers about their own motivation.
That said, a lot of this stuff came about after Clinton demanded more cops on the street and got them. This was right after he got elected bragging about how he'd taken on the NRA in Arkansas...and won. Also about the time the AWB passed, etc.
You also had the Rodney King riots which cause a lot of bad things to happen. Many times when bad things happen the response will be a sort of duality where two opposing sides and their respective philosophies BOTH get what they want as opposed to one winning and the other losing. In that case it was both appeasement of a minority by rewarding lawbreakers for doing what they do while at the same time militarizing the police that the decent people from that minority saw as causing the problem.
You see the same thing in the schools when a normal problem happens and a group which has been advocating for change suddenly either comes into power or is empowered and has the opportunity to make the changes they want. Those changes fail miserably and two years later (which is almost at the same time in terms of organizations) their opposing numbers get empowered to change things the other way. You never go back to where you were.
Getting back to the issue...an area with 4000 population and probably no tax base to speak of, if it's like around here, doesn't have the money to pay for higher salaries. So unless you want to take more money from the state or Feds, neither of which has it, then you adjust in places other than salary.
"Vetting" is not gonna work. If anything, cops are over-vetted now. It is identical to problems in the schools. Your schools and police are reflections of your community regardless of whether in this case, those cops were hired locally or from Cali or wherever. You elect people from your community and they call the shots. That is where you have your say and that is where you are usually [bleep]. Most community leaders are out for themselves NOT to serve their community. You can't expect people like that to hire good people either to teach or police. And if good people are hired, how can you trust scumbags to retain them or pay them more even if the money is available. You think the excellent teacher who doesn't give the school board member's kid A's is gonna get rehired next year? Same with the cop who pulls the County Commissioner over and hauls his ass to the calabozo for DUI. In bigger venues, things are not necessarily better, they are just on a bigger level with more visibility and scrutiny. So sometimes you have less of this but it still goes on.
As soon as a good person gets elected to one of these boards, they have longtime board members both sucking up to them and at the same time, bullying them to go along to get along. And if a person has no allies on a board, how will they do anything but cast protest votes all the time? In the case of small town police, these communities are frickin' BROKEASSED! What is a source of revenue? The new highway running through the edge of town, not arresting the Mayor's forty-year-old Meth dealing son. When you can't be a "real" cop by kicking ass on real problems and all you get to do is be a freak on a leash writing tickets to anybody with out-of-county tags, then your attention turns to the harmless pot-head who moved in from the city or some local yokel whose goats keep eating the Town Councilmen's petunias.
More militarized cops who see all the public as lawbreakers deserving of punishment to one degree or another, just isn't the answer, regardless of pay, vetting or what-have-you.
You can "study" all you want, but the facts are that where you have higher paid teachers you have higher achievement.
It ain't my studies, but published ones.
I will say that the best predictor of student achievement is how much money the parents make. Generally speaking, in America how much money you make reflects how much emphasis you put on education. Maybe better paying districts got a wealthier population and hence more educated parents.
This is readily observable where I live.
Bugs the crap out of me when they persist in breaking education stats down by "race", just feed parents' income into the model and you get a much better fit, irrespective of ethnicity.
Birdwatcher
I'll make one more observation about education because IMO this thread ain't about that, then you can wax eloquent all you want.
What you're saying is dancing around what I'm saying, which is 100% true, from your first assertion that they aren't YOUR studies. I never said they were. You're studying the studies and then citing them. There is no way to objectively measure motivation. There are objective measures of teacher salary contrasted with achievement. Race, parent income, etc. are extraneous factors in a study of what I spoke of and which I qualified my statement with.
you draw a cross( or imagine) horn to opposite eye a cross more or less ( center X marks the spot) and put the bullet in flat,
X marks the spot, that's correct. The Idaho/Adam's County depooties who couldn't/wouldn't do the right thing should be whipped to death for their incompetence.
you draw a cross( or imagine) horn to opposite eye a cross more or less ( center X marks the spot) and put the bullet in flat,
X marks the spot, that's correct. The Idaho/Adam's County depooties who couldn't/wouldn't do the right thing should be whipped to death for their incompetence.
FWIW I wasn't trying to skew the meaning of the post, just understand what that part meant without getting into the feud portion.
I understand. Unfortunately, my whole post was feud based.
I'm trying to understand the latitudes that are and aren't afforded people and under what circumstances.
I just want to know why aces feels compelled to grant an accolade to a man who's business revolves around dealing with facts, evidence, and the legal system as opposed to an anonymous person on the web, who simply advocates waiting on the facts, evidence, and allowing the legal system to function. The latter person is subsequently treated with all the charm of a pack of drunken sailors (no offense to drunken sailors)
De-escalate what situation? A car/cow wreck normally has nothing to "de-escalate".
Originally Posted by postoak
The Statesman also interviewed several family members, including Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the couple’s who said he witnessed the shootings.
“Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations,” said Rowdy Paradis. “In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man.”
De-escalate what situation? A car/cow wreck normally has nothing to "de-escalate".
Originally Posted by postoak
The Statesman also interviewed several family members, including Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the couple’s who said he witnessed the shootings.
“Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations,” said Rowdy Paradis. “In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man.”f
from your first assertion that they aren't YOUR studies. I never said they were...
Plain English, you wrote...
Quote
You can study all you want
I'm getting a glimpse of what its like to be a Cop on these treads...
Quote
What you're saying is dancing around what I'm saying, which is 100% true
Nope, just cut right to the heart of it; educated folks emphasize education in their kids, generally speaking, they also live in areas where teachers get paid more. I can tell you straight up, parents are everything.
Sorta ironic I know, me a public school teacher, arguing against the role of salaries....
De-escalate what situation? A car/cow wreck normally has nothing to "de-escalate".
Originally Posted by postoak
The Statesman also interviewed several family members, including Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the couple’s who said he witnessed the shootings.
“Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations,” said Rowdy Paradis. “In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man.”f
Of course. Something here was definitely different than the average cow/car wreck that these guys handle all the time. What was it? Did the deputies just get together at lunch and decide to kill the next guy they see? Did the cow farmer lose his mind over his prize bull? Was it just a tragic accident?
De-escalate what situation? A car/cow wreck normally has nothing to "de-escalate".
Originally Posted by postoak
The Statesman also interviewed several family members, including Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the couple’s who said he witnessed the shootings.
“Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations,” said Rowdy Paradis. “In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man.”f
Of course. Something here was definitely different than the average cow/car wreck that these guys handle all the time. What was it? Did the deputies just get together at lunch and decide to kill the next guy they see? Did the cow farmer lose his mind over his prize bull? Was it just a tragic accident?
Not enough facts at this point to determine what happened and why, IMHO.
While Paradis was getting the skid loader, the deputies started shooting at the bull. At least one of them had a semiautomatic rifle, perhaps an AR-15, an adaptation of the military M16.
“They opened up with their pistols and their M16s ... before Jack got there,” Paradis said. “That’s an inhumane deal. ... This is a 2-ton Angus bull that’s pissed off, he’s hurt and psychotic. ... It was blazing down there and it sounded like World War III on this bull, because they got him charging at everyone again.”
Paradis drove the skid loader down the driveway and parked on the highway. The bull was lying on the pavement. Donna Yantis had walked the rifle to her husband. Jack Yantis was standing about 4 feet from the bull, aiming the rifle at the back of the bull’s head. His back was to the two deputies, who were standing in the far lane facing each other as if they were having a conversation.
“I put the (skid loader’s) lights on him and the bull, and he lined up to shoot the bull in the back of head and put him out humanely,” Paradis said.
DEPUTIES SHOOT YANTIS
The rifle’s barrel was about 2 feet from the bull, and Jack Yantis’ finger was on the trigger.
“Everything was going as planned. … I did not notice any conversation at all” between Jack Yantis and the deputies, Paradis said. “Then the one cop turned around and grabbed his shoulder and jerked him backwards.”
The deputy came from behind, spun Yantis around and grabbed the rifle’s scope, Paradis said.
The deputy pushed Yantis. The rifle was still in Yantis’ hands, its barrel pointed at the ground. Yantis was trying to regain his footing.
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
One deputy began shooting at Yantis, then the other deputy started shooting.
HANDCUFFS AND A HEART ATTACK
Donna Yantis said she and Paradis screamed at the deputies to stop.
Shot in the chest and abdomen, Jack Yantis fell to the ground. Neither deputy went to check on him. Paradis and Donna Yantis started running toward him.
“And then they threatened me and my nephew ... threw us on the middle of Highway 95, searched us and handcuffed us, and wouldn’t let us go take care of Jack,” Donna Yantis said.
Paradis said one deputy pointed his gun at Paradis’ head.
Donna Yantis had a heart attack. Some time later, she was taken by ambulance to Midvale and then by helicopter to Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise, where she remained hospitalized Saturday.
Rumsey, the family friend at dinner, had been near the wrecked car when the shooting started and ran toward Jack. The deputies handcuffed him, too.
The problem is factual by whom..ISP has a history of cover ups to protect law enforcement officers..3 ISP filed suit as whistle blowers not covering up with the rest of them(telling the truth) and given chit duty since which brought this article from the Statesman.
When the Idaho State Police are accused of bias, wrongdoing, cover-ups or favoritism, whose job is it to ferret out the truth?
ISP does not have an oversight board — for instance, the Correction Board, the Land Board or the Fish and Game Commission. The governor appoints the director and deputy director; they answer to him. The governor has the authority to call for investigations.
The Idaho Attorney General’s Office says it does not have authority to conduct an investigation, unless asked to do so by a county sheriff or prosecutor.
When the Idaho State Police are accused of bias, wrongdoing, cover-ups or favoritism, whose job is it to ferret out the truth?
ISP does not have an oversight board — for instance, the Correction Board, the Land Board or the Fish and Game Commission. The governor appoints the director and deputy director; they answer to him. The governor has the authority to call for investigations.
The Idaho Attorney General’s Office says it does not have authority to conduct an investigation, unless asked to do so by a county sheriff or prosecutor.
IF that account proves to NOT be in accordance with the facts in any meaningful way, the Lawyers who oversaw its preparation and release should be dis-barred.
Fact is everything reported by reporters is not 100% accurate. Anyone ever involved in a write up by reporters surely knows this.
I haven't read any reports from reporters that were there,I have read reports/statements from family members that were there though.I also saw the interview in person from his daughter and son-in-law that is factual to what they saw,not heard,saw.Unless of course they made a false statement on what they saw.
When you read a statement from a family member(More than one) that is the same from news channel to news channel,that would be more factual.None of the statements contradict the other.
ISP on the other hand is just getting to taking statements 10 days after the fact.The big concern from the meeting with the Sheriff last night was why are we paying for body cams and dash cams if there not on..Sheriffs reply..It's up to each deputy when to and when not to turn them on...
IF that account proves to NOT be in accordance with the facts in any meaningful way, the Lawyers who oversaw its preparation and release should be dis-barred.
So you are of the belief that everything a report writes is 100% spot? You are saying that reporters never miss quote or take statements out of context, right?
The big concern from the meeting with the Sheriff last night was why are we paying for body cams and dash cams if there not on..Sheriffs reply..It's up to each deputy when to and when not to turn them on...
Is it confirmed that neither body nor dash cam footage is available?
Jerry Spence will make sure that the families side is very well represented. IMHO 30 years ago the officers would have waited for the rancher to dispatch the bull and thus this would not have escalated.
No,just the dash cam so far..No comment on the body cams other than the sheriff said he didn't know(Ya right)..According to the Sheriff when he and the under sheriff arrived on scene they didn't talk to anyone and left everything for the ISP.
I highly doubt he did not talk to either officer on scene without ISP there and before it was all turned over to them..
IMHO 30 years ago the officers would have waited for the rancher to dispatch the bull and thus would not have escalated.
Bingo. It's a massive change in American police culture that's at the root of the problem. How we fix that, I don't know, because it's just a symptom of much broader problems in the culture at large.
IF that account proves to NOT be in accordance with the facts in any meaningful way, the Lawyers who oversaw its preparation and release should be dis-barred.
So you are of the belief that everything a report writes is 100% spot? You are saying that reporters never miss quote or take statements out of context, right?
A family retains a Lawyer.
They want to release a statement to the Press, but don't want to jeopardize any future possible lawsuit.
The Lawyer helps them with the statement, knowing that they may have to give a deposition, or testify in court, UNDER OATH, about the event.
Any mis - statements that have to be explained away later are a Lawyer's nightmre.
Also in the connecting counties,Valley and Idaho,it is very very rare for dispatch to give an officer the green light on putting injured game away.Fish and Game has to do it.
A county or city officer cannot euthanize an injured animal without confirmation from the appropriate source.Seen it sadly to many times.
I highly doubt he did not talk to either officer on scene without ISP there and before it was all turned over to them..
Yea....that's pretty hard to swallow.....but don't worry...I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain to you that it's quite common for a supervisor to show up at the scene of a shooting in which two of his charges are involved and not talk to either of them.....followed by the usual condescending wise crack of course.
IMHO 30 years ago the officers would have waited for the rancher to dispatch the bull and thus would not have escalated.
Bingo. It's a massive change in American police culture that's at the root of the problem. How we fix that, I don't know, because it's just a symptom of much broader problems in the culture at large.
I actually agree with that, and I was a cop 30 years ago. I'm familiar with open range too...I lease the hunting rights on 10K acres of it. Funny how cattle on open range has an ear tag and a brand, but those in fences are unmarked and nobody owns them when they get out and wreck a car.
I highly doubt he did not talk to either officer on scene without ISP there and before it was all turned over to them..
Yea....that's pretty hard to swallow.....but don't worry...I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain to you that it's quite common for a supervisor to show up at the scene of a shooting in which two of his charges are involved and not talk to either of them.....followed by the usual condescending wise crack of course.
Well...I guess that would be me. We lawyer up as soon as it happens and don't speak to anybody else...BUT a report is completed immediately.
IF that account proves to NOT be in accordance with the facts in any meaningful way, the Lawyers who oversaw its preparation and release should be dis-barred.
So you are of the belief that everything a report writes is 100% spot? You are saying that reporters never miss quote or take statements out of context, right?
A family retains a Lawyer.
They want to release a statement to the Press, but don't want to jeopardize any future possible lawsuit.
The Lawyer helps them with the statement, knowing that they may have to give a deposition, or testify in court, UNDER OATH, about the event.
Any mis - statements that have to be explained away later are a Lawyer's nightmre.
None of your post deals with the reporters version which may or may not be 100% accurate.
None of your post deals with the reporters version which may or may not be 100% accurate.
Which ones are you talking about?I never have saw a reporters version but I have seen witness's statements reporters reported or interviews with witness's..
None of your post deals with the reporters version which may or may not be 100% accurate.
Which ones are you talking about?I never have saw a reporters version but I have seen witness's statements reporters reported or interviews with witness's..
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh! Which is all we get to see. In cases like this there is 3 sides to the event, the families, the deputies and the truth usually somewhere in the middle.
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
So what will be the ISP report when a link is provided?Will it be directly from the ISP headquarters or "reported" on a news station or the paper?
The 100% facts and nothing but the facts regardless of what others saw?
Let me leave you with an exert from the town meeting last night held by the Sheriff:
One man said many do not trust the police to do a truly independent investigation of Yantis’ death.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
The same reporter to reporter only when they reprint the original article. You don't trust the government in Idaho to do a fair investigation but you trust a reporter?
I could give a FRA, about the nitpicking and "Angels dancing on the head of a pin" BS that JWP475 keeps throwing out here.
At this point you're "our man on the scene", and a LOT of folks are following your posts, quietly weighing what they read, and not making much noise, one way or another.
You don't trust the government in Idaho to do a fair investigation but you trust a reporter?
What type of logic is that?
You'll have to ask the guy from Council that said it.I didn't,but I do know them well,his wife fixed me lunch many many times.
I don't trust reporters as you imply, but I do trust what I see on live interviews as I have with most of the quotes I post,then the live interview is broken down into text to publish in a paper or on a news site by a writer or ya,that damned reporter.
EVERY reporter is looking for one thing...the Big Story. If they can't find it, they'll manufacture it. It is the only way to advance to a bigger market and more money.
EVERY reporter is looking for one thing...the Big Story. If they can't find it, they'll manufacture it. It is the only way to advance to a bigger market and more money.
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
[/i]
I would guess that if multiple news outlets are all doing stories based on the same statement released by the families lawyer that they would all pretty much be the same...same source document.
I could give a FRA, about the nitpicking and "Angels dancing on the head of a pin" BS that JWP475 keeps throwing out here.
At this point you're "our man on the scene", and a LOT of folks are following your posts, quietly weighing what they read, and not making much noise, one way or another.
Keep em' coming, please.
GTC
"Angels dancing on the head of a pin"
Just a part of the "Circling the wagons" drill we've watched here on the 'fire so many times.
Like everytime that ANY cop, ANYWHERE, is accused of wrongdoing.
They are harmless and ineffective, but - Bless their little hearts - it makes 'em feel good about themselves.
Apparently some of the sort of folks that are part of the problem are posting right here on the fire.
You mean the folks that advocate killing folks for improperly dispatching injured animals, or lynching folks without a fair trial.
I agree.
From the residents of Council to the sheriff alst night...NOT ME..
More than one person asked why the deputies are on paid leave and not sitting in jail pending the outcome of the investigation.
Well, I know cross has said it already, and I know you have your opinion on the matter, Mr. Cutter of Log, but I'd like to thank you for the updates.
At this point, the thread is a train wreck I can't walk away from.
Like a tongue going to the hole of a tooth knocked out.
Wish the Idaho SP would just get on with it, so all those so inclined can beat their chest and claim victory, and others can claim conspiracy or public pressure or whatever, and ultimately, we can get back to business as usual.
Although, I wholly expect many of the folks here of impeccable honor and duty to move to Idaho and become deputies, as a matter of social justice on their parts.
For those involved in this thread that question post from whatever source or the poster,may I suggest since your not locals that you tune into a live feed from a local station to see the reporting in person live and actually on scene in many cases and from the people that were there,also in some cases....
Quote
Area served City of license VC RF Callsign Network Notes Boise Boise 2 9 KBOI-TV CBS Boise Boise 4 21 KAID PBS Boise Nampa 6 24 KIVI-TV ABC Boise Boise 7 7 KTVB NBC Boise Caldwell 9 10 KNIN-TV Fox Boise Nampa 12 13 KTRV-TV MyNetworkTV Boise Boise 39 39 KKJB Local/Telemundo
Although, I wholly expect many of the folks here of impeccable honor and duty to move to Idaho and become deputies, as a matter of social justice on their parts.
Yeah...I've been to Idaho. My best friend married a rich rancher's daughter there. This thread pretty much confirms my experience there was not unique.
Mr. Yantis has previous convictions for Resisting, Battery, and OWI. Older stuff, but something that may or may not provide some insight into how things went bad.
What everyone seems to forget,out of those quotes by the locals or the locals attitudes..They know way more of what went on than we do....
There were EMT's on scene that have not gone public about the shooting or why they were not called over to check on Jack after he was shot to care for him..Others were in the road block at the scene and there were the curious neighbors,none of which has said anything publicly, but the locals know from the many that were there what actually happened.
In a small town like Council,word spreads fast and mums the word.
Mr. Yantis has previous convictions for Resisting, Battery, and OWI. Older stuff, but something that may or may not provide some insight into how things went bad.
Geez...Battery and obstructing an officer in 1997..In 2002 driving with an expired licence and a DUI and in 2005 an over weight ticket..OMG..What a rascal...
It sounds just typical for up in that area.One of my buddies got beat half to death with a night stick for not complying with an officer down there...
Nothing in 13 years on his record although it would be interesting to see if any of the arresting officers of his past was the head honcho that did the harm in this incident.
I am surprised that is up there for the public listing the officers names....
EVERY reporter is looking for one thing...the Big Story. If they can't find it, they'll manufacture it. It is the only way to advance to a bigger market and more money.
Let's get to brass tacks, here. We have several written witness accounts, and no evidence at all that they are factually incorrect.
We have some reporters reporting trivial stuff independently.
We have a sheriff's statement after the fact that contains several (I dare say) deliberate misstatements and factual errors. The suggestion he didn't speak to the deputies is mind boggling, if true.
Everything is being investigated by the ISP, which has a history of covering up gross police misconduct and harassing anyone that doesn't join the cover up.
And you wonder why we don't wait for whatever story the Sheriff, ISP and suspected murderers are cooking up together?
And you wonder why local witnesses are reluctant to speak out in fear of retaliation?
Mr. Yantis has previous convictions for Resisting, Battery, and OWI. Older stuff, but something that may or may not provide some insight into how things went bad.
EVERY reporter is looking for one thing...the Big Story. If they can't find it, they'll manufacture it. It is the only way to advance to a bigger market and more money.
Let's get to brass tacks, here. We have several written witness accounts, and no evidence at all that they are factually incorrect.
We have some reporters reporting trivial stuff independently.
We have a sheriff's statement after the fact that contains several (I dare say) deliberate misstatements and factual errors. The suggestion he didn't speak to the deputies is mind boggling, if true.
Everything is being investigated by the ISP, which has a history of covering up gross police misconduct and harassing anyone that doesn't join the cover up.
And you wonder why we don't wait for whatever story the Sheriff, ISP and suspected murderers are cooking up together?
And you wonder why local witnesses are reluctant to speak out in fear of retaliation?
No. I don't wonder about any of it. I was asked about reporters, not to speculate on things that I have no knowledge of. Are you one of those scared witnesses, or are you speculating?
Let's get to brass tacks, here. We have several written witness accounts, and no evidence at all that they are factually incorrect.
We have some reporters reporting trivial stuff independently.
We have a sheriff's statement after the fact that contains several (I dare say) deliberate misstatements and factual errors. The suggestion he didn't speak to the deputies is mind boggling, if true.
Everything is being investigated by the ISP, which has a history of covering up gross police misconduct and harassing anyone that doesn't join the cover up.
And you wonder why we don't wait for whatever story the Sheriff, ISP and suspected murderers are cooking up together?
And you wonder why local witnesses are reluctant to speak out in fear of retaliation?
WOW..Great post and 100% correct in my eyes especially about retaliation...Last night at the Sheriffs meeting they ask the Sheriff if he would resign if the deputies were convicted of wrong doing..He said...NO
So there left with the currant Sheriff and deputies to deal with and be watched by.Know wonder they ain't talk'n publicly.
I say cop in this case instead of officer..Just 1 cop on your case in a small town looking for any reason too, is not a good thing.
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
But didn't talk to the deputy on scene....Really!
Come on..
We're confronting the "trickle down morality" prevalent at the highest levels,...e.g. LYING is justified, by extenuating circumstances, or what one's puppet masters and lawyers dictate / advise. That A-whole has failed in his oath, and failed his community !
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
But didn't talk to the deputy on scene....Really!
Come on..
Yes. Really
Whether you think so or not, every one here is not stupid.
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
But didn't talk to the deputy on scene....Really!
Come on..
Yes. Really
Whether you think so or not, every one here is not stupid.
Maybe not. But we know you are.
If they lawyered up he CAN'T talk to them
Furthermore why would he inject himself into the middle of an investigation he is not conducting. He knows he still has an agency to run
Furthermore why would he inject himself into the middle of an investigation he is not conducting
There was no investigation at that point.It was an ongoing incident where the sheriff was in charge once he arrived.
Through all that, the victim was never given medical care with EMT's on scene..The deputies do not have the authority to pronounce him dead.Only the coroner or an MD can do that here.
And the sheriff was oblivious to all this while there!
Yup,that's the way it went down and more than likely ISP will back it up with the officers fearing for there lives from a guy they called to take care of the bull....
Mr. Yantis has previous convictions for Resisting, Battery, and OWI. Older stuff, but something that may or may not provide some insight into how things went bad.
Picture this..The accident and what followed..The sheriff was notified probably by cell phone rather than over the air by the deputy and the sheriff and under-sheriff come to the scene..Both above the deputy and in charge at that point.
But didn't talk to the deputy on scene....Really!
Come on..
He didn't say he had not talked to them, said he had turned over the cam's or footage to ISP and didn't know if they were on and recording during the incident or not.
Just seems strange that he would not know if there was video or not, nine days after the fact.
Not sure what you mean by "swapped ends completely."
That speaks volumes, in and of itself.
I don't really give a damn if YOU understand,...there are a LOT of other folks reading this that will understand, and copy 5x5 EXACTLY what I'm saying.
Not sure what you mean by "swapped ends completely."
That speaks volumes, in and of itself.
I don't really give a damn if YOU understand,...there are a LOT of other folks reading this that will understand, and copy 5x5 EXACTLY what I'm saying.
GTC
Let me repeat a previous post: Do you ever discuss something with someone you don't agree with and NOT turn to insults or unfounded conclusions?
Picture a cop, or cops, accused of grievous misconduct.
Picture a circle of forum members sympathetic to them forming a wall around them.
Picture other forum members outraged by the event as reported, and posting comments to that effect.Some say their piece and move on. Others hang around, because:
Those forming the wall around the cops respond to EVERY post made which is critical of the cops. So... the thread goes on and on.
You had the option of saying your piece and moving on, not identifying with either group.
Instead, you chose to hang around and participate, identifying with those OUTSIDE the wall.
Now, it appears you have joined the wall. Nothing wrong with changing sides, but nothing wrong with someone calling attention to it, either.
Yantis' son-in-law, Mike Armistead, said he still had unanswered questions, but expressed conviction the truth would emerge eventually.
"I think when it's all settled and everything comes out, we'll get answers," he said. "I have confidence in the investigation".
Originally Posted by logcutter
Quote
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
So what will be the ISP report when a link is provided?Will it be directly from the ISP headquarters or "reported" on a news station or the paper?
The 100% facts and nothing but the facts regardless of what others saw?
Let me leave you with an exert from the town meeting last night held by the Sheriff:
One man said many do not trust the police to do a truly independent investigation of Yantis’ death.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
Even the locals don't agree on the outcome of the investigation.
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
Picture a cop, or cops, accused of grievous misconduct.
Picture a circle of forum members sympathetic to them forming a wall around them.
Picture other forum members outraged by the event as reported, and posting comments to that effect.Some say their piece and move on. Others hang around, because:
Those forming the wall around the cops respond to EVERY post made which is critical of the cops. So... the thread goes on and on.
You had the option of saying your piece and moving on, not identifying with either group.
Instead, you chose to hang around and participate, identifying with those OUTSIDE the wall.
Now, it appears you have joined the wall. Nothing wrong with changing sides, but nothing wrong with someone calling attention to it, either.
I don't think I ever identified with those "outside the wall" if anything I was sympathetic with the police until the full story comes out. The only version we have is the sanitized family version put out through the mouthpiece lawyer who has dollars in his eyes.
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
what caught my eye is that she is saying the sheriff is lying, and her husband is the one saying he has confidence in the investigation.
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
what caught my eye is that she is saying the sheriff is lying, and her husband is the one saying he has confidence in the investigation.
The Sheriff ain't the one doing the investigating. The Idaho State Police are. So it's not contradictory.
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
what caught my eye is that she is saying the sheriff is lying, and her husband is the one saying he has confidence in the investigation.
The Sheriff ain't the one doing the investigating. The Idaho State Police are. So it's not contradictory.
If she believes the sherrif is lying, then the deputies will probably lie as well, thus effecting the investigation, don't you think?
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
what caught my eye is that she is saying the sheriff is lying, and her husband is the one saying he has confidence in the investigation.
The Sheriff ain't the one doing the investigating. The Idaho State Police are. So it's not contradictory.
I wasn't pointing out that it is contradictory. Just that the situation isn't black and white - as in, the SIL doesn't roll with the whole "investigation under one roof" theory of corruption.
Also pointing out, contrary to what was also thrown out here as "facts in existence" that apparently one of the family is OK with the impending investigation process so far.
I keep thinking that Jack Yantis was called by the sheriff's dispatcher and that everybody on the scene KNEW he was coming and KNEW that he was going to put down that bull with a firearm, just as he had done on previous occasions. The sheriff's deputies had obviously FAILED by just gut-shooting that bull for fun. The sheriff should have arrested both deputies within one hour of his arrival at that scene.
Out of all the speculation, one thing is certain, and that is Turdcutter is living proof that cousins shouldn't breed.
One of the biggest piece of sh.it mall cops speaks up to condemn logcutter for keeping us updated. It would be unbelievable but I've come to expect anything by the "cops do no wrong" crowd. Great Wapus.sy keeps delivering with stupid comments and boring insults.
Whether the deputies knew he was coming out or not, him arriving at the scene with a gun, especially given the other movement-the skid steer, etc., shouldn't have been cause for alarm. Thus, I think the "reasonable man" defense goes out the window-at least it would for a "civilian".
this kind of caught my eye out of that meeting: "Sarah Yantis, Jack's daughter, was emotional after the nearly one-hour meeting. She told KTVB the sheriff didn't answer any questions.
"I found him to be evasive [and] contradictory, and in the end I just asked him to look me in the eye when he lied to us," she said."
what caught my eye is that she is saying the sheriff is lying, and her husband is the one saying he has confidence in the investigation.
The Sheriff ain't the one doing the investigating. The Idaho State Police are. So it's not contradictory.
I wasn't pointing out that it is contradictory. Just that the situation isn't black and white - as in, the SIL doesn't roll with the whole "investigation under one roof" theory of corruption.
Also pointing out, contrary to what was also thrown out here as "facts in existence" that apparently one of the family is OK with the impending investigation process so far.
Hmm.
What you've got is apparently Jack's daughter thinks the Sheriff ain't to be trusted. Her husband trusts the ISP to investigate the matter. I don't fully understand some of what you're saying, I guess.
What you've got is apparently Jack's daughter thinks the Sheriff ain't to be trusted. Her husband trusts the ISP to investigate the matter. I don't fully understand some of what you're saying, I guess.
I'm saying that:
All the people, apparently family, aren't all "don't trust the government" sorts, if they are able to separate two different offices into categories of "trust" and "don't trust"
AND
maybe you're steaming expose on the corruption of ISP investigators isn't all it was cracked up to be?
Unless they have already intimidated the son in law into being a toady. (your easy out)
Even the locals don't agree on the outcome of the investigation.
That's to be expected in a small town,isn't it?You have all the law enforcement families, with there aunts/cousins and close friends backing them in the time of need,then you have the others backing there friends and family.
Less than 800 folks now, I believe and yes,they don't all agree on this or politics/religion/hunting/guns or anything for that matter and they fist fight from time to time also.Just a normal backwoods community.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
What I don't understand is the lack of people waiting for the outcome of the investigation before deciding guilt or innocence by ANY party involved.
I'm sure the ISP and the special prosecutor feel the extreme pressure to release the details of the investigation... But, I would rather have them do it correctly and leave nothing out, or cause room for further speculation, than do a half assed job.
Not too worried about the integrity of the investigation either. (I only worry about that on the federal level, with BamBam and an agenda to grind)
With the publicity this has drawn, nobody can cover up much of anything.
I expect the investigation to be very enlightening. No matter which side of the issue someone is sitting on.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
What I don't understand is the lack of people waiting for the outcome of the investigation before deciding guilt or innocence by ANY party involved.
I'm sure the ISP and the special prosecutor feel the extreme pressure to release the details of the investigation... But, I would rather have them do it correctly and leave nothing out, or cause room for further speculation, than do a half assed job.
Not too worried about the integrity of the investigation either. (I only worry about that on the federal level, with BamBam and an agenda to grind)
With the publicity this has drawn, nobody can cover up much of anything.
I expect the investigation to be very enlightening. No matter which side of the issue someone is sitting on.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
To be continued...
Well, luckily you're willing to lower yourself to the level of the cops and denigrate other forum members, and their wives.
Mr. Yantis has previous convictions for Resisting, Battery, and OWI. Older stuff, but something that may or may not provide some insight into how things went bad.
What you've got is apparently Jack's daughter thinks the Sheriff ain't to be trusted. Her husband trusts the ISP to investigate the matter. I don't fully understand some of what you're saying, I guess.
I'm saying that:
All the people, apparently family, aren't all "don't trust the government" sorts, if they are able to separate two different offices into categories of "trust" and "don't trust"
AND
maybe you're steaming expose on the corruption of ISP investigators isn't all it was cracked up to be?
Unless they have already intimidated the son in law into being a toady. (your easy out)
I'm just some dude a thousand or so miles south and have little invested in the whole situation other than wanting to see people treated fairly. I felt like the thing I posted, that Logcutter (IIRC) also posted later, was significant. I am not close enough to Idaho's state politics and situation to know if the ISP can be trusted. I don't trust them, but it doesn't matter one way or the other because I'm just commenting on an internet forum. I don't have any thoughts on them intimidating the son-it never entered my mind until you said it. I don't know if the daughter and her husband differ-I was just pointing out that their two statements don't necessarily indicate that they do.
I think you've read a whole lot of speculation into my posts on this and the other related thread, that was never there. I've never given my thoughts on what happened and I'll be the first to say, I wasn't there, so my opinion on things that aren't strictly facts doesn't matter much.
As I said much earlier in the thread when told to quit speculating...you can't quit what you haven't started. Since then I've said some speculative stuff...but not much.
The run-ins with the law years back muddy the waters some. I do have opinions on modern policing, which I already related. Hope this clarifies things while figuring it won't.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
Equating Jack Yantis to Michael Brown has already been done on this thread... more than once.
I think you'll find that these Deputies don't measure up to Officer Wilson, either.
The comparison was merely used as an example of how people heard from "eye witnesses" and the family about an event before the investigation was completed, then they ran off the tracks and based their assumptions of guilt, and their lawless actions immediately following the incident before the facts were made public.
There are lots of similarities.
Not comparing the Yantis family to the Brown family by any means. But sometimes it pays to wait for the facts before committing one's self to one side or the other.
To make bold statements of guilt based one side of a story just shows ignorance.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
To be continued...
Well, luckily you're willing to lower yourself to the level of the cops and denigrate other forum members, and their wives.
What position did you hold in law enforcement?
Yep. I have no problem calling it as I see it, too bad you're too blind to see the problem but you're more than willing to protect those wearing the uniform for no reason other than they're cops. You and others like you are a disgusting snapshot of police departments across this nation.
Equating Jack Yantis to Michael Brown has already been done on this thread... more than once.
I think you'll find that these Deputies don't measure up to Officer Wilson, either.
The comparison was merely used as an example of how people heard from "eye witnesses" and the family about an event before the investigation was completed, then they ran off the tracks and based their assumptions of guilt, and their lawless actions immediately following the incident before the facts were made public.
There are lots of similarities.
Not comparing the Yantis family to the Brown family by any means. But sometimes it pays to wait for the facts before committing one's self to one side or the other.
To make bold statements of guilt based one side of a story just shows ignorance.
But.... it equates forum members with inner-city blacks as well. I think we are a little more discerning than them.
Equating Jack Yantis to Michael Brown has already been done on this thread... more than once.
I think you'll find that these Deputies don't measure up to Officer Wilson, either.
The comparison was merely used as an example of how people heard from "eye witnesses" and the family about an event before the investigation was completed, then they ran off the tracks and based their assumptions of guilt, and their lawless actions immediately following the incident before the facts were made public.
There are lots of similarities.
Not comparing the Yantis family to the Brown family by any means. But sometimes it pays to wait for the facts before committing one's self to one side or the other.
To make bold statements of guilt based one side of a story just shows ignorance.
But.... it equates forum members with inner-city blacks as well. I think we are a little more discerning than them.
I agree with you gene, except for acesnaids....you just know he sucks ghetto cack
In one case we have folks telling our right lies and in another several saying basically the same thing?
in one details reveled very soon, and not in the other.
Bad comparison all around, about the only similarity is LE shot some one.
Actually the early witness statements with Michael Brown were pretty consistent, hence the "hands up don't shoot" nonsense. This was almost immediate.
After the investigation played out, and all the witnesses were interviewed, the forensics and ballistics were examined, we had a pretty good picture of what the truth was.
However, some of the witnesses still maintained he had his hands up, their testimony just wasn't deemed credible by the Grand Jury, as the forensics contradicted it.
And sometimes peoples recollection of things "Changes" when they are under oath and in front of a Grand Jury.
Don't take me wrong on this as I married an officer and have nothing but respect for most..I call them officers not cops out of respect.
The problem I see is the police family that sticks together, right or wrong.Not admitting officers are human and do make mistakes,some worse than others and any investigation,especially on other officers, is going to show the true facts only,not what really happened.We know this is not true all the time.
In this case,will the deputies report over ride what the witness's saw and experienced.Maybe the witness's are getting there statements out so they won't be thrown under the rug in the ISP investigation.
If the ISP report comes out negative to the victim, will that nullify what others saw and went through as if it didn't happen.I think it is good the other side is being heard before the official ISP report comes out.
Had none of this came out, it would be easy to just say Jack fired his weapon first and the officers took appropriate measures to protect those on scene or they feared for there lives.
"The problem I see is the police family that sticks together, right or wrong.Not admitting officers are human and do make mistakes,some worse than others and any investigation,especially on other officers, is going to show the true facts only,not what really happened.We know this is not true all the time."
Our forum cops will readily agree with you about some cops being bad. But only in a generic way.
Once a particular incident of cops misbehaving is brought up for discussion, the usual cadre responds just like Pavlov's dogs. They are robotic like in their responses.
Apparently, they WANT to be seen as different from, and apart from, the rest of the citizenry.
THEY are the chief cause of the division and mistrust where it exists.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
To be continued...
Well, luckily you're willing to lower yourself to the level of the cops and denigrate other forum members, and their wives.
What position did you hold in law enforcement?
Yep. I have no problem calling it as I see it, too bad you're too blind to see the problem but you're more than willing to protect those wearing the uniform for no reason other than they're cops. You and others like you are a disgusting snapshot of police departments across this nation.
How am I any different then the deceased's son-in-law who said that we will get the facts when thee investigation is complete, and have trust in the investigation?
I have no problem calling it as I see it.
You're a thug, no different than the ones that riot for no reason.
Your friend mirage and pal as well.
My guess is the lot of you will ultimately need due process before your lives are through.
...You and others like you are a disgusting snapshot of police departments across this nation.
Others of us see it this way too. Disgusting and shameful. It is precisely how LE misconduct is condoned and even encouraged.
So what would you rather have?
You want Obama to form a National Police Force that answers only to his Justice Dept.? How would that work out for everyone?
One thing about local law enforcement is that if you don't like the game they are playing, you and the rest of the constituency can by law and right change the players. That's the good thing about freedom. You have legal remedies to problematic areas of government.
Hell, you don't even have to have a good reason, other than you don't like the way he looks to vote a sheriff out of office.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
This is telling coming from a man with his reputation and shows how bad things must be down there at the present time.
"You're a thug, no different than the ones that riot for no reason.
Your friend mirage and pal as well."
'Scuse me, but your lack of discernment is showing.
THIS is the internet... see?
Rioting for no reason is something that can only be done in the REAL world.
I hope you don't confuse the two this easily on the job.
That would be a very bad thing.
I see the difference fine.
I equate their level of dumbphuckery with that as people that riot for no or incorrect reasons. Expressing their level of outrage that coincides with undo attacks on people's wives based simply on a civil request to wait for the facts. Not to mention labeling that level of due process as shameful and disgusting in order to propagate more irrational BS.
Pretty much a thug in anyone's book.
And my job is surveying, so I place virtual maps into the real world. And vice versa. Got a pretty good handle on it, in fact.
"The problem I see is the police family that sticks together, right or wrong.Not admitting officers are human and do make mistakes,some worse than others and any investigation,especially on other officers, is going to show the true facts only,not what really happened.We know this is not true all the time."
Our forum cops will readily agree with you about some cops being bad. But only in a generic way.
Once a particular incident of cops misbehaving is brought up for discussion, the usual cadre responds just like Pavlov's dogs. They are robotic like in their responses.
Apparently, they WANT to be seen as different from, and apart from, the rest of the citizenry.
THEY are the chief cause of the division and mistrust where it exists.
Gene. Can you point one post on this thread where anyone has specifically defended the cops in question?
With Gene and the "ilk" collectively and without exception identifying the forum cops as a group in totality, there is no room in the discussion for varying degrees of response, common sense approaches to the situation, due process, facts, evidence, etc.
You either agree with the "ilk" or you don't.
And he's as much to blame with his broad brush as he makes the "forum cops" out to be.
In conclusion, its hard to show any level of respect for someone that wants to break down people for being diligent and prudent in making a decision.
It's sad that people who advocate this method for making a [bleep] life and death decision are mocked.
If founding fathers are rolling over because of the alleged tyranny in the U.S., they are equally rolling over for the mob mentality exhibited by so many.
No different than low information voters responding to social media.
I'm going for a beer on Veteran's Day, so I can wonder why I even put boots to dirt to defend some of you folks right to idiocy.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
This is telling coming from a man with his reputation and shows how bad things must be down there at the present time.
Good to see somebody else catching that drift. Kudos.
In conclusion, its hard to show any level of respect for someone that wants to break down people for being diligent and prudent in making a decision.
It's sad that people who advocate this method for making a [bleep] life and death decision are mocked.
If founding fathers are rolling over because of the alleged tyranny in the U.S., they are equally rolling over for the mob mentality exhibited by so many.
No different than low information voters responding to social media.
I'm going for a beer on Veteran's Day, so I can wonder why I even put boots to dirt to defend some of you folks right to idiocy.
In conclusion, its hard to show any level of respect for someone that wants to break down people for being diligent and prudent in making a decision.
It's sad that people who advocate this method for making a [bleep] life and death decision are mocked.
If founding fathers are rolling over because of the alleged tyranny in the U.S., they are equally rolling over for the mob mentality exhibited by so many.
No different than low information voters responding to social media.
I'm going for a beer on Veteran's Day, so I can wonder why I even put boots to dirt to defend some of you folks right to idiocy.
Excuse me ?
did you just say "alleged tyranny ?"
Phew, good to know that there's no truth to that rumor.
"The problem I see is the police family that sticks together, right or wrong.Not admitting officers are human and do make mistakes,some worse than others and any investigation,especially on other officers, is going to show the true facts only,not what really happened.We know this is not true all the time."
Our forum cops will readily agree with you about some cops being bad. But only in a generic way.
Once a particular incident of cops misbehaving is brought up for discussion, the usual cadre responds just like Pavlov's dogs. They are robotic like in their responses.
Apparently, they WANT to be seen as different from, and apart from, the rest of the citizenry.
THEY are the chief cause of the division and mistrust where it exists.
Gene. Can you point one post on this thread where anyone has specifically defended the cops in question?
Can you point to where I claimed y'all DEFENDED them. in the post you quoted?
With Gene and the "ilk" collectively and without exception identifying the forum cops as a group in totality, there is no room in the discussion for varying degrees of response, common sense approaches to the situation, due process, facts, evidence, etc.
You either agree with the "ilk" or you don't.
And he's as much to blame with his broad brush as he makes the "forum cops" out to be.
Plain and simple.
Why do you care if guys on an internet forum speak their minds WHEN IT HAS NOT ONE DAMN THING TO DO WITH YOU PERSONALLY?
When I asked that earlier, you, or one of your "ilk" said if I didn't understand it already, it couldn't be explained to me.
IME, a man that can't write clearly doesn't have a writing problem, he has a THINKING problem.
And.. if a man can't come up with a written explanation for WHY he believes something, it's because he's operating on feelings...... like a female.
"The problem I see is the police family that sticks together, right or wrong.Not admitting officers are human and do make mistakes,some worse than others and any investigation,especially on other officers, is going to show the true facts only,not what really happened.We know this is not true all the time."
Our forum cops will readily agree with you about some cops being bad. But only in a generic way.
Once a particular incident of cops misbehaving is brought up for discussion, the usual cadre responds just like Pavlov's dogs. They are robotic like in their responses.
Apparently, they WANT to be seen as different from, and apart from, the rest of the citizenry.
THEY are the chief cause of the division and mistrust where it exists.
Gene. Can you point one post on this thread where anyone has specifically defended the cops in question?
Can you point to where I claimed y'all DEFENDED them. in the post you quoted?
With Gene and the "ilk" collectively and without exception identifying the forum cops as a group in totality, there is no room in the discussion for varying degrees of response, common sense approaches to the situation, due process, facts, evidence, etc.
You either agree with the "ilk" or you don't.
And he's as much to blame with his broad brush as he makes the "forum cops" out to be.
Plain and simple.
Why do you care if guys on an internet forum speak their minds WHEN IT HAS NOT ONE DAMN THING TO DO WITH YOU PERSONALLY?
When I asked that earlier, you, or one of your "ilk" said if I didn't understand it already, it couldn't be explained to me.
IME, a man that can't write clearly doesn't have a writing problem, he has a THINKING problem.
And.. if a man can't come up with a written explanation for WHY he believes something, it's because he's operating on feelings...... like a female.
Let's see. 50 pages of guys beating each other up in sheer vitriol over an incident that they did not witness...and you say females operate on feelings? Not meant to hurt your feelers. Just simple observation.
Let's see. 50 pages of guys beating each other up in sheer vitriol over an incident that they did not witness...and you say females operate on feelings? Not meant to hurt your feelers. Just simple observation.
With Gene and the "ilk" collectively and without exception identifying the forum cops as a group in totality, there is no room in the discussion for varying degrees of response, common sense approaches to the situation, due process, facts, evidence, etc.
You either agree with the "ilk" or you don't.
And he's as much to blame with his broad brush as he makes the "forum cops" out to be.
Plain and simple.
Why do you care if guys on an internet forum speak their minds WHEN IT HAS NOT ONE DAMN THING TO DO WITH YOU PERSONALLY?
When I asked that earlier, you, or one of your "ilk" said if I didn't understand it already, it couldn't be explained to me.
IME, a man that can't write clearly doesn't have a writing problem, he has a THINKING problem.
And.. if a man can't come up with a written explanation for WHY he believes something, it's because he's operating on feelings...... like a female.
Let's see. 50 pages of guys beating each other up in sheer vitriol over an incident that they did not witness...and you say females operate on feelings? Not meant to hurt your feelers. Just simple observation.
Wrong.
Gene was a nasty, no good drunk that had his bell rung a few times by the authorities, he knows everything.
And Fecesneights went to band camp once, so he too is all knowing.
Let's see. 50 pages of guys beating each other up in sheer vitriol over an incident that they did not witness...and you say females operate on feelings? Not meant to hurt your feelers. Just simple observation.
This thread turned out as expected. An innocent man is killed by the cops and the usual low life scum aka campfire cops show up to put down anyone that doesn't say how awesome the cops are. After several days and countless denigrations of the victim, victims family and the victims supporters the campfire cu.nts/cops come back with what ifs and other red herrings but in a way indicating that they know they've dug themselves into a hole that their ego can't get them out of.
And you know for a fact Mr Yantis is absolutely innocent and the police guilty how?
[bleep] me i thought we still lived in America where people are innocent until PROVEN guilty.
Gene--Of course not. Nor do the mindless..."rest in peace brother" or "you're watch is done forever and I'm so sad" posts when a cop is killed. They don't wait for the facts they just feel an incosolable "fake" loss under the assumption he died while legally executing his duties. Even the fat fu.ckers that have a heart attack running from coffee shop to donut shop get the whole state sponsored funeral-stop traffic for another dead hero bull sh.it.
It sounds like the rancher was murdered to me but then I know what it is like when the press reports something. When I read what the press wrote about us when the SIL robbed banks. I did not even recognise the people they were reporting about. The out and out fabrications were almost funny and they never did report any truth. I also understand that among the thousands of great professional LEOs out there a few are bad eggs.
I will wait and see what happens before making any judgements.
I am pretty damned sick of all the name calling between Fire members. It does nothing for the innocent nor for the Fire. Different opinions don't have to end in name calling and slandering other's families.
Gene--Of course not. Nor do the mindless..."rest in peace brother" or "you're watch is done forever and I'm so sad" posts when a cop is killed. They don't wait for the facts they just feel an incosolable "fake" loss under the assumption he died while legally executing his duties. Even the fat fu.ckers that have a heart attack running from coffee shop to donut shop get the whole state sponsored funeral-stop traffic for another dead hero bull sh.it.
Holy schit!
Giving people grief over not waiting for the facts.
Gene--Of course not. Nor do the mindless..."rest in peace brother" or "you're watch is done forever and I'm so sad" posts when a cop is killed. They don't wait for the facts they just feel an incosolable "fake" loss under the assumption he died while legally executing his duties. Even the fat fu.ckers that have a heart attack running from coffee shop to donut shop get the whole state sponsored funeral-stop traffic for another dead hero bull sh.it.
Holy schit!
Giving people grief over not waiting for the facts.
It is an upside down world....
Pointing out the irony of your patience, Einstein.
De-escalate what situation? A car/cow wreck normally has nothing to "de-escalate".
Originally Posted by postoak
The Statesman also interviewed several family members, including Rowdy Paradis, a nephew of the couple’s who said he witnessed the shootings.
“Law enforcement should be trained to de-escalate situations,” said Rowdy Paradis. “In this case, I stood 10 feet away and watched two deputies escalate the situation and needlessly kill a man.”f
Of course. Something here was definitely different than the average cow/car wreck that these guys handle all the time. What was it? Did the deputies just get together at lunch and decide to kill the next guy they see? Did the cow farmer lose his mind over his prize bull? Was it just a tragic accident?
Not enough facts at this point to determine what happened and why, IMHO.
With absolutely no facts to support such an assumption........ I would bet good money that Yantis told the deputies exactly what he thought of their efforts to kill the injured bull.
He might well have called into question their manhood and their abilities as Peace Officers.
Such is likely the de-escalation referred to by the widow.
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
So what will be the ISP report when a link is provided?Will it be directly from the ISP headquarters or "reported" on a news station or the paper?
The 100% facts and nothing but the facts regardless of what others saw?
Let me leave you with an exert from the town meeting last night held by the Sheriff:
One man said many do not trust the police to do a truly independent investigation of Yantis’ death.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
Is this the same B Pierce from Payette Co, and whom writes for the major gun rags?
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
So what will be the ISP report when a link is provided?Will it be directly from the ISP headquarters or "reported" on a news station or the paper?
The 100% facts and nothing but the facts regardless of what others saw?
Let me leave you with an exert from the town meeting last night held by the Sheriff:
One man said many do not trust the police to do a truly independent investigation of Yantis’ death.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
Is this the same B Pierce from Payette Co, and whom writes for the major gun rags?
I was wondering the same thing regarding Mr. Pierce...
You put up links that are written by reporters. Duh!
So interviews or anything written in the paper or reported by a news station is meaningless even though it is the same from reporter to reporter.
So what will be the ISP report when a link is provided?Will it be directly from the ISP headquarters or "reported" on a news station or the paper?
The 100% facts and nothing but the facts regardless of what others saw?
Let me leave you with an exert from the town meeting last night held by the Sheriff:
One man said many do not trust the police to do a truly independent investigation of Yantis’ death.
“All of the investigation is under one roof of government,” Brian Pearce said. “You’re looking at a crowd that does not trust government on any level.”
Is this the same B Pierce from Payette Co, and whom writes for the major gun rags?
I was wondering the same thing regarding Mr. Pierce...
Yes. It's that Brian Pearce. Friend of mine. He has a ranch not far from there.
brian is kind of one of my heros. He actually answers back when you attempt to contact him on gun issues. I trust him implicitly on cast bullets and so on. He got a one of a kind elmer keith mould from a guy that use to post on here. If you talk to him, ask him about it sometime. Might surprise you.
brian is kind of one of my heros. He actually answers back when you attempt to contact him on gun issues. I trust him implicitly on cast bullets and so on. He got a one of a kind elmer keith mould from a guy that use to post on here. If you talk to him, ask him about it sometime. Might surprise you.
I can see where a huge some of money is offered to keep this from ever seeing a court house, I think Mr Spence will Prevent any settlement that is not monumental . And I hope that the Yantis family understands that no amount of money will ever bring a life back to those grand kids or the widow who now will grow old alone.
This is just going to be a huge loss for everyone involved, with no winners, just a big blemish on an American way of life.
If this has been asked somewheres already I apologize....
It seems established that the dispute revolved around Mr Yantis' intention to put down the bull with a firearm at that moment in time, over the objections of the officers working the scene.
If Mr. Yantis had indeed proceeded with this act, against specific instructions, what crime would he have been guilty of?
What lawful authority is extended to officers working an accident scene, how far does that authority extend, and what can they tell people to do or not to do?
I find so many things about this strange and if this little quote about how often police are actually held responsible for there actions,disturbing.
Law enforcement officers are brought before a jury in only 1.5% of officer-involved homicide cases. The eye witness testimony should be more than compelling enough for the officers involved to be tried in a courtroom. Law enforcement should be held to the same standards as the civilians they are sworn to serve and protect. No person is above the law. We want to see these officers tried before a jury as any civilian would be in the same circumstance. The innocence or guilt of these officers should be decided by a jury. This is the only way we see justice being served.
If this has been asked somewheres already I apologize....
It seems established that the dispute revolved around Mr Yantis' intention to put down the bull with a firearm at that moment in time, over the objections of the officers working the scene.
If Mr. Yantis had indeed proceeded with this act, against specific instructions, what crime would he have been guilty of?
What lawful authority is extended to officers working an accident scene, how far does that authority extend, and what can they tell people to do or not to do?
Thanks,
Birdwatcher
I haven't understood from any of the eyewitness accounts that there was much communication. Maybe I'm not remembering the last one I read-which was the best storyseemed like the most accurate. The bull had supposedly walked "home" which I assume was close since the cops were able to walk up and accost Yantis from behind. I'm not sure the bull was at the "scene" anymore. A bull could get out of my pasture right where I live on a major US highway, get hit and then wander or hobble back into my yard with the accident scene say, fifty yards away. If I had a skid steer out there and was fixing to shoot my bull I don't really know what business it would be of the cops anyway-which is kinda what this whole thing is about. I never read where they told him much of anything until they walked up and laid hands on him. Laying hands all authoritarian-like on a guy about to shoot a bull seems akin to stepping all puffed up in front of a moving vehicle. I guess a lot of folks just deserve to die.
I find so many things about this strange and if this little quote about how often police are actually held responsible for there actions,disturbing.
Law enforcement officers are brought before a jury in only 1.5% of officer-involved homicide cases. The eye witness testimony should be more than compelling enough for the officers involved to be tried in a courtroom. Law enforcement should be held to the same standards as the civilians they are sworn to serve and protect. No person is above the law. We want to see these officers tried before a jury as any civilian would be in the same circumstance. The innocence or guilt of these officers should be decided by a jury. This is the only way we see justice being served.
Uhhh...I'm pretty sure you have to be indicted before you are tried for a felony. Are you sure you want to do away with the Grand Jury system? I know it's all the rage right now in Ferguson, St.Louis and Baltimore.
Law enforcement officers are brought before a jury in only 1.5% of officer-involved homicide cases. The eye witness testimony should be more than compelling enough for the officers involved to be tried in a courtroom. Law enforcement should be held to the same standards as the civilians they are sworn to serve and protect. No person is above the law. We want to see these officers tried before a jury as any civilian would be in the same circumstance. The innocence or guilt of these officers should be decided by a jury. This is the only way we see justice being served.
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
'xcuse me? "Wouldn't allow it?" Are you his daddy?
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
Whose liability? Dam sure the ranchers property and open range is legal in Idaho. If not mistaken the autos are responsible for cattle they hit.
If I have been notified and am on the way no one has my permission to dispatch one of my animals. That us my call.
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
Whose liability? Dam sure the ranchers property and open range is legal in Idaho. If not mistaken the autos are responsible for cattle they hit.
If I have been notified and am on the way no one has my permission to dispatch one of my animals. That us my call.
I explained it back in the beginning pages of this thread, but if his shot were to go errant, and strike a bystander, that puts the liability on whichever agency controls the scene, has nothing to do with who owns the cow
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
Whose liability? Dam sure the ranchers property and open range is legal in Idaho. If not mistaken the autos are responsible for cattle they hit.
If I have been notified and am on the way no one has my permission to dispatch one of my animals. That us my call.
I explained it back in the beginning pages of this thread, but if his shot were to go errant, and strike a bystander, that puts the liability on whichever agency controls the scene, has nothing to do with who owns the cow
Your explaiation is BS, the multitude of shots fired by the deputies carries much greater risk of going errant. The rancher was a couple of feet behind the Bulls head not much chance of an errant shot especially with the fragile high velocity 204 bullets. The deputies were taking entirely too muck control in a free society.
Nth is was a rural setting near the ranchers drive way, explain the liability now?
If this has been asked somewheres already I apologize....
It seems established that the dispute revolved around Mr Yantis' intention to put down the bull with a firearm at that moment in time, over the objections of the officers working the scene.
If Mr. Yantis had indeed proceeded with this act, against specific instructions, what crime would he have been guilty of?
What lawful authority is extended to officers working an accident scene, how far does that authority extend, and what can they tell people to do or not to do?
Thanks,
Birdwatcher
It varies from State to State. In Texas, any "hazard" that requires emergency response involving a "highway, street, sidewalk, railway, waterway, elevator, aisle, hallway, entrance, or exit to which the public or a substantial group of the public has access, or any other place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances" requires that a person obey a "reasonable request or order to move issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace officer , a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of the premises".
The offense would be OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
In a nutshell, it means don't get in the middle of an cluster unless you are helping. I doubt this was an issue here and won't speculate what was.
If this has been asked somewheres already I apologize....
It seems established that the dispute revolved around Mr Yantis' intention to put down the bull with a firearm at that moment in time, over the objections of the officers working the scene.
If Mr. Yantis had indeed proceeded with this act, against specific instructions, what crime would he have been guilty of?
What lawful authority is extended to officers working an accident scene, how far does that authority extend, and what can they tell people to do or not to do?
Thanks,
Birdwatcher
It varies from State to State. In Texas, any "hazard" that requires emergency response involving a "highway, street, sidewalk, railway, waterway, elevator, aisle, hallway, entrance, or exit to which the public or a substantial group of the public has access, or any other place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances" requires that a person obey a "reasonable request or order to move issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace officer , a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of the premises".
The offense would be OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
In a nutshell, it means don't get in the middle of an cluster unless you are helping. I doubt this was an issue here and won't speculate what was.
If what is reported is accurate and I have no way of knowing for sure if it is or not. No way would I grab a man by the should to spin him around with his finger on the trigger. That appears to be the catalyst that set the done a road that should not have benn traveled.
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
They called Yantis to take care of the bull. "Taking care of the bull" means shooting it. Then the deputies took exception to him doing so.
I'll agree with jwp that all those shots already fired made for a helluva lot more liability than one quick one from a .204.
I am giving quotes and nothing but quotes..I have my personal opinion on this but I have not given it here.The whole thing is disturbing...
From the biker eye witness...
Obviously you do have a personal opinion, and it is very obvious, as they always are. I'm sure the ISP would love to talk to your witness. Do they have to go to New Orleans to interview him? That's where his Face Book account says he lives.
Nth is was a rural setting near the ranchers drive way, explain the liability now?
Do you really want an explanation, or just to talk?
Mr. Powell not a lot of people 360 degrees like in a city, plus rancher have much more experience putting down animals than do deputies. I am no stranger the the law enforcement rational, but in this case just don't buy it.
I'm sure the ISP would love to talk to your witness. Do they have to go to New Orleans to interview him? That's where his Face Book account says he lives.
I hope not.
This is taking forever.
Maybe ISP will just cut and paste his Facebook posts into the report?
Nth is was a rural setting near the ranchers drive way, explain the liability now?
Do you really want an explanation, or just to talk?
Mr. Powell not a lot of people 360 degrees like in a city, plus rancher have much more experience putting down animals than do deputies. I am no stranger the the law enforcement rational, but in this case just don't buy it.
I'm sure the ISP would love to talk to your witness. Do they have to go to New Orleans to interview him? That's where his Face Book account says he lives.
I hope not.
This is taking forever.
Maybe ISP will just cut and paste his Facebook posts into the report?
I hope that works. I will take a long time for them to interview all these witnesses that live thousands of miles away.
Nth is was a rural setting near the ranchers drive way, explain the liability now?
Do you really want an explanation, or just to talk?
Mr. Powell not a lot of people 360 degrees like in a city, plus rancher have much more experience putting down animals than do deputies. I am no stranger the the law enforcement rational, but in this case just don't buy it.
Buy what?
You know what, you are an intellegent individual.
If one of the deputies would have put one round into the face plate and into the Brian cavity with handgun or 223 all would have been fine. But their lack of knowledge and experience in what needed to be done created a far greater liability.
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
Whose liability? Dam sure the ranchers property and open range is legal in Idaho. If not mistaken the autos are responsible for cattle they hit.
If I have been notified and am on the way no one has my permission to dispatch one of my animals. That us my call.
I explained it back in the beginning pages of this thread, but if his shot were to go errant, and strike a bystander, that puts the liability on whichever agency controls the scene, has nothing to do with who owns the cow
Your explaiation is BS, the multitude of shots fired by the deputies carries much greater risk of going errant. The rancher was a couple of feet behind the Bulls head not much chance of an errant shot especially with the fragile high velocity 204 bullets. The deputies were taking entirely too muck control in a free society.
You explain that in a civil trial the ...the fact is the scene belongs to LE fire/ems those are the entities that will be held liable
You explain that in a civil trial the ...the fact is the scene belongs to LE fire/ems those are the entities that will be held liable
Therein lies much of the problem. Had the deputies allowed the rancher to take care of this there would be no one dead and no civil suit, but now you have both.
Thank god that where I live the own is allowed to deal with his animal without LEO trying to take over when they are not the. Ones that own the livestock.
Your explaiation is BS, the multitude of shots fired by the deputies carries much greater risk of going errant. The rancher was a couple of feet behind the Bulls head not much chance of an errant shot especially with the fragile high velocity 204 bullets. The deputies were taking entirely too muck control in a free society.
Spot on, not to mention the barrage of gunfire on the bull ending in a belly wound.....Ouch...
If one of the deputies would have put one round into the face plate and into the Brian cavity with handgun or 223 all would have been fine. But their lack of knowledge and experience in what needed to be done created a far greater liability.
What do you know about their knowledge and experience?
Dispatch called the ranch, he was on his way. Officers should have waited for the ranch to dispatch the bull IMHO. The bull was the property of the rancher and a bull with broken legs ain't capable of much of a charge IMHO.
Hope the results of the investigation and the forensic evidence are released shortly.
I don't know how it works in Idaho, but here we very likely wouldn't allow it simply due to liability reasons
'xcuse me? "Wouldn't allow it?" Are you his daddy?
That's the problem I have with cops, "we control you, we are your boss"
I understand that here on the 'fire forum we are supposed to disregard all the witness accounts until the Idaho State Police [who weren't at the scene of the shooting] informs us of who actually saw what they think they saw, but, on the off chance that some witnesses can be believed, THIS seems to be the sequence of the bull's actions:
Bull is hit by a car not far from his owner's home.One hind leg is broken.
Bull hobbles back toward his owner's house and lays down at the roadside.
While the owner, in response to a request from the S.O., is making preparation to dispatch the bull and butcher him, the deputies approach the bull and start shooting him, putting him on the prod, and he goes back toward the car that hit him.
Among the shots fired by the Deputies are some that break the bull's good leg, putting him down in the highway, not far from the car.
IF this account of the bull's actions is factual, the human actor's responses become somewhat predictable.
The bull was un-biased as far as cops are concerned.
There are so many disturbing things that happened that night it is hard to pick just one of them as being the reason for this madness...
The part that disturbs me the most after all is said and done is that there is absolutely no mention of medical aid being given to Jack Yantis after being shot multiple times.That is disturbing..
There are so many disturbing things that happened that night it is hard to pick just one of them as being the reason for this madness...
The part that disturbs me the most after all is said and done is that there is absolutely no mention of medical aid being given to Jack Yantis after being shot multiple times.That is disturbing..
Could one of the reasons they handcuffed his wife have been to prevent her from administering first aid?
I repeat. The authorities called Jack to take care of his bull and then killed him when he attempted to do what they requested.
There are so many disturbing things that happened that night it is hard to pick just one of them as being the reason for this madness...
The part that disturbs me the most after all is said and done is that there is absolutely no mention of medical aid being given to Jack Yantis after being shot multiple times.That is disturbing..
Could one of the reasons they handcuffed his wife have been to prevent her from administering first aid?
I repeat. The authorities called Jack to take care of his bull and then killed him when he attempted to do what they requested.
Seriously?
Are you pushing the "organized tyranny" angle or "dicks with a badge" angle?
Could one of the reasons they handcuffed his wife have been to prevent her from administering first aid?
It is disturbing to think that is possible,unlikely but possible.I'm not sure the lead deputy had 100% control of his brain at the time of the incident.Some bizarre things happened within just a few minutes with decisions that are not seen as the norm.
Somehow it went from a rancher being called from dispatch to take care of his bull, to a rancher/his wife and nephew being treated as a threat to the officers and inappropriate actions by the cops took over.
Well I may as well get in on the act and post something really relevant to the original post.
Today I ordered a bottle of Hennessy xo cognac from the local store and the bloody thing will be here on Monday...at the God-almighty price of $241.00 Aust...for you yanks that is currently about 27 cents US.
The last time I ordered a bottle was in the eighties and the damn thing only cost $78.00.
Oh, and the other night a local fellow died in a house fire about 200 yards from my door, the screams were unpleasant to hear and I am sorry he went that way as he was not a bad sort of fellow...actually, he was one of those inoffensive sort of fellows that pretty much got along with everyone.
".the fact is the scene belongs to LE fire/ems those are the entities that will be held liable"
Glad to have you on "OUR" side in the discussion.
It has nothing to do with sides.
The scene control issues has to do with scene integrity and evidence protection.
As far as the claims of medical attention being denied, does anyone know how many medics were on scene, and if at the time of the shooting they were attending to the accident victims?
Somehow it went from a rancher being called from dispatch to take care of his bull, to a rancher/his wife and nephew being treated as a threat to the officers and inappropriate actions by the cops took over.
Or could be ole Yantis was half a bottle in when he showed up on scene and started acting a fool and things went down hill from there. We can all guess....
As far as the claims of medical attention being denied, does anyone know how many medics were on scene, and if at the time of the shooting they were attending to the accident victims?
Many times EMT's go to the scene in there personal rigs while the ambulance waits for the the EMT's to get there so there is no way to know exactly how many trained EMT's were there.There were 2 ambulances on scene..There also was extrication which can be either specially trained EMT's or specially trained fire dept.
The officers alone should have had at a minimum,a certification in first aid requirement.There was know shortage of medically capable people on scene yet there is know mention of "any"aid being given to Jack other than his wife who was thrown to the ground and handcuffed.
I can see why know one else jumped in to try and help him!
Somehow it went from a rancher being called from dispatch to take care of his bull, to a rancher/his wife and nephew being treated as a threat to the officers and inappropriate actions by the cops took over.
Or could be ole Yantis was half a bottle in when he showed up on scene and started acting a fool and things went down hill from there. We can all guess....
I'd rather be guilty of falsely accusing two live deputies than to BE guilty of slandering a dead man.
As I've said many times; We learn little from these threads other than about our fellow members.".
OK guys put yourself at the scene from what has been posted so far and the news accounts. You have a car with people trapped in the middle of the road. 2 LEO's and EMP on the scene plus several more witnesses and lookers. You have a mad bull that is coming towards the area again. This bull is hurting and going to hurt something. He's not in a squeeze shoot, not chained or anything. The bull is wandering around and mad. He's coming back into the area. You have many people in the area, you have two trapped, very injured people in a car on the road. What are you going to do? Well some say they are going to walk up to this bull and shoot him in the head, up close to this mad bull that is 100% loose in the open. Hurt but moving towards the group on the hwy. What's your decision making process going to be? You going to walk up to within 2 feet and place a weapon near the bulls head, hey this bull is able to move. Could injury or kill you. What are you going to do? You guys do that with moving, kicking wild animals? Moving is the important part. By the time the rancher got there, the bull was down, easy to move in close and shoot him. All the deputies wanted to do was to stop the bull, they did. From that point on, I'll have to wait on the answers from the LEO side. Then we can take the news, witnesses and Leo sides to see which way we fall.
Somehow it went from a rancher being called from dispatch to take care of his bull, to a rancher/his wife and nephew being treated as a threat to the officers and inappropriate actions by the cops took over.
Or could be ole Yantis was half a bottle in when he showed up on scene and started acting a fool and things went down hill from there. We can all guess....
I'd rather be guilty of falsely accusing two live deputies than to BE guilty of slandering a dead man.
As I've said many times; We learn little from these threads other than about our fellow members.".
I'd rather have facts before passing judgment, but apparently that's not how the Campfire Court works, so I'll guess right along with everyone else.
I called my buddy, Brian Pearce that was quoted in the news story. (Yes, he is THAT Brian Pearce.)
We had a very long, candid conversation about this, and what measures are being taken by the sheriff.
We pretty much agree that the facts of the investigation have are not known at this time, but from accounts coming from people that were on the scene, the sheriff needs to be more forthcoming about some things.
A small county and it's citizens have lots of concerns and questions right now. They are not getting any answers whatsoever. That needs to change. It needs to change on the local and the state level.
The citizens that have entrusted public office to the sheriff and state police should come first. Priority one. Always.
With questions being asked, and no answers coming back to them, it appears that those priorities have shifted.
I too feel that the sheriff can make some information avl. to calm the concerns of the people and address the issues at hand... without compromising the investigation.
Right, wrong, or somewhere in between isn't so much the issue right now. The public needs to know that they can trust certain levels of government to do the lawful and right thing. People in that community don't have that trust right now.
As far as the claims of medical attention being denied, does anyone know how many medics were on scene, and if at the time of the shooting they were attending to the accident victims?
Many times EMT's go to the scene in there personal rigs while the ambulance waits for the the EMT's to get there so there is no way to know exactly how many trained EMT's were there.There were 2 ambulances on scene..There also was extrication which can be either specially trained EMT's or specially trained fire dept.
The officers alone should have had at a minimum,a certification in first aid requirement.There was know shortage of medically capable people on scene yet there is know mention of "any"aid being given to Jack other than his wife who was thrown to the ground and handcuffed.
I can see why know one else jumped in to try and help him!
What kind of medical treatment do you give a dead man
but from accounts coming from people that were on the scene, the sheriff needs to be more forthcoming about some things.
That's it right there.He knows stuff but is playing dumb.There were EMT's and fire that was on scene also,all volunteers with there versions they saw, leaking out slowly in the community.One picture of the scene shows some of the local ems/fire right there.
The sheriff is fooling know one and why some walked out of the meeting.
As far as the claims of medical attention being denied, does anyone know how many medics were on scene, and if at the time of the shooting they were attending to the accident victims?
Many times EMT's go to the scene in there personal rigs while the ambulance waits for the the EMT's to get there so there is no way to know exactly how many trained EMT's were there.There were 2 ambulances on scene..There also was extrication which can be either specially trained EMT's or specially trained fire dept.
The officers alone should have had at a minimum,a certification in first aid requirement.There was know shortage of medically capable people on scene yet there is know mention of "any"aid being given to Jack other than his wife who was thrown to the ground and handcuffed.
I can see why know one else jumped in to try and help him!
What kind of medical treatment do you give a dead man
If as claimed he was not attended, then no one knows if he was already dead or died from lack of attention.
What kind of medical treatment do you give a dead man
Were they qualified to pronounce him dead?"NO"That is why only a few have the qualifications to make that call.Ever heard of the so called not breathing dead man scaring the hell out of the coroner...It happens and one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
The Sheriff apparently overlooks the big picture in this deal. He has THAT in common with the cop-crowd here.
Granted, we all are due the presumption of innocence.
But what happens when a citizen kills someone? Where is the burden of proof?
He IS "guilty" of homicide by virtue of killing a human.
To avoid being found guilty of manslaughter or murder, he must prove it was "justified". In part, at least, his "proof" is his statements to investigators.
If one considers how an ordinary citizen is treated after shooting someone, and contrasts it with how these deputies are being treated, it's easy to conclude that, in practice, the burden of proof shifts according to one's employment.
The Authorities in this instance give credibility to that conclusion. Especially the Sheriff.
As much as I hate to agree with gitem on anything she is sorta kinda right as far as EMTs go. If the crew, let's assume 6, are involved in the extrication and treatment of the Subaru occupants they would be derelict in their duties to leave those patients to treat Mr.Yantis. If the patients were packaged for transport/airlift it's possible that at that point a couple of them could be freed up to the attend to Jack. The rules of triage would dictate that treatment of the living but critically injured comes before virtually all other injuries. I don't know what staffing the fire department has there but the delay in treatment could have been the amount of time it took to tone out another rig. I imagine a small fire department would have been up to their as.ses in alligators treating the injured on scene and setting up an LZ Our department required a minimum of 2 engines with lines extended for an LZ.
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
You sure about that?
that is exactly the way it was for me. I remember a friend getting a welfare check in the middle of the winter call. Real cold out. He goes up looks in the window, and says their dead. Dispatcher aware of the rules regarding coroner, said are you sure? He radio's back and says, yeah i am sure, i am watching flies crawl in and out of their nose. Keep in mind scanners. The calls to the sheriff started immediately.
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
If anyone even thought Jack was alive they would have shot him a couple more times, just to be safe.
right.
Any 62 year old man that takes 5 rounds to the chest from 10 feet must be a BMF and no one to take a chance with, I'm surprised that a round to the fore head was not needed to guarantee the officers safety in this situation.
one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
You sure about that?
Yes and a city police officer cannot arrest a county sheriff.Saw them try in McCall Idaho.What a stand off and joke as they tried to arrest the sheriff coming out of a pub there.The coroner has powers I never realized.
The politics of it all is amazing..My ex was head EMS in McCall and my son is a first responder/fire here..Some of the legalities of some situations are just crazy.
Joe Blow the deputy cannot pronounce someone dead in Idaho hell,he can't even put down a deer without fsih and games approval!
one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
You sure about that?
that is exactly the way it was for me. I remember a friend getting a welfare check in the middle of the winter call. Real cold out. He goes up looks in the window, and says their dead. Dispatcher aware of the rules regarding coroner, said are you sure? He radio's back and says, yeah i am sure, i am watching flies crawl in and out of their nose. Keep in mind scanners. The calls to the sheriff started immediately.
one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
You sure about that?
Yes and a city police officer cannot arrest a county sheriff.Saw them try in McCall Idaho.What a stand off and joke as they tried to arrest the sheriff coming out of a pub there.The coroner has powers I never realized.
The politics of it all is amazing..My ex was head EMS in McCall and my son is a first responder/fire here..Some of the legalities of some situations are just crazy.
Joe Blow the deputy cannot pronounce someone dead in Idaho!
What kind of medical treatment do you give a dead man
Were they qualified to pronounce him dead?"NO"That is why only a few have the qualifications to make that call.Ever heard of the so called not breathing dead man scaring the hell out of the coroner...It happens and one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
Neat story, but they can use obvious signs to determine whether treatment t is warranted... that has nothing to do with officially calling the death
Find a medic who has been doing the job more than 6 months who would see a body lying on the ground with a whole family of bullet holes in his chest, eyes staring off into space and mouth gaped open that is gonna say..." hey guys this one needs CPR"...
What kind of medical treatment do you give a dead man
Were they qualified to pronounce him dead?"NO"That is why only a few have the qualifications to make that call.Ever heard of the so called not breathing dead man scaring the hell out of the coroner...It happens and one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
A close friend got lit up by about a half dozen cops. I mean LIT UP. I bet he had 10+ holes in him in a few seconds. Both pistol and rifle.
They immediately started CPR and then the ambulance fellas took over. They worked on him for probably ten minutes.
Why? I dunno, most of his lungs and heart poured out onto the black top, but they did.
Besides the wife and nephew, how many civilians are claiming they had eyes on the rancher at the very moment he was shot?
Call the Sheriff and ask him.
Most people were probably focused on the car. Ain't every day that you get to see that "Jaws of life" operation.
Now, if there was this big confrontation between the cops and Mr. Yantis, some would look that way and be positioned to observe the killing.
But if some of the witnesses are telling the truth about no words being exchanged between the victim and his killers, there may not be many that actually saw it. Most of them would be the ones who were members of the Yantis party.
BTW, "victim and his killers" are perfectly appropriate technical words.
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
slapping is a serious charge?
There's a pretty good chance that if the kid had slapped the cop the way the cop slapped him, the cop would have pulled his weapon and killed him. You can assess the seriousness of the situation yourself.
I wasn't trying to be a smartass. It's just that over the course of this thread, concern has shifted to the lack of transparency on the part of the authorities.
Neat story, but they can use obvious signs to determine whether treatment t is warranted.
It's not there call..Period..Maybe where you live but not here!
Since you like my sttories here is another that just happened up the clearwater river above Headquarters at a forest service work station in the boonies..
The call came in to the EMT's..They arrived and the victim appeared to be dead and radioed for advice on procedure.First reply was start protocol life saving techniques etc then the supervisor contacted an MD in Orofino and they did the check list of determining if he was dead via radio..Once and only once they went through the steps provided by the MD were they able to stop life saving efforts and even then,the victom was not pronounced dead until at the hospital..
So,the deputies on scene had the obligation to proceed with life saving techniques until a qualified person could make the call..They did not do that as they did not put the bull out of commission to stop suffering...
Jack and the bull lied there dieing on the pavement without any effort to save Jack or euthanize(the bull) even though it was requested by the family/owners .
Neat story, but they can use obvious signs to determine whether treatment t is warranted.
It's not there call..Period..Maybe where you live but not here!
Since you like my sttories here is another that just happened up the clearwater river above Headquarters at a forest service work station in the boonies..
The call came in to the EMT's..They arrived and the victim appeared to be dead and radioed for advice on procedure.First reply was start protocol life saving techniques etc then the supervisor contacted an MD in Orofino and they did the check list of determining if he was dead via radio..Once and only once they went through the steps provided by the MD were they able to stop life saving efforts and even then,the victom was not pronounced dead until at the hospital..
So,the deputies on scene had the obligation to proceed with life saving techniques until a qualified person could make the call..They did not do that as they did not put the bull out of commission to stop suffering...
Jack and the bull lied there dieing on the pavement without any effort to save Jack or euthanize(the bull) even though it was requested by the family/owners .
The differences is they called ad were doing as instructed by medical command.
So your telling me EMT'S and medics start CPR on decapitation patients from MVAS in idaho?
...concern has shifted to the lack of transparency on the part of the authorities...
This lack of transparency is an epidemic in not just LE, but all of .gov. Along with outright misinformation and covering up, it is what we have come to expect. Unlike justice.
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
slapping is a serious charge?
There's a pretty good chance that if the kid had slapped the cop the way the cop slapped him, the cop would have pulled his weapon and killed him. You can assess the seriousness of the situation yourself.
you are basing this on:
1) your prior history of slapping cops and getting shot 2) your prior history of being a cop getting slapped 3) direct observation of cops getting slapped 4) videos on the 24hcf of cops getting slapped 5) swag.
seriously, assaulting an officer is a misdemeanor in many localities. It exists because sometimes, attempted murder doesn't fit the scenario....
And, believe it or not, assaulting an officer charges far out number officer involved shootings in the real, non-campfire-internet-police-tyranny world.
but we digress on tangents aimed to incite a response again.
Who needs conjecture as long as we can point out all sorts of other events that aren't germane.
So your telling me EMT'S and medics start CPR on decapitation patients from MVAS in idaho?
Jack wasn't decapitated..Irrelevant!
Completely relavent.. as you have stated. Only docs and coroner's can pronounce. Therefore, you are in deface stating that every patient must be treated irregardless of obvious observances
Obviously, TRH has as much right to comment on the video as someone did in posting it.
But it does take the thread off track. That's what makes it difficult to discuss a particular example of potential LEO wrongdoing into the agenda driven "us vs. them" debates of police actions.
So... all of "us" on this thread are lumped in with TRH, and all of "Y'all" are lumped in with Gitem and DINK.
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
slapping is a serious charge?
There's a pretty good chance that if the kid had slapped the cop the way the cop slapped him, the cop would have pulled his weapon and killed him. You can assess the seriousness of the situation yourself.
But it does take the thread off track. That's what makes it difficult to discuss a particular example of potential LEO wrongdoing into the agenda driven "us vs. them" debates of police actions.
Even on track and content specific, you yourself have illiterated the future responses of campfire cops as robotic and other phrases.
Completely relavent.. as you have stated. Only docs and coroner's can pronounce. Therefore, you are in deface stating that every patient must be treated irregardless of obvious observances
It is not relevant because Jack was not decapitated.
Obvious to whom,that one deputy in charge?He may have thought at that time he was god but he wasn't and "Did Not" have the right to withhold medical attention to Jack or anyone or anything!
There was an abundance of medical people there and one in the car got out on his own,the other had to be cut out.Both aware and talking...
This was a cop grabbing a guy from behind with a loaded weapon ready to fire..Nothing but bad can come from that and he should have known that but he 'da man with the.. it's my way or the highway attitude..
I'll bet he wished he had it all to do over again now..He just plain phuucked up and he knows it...Why do you think they took him out of the county for protection and not the other deputy?????
Since more cops are supposed to be good than bad, why didn't the other cop on the scene immediately arrest that slapping cop on multiple serious charges?
slapping is a serious charge?
There's a pretty good chance that if the kid had slapped the cop the way the cop slapped him, the cop would have pulled his weapon and killed him. You can assess the seriousness of the situation yourself.
It is assault and battery and can be a felony.
It certainly could be. Could also be a lot less.
I've had to entertain a lot of people that were simply pissed and took a swing at me - some even hit me.
But in my heart of hearts I judged their intent to be minor. Why would I charge them with a felony, or shoot them?
A close friend got lit up by about a half dozen cops. I mean LIT UP. I bet he had 10+ holes in him in a few seconds. Both pistol and rifle.
They immediately started CPR and then the ambulance fellas took over. They worked on him for probably ten minutes.
Why? I dunno, most of his lungs and heart poured out onto the black top, but they did.
Protocol...Something this deputy did not follow and we will never know if Jack had a chance to survive,thanks to Barney Fife.Crazier things have happened!
So,the deputies on scene had the obligation to proceed with life saving techniques until a qualified person could make the call..They did not do that as they did not put the bull out of commission to stop suffering...
I'd question that assumption... EMT personnel are not law enforcement officers, and if the local law sees or perceives a threat to others can withhold access to any injured until that threat is removed (in this case I'd say the bull).
one reason just anybody can't make that call including officers and EMT's.An MD or the coroner can not a sheriffs deputy.
You sure about that?
that is exactly the way it was for me. I remember a friend getting a welfare check in the middle of the winter call. Real cold out. He goes up looks in the window, and says their dead. Dispatcher aware of the rules regarding coroner, said are you sure? He radio's back and says, yeah i am sure, i am watching flies crawl in and out of their nose. Keep in mind scanners. The calls to the sheriff started immediately.
Fictional John Wayne character is debating whether he can be my son, and you are busting my spell checker.
Glad you guys are on the ball here.
You think a lot of things are funny which few here share your enthusiasm for. I'm not a fictional John Wayne character anymore than Curdog is a talking canine. They're called "handles" son, and I'm not debating you, I'm informing you. I don't know what you think you're doing and I doubt you do either.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
Don't be cute Ethan, you started that "son" crap...and it is extremely rude to use it on another grown man.
Were the two of you standing in front of me when you did it and he started to kick you to death I would consider it to be your fault.
RWE routinely doesn't act like a grown up and he's young enough to be my son. I didn't say it rudely nor was I being cute. You're an Australian subject and not a free man so your opinion has no meaning here. Thanks for sharing though.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
Can I, here in NH, "declare" a subject deceased? No. Can I look at a subject an say "George, that guy is clearly dead" and not render aid? Absolutely. In the latter example, did I declare him dead? Sure, just not officially. In the prior "lit up, lungs leaking on the pavement" example, I'd likely render aid if it was my shoot so as not to be hung "here" and in the Court of public opinion. If I roll up on it.......I'll play it as I see it in person.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
I'm not sure I'd argue in favor of that.....
I'm not arguing. It's a known fact. If some dude breaks into your house and is raping your wife and you shoot him, you are supposed to render aid if he's not dead. Of course, if you're busy aiding your wife or if he still poses a threat to you, were you to help him, no such obligation exists. Feel free to disbelieve me and seek other sources of wisdom on this though.
Can I, here in NH, "declare" a subject deceased? No. Can I look at a subject an say "George, that guy is clearly dead" and not render aid? Absolutely. In the latter example, did I declare him dead? Sure, just not officially. In the prior "lit up, lungs leaking on the pavement" example, I'd likely render aid if it was my shoot so as not to be hung "here" and in the Court of public opinion. If I roll up on it.......I'll play it as I see it in person.
I can't speak for anybody else but I'm not arguing about rendering aid to a clearly dead man. There has been some discussion that he wasn't dead though and that's a different story. I'm not one of the ones arguing about "declared dead" vs. drt.
It also comes into play when they had to have known that they had just shot a guy who posed no threat other than evidently his gun accidentally discharged when they manhandled him. Admittedly a lot of unknowns here but things ain't looking good for the boys in blue.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
I'm not sure I'd argue in favor of that.....
I'm not arguing. It's a known fact. If some dude breaks into your house and is raping your wife and you shoot him, you are supposed to render aid if he's not dead. Of course, if you're busy aiding your wife or if he still poses a threat to you, were you to help him, no such obligation exists. Feel free to disbelieve me and seek other sources of wisdom on this though.
I said I'm not sure I'd argue in favor of that.... What a person in some cases is supposed to do and what I'd argue for them doing may be completely different.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
That's right..Each of the deputies were required to have a first aid card that included CPR certification!
Don't be cute Ethan, you started that "son" crap...and it is extremely rude to use it on another grown man.
Were the two of you standing in front of me when you did it and he started to kick you to death I would consider it to be your fault.
RWE routinely doesn't act like a grown up and he's young enough to be my son. I didn't say it rudely nor was I being cute. You're an Australian subject and not a free man so your opinion has no meaning here. Thanks for sharing though.
I guess advocating due process, and informed decision making renders me not a grown up?
Apparently I don't act like your idea of a cop, at least, when I used to be a cop.
Probably don't act like your idea of a soldier, when I was in the military, and based on some of your blather, I don't act like your idea of a EMS person, when I did that as well.
Maybe, just maybe, its your ideas that are [bleep] up like a soup sandwich, and not the way I act?
Completely relavent.. as you have stated. Only docs and coroner's can pronounce. Therefore, you are in deface stating that every patient must be treated irregardless of obvious observances
It is not relevant because Jack was not decapitated.
Obvious to whom,that one deputy in charge?He may have thought at that time he was god but he wasn't and "Did Not" have the right to withhold medical attention to Jack or anyone or anything!
There was an abundance of medical people there and one in the car got out on his own,the other had to be cut out.Both aware and talking...
This was a cop grabbing a guy from behind with a loaded weapon ready to fire..Nothing but bad can come from that and he should have known that but he 'da man with the.. it's my way or the highway attitude..
I'll bet he wished he had it all to do over again now..He just plain phuucked up and he knows it...Why do you think they took him out of the county for protection and not the other deputy?????
1) it is relevant....its just apparently above your intelligence
A) it would likely be obvious to any medically trained first responder that he was expired, especially if an FR bent down and said he has no pulse,
2) do you have proof they withheld medical attention
3) you stated in an earlier post that there was no way to know how many medical personnel were on scene, yet now you state there was an abundance of them....which is it?
lol.... After some of your posts there may be several people willing to aid RWE in case his leg gets tired....
Really? Have I insulted you in some way? It's common in Kansas to use the term "son" on somebody who is your junior. I don't recall insulting anybody on this thread but maybe I did. I don't ever recall insulting you or really talking to you much in any form, which is unlikely to change given your saying something like that. Actually for the type of topic, this thread has been fairly amicable other than one or two guys.
You're an Australian subject and not a free man so your opinion has no meaning here. Thanks for sharing though.
Ethan:
We have an Australian forum here on the 'Fire, and were you adventurous enough to ever post on it, I doubt the Aussie members there would treat you with the same degree of arrogant pride that you've displayed here. Unless you were to provoke it, which seems more and more likely.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
That's right..Each of the deputies were required to have a first aid card that included CPR certification!
Interesting...... Regional differences.
I haven't been CPR certified in years. I've never held any "first aid card".
I guess advocating due process, and informed decision making renders me not a grown up?
Apparently I don't act like your idea of a cop, at least, when I used to be a cop.
Probably don't act like your idea of a soldier, when I was in the military, and based on some of your blather, I don't act like your idea of a EMS person, when I did that as well.
Maybe, just maybe, its your ideas that are [bleep] up like a soup sandwich, and not the way I act?
lol
I wouldn't have known you had been a cop or a soldier had you not mentioned both in the past couple of days.
Going on avatars, handles and what-have-you, I thought you were an ancient Greek warrior or a possum.
You're an Australian subject and not a free man so your opinion has no meaning here. Thanks for sharing though.
Ethan:
We have an Australian forum here on the 'Fire, and were you adventurous enough to ever post on it, I doubt the Aussie members there would treat you with the same degree of arrogant pride that you've displayed here. Unless you were to provoke it, which seems more and more likely.
You, RWE and Stuart can continue making this thread about yourselves and your own drama if you want to, but it's not about your idea of manners or Stuart trying to pick fights, which is his normal mode. It's about a guy being shot to death for apparently no good reason and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
1) it is relevant....its just apparently above your intelligence
A) it would likely be obvious to any medically trained first responder that he was expired, especially if an FR bent down and said he has no pulse,
2) do you have proof they withheld medical attention
3) you stated in an earlier post that there was no way to know how many medical personnel were on scene, yet now you state there was an abundance of them....which is it?
1-It is not relevant..As a first responder you have the obligation to follow protocol aka the rules.There is no place in the rules that say's you have the right to wing it and "assume" anything and even if at first try he has no pulse it is your duty as a first responder to try and resuscitate him..See I said that without childish insults..Try it.
2-Yes-The wife ran to aid the injured and was thrown to the ground and cuffed as was the nephew and with both deputies being certified in CPR and carried a medical card they did not give him medical help.That is withholding...
3-Lets see..know one knows how many EMT's showed up in there personal rigs but there were two ambulances on scene and the fire department..Your guess is as good as mine but that would mean an abundance to me with the other injured alive and talking.Jack not so much..
and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
like due process
Ask Jack Yantis about Due Process. Or ask his wife if she's out of the hospital.
And the people responsible for these acts are not entitled to due process?
Surely, you think so, and I'll acknowledge your right to indict the entire "industry", and you can acknowledge my right to say your a fool for doing so.
You, RWE and Stuart can continue making this thread about yourselves and your own drama if you want to, but it's not about your idea of manners or Stuart trying to pick fights, which is his normal mode. It's about a guy being shot to death for apparently no good reason and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay.
But you go right ahead and spruik to all and sundry.
added; And that goes for those on both sides of the argument.
and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
like due process
Ask Jack Yantis about Due Process. Or ask his wife if she's out of the hospital.
And the people responsible for these acts are not entitled to due process?
Surely, you think so, and I'll acknowledge your right to indict the entire "industry", and you can acknowledge my right to say your a fool for doing so.
You, RWE and Stuart can continue making this thread about yourselves and your own drama if you want to, but it's not about your idea of manners or Stuart trying to pick fights, which is his normal mode. It's about a guy being shot to death for apparently no good reason and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay.
But you go right ahead and spruik to all and sundry.
It's not about you or your pet Kangaroo regardless of how much you want it to be.
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
That's right..Each of the deputies were required to have a first aid card that included CPR certification!
Interesting...... Regional differences.
I haven't been CPR certified in years. I've never held any "first aid card".
Yeah regional differences. Here you have to have first aid and CPR to be a cop. Of the thousands of calls I can't remember one where a cop rendered aid. That's not an indictment as they were dealing with their own responsibilities. Not to mention our response times usually precluded the need for them to wade into unfamiliar territory.
In Washington we have the "Good Samaritan" law that doesn't require a citizen to render aid But if they do render aid they cannot be sued regardless of what they do or don't do. Outside of brain surgery.
You, RWE and Stuart can continue making this thread about yourselves and your own drama if you want to, but it's not about your idea of manners or Stuart trying to pick fights, which is his normal mode. It's about a guy being shot to death for apparently no good reason and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay.
But you go right ahead and spruik to all and sundry.
It's not about you or your pet Kangaroo regardless of how much you want it to be.
Yeah regional differences. Here you have to have first aid and CPR to be a cop
It's that way here also..I asked why for the officers and volunteer fire out of curiosity and was told it was for the ability to stabilize until medical help arrives.The ambulance rolls with fire on major fires.
It makes sense with police often being first on scene.
'Left for dead like common roadkill': Yantis family look for answers
By Rachel Bjornestad Published: Nov 11, 2015 at 1:54 AM MST Last Updated: Nov 11, 2015 at 6:09 AM MST
COUNCIL, Idaho (KBOI) -- THe family of a rancher who was shot and killed in Council told their side of the story Tuesday.
And although details about the shooting are still unclear, Jack Yantis' daughter Sarah was adamant that her father was murdered by Adam County deputies.
And they want to see justice.
"This is the exact spot where my dad Jack Yantis was brutally gunned down and murdered by the Adams County deputies," Sarah Yantis said.
"Though it has been washed twice, and it rained for a night and a day, his blood still remains here on the road. I believe this is where his blood is going to stay until he receives justice for the tragic and needless murder."
Concerned locals packed the Council Valley Assembly of God Tuesday night to hear from the Adams County Sheriff.
"The reason we held this meeting was to get some information out to the public," Sheriff Ryan Zollman said. "To try to explain to them to the best of our ability what we are going through right now."
The community hoped for more information about the officer-involved shooting that killed Jack Yantis, a long-time rancher and resident of Council. Members of the Yantis family were also in attendance.
Some at the meeting were frustrated by what they saw as Zollman’s inability to answer many of their questions, since the Idaho Attorney General has taken over the investigation.
He confirmed that deputies in the area are issued body cameras, but he did not know if they were recording during the shooting. Zollman said he would not release the identities of the deputies for safety reasons.
With so much uncertainty surrounding the shooting, some left the meeting with more questions than answers.
“I would like to know exactly what led up to the incident itself, and that's not what is being told right now because it's under investigation,” Shirley Halsey, a Council resident said.
Meanwhile, Sheriff Zollman and his family have received death threats. "My three small children are very upset,” he said. “This is going to change our lives forever."
Zollman said he would not resign if the deputies were charged and convicted of a crime, because he is committed to serving the people who elected him.
The family of Jack Yantis has accused the deputies involved of murdering Jack. They released a statement earlier on Tuesday regarding the incident.
Here's the remaining statement read by Sarah Yantis:
"My father did not receive any care, including medical care, prior to my arrival," she continued. "And he was shot and left for dead like common roadkill. At the same time, the bull was left to suffer and bleed out inhumanely. When asked to put it down, they would not do it.
"While my father's blood stains this pavement, the officers that murdered him are on paid leave. What has America come to? It's no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave."
Most or a lot of our volunteers are EMTs but at the very least First Responder certified. All full time firefighters have to be EMTs by graduation from the academy. Many departments require you're an EMT as part of the application requirements. A way of early vetting and getting a smaller applicant group
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
That's right..Each of the deputies were required to have a first aid card that included CPR certification!
Interesting...... Regional differences.
I haven't been CPR certified in years. I've never held any "first aid card".
Yeah regional differences. Here you have to have first aid and CPR to be a cop. Of the thousands of calls I can't remember one where a cop rendered aid. That's not an indictment as they were dealing with their own responsibilities. Not to mention our response times usually precluded the need for them to wade into unfamiliar territory.
In Washington we have the "Good Samaritan" law that doesn't require a citizen to render aid But if they do render aid they cannot be sued regardless of what they do or don't do. Outside of brain surgery.
Conversely...... It was a source of pride in my earlier years that I was NEVER beat to a med call by the volunteers. I have more "saves" than a number of them.
We're staffed during the day, now, so less of an issue.
JSTUART--All aid cars and ambulances around here are staffed by Emergency Medical Technicians. EMTs around here don't start IVs or administer meds. Only paramedics do. Other states have EMT 1,2and 3 with incremental responsibilities up to intubation, IV therapy and administration of meds. Defibrillator and cardiac monitoring also becomes more involved rather than an AED. It depends upon the medical director whose license you operate under.
He confirmed that deputies in the area are issued body cameras, but he did not know if they were recording during the shooting.
That stinks pretty bad.
I haven't read the entire thread, too much fire, so forgive me if this has been posted. In the absence of police cam video is there any unrelated, independent witness statements or video?
EMTs around here don't start IVs or administer meds.
In Idaho there are basic EMT's which cannot do IV's and such and advanced EMT's which can,then paramedics.We also like Adams county only have volunteer fire and EMS.None are fulltime except the EMT director.
That's what I thought logcutter. And thanks for the local perspective you offer. I worked with a guy in the PD that had to leave to let the trouble he caused simmer down. He took a job in Utah (I believe) or AZ as a LEO/EMT-P park ranger position. I thought that would be a good fit for him as he was a damn good EMT. He only lasted a year or so before he and some of his LEO buddies got into a barroom brawl and out came his gun. He was fired and was welcomed back to the department he previously worked for.
He missed his calling as a paramedic because he was an ego driven cop. Funny as hell too.
lol.... After some of your posts there may be several people willing to aid RWE in case his leg gets tired....
Really? Have I insulted you in some way? It's common in Kansas to use the term "son" on somebody who is your junior. I don't recall insulting anybody on this thread but maybe I did. I don't ever recall insulting you or really talking to you much in any form, which is unlikely to change given your saying something like that. Actually for the type of topic, this thread has been fairly amicable other than one or two guys.
lol again.... Yes, really, laughing again. No, you have not insulted me at all. Some of your comments to others have appeared insulting, and several others appear more than slightly irritated at you. I have no desire to kick you. I'm enjoying the show to much, thus my tongue in cheek comment in regard to someone coming to your (or RWE's?) aid during a booting frenzy...
Here the only first responders that can declare death even in obvious cases such as rigor are paramedics, nurses or docs.
EMTs and cops cannot
Absolutely FALSE sir!
I've been a practicing WA. State EMT for 20 years and have ALWAYS been able to withhold resuscitation with obvious death under multiple reasons and confirm tome of death with but a simple call to my base station doctor.
Injuries incompatible with life and rigor mortis as you stated are 2 of the multiple incidents an emt may pronounce and withhold resucitation.
WA State EMT Protocols:
King County Protocols:
Also your statement that LEOs can in no way pronounce death is also a slippery slope. I know more then 1 LEO who is also an EMT-P that carry full ALS gear, one not far from your own AO
1) it is relevant....its just apparently above your intelligence
A) it would likely be obvious to any medically trained first responder that he was expired, especially if an FR bent down and said he has no pulse,
2) do you have proof they withheld medical attention
3) you stated in an earlier post that there was no way to know how many medical personnel were on scene, yet now you state there was an abundance of them....which is it?
1-It is not relevant..As a first responder you have the obligation to follow protocol aka the rules.There is no place in the rules that say's you have the right to wing it and "assume" anything and even if at first try he has no pulse it is your duty as a first responder to try and resuscitate him..See I said that without childish insults..Try it.
2-Yes-The wife ran to aid the injured and was thrown to the ground and cuffed as was the nephew and with both deputies being certified in CPR and carried a medical card they did not give him medical help.That is withholding...
3-Lets see..know one knows how many EMT's showed up in there personal rigs but there were two ambulances on scene and the fire department..Your guess is as good as mine but that would mean an abundance to me with the other injured alive and talking.Jack not so much..
I'm not familiar with ID protocols but here in WA. multiple GSW without pulses does not specifically require EMS to inititate CPR if they feel the injuries are not compatible with life.
JSTUART--All aid cars and ambulances around here are staffed by Emergency Medical Technicians. EMTs around here don't start IVs or administer meds. Only paramedics do. Other states have EMT 1,2and 3 with incremental responsibilities up to intubation, IV therapy and administration of meds. Defibrillator and cardiac monitoring also becomes more involved rather than an AED. It depends upon the medical director whose license you operate under.
Again your info is muddt at best. If your familar with WA EMD then you well know LOTS of WA. Counties have EMT-I's that can start IV's and intubate with an adjuncts like an LMA, King LTD, Combi-tube etc.
Also an EMT-P cannot defibrillate anything that an AED wont, the exception is they can cardiovert and pace.
MA---We can withhold resuscitation in obvious situations but an EMT cannot "call it" baring inability to continue. As far a an LEO cross trained as a paramedic....well you're just trying to play games.
Mallard---I understand that EMTs in other locations can do different things hence my qualifying "around here". I don't understand your insecurities other than arguing for the sake of arguing.
"Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay."
That's not exactly true. A corpse is pretty solid evidence of a homicide when it's riddled with bullet holes.
Unless someone wants to introduce another actor with a firearm, there is pretty solid evidence that the two Deputes are responsible for the homicide.
Now..... THEY should be the ones to provide evidence that it was a "justified" homicide.
Do you disagree?
I do.
It is the burden of the prosecutor to prove guilt, not the burden of the defendant to prove their innocence.
I'm pretty sure that we all know that's so, ONCE CHARGES ARE FILED.
Right now, we are in the court of public opinion, and different rules apply.
I don't recall any of you complaining when the Muslim Major at Ft. Hood was pronounced guilty, right here, in the court of public opinion. Some of you were the quickest to reach a verdict.
Am I classing these two deputies with a muslim terrorist?
No.... a muslim terrorist is killing people for an ideal... not from ego.
In his own warped way, he is living up to a trust, not betraying one.
"Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay."
That's not exactly true. A corpse is pretty solid evidence of a homicide when it's riddled with bullet holes.
Unless someone wants to introduce another actor with a firearm, there is pretty solid evidence that the two Deputes are responsible for the homicide.
Now..... THEY should be the ones to provide evidence that it was a "justified" homicide.
Do you disagree?
I do.
It is the burden of the prosecutor to prove guilt, not the burden of the defendant to prove their innocence.
I'm pretty sure that we all know that's so, ONCE CHARGES ARE FILED.
Right now, we are in the court of public opinion, and different rules apply.
I don't recall any of you complaining when the Muslim Major at Ft. Hood was pronounced guilty, right here, in the court of public opinion. Some of you were the quickest to reach a verdict.
Am I classing these two deputies with a muslim terrorist?
No.... a muslim terrorist is killing people for an ideal... not from ego.
In his own warped way, he is living up to a trust, not betraying one.
Talk about warped...now, you are defending yourself by saying charges need to be filed? The judicial system must work?
Would you want to be "tried in the court of public opinion?" I wouldn't. I would hope the investigation was thorough and objective. Then, with that investigation, I could have a trial (if indicted) where my Constitutional rights were protected from the "court of public opinion."
When you shoot somebody you have the obligation to render aid if they are still alive. Whether the deputies allowed the EMT's access or they did it themselves, the obligation was still there. Certainly if you as a citizen shoot somebody, you have an obligation to render aid unless you can't due to the wounded person still being a threat. It sounds like Yantis was totally incapacitated yet they evidently neither attempted aid themselves, or tried to get paramedics to. Nor did they allow his family to aid him. That's what the story is thus far.
I'm not sure I'd argue in favor of that.....
I'm not arguing. It's a known fact. If some dude breaks into your house and is raping your wife and you shoot him, you are supposed to render aid if he's not dead. Of course, if you're busy aiding your wife or if he still poses a threat to you, were you to help him, no such obligation exists. Feel free to disbelieve me and seek other sources of wisdom on this though.
And where is this "known fact" a law? Not looking for the typical EthanEdwards smart-arse remark; looking for you to cite section and code.
I just want to know where it clearly states that if I shoot someone in my house, that I'm legally REQUIRED to render aid.
"Talk about warped...now, you are defending yourself by saying charges need to be filed? The judicial system must work?
Would you want to be "tried in the court of public opinion?" I wouldn't. I would hope the investigation was thorough and objective. Then, with that investigation, I could have a trial (if indicted) where my Constitutional rights were protected from the "court of public opinion."
You are being purposely obtuse.
The only Constitutional Right being threatened on this thread is the First Amendment Right to free speech if the cops on here had their way.
I know it must be frustrating to cops to transition from the real world - where you can demand that a man shut up, and hurt him if he doesn't - to the cyber world where you are powerless over anyone else.
Yes and a city police officer cannot arrest a county sheriff.
You boys sure have some strange laws.
In Arkansas, the Coroner is the only one can arrest the Sheriff.
I've been told that only a Constable can serve papers on the sheriff here.
We have had three Sheriffs arrested in adjoining Counties [and ours is sweatin' it] over the span of several years and it was Texas Rangers that arrested them.
Yes and a city police officer cannot arrest a county sheriff.
You boys sure have some strange laws.
Probably heard that around the table in cell block four last time he was in. It'd be interesting to start a side pot and wager on who's spent more on jailhouse commissary, Curdog or Jayco?
Will this be another case where a grand jury declines to indict? I want to believe this won't be swept under the rug, but why is it that I think the LE Agency in question is seeking every opportunity to place blame on the victim, and sweep this under the rug.
If you go by the accounts of the witnesses, AT BEST this is involuntary manslaughter. Something that ANYONE but a cop would be arrested and charged for.
Is this where the cops attempt to divert or sidetrack the topic with ad hominem attacks on the "messenger" because it's taken a turn that goes against their agenda?
"Talk about warped...now, you are defending yourself by saying charges need to be filed? The judicial system must work?
Would you want to be "tried in the court of public opinion?" I wouldn't. I would hope the investigation was thorough and objective. Then, with that investigation, I could have a trial (if indicted) where my Constitutional rights were protected from the "court of public opinion."
You are being purposely obtuse.
The only Constitutional Right being threatened on this thread is the First Amendment Right to free speech if the cops on here had their way.
I know it must be frustrating to cops to transition from the real world - where you can demand that a man shut up, and hurt him if he doesn't - to the cyber world where you are powerless over anyone else.
Obtuse? I don't think there is anything obtuse about the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Do you?
The ISP and attorney general will be looking at possible state criminal violations; the federal authorities are examining possible federal violations. Federal statutes that could be implicated include the federal prohibition on a law enforcement officer willfully and intentionally depriving a person of his or her statutory or constitutional rights. Intentional use of excessive force by law enforcement could violate the 4th Amendment’s protections against illegal search and seizure.
It's not very often I cheer federal involvement but this is one of them. I'm surprised though, mostly because he ain't black nor do I believe guilty of a crime.
The only Constitutional Right being threatened on this thread is the First Amendment Right to free speech if the cops on here had their way.
I know it must be frustrating to cops to transition from the real world - where you can demand that a man shut up, and hurt him if he doesn't - to the cyber world where you are powerless over anyone else.
Waded through several more pages trying to catch up to see if there has been any more concrete updates, no real change.
The more I think about this, the more possibilities there seems to be..
One thing I would say is with regards Mr Yantis being called by the Dispatcher to deal with the bull.
That is fine, but regardless of what the Dispatcher requests, the scene itself would have been under control of one of the Deputies, and Mr Yantis should have followed his direction as what needed to be done and just as importantly, when.
One of the family members suggests the Deputies should have been trained to "de-escalate" situations which suggests there was a confrontation between the two parties before the actual shooting..
Maybe the Deputy no longer wanted Mr Yantis to shoot and recover the carcass at that point? Perhaps doing so may have (potentially) interfered with the rescue operation being carried out at the Subaru? Or for some other safety/liability reason?
From a family member of Mr Yantis, it also seems that its possible Mr Yantis had an AD when one of the Deputies yanked his shoulder? So, the Deputies are then in the situation of a shot being fired following a previous confrontation?? The potential for the situation to go FUBAR is really looming at this point..
Regardless of how things actually went down, this definitely does not seem to be the Deputies finest hour.
Things appear to have gone from bad to worse, and were perhaps not helped by Mr Yantis..
For me, the Deputies have *a lot* of explaining to do about numerous aspects of their handling of this incident and I am glad the Attorney Generals Office and possibly the FBI are investigating this...
It's a step in the right direction but I'd fell allot better if the FBI/AG hadn't just given Lois Learner a pass.
That picture of the family standing by the roadside with those two grand kids that will never see their grandfather again is pretty gut wrenching. I'm not sure what's harder to do....look at that picture....or read all the childish squabbling on this thread.
And the longer the silence last the more deviate and unbelievable the excuses will be, at this point does anyone believe that video will be produced, or will we be told of some unforeseeable reason none exists?
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
well since all of this at this is guesswork, your spin is pretty much the same spin i came too pretty quick.
That sounds very plausible, but the longer it takes to get the story out the longer people have to fester and form their own conclusions, the cops aren't helping them selves out any by not being forth coming.
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
There you go, slandering (seems to be the word of the day) a dead man.......rolls eyes
Actually, probably not too far fetched, but I'll bet booze is involved.
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
One Deputy had 5 years on the other 15 years on.
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
All I can say is if this happened with my father being killed and my mother being handled like what happened in Idaho an investigation, lawsuits, news media inquiries, and public relations messaging would be the least of the deputies and Sheriff's Department's involved worries.
If I shot someone at work I wouldn't speak to my boss either. I'm legally required to tell them if there are any outstanding suspects to look for, how many shots I fired and what direction I fired. After that, I won't say anything without my lawyer. That's to protect me and my family, no matter how righteous the shooting. And Yall would be wise to do the same. So I believe that the Sheriff might not have any details from his deputies.
If the rancher was obviously dead (he can be obviously dead without being pronounced dead, that's common sense) I wouldn't perform first aid. After he's dead it's a crime scene. And it's just as likely that they'd be accused of tampering with his body to hide something. If he was obviously dead I'd not touch him.
And the county's legal team says "don't release any videos", that's probably how it'll go. The Sheriff can do whatever he wants, but (at least here) the county commissioners have the purse strings and can play him like a puppet. Especially when they're afraid of a lawsuit. Or they can pressure him to release the videos. But there's always somebody in charge of you, even the mighty Sheriff.
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
My theory as well only figure the rancher may have had a high bac and add a wreck victim walking around freaking out and an entrapped driver wailing like a claxon and you have a situation that got completely FUBAR'd in a flash.
That sounds very plausible, but the longer it takes to get the story out the longer people have to fester and form their own conclusions, the cops aren't helping them selves out any by not being forth coming.
I suspect the Deputies will be doing exactly what their lawyers advise them...
"What happened next is still under investigation, but Zollman said there was an altercation and Yantis and both deputies all fired their weapons.
Yantis was fatally wounded and died at the scene. One of the deputies suffered a minor injury."
Appears that he fired his rifle and both deputies fired their weapons. One of the interviews with family says they think the rifle fired when the police were turning him around. Playing the guessing game...maybe it's an AD(?)...but if an officer is wound up tight as a drum already...and they've already had an altercation, an unintentional AD may not seem unintentional.
Ugly situation that has no option for a happy ending....
Since we have two cop members [at least] offering to bet that Mr Yantis was drunk or drinking, and that was his contribution to his killing, I'll suggest that it was a Deputy's ego, not fear for his life, that was his contribution.
Mrs.Yantis will get a sizable settlement from the County just for her injuries.
If the Family's account of Mr Yantis never pointing his rifle at the Deputies would not stand up to scrutiny, their Lawyer would not have let them include it in their statement, which could affect settlement negotiations.
If you can't put your trust in a Lawyer's greed, where can you put it?
You, RWE and Stuart can continue making this thread about yourselves and your own drama if you want to, but it's not about your idea of manners or Stuart trying to pick fights, which is his normal mode. It's about a guy being shot to death for apparently no good reason and the decline of a lot of our institutions here in the USA.
Actually fellow, the whole thing is about halfwits jumping to conclusions with not a single solitary piece of evidence other than hearsay.
But you go right ahead and spruik to all and sundry.
added; And that goes for those on both sides of the argument.
There's no hearsay. Hearsay only has meaning in a courtroom, and refers to statements testified to that were made by people who are not on the witness stand, offered for their truth value.
I don't care how much he was worth, the rancher was more worried about putting him out of his misery than any fuuckin' lost burger.
You don't walk up to a deal like that and see a destroyed car and people hurt and start worrying about the monetary value of a bull.
Spot on...the rancher didn't get the love and respect the community has for him by being an inhumane, heartless, money grubbing prick.....Period
ETA....it wouldn't surprise me one bit if he was pissed after seeing the "heartless, inhumane" way the boys in blue filled the poor creature with lead....realized they weren't up for the task....and walked off leaving it to suffer though......
The miss trust and hatred that this shooting will cause is going to last generations, no matter the findings the deputies families will have to move, and the sheriffs office will be the target of ridicule and scorn. And worst of all is a family has lost a husband, father and a grandfather at a very young age.
I don't care how much he was worth, the rancher was more worried about putting him out of his misery than any fuuckin' lost burger.
You don't walk up to a deal like that and see a destroyed car and people hurt and start worrying about the monetary value of a bull.
Spot on...the rancher didn't get the love and respect the community has for him by being an inhumane, heartless, money grubbing prick.....Period
ETA....it wouldn't surprise me one bit if he was pissed after seeing the "heartless, inhumane" way the boys in blue filled the poor creature with lead....realized they weren't up for the task....and walked off leaving it to suffer though......
Amen!
How the [bleep] they could be so heartless and inhumane to a cow whilst people are fighting for their life, trapped in a car is beyond me.
One guy got out of the car on his own.....the other was concious but trapped......were the deputies running the jaws to extract him....and if so....how did they find time to tune the Bull up with their Glocks/Ar's???? From what I read.... the bull had gone home and laid down when they went commando on him.....you might want to read the statements fron those that were actually there instead of all the cop/groupie's BS speculation.....
Funny how everyone seems to think in small communities that everyone knows and gets along well with their local law enforcement... yet in this instant seems like no one knows anything about their officers ones that have been on the force for years. And as to the rancher everyone says he was well liked by everyone but yet haven't heard anything as to anyone having dealt with the guy... and we're now getting to the point of saying that he may have been under the influence. Lot of speculation on the bull and yet no one seems to know why it might have been so important as to possibly having started a ruckus between him and the officers.
Or, maybe better said that no one knows anything, except that the family is bitter!
I'm guessing they weren't trying to kill it, just get it stopped from being a PIA, which it seems the succeeded in doing.
I'm betting there were 3 big dicks there, all measuring and shouting. I'm betting there was a rancher that wasn't accustomed to taking 'orders' from ANYONE and cops that weren't accustomed to someone NOT taking orders from them.
Seems it would have taken one level head to have fixed the situation, which there obviously wasn't, on either side.
What I'm certain of is that the rancher didn't walk up, say howdy boys and then the cops shot him for sheits and giggles.
Again, likely enough ego from all sides to fill a wagon, but of course the professionals are the ones that should be able to keep said egos checked.
It was obviously a cluster [bleep] of epic proportion. There should have been ONE calm head in charge of the scene. Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't.
Yeah, because the deputies have OWI/DUI/DUII (whatever you want to call it) conviction(s).
This wasn't a dui stop. This was a murder. Try and stay on task. Are you suggesting that Jack was drunk?
No [bleep], Sherlock. Homicide at this point. And I have no idea if he was drunk or not, but can guess right along with everyone else.
But Jack didn't shoot and kill the cops. So you think the cops killed him because he was drunk? Or because Jack had more restraint drunk than the cops did sober?
It would make more sense if one or both of the deputies were drunk or high. At least then there'd be a reason for acting so cowardly during this cluster fu.ck.
Just a thought, unless you knew the man, doesn't referring to him as "Jack" seem like a bit of disrespectful casual familiarity?
Fu.ck you. You already said you weren't going to shed a tear over this man. WTF would you care how I refer to someone you care nothing about. Go crawl back under the rock you pathetic fa.g.
Just a thought, unless you knew the man, doesn't referring to him as "Jack" seem like a bit of disrespectful casual familiarity?
Fu.ck you. You already said you weren't going to shed a tear over this man. WTF would you care how I refer to someone you care nothing about. Go crawl back under the rock you pathetic fa.g.
I can't talk to you, I don't get paid to talk to the mentally ill anymore.
Did the attendant walk away from the computer in the ward and you sneaked over to begin typing again?
Quick! Here they come, back to your room, act like you took your meds.
Just a thought, unless you knew the man, doesn't referring to him as "Jack" seem like a bit of disrespectful casual familiarity?
how are you supposed to refer to a man named 'Jack'?
He's just being a cu.nt trying to stir the pot. He made light of all this earlier and stated he had no sympathy, thought all this was funny stuff like some comedy in a far off strange place.
He showed how much respect he has and just wants to rub it in.
Just a thought, unless you knew the man, doesn't referring to him as "Jack" seem like a bit of disrespectful casual familiarity?
how are you supposed to refer to a man named 'Jack'?
He's just being a cu.nt trying to stir the pot. He made light of all this earlier and stated he had no sympathy, thought all this was funny stuff like some comedy in a far off strange place.
He showed how much respect he has and just wants to rub it in.
No Ace, he is correct in that the use of the first name in a personal manner is discourteous unless the man was known to you.
Funny how everyone seems to think in small communities that everyone knows and gets along well with their local law enforcement... yet in this instant seems like no one knows anything about their officers ones that have been on the force for years. And as to the rancher everyone says he was well liked by everyone but yet haven't heard anything as to anyone having dealt with the guy... and we're now getting to the point of saying that he may have been under the influence. Lot of speculation on the bull and yet no one seems to know why it might have been so important as to possibly having started a ruckus between him and the officers.
Or, maybe better said that no one knows anything, except that the family is bitter!
Phil
Like most things that get kicked around on this forum, we don't have all the facts. But I think we have more than enough to make a reasonable person go WTF? Which warrants an investigation into what actually happened. And we HOPE it's a fair and independent investigation. I'm always concerned when someone's been shot by officers under questionable circumstances because I've seen more than a couple "bad" LE shootings swept under the rug.
I don't want anyone railroaded, but I don't want someone getting away with chit just 'cause he's a cop.
Is there even one person that believes that Mr.Yantis had any intention of harming anyone but the bull?
no
Not anymore, at least. Since everyone else has ideas about what might have happened, I'll throw one out.
Young, inexperienced deputy responds to a crash. People are hurt, trapped in cars and there's a giant injured bull on the side of the road. So he tries to shoot the thing, obviously in all the wrong places, and it just won't die. Now his nerves are fried. He's got the wreck to deal with, he just fired his gun for maybe the first time in a real situation, and the bull still isn't dead.
Then the rancher shows up. The rancher immediately flips out on him, shouting about wasted meat and the suffering bull and what a dumb young punk the cop is.
Words are exchanged and now we've got a full fledged pissing contest going on. The cop tells the rancher to get out of the crash scene and wait. Rancher walks away and sends for a rifle.
Deputy looks over a bit later and sees rancher with a rifle. Deputy grabs rancher by he shoulder and the gun accidentally discharges.
Deputy thinks "this crazy old coot is shooting at me!" and shoots him.
Wife and son-in-law rush toward the rancher, who is at the deputy's feet. Deputy thinks they're rushing at him for shooting the rancher and handcuffs them.
From the perspective of the rancher and his family the deputy is a murderer.
The deputy's perspective IN THE MOMENT THE RIFLE WENT OFF was that he was being shot at. The deputy's perspective now is likely that he made a terrible, terrible mistake. _______________________________________
My point being that this could all the the result of one terrible, awful misperception. A lot of mistakes led up to that misperception, no doubt, and likely a few spread around on both sides of the coin.
But not everything in life is the result of malice. Sometimes mistakes are made. That doesn't excuse the tragedy of what happened, but it can help explain how it happened.
One Deputy had 5 years on the other 15 years on.
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
You are really way off there. Stick to what you know.
If I shot someone at work I wouldn't speak to my boss either. I'm legally required to tell them if there are any outstanding suspects to look for, how many shots I fired and what direction I fired. After that, I won't say anything without my lawyer. That's to protect me and my family, no matter how righteous the shooting. And Yall would be wise to do the same. So I believe that the Sheriff might not have any details from his deputies.
If the rancher was obviously dead (he can be obviously dead without being pronounced dead, that's common sense) I wouldn't perform first aid. After he's dead it's a crime scene. And it's just as likely that they'd be accused of tampering with his body to hide something. If he was obviously dead I'd not touch him.
And the county's legal team says "don't release any videos", that's probably how it'll go. The Sheriff can do whatever he wants, but (at least here) the county commissioners have the purse strings and can play him like a puppet. Especially when they're afraid of a lawsuit. Or they can pressure him to release the videos. But there's always somebody in charge of you, even the mighty Sheriff.
But we hear officers here and elsewhere state that if you are involved in an incident, you need to speak to the police. If you refuse and lawyer up, then that implies you did something wrong?????? Does not compute?????
If I shot someone at work I wouldn't speak to my boss either. I'm legally required to tell them if there are any outstanding suspects to look for, how many shots I fired and what direction I fired. After that, I won't say anything without my lawyer. That's to protect me and my family, no matter how righteous the shooting. And Yall would be wise to do the same. So I believe that the Sheriff might not have any details from his deputies.
If the rancher was obviously dead (he can be obviously dead without being pronounced dead, that's common sense) I wouldn't perform first aid. After he's dead it's a crime scene. And it's just as likely that they'd be accused of tampering with his body to hide something. If he was obviously dead I'd not touch him.
And the county's legal team says "don't release any videos", that's probably how it'll go. The Sheriff can do whatever he wants, but (at least here) the county commissioners have the purse strings and can play him like a puppet. Especially when they're afraid of a lawsuit. Or they can pressure him to release the videos. But there's always somebody in charge of you, even the mighty Sheriff.
But we hear officers here and elsewhere state that if you are involved in an incident, you need to speak to the police. If you refuse and lawyer up, then that implies you did something wrong?????? Does not compute?????
And if you've been charged, you're guilty. Words the popo dislike. "I want to speak to my lawyer".
Words the popo dislike. "I want to speak to my lawyer".
Those words will get a man killed and a throwdown tossed at his feet for the Official Police Photographer to present to the sympathetic grand jury panel.
Words the popo dislike. "I want to speak to my lawyer".
Those words will get a man killed and a throwdown tossed at his feet for the Official Police Photographer to present to the sympathetic grand jury panel.
Yep... Got my head bounced offa the trunk of a police cruser for that very thing. I won in the end but it wasn't cheap.
Words the popo dislike. "I want to speak to my lawyer".
Those words will get a man killed and a throwdown tossed at his feet for the Official Police Photographer to present to the sympathetic grand jury panel.
Yep... Got my head bounced offa the trunk of a police cruser for that very thing. I won in the end but it wasn't cheap.
Just a thought, unless you knew the man, doesn't referring to him as "Jack" seem like a bit of disrespectful casual familiarity?
how are you supposed to refer to a man named 'Jack'?
He's just being a cu.nt trying to stir the pot. He made light of all this earlier and stated he had no sympathy, thought all this was funny stuff like some comedy in a far off strange place.
He showed how much respect he has and just wants to rub it in.
No Ace, he is correct in that the use of the first name in a personal manner is discourteous unless the man was known to you.
Got my head bounced offa the trunk of a police cruser for that very thing. I won in the end but it wasn't cheap.
That brings to mind something that happened to a friend of mine, long ago. This was back when afro's were popular and even some white boys were trying to grow them. My friend was one and carried one of those big handled hair picks in his back pocket. Anyway the bunch got stopped one night and ordered out of the car. The policeman saw the hair pick in his back pocket and asked him what was in his pocket. My friend being a smart azz, replied that it was a sub machine gun. The nice policeman did not think that it was funny and slammed him up against the car too. The rest of us thought it was funny. miles
My friend being a smart azz, replied that it was a sub machine gun. The nice policeman did not think that it was funny and slammed him up against the car too. The rest of us thought it was funny. miles
A student of mine some years back when apprehended by the Park Police for some transgression told them "Can we wait until the REAL police get here" He subsequently tripped and fell a few times in custody too.
Same kid in class one day was studiously bundling up a bunch of old assignment papers, he weren't making much noise so I didn't make an issue.
Suddenly he stands up holding a giant paper sperm by the tail like it was a divining rod, which flailing sperm proceeds to "drag him against his will" two seats over towards at notably attractive (and stuck up) young lady
Might be the funniest thing I have seen in the classroom.
Last I seen of that kid he was full of metal rods from having wrapped his sport bike around a tree at warp speed, I hope he is doing well.
Spot on...the rancher didn't get the love and respect the community has for him by being an inhumane, heartless, money grubbing prick.....Period
ETA....it wouldn't surprise me one bit if he was pissed after seeing the "heartless, inhumane" way the boys in blue filled the poor creature with lead....realized they weren't up for the task....and walked off leaving it to suffer though......
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
You are really way off there. Stick to what you know.
Or I could be right.
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
As to the posts regarding the FBI getting involved.
For perspective, see the below decision last week regarding a police shooting that the FBI investigated where an officer shot an unarmed black male subject 14 times during an altercation. Obviously a different case with different circumstances, but it does show the difficulty in trying to apply federal statutes to this case.
"The team of experienced federal prosecutors and FBI agents considered whether Manney violated federal law by willfully using unreasonable force against Hamilton. Under the applicable federal criminal civil rights statute, prosecutors must establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a law enforcement officer willfully deprived an individual of a Constitutional right. To establish willfulness, federal authorities must show that the officer acted with the deliberate and specific intent to do something the law forbids. This is the highest standard of intent imposed by law. Mistake, misperception, negligence or poor judgment are not sufficient to establish a federal criminal civil rights violation.
In this case, there were numerous civilian witnesses who saw some part of the physical confrontation between Manney and Hamilton. Based on those eyewitness accounts, the account of the former officer involved, the physical evidence and the assessments of independent use of force experts, the team of experienced federal prosecutors and FBI agents determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Manney acted willfully with a bad purpose to violate the law."
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My guess is as good as anyone else's.
Dink
JFC......how fuuk'in stupid are you?
If the rancher didn't want the bull killed why did he have his wife bring him a rifle....which by all reports he was pointing at the bull when the chit hit the fan.
You need to go wash your arm after sticking it up your ass far enough to produce that gem......
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
You are really way off there. Stick to what you know.
Or I could be right.
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My guess is as good as anyone else's.
Dink
No, no you're wrong and your guess is much poorer than those with some knowledge on the subject.
Every rancher I know, and I know hundreds, care very much about salvaging an animal such as this.
You have no clue what you're talking about with regard to selling semen. An article stated the rancher had hand-raised this calf. You aren't selling semen on a gelbvieh bull raised like that. Trust me, you are way off base there.
JFC, for popo's you guys don't look at the given evidence much.
Yantis was called to the scene to TAKE CARE OF THE BULL. It was NOT at all clear that it needed to be put down. If that had been the request, Yantis would have brought a rifle when he first showed up. He was there to take CARE of the bull. Not take care of, police style. Take care of, rancher style.
As Yantis shows up, the deputies go off half cocked and riddle the bull.
What do you THINK Yantis told the trigger happy morons? "Good job?". "Atta boy?". No, he told them exactly the truth. That they were utter morons and that their mommy had some character flaws.
The local yokels, hyped up from the killing already, took offense and showed Yantis who was really boss.
That's the de-escalation the family was talking about.
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My guess is as good as anyone else's.
Dink
JFC......how fuuk'in stupid are you?
If the rancher didn't want the bull killed why did he have his wife bring him a rifle....which by all reports he was pointing at the bull when the chit hit the fan.
You need to go wash your arm after sticking it up your ass far enough to produce that gem......
He had everything thing in motion to kill the bull before he got on scene. Once he got there he started thinking about what he could be worth vs what insurance was going to pay.
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
You are really way off there. Stick to what you know.
Or I could be right.
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My guess is as good as anyone else's.
Dink
No, no you're wrong and your guess is much poorer than those with some knowledge on the subject.
Every rancher I know, and I know hundreds, care very much about salvaging an animal such as this.
You have no clue what you're talking about with regard to selling semen. An article stated the rancher had hand-raised this calf. You aren't selling semen on a gelbvieh bull raised like that. Trust me, you are way off base there.
My friend being a smart azz, replied that it was a sub machine gun. The nice policeman did not think that it was funny and slammed him up against the car too. The rest of us thought it was funny. miles
A student of mine some years back when apprehended by the Park Police for some transgression told them "Can we wait until the REAL police get here" He subsequently tripped and fell a few times in custody too.
Same kid in class one day was studiously bundling up a bunch of old assignment papers, he weren't making much noise so I didn't make an issue.
Suddenly he stands up holding a giant paper sperm by the tail like it was a divining rod, which flailing sperm proceeds to "drag him against his will" two seats over towards at notably attractive (and stuck up) young lady
Might be the funniest thing I have seen in the classroom.
Last I seen of that kid he was full of metal rods from having wrapped his sport bike around a tree at warp speed, I hope he is doing well.
Birdwatcher
In high school one particular teacher was concerned (overly) about every students ability to take a test well and warned non-stop of each test and quiz and advised at great length about getting enough sleep the night before a test eating a full breakfast the morning of and so on.
Class clown failed a test and the teacher was openly making fun of his test answers.
Clown apologizes and tells the teacher he was right, the night before he had too much on his mind and was completely unable to sleep.
Teacher immediately apologizes and asks if he wants to retest... but then asks why he could not sleep...
"I was thinking all night about Jennifer and had a hard-on so big I didn't have enough skin left to close my eyes!"
Kind of interesting how it ties together..Ruby Ridge..Enter Gerry Spence..Adams County..Enter Gerry Spence...Then the FBI..
Maybe they want revenge on Gerry for loosing at Ruby Ridge .
Logcutter, curious as to whether any of the land involved was federal or reservation land?
The land around the accident was all private except for easements and of course, state highway 95.There isn't any reservation land in that area I know of and the Forest Service boundary is on up the road.
yea,,,,I watched it too.....they did say that relatives weren't allowed to try to administer aid but no mention of the wife being handcuffed and suffering a heart attack.
He had everything thing in motion to kill the bull before he got on scene. Once he got there he started thinking about what he could be worth vs what insurance was going to pay.
Why are you OK with him speculating but not the rest of us?
Who said I was?
I have issue, not with speculation, but with many poster's advocation and complacency with disregarding a person's basic rights as guaranteed in this country. Throw out all the speculation you wish, but do not allow it to cross into advocation for pulling an end around on the justice system, proper investigations, the concept of innocent until proven guilty, etc.
Additionally, you do realize there is a difference between civil suits and criminal prosecutions?
Here's an example:
OJ Simpson was exonerated of murder in his criminal trial (the prosecutor's office couldn't prove to a jury that he was guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, thus, innocent). However, he was found liable in the civil suit regarding the same issue.
My guess is that the Deputies will walk as far as Criminal penalties because their actions are found to be within their Departmental guidelines as far as use of force. Even handcuffing the widow and friend was probably allowed.
End the War on Drugs and the militarization of LE. And reform LE's rules of engagement. For starters, if LE steps in front of an escaping suspect's vehicle, intending to either stop or kill him, prosecute him for murder/attempted.
It looks like the statistics were dead on [no pun intended] as far as Mr. Yantis vs. the Deputies who killed him:
The 10 Deadliest Jobs: Deaths per 100,000
1. Logging workers: 128.8 2. Fishers and related fishing workers: 117 3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers: 53.4 4. Roofers: 40.5 5. Structural iron and steel workers: 37 6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors: 27.1 7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers: 23 8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers: 22.1 9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers: 21.3 10. Construction laborers: 17.4
Jack Yantis, spending his life in TWO of the deadliest occupations in the country,Logging and Ranching, certainly succumbed before the cops, who's jobs rank pretty far down as far as fatalities.
In fact, they rank lower as far as death from homicide than the general population, according to FBI statistics.
Cops are murdered at a rate of 3 per hundred thousand.
For the general population, it is 5.3 per hundred thousand.
Looks like the rest of us have more cause to be concerned about "going home at the end of our shift" than does the average cop.
He had everything thing in motion to kill the bull before he got on scene. Once he got there he started thinking about what he could be worth vs what insurance was going to pay.
I'd question even those numbers given there is no official federal data base as to the numbers and most are not reported inter agency.
Guess work!
Phil
Links are provided for every death. Most I read seemed to have had it coming. Just providing the link, not making judgments here. Net has more that seems to substantiate these numbers.
The FBI has investigated every officer involved shooting I know of.
So the FBI investigates every time a cop shoots somebody? Or am I missing something in what you're saying?
As far as I know. There are 36,000 FBI agents and a few hundred people killed by LE year, so it's not hard.
That's unreal. I had no idea there were 36k FBI. That's the standing army our forefathers warned us about right there, not even figuring in all the TSA.
The FBI has investigated every officer involved shooting I know of.
So the FBI investigates every time a cop shoots somebody? Or am I missing something in what you're saying?
As far as I know. There are 36,000 FBI agents and a few hundred people killed by LE year, so it's not hard.
That's unreal. I had no idea there were 36k FBI. That's the standing army our forefathers warned us about right there, not even figuring in all the TSA.
A lot of police shootings and civil rights violations to investigate...
You folks that are bitching about cops then bitching about so many FEDS are going to be bitching more when ALL cops come under the FEDS. That will fix everything and that is where it is headed.
The FBI has investigated every officer involved shooting I know of.
So the FBI investigates every time a cop shoots somebody? Or am I missing something in what you're saying?
As far as I know. There are 36,000 FBI agents and a few hundred people killed by LE year, so it's not hard.
That's unreal. I had no idea there were 36k FBI. That's the standing army our forefathers warned us about right there, not even figuring in all the TSA.
And you can add to that total a whole schittload of park rangers, BLM rangers, and USFS rangers to whom Clinton issued pretty blue lights for their service vehicles and strapped guns onto thier hips in an effort to keep his election promise of adding X number of thousands of new police.
The U.S. Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services (DLA) help the Department of Defense to dispose of its "excess property [...] from air conditioners to vehicles, clothing to computers" by "transfer to other federal agencies, or donation to state and local governments and other qualified organizations", as well as by "sale of surplus property".[7] Availability of surplus equipment has been facilitated by the reduced American presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.[4] The 1033 program is designed to specifically work with law enforcement agencies, like local police forces, school district police and others.
Material donated[edit]
From 1997 until 2014, $5.1 billion in military hardware were transferred from the Department of Defense to local American law enforcement agencies, according to DLA's "Law Enforcement Support Office" (LESO) and material worth $449 million was transferred in 2013 alone.[2][8] About a third of the equipment is new.[9] The most commonly obtained item from the 1033 program is ammunition. Other most commonly requested items include cold weather clothing, sand bags, medical supplies, sleeping bags, flashlights and electrical wiring.[10] The 1033 program also transfers office equipment such as fax machines, which many smaller police departments are unable to afford. The DLA also offers tactical armored vehicles, weapons, including grenade launchers, watercraft, and aircraft.[11][5]
Police departments[edit]
As of 2014, 8,000 local law enforcement agencies participate in the reutilization program.[2] Police departments are responsible for paying for shipment and storage of material acquired, but do not pay for the donation. The largest number of requests for material comes from small to mid-sized police departments who are unable to afford extra clothing, vehicles and weapons. The program gives smaller police departments access to material that larger police departments are usually able to afford without federal assistance. [12] A memorandum of agreement between the DLA and the states participating in 1033 requires, that local police forces use the military equipment within one year, or return it.[4] The rules allow police to dispose of or sell some goods after at least one year of usage.[13]
School districts[edit]
As of September 2014 more than twenty school district police agencies received military-grade equipment through the program.[14] The San Diego school district planned to return a military surplus vehicle after negative public reaction.[15]
Quote--As of September 2014 more than twenty school district police agencies received military-grade equipment through the program
True,our school board found out the school police ordered 6 full auto rifles, not one of the guys had been trained in their use and no prior military in the 6 person force.
They had to send them back and Chief lost his job as he had to move on. School board was pissed on this one. 2,500 hundred people in this little town.
True,our school board found out the school police ordered 6 full auto rifles, not one of the guys had been trained in their use and no prior military in the 6 person force.
That is a lot of the problem, and the clause where they must use a lot of this equipment within a year. Small police departments do not need military grade equipment, nor do a lot of the big ones. miles
Quote--As of September 2014 more than twenty school district police agencies received military-grade equipment through the program
True,our school board found out the school police ordered 6 full auto rifles, not one of the guys had been trained in their use and no prior military in the 6 person force.
They had to send them back and Chief lost his job as he had to move on. School board was pissed on this one. 2,500 hundred people in this little town.
Here is another example of a big city cop working for rural counties with there way or the highway approach.This was in neighboring Valley county that connects to Adams county.
Quote
A Valley County man, who said he was roughed up by McCall Police during a traffic stop in July 2011, was paid $14,500 by the City of McCall's insurance carrier.
This morning's McCall Star News reports that 79-year-old Rodney Whaley filed the claim following the incident, in which he said he was "forcefully seized by the arms and slammed to the hood of a police car, causing him to lose consciousness." Whaley was taken by ambulance to St. Luke's Hospital in McCall and was later booked into the Valley County Jail for resisting and obstructing officers. The charges were later dismissed.
The Star News said Whaley claimed to have suffered four bruised ribs and later developed pneumonia and a staph infection.
Do you know if the cop was "thrown under the bus" in this incident.
He was for sure..I believe he was fresh out of POST to be fare because he was still taking some training earlier that year in Meridian.In his 30's roughing up a 79 year old guy..Geez..
I just don't get the "attitude" some officers have such as what happened to Jack..The head deputy could just as easily let Jack do what he was summoned by the dispatcher to do and it would have been over and the bull dispatched and taken off the public highway..Done and know fuss since this wasn't Jacks first rodeo dispatching an animal hit by a car.
I wonder who is responsible for the bull now..The Subaru driver or the county for drilling it multiple times with there firearms.
Quote--As of September 2014 more than twenty school district police agencies received military-grade equipment through the program
True,our school board found out the school police ordered 6 full auto rifles, not one of the guys had been trained in their use and no prior military in the 6 person force.
They had to send them back and Chief lost his job as he had to move on. School board was pissed on this one. 2,500 hundred people in this little town.
How much did the six full sutos cost?
Free----from the feds. They had to figure out how to return them.
Someone on Facebook is saying that it is the same officer that got fired from the McCall PD.That would not surprise me as I know more than one that went to Adams county as deputies from the McCall PD.
Another said I new it about it being the same officer...
Someone on Facebook is saying that it is the same officer that got fired from the McCall PD.That would not surprise me as I know more than one that went to Adams county as deputies from the McCall PD.
Another said I new it about it being the same officer...
If this turns out to be true I hope it shines a light on the practice of firing a cop from one force only to be hired by another.
If a cop is fired for actions such as this, they should be banned from ever wearing a badge.
Quote--As of September 2014 more than twenty school district police agencies received military-grade equipment through the program
True,our school board found out the school police ordered 6 full auto rifles, not one of the guys had been trained in their use and no prior military in the 6 person force.
They had to send them back and Chief lost his job as he had to move on. School board was pissed on this one. 2,500 hundred people in this little town.
How much did the six full sutos cost?
Free----from the feds. They had to figure out how to return them.
I read an article the other day written by the Prosecutor in the trial of some NYPD cops. They have a State Law that prevents any of a cop's prior abuses to be brought up at trial.
The gist of the article was the difficulty in prosecuting cops as compared to one of us commoners. That was only one of a multitude of reasons.
I read an article the other day written by the Prosecutor in the trial of some NYPD cops. They have a State Law that prevents any of a cop's prior abuses to be brought up at trial.
Your state undoubtedly has a similar law of evidence that would prevent a prosecutor from mentioning any of your prior abuses (if you had any) at your trial (if you were to be tried for something), absent some narrow exceptions.
It's not a special law for the protection of LEOs.
At trial. She made it sound as if the rule was peculiar to cops, something their Union lobbied for.
I'll see if I can find it.
It's not unique to cops, it's a standard for Court.
I can't enter evidence of a past DWI in order to convict an alleged drunk driver. Ditto on an assault for a wife beater.
Sentencing, however, is another issue.
ETA...,beat to it.
I copied this from the article I mentioned. You would NOT want to read the complete article.
t’s hard to prosecute cops. There are two main reasons for this: The first is the special deference that jurors, judges, and prosecutors show officers thanks to the widespread perception that they are heroic public figures valiantly trying to protect us. The second is the bevy of special laws around the country that are designed to shield police officers from the very tactics the police regularly use on ordinary suspects. For example, in most states, law enforcement officers cannot be questioned until they have been given a few days to get their stories straight. And many states have passed laws—such as Section 50-a of New York’s Civil Rights Law—that are specifically designed to make it almost impossible to obtain or use at trial records of a police officer’s prior brutality or misconduct. These two factors can make convicting police officers extremely difficult, and it is no accident; it is the direct result of the sustained effort by police unions to protect officers from even the most deserved discipline or prosecution."
I googled "how hard is it to prosecute cops" and there are pages of articles all saying this same thing.
The statistics cited in some of the articles are amazing as far as offenses vs. charges brought.
Do you believe that an LEO's personnel file should be utilized as evidence during a trial?
Honestly, much of the article was irrelevant for "me". For instance, I'm not going to have to deal with disclosing an assault conviction for one of my guys. He's not going to have a job with a conviction......
A couple of weeks ago a St. Louis "yout" killed a Kentucky State Trooper during a traffic stop on I-24 in Western Kentucky.
A few hours later he was shot dead by a Kentucky State Trooper group.
I got no problem with that at all. It's probably not by the book, but I don't care. I've got my opinion and it's going to be what it is.
On the other hand, If I was a law officer on the scene of this incident, I have no doubt that I could have handled it without anybody getting killed or even being charged with a crime.
I think the record should be subject to discovery.
The Lawyers can argue over relevancy with regard to its contents and the Judge can rule.
If I was charged with a crime of violence, the State would be questioning my neighbors and friends, hoping to establish a pattern of violent behavior. They would have a list of all my prior arrests and/or convictions.
A LEO's abuse victims would likely be scattered among the general population. How would one find HIS victims without the help of the State.
I think the record should be subject to discovery.
The Lawyers can argue over relevancy with regard to its contents and the Judge can rule.
If I was charged with a crime of violence, the State would be questioning my neighbors and friends, hoping to establish a pattern of violent behavior. They would have a list of all my prior arrests and/or convictions.
A LEO's abuse victims would likely be scattered among the general population. How would one find HIS victims without the help of the State.
Here, I am mandated to disclose anything in a file that would impeach an officer's credibility to the defense.
If you were charged, the State would absolutely have your records and could ABSOLUTELY NOT utilize them in the course of the trial (*assumption based on our standards*). Upon conviction, however, a past history of CONVICTION for a similar offense is relevant to sentencing.
"Mr. Yantis, this is the Sheriff's Dept. One of your bulls has been hit by a car down here on the highway in front of your house. Some people are hurt. We've got our hands full getting them to the hospital. I'd appreciate it if you'd come down here, put the bull down and take it away from the scene. It's hurt pretty bad and is getting in the way.
Too bad to see LE/groupies intentionally misdirect this thread.
It's what you do if you're trying to defend the indefensible.
"Wait on the facts" is about worn out on this thread.
The Atty. General ain't hossin' to have to tell the family and friends, along with concerned citizens, that he is not going to prosecute these two cowardly thugs.
Gene, forgive me, but this one is likely to go long......
Let's take similar offenses.... an assault for an LEO and "regular" citizen.
John Smith has been investigated for 3 assaults, but not arrested. Let's say "false reports" on two and lack of evidence on the third. Bare with me and assume he's a "local" and all are handled by "my" agency. He's arrested and going to trial. None of those investigation can be (nor should they be) admitted.
Off. Smith has been investigated for three assaults (use of force on duty). Two were found to be "false reports" and one was ruled out on lack of evidence. Same/same......should those be admissible?
The major difference...... On the two "false reports" for John Smith, the reporting party is getting arrested. Cleared false reports with an officer, around here at least,........not gonna happen.
Gene....in your hypothetical I'm assuming that the "ex" is going to be used to testify in regards to past abuse. If so, that's character evidence and is inadmissible by the prosecutor. If a defense attorney REALLY screws up and "opens the door" he might be able to get it in later. If so, blame the hypothetical lawyer.
So, apples to apples, personnel file open during trial?
If I was charged with spousal abuse, the state could find an ex wife to testify against me.[hypothetical, of course]
Don't know about Texas, but let's keep this general.
You're charged with domestic battery of your second wife. You were previously convicted of domestic battery of your first wife.
In any state I know about, the prosecutor would NOT be allowed to let the jury know about the first conviction, and if the prosecutor DID let them know, even accidentally, say though the careless testimony of a non-very-bright investigating officer, that would be grounds for mistrial, or reversal by a court of appeals. Your first wife would not be allowed to testify ... UNLESS ...
And this is why your first wife would be patiently waiting in the corridor ... for just this very moment ... (Just thinking about this makes me smile.) If you were to be STUPID enough to take the stand in your defense and say, in front of the jury, something like "I'm just not the kind of person who would beat up a woman."
I live for moments like this. You just made your character an issue in your trial, and - details will vary, state-to-state - up walks your first wife, past the defense table, hiding a little smirk on her face and she takes the stand and says to the jury, "Well, he purely beat the hell out of me!"
"Mr. Yantis, this is the Sheriff's Dept. One of your bulls has been hit by a car down here on the highway in front of your house. Some people are hurt. We've got our hands full getting them to the hospital. I'd appreciate it if you'd come down here, put the bull down and take it away from the scene. It's hurt pretty bad and is getting in the way.
I appreciate it"
Handled like that, the situation is over with.
I don't know how the Dispatcher worded it, but that sounds pretty close to how it was done, save for your last sentence. Your first two paragraphs occurred and instead of the last paragraph, the cops shot Mr. Yantis when he arrived to do what the Dispatcher requested.
Someone on Facebook is saying that it is the same officer that got fired from the McCall PD.That would not surprise me as I know more than one that went to Adams county as deputies from the McCall PD.
Another said I new it about it being the same officer...
If this turns out to be true I hope it shines a light on the practice of firing a cop from one force only to be hired by another.
If a cop is fired for actions such as this, they should be banned from ever wearing a badge.
It is infact true..He was hired as a part time Marine officer then went full time in Sept of 2013 after being let go at the MPD.
My opinion is the rancher wanted to save the bull for is AI program. The bull is probably worth a lot of money in AI sales. There some type of argument that takes place and it goes from there.
That's why the wife has the de-escalation statement. Dink
You are really way off there. Stick to what you know.
Or I could be right.
Think about. No rancher cares about a meat bull especially if the vehicles insurance covers it.
Deputies with 5 and 15 years on had been down this road many times before. They don't care who kills the bull.
The only thing the fight could have been about is the bull. And he is only cared about if he's worth more than the insurance will pay. If the rancher thought he could save him and sell straws from him and the deputies wanted to kill him is what the fight is going to be about.
My guess is as good as anyone else's.
Dink
No, no you're wrong and your guess is much poorer than those with some knowledge on the subject.
Every rancher I know, and I know hundreds, care very much about salvaging an animal such as this.
You have no clue what you're talking about with regard to selling semen. An article stated the rancher had hand-raised this calf. You aren't selling semen on a gelbvieh bull raised like that. Trust me, you are way off base there.
You could be right or wrong...
Dink
One last time.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Yes, I know what AI bulls are worth. I also know what it takes for a bull to reach that level. I have personally bought, at auction, bulls that ended up in an AI stud. I have worked many bulls that ended up standing at stud including one of the all-time high sellers in the Angus breed. You obviously know nothing about the subject matter. Quit embarrassing yourself and talking out your bunghole. Your assumption would be akin to me saying the neighbors 98 Toyota pickup that was destroyed by a vandal is as valuable as Jeff Gordon's Nascar race car.
Of course I know nothing about AI Bulls that's why I asked about the value of one.
Another question. If the rancher was into progressive ranching why would he keep a bull that had no potential in becoming a top notch bull?
Dink
If what the report state is correct, he kept the bull after hand-raising him. A bull can be good phenotypically but not really good as far as performance goes. Also, if the guy decides he has a decent calf he can keep intact and not have to spend $4500 - $5000 next Spring for a bull, he might do that.
There are hundreds of thousands of breeding bulls produced every year. And there might be one or two that make it into a stud and prove to be a really successful AI bull. Hundreds are bought or leased by studs and of those, a very few make it more than a couple years as a marketable prospect.
Someone on Facebook is saying that it is the same officer that got fired from the McCall PD.That would not surprise me as I know more than one that went to Adams county as deputies from the McCall PD.
Another said I new it about it being the same officer...
If this turns out to be true I hope it shines a light on the practice of firing a cop from one force only to be hired by another.
If a cop is fired for actions such as this, they should be banned from ever wearing a badge.
It is infact true..He was hired as a part time Marine officer then went full time in Sept of 2013 after being let go at the MPD.
It's not unusual for officers who get fired elsewhere to get hired in Bumfuk. Any other profession, for that matter. That doesn't mean they're all bad though, some just want to stay home or retire to a place where there's not much to do. You get what you pay for.
In my experience a 2200 lb bull with one shattered leg is worth about the same as 800 lb of hamburger.
We have multiple witness accounts that Mr Yantis asked for his rifle before the deputies ever started shooting his bull. He asked for the rifle for just one reason, and that reason was to put a crippled animal out of its misery.
A supposed value of a critically wounded animal to some imagined AI program is a Red Herring at best.
It's not unusual for officers who get fired elsewhere to get hired in Bumfuk. Any other profession, for that matter. That doesn't mean they're all bad though, some just want to stay home or retire to a place where there's not much to do. You get what you pay for.
More than once, I've heard a city councilman say that (name of town) is such a great place to live in, any (public servant) should feel privileged - no, honored - to be paid a salary considerably below the state average.
rule of bureaucratic crisis management is: “Find someone else to blame.” This is true even in agencies as small as the Adams County Sheriff’s Office.
Sheriff Ryan Zollman would have an insuperable conflict of interest were he to conduct the official inquiry into the November 1st killing of Jack Yantis. He could have avoided that conflict by firing the deputies, charging them as private citizens, and then turning the evidence over to a special prosecutor.
This would have provoked trouble with the Fraternal Order of Police and precipitated a grievance with the Idaho State Industrial Commission, but it would also have demonstrated to Zollman’s constituents that the killing was being investigated as a criminal homicide, rather than a suspected “assault on law enforcement.”
The inquiry was handed over to the Idaho State Police, an agency that reliably botches investigations of this kind – whether they deal with a previous officer-involved homicides, or pervasive corruption within Idaho’s prison system. Attorney General Lawrence Wasden has now invited the FBI to conduct its own investigation.
“We want to be deliberate and thorough,” insists Wendy Olson, the U.S. Attorney for Idaho. “ISP will be thorough, the FBI will be thorough.” In the meantime, “people need to be patient” as official procedures are followed. Thoroughness is not the summum bonum in an investigation of this kind: Anybody engaged in a cover-up is certainly motivated to be thorough. Richard Nixon expected his “plumbers” to be thorough in their efforts to prevent transparency and accountability.
Furthermore, the objective in staging multiple investigations is not thoroughness, but diffusion of responsibility. There is a vanishingly small possibility that the still-unnamed and still-publicly compensated killers could be put on trial for criminal homicide, or face federal civil rights charges in the event no state charges are filed. On previous performance it’s more likely that the two “independent” investigations, which will be sharing the same evidence, will both rule the killing “justified.” Should that happen, Yantis’s family and friends will receive the familiar condescending lecture about the need to “respect the process.” In less elevated language this means, essentially, “Sucks to be you.”
Wasden
The officials presiding over the “independent” inquiries operate on a sliding scale of zealousness. Lawrence Wasden displayed great zeal in pursuing felony charges against Carol Asher, a retired schoolteacher who frustrated a prosecutor by acting as a conscientious juror.
In her ardor for what she pretended was justice, Wendy Olson set aside the findings of a local investigation and threatened to send Bonners Ferry resident Jeremy Hill to federal prison for the supposed crime of shooting a grizzly bear that threatened his family. She eventually extorted $1,000 from Hill to end her vindictive and unwarranted prosecution.
Neither of those “offenses” involved actual crimes of violence against human beings. But neither of those “suspects” was swaddled in the habiliments of the state’s punitive priesthood, or invested with “qualified immunity.” And besides, Jack Yantis was “no stranger to the police,” as the Washington Post archly observed, taking note of an inconsequential record that included a traffic infraction, two DUIs and a charge of “resisting and obstructing,” the last of which should have earned him a commendation, rather than a citation.
The Post and other state-centric media outlets continue to insinuate that Yantis was in some sense responsible for his own death. This is true only to the extent that if Yantis hadn’t cooperated with a request to help the over-matched deputies deal with the wounded bull, which underscores the wisdom of avoiding any contact whatsoever with the state’s privileged purveyors of sanctified violence.
Media coverage of the Yantis killing, predictably, is freighted with intimations of potential violence against Sheriff Zollman and other officials from the rural “anti-government extremists” who populate Adams County. Sheriff Zollman, who seems like an earnest and decent man, reports that his family has received death threats, and he has refused to disclose the names of the deputies who killed Yantis in order to spare them similar treatment. This wouldn’t be a problem if the deputies had been charged with a criminal offense and taken into custody – or even released on bail once charges had been filed. Threats of the kind Zollman allegedly received are precipitated by frustration over the privileged status of law enforcement officers implicated in wrongful deaths or other acts of criminal violence.
Any evidence that Yantis assaulted or threatened the deputies would have been provided to the public within hours of the incident. If two Adams County citizens had shot and killed a sheriff’s deputy, they would have been incarcerated without bail, and their names would be known.
Despite Sheriff Zollman’s reticence, Adams County residents have identified two of his deputies as the shooters. If those men (whose names have been made known to me) are not the would-be suspects, the sheriff is doing them no favors by withholding the names of the deputies who killed Yantis. In either case, the pretense of secrecy cannot continue much longer in the age of social media.
Whenever law enforcement agencies investigate each other, the priority is to uphold “order” and vindicate “authority,” rather than to impose accountability for official misconduct. Stipulating that the “official” authority claimed by any government functionary is entirely fictitious, Sheriff Zollman could have exercised moral authority in the service of ordered liberty by filing charges against the deputies and requiring them to undergo the same process that would be endured by similarly situated defendants who were not part of the state’s enforcement caste.
Since Zollman has abdicated his responsibilities, the task of carrying out a truly independent investigation should be carried out by a citizens’ grand jury. That panel would act as a fact-finding body, taking testimony from witnesses and, if suitable evidence is found, delivering a “presentment” against the deputies to the county prosecutor.
The State of Idaho’s official judicial guidelines describe a Grand Jury as “a panel of citizens called together to hear evidence and determine if criminal charges should be initiated.” There is no requirement that the panel be “called together” by the sheriff, prosecutor, or the local courts.
Were a citizens’ grand jury to be assembled in Adams County, the air will be clotted with frantic warnings about “vigilante justice,” the Southern Poverty Law Center will denounce the development as a manifestation of the much-dreaded and little-defined “sovereign citizen movement,” and sanctimonious chin-pullers will insist that matters of this kind are best handled by “professionals.” This will make sense only to people completely ignorant of the original purpose of the grand jury.
As legal scholar Roger Roots points out, the “grand jury in its primal, plenary sense … was a group of men who stood as a check on government, often in direct opposition to the desires of those in power.” Far from being an instrument of the political elite, “American grand juries initiated prosecutions against corrupt agents of the government, often in response to complaints from individuals.”
When the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted in 1946, the grand jury – which had always been a non-government entity – became the “total captive of the prosecutor,” in the words of former federal Judge William J. Campbell.The Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure, significantly, was an appointed body without legislative authority, popular mandate, or accountability: It was assembled by the FDR regime out of people representing the prosecutorial class. The result was a “grand jury” procedure that effectively ended the public’s role in the administration of justice. By organizing an independent grand jury to investigate the Yantis killing, Adams County citizens would be acting to restore the rule of law, rather than to subvert it.
Like all “official” investigations of its kind, the inquiry into the killing of Jack Yantis is a liturgy intended to reinforce the “legitimacy” of the agency that employed the killers. This is why the pursuit of actual justice is a task that cannot be entrusted to the “professionals."
Now that i have been here in Cousil Idaho, the community where Jack Yantis was killed by police....I believe the names of the officers involved are Brian Wood and Cody Roland. I believe Brian Wood has some skeletons in his closet from a prior department. I believe Sherriff Ryan Zollman may have found out Brian Wood lied on his application for employment and didn't do anything about it. I believe some of the citizens in this town are afraid to say what needs to be said. I believe the officers body camera footage needs to be at least partially realeased to validate it exists. I believe if it doesn't exist there is enough evidence to charge the officers.
Valley County man, who said he was roughed up by McCall Police during a traffic stop in July 2011, was paid $14,500 by the City of McCall's insurance carrier.
This morning's McCall Star News reports that 79-year-old Rodney Whaley filed the claim following the incident, in which he said he was "forcefully seized by the arms and slammed to the hood of a police car, causing him to lose consciousness." Whaley was taken by ambulance to St. Luke's Hospital in McCall and was later booked into the Valley County Jail for resisting and obstructing officers. The charges were later dismissed.
The Star News said Whaley claimed to have suffered four bruised ribs and later developed pneumonia and a staph infection.
McCall Police Officer Brian Wood was involved in the incident. Wood left the department in November 2011, but city officials said his departure was a confidential personnel matter.
To the best of my knowledge, hand-raised bulls are the most dangerous. Seems they view humans as part of their own dominance hierarchy, hand-raised deer do the same thing.
One thing about a bull, they can hurt you and not be trying too. Maybe swinging their head at a fly or something. People that have not been around them, have no idea of the power they have. miles
To the best of my knowledge, hand-raised bulls are the most dangerous. Seems they view humans as part of their own dominance hierarchy, hand-raised deer do the same thing.
Only if the people that raised them failed to establish their position at the top of the pecking order. Also hand raised doesn't nessecarily mean "tame" depending on the amount of human contact.
Despite your understanding a wild Ill tempered bull is by far more dangerous.
Now that i have been here in Cousil Idaho, the community where Jack Yantis was killed by police....I believe the names of the officers involved are Brian Wood and Cody Roland. I believe Brian Wood has some skeletons in his closet from a prior department. I believe Sherriff Ryan Zollman may have found out Brian Wood lied on his application for employment and didn't do anything about it. I believe some of the citizens in this town are afraid to say what needs to be said. I believe the officers body camera footage needs to be at least partially realeased to validate it exists. I believe if it doesn't exist there is enough evidence to charge the officers.
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
One thing about a bull, they can hurt you and not be trying too. Maybe swinging their head at a fly or something. People that have not been around them, have no idea of the power they have. miles
Knew a farmer who was very badly injured when he was a young man. Not sure of all the details, but the bull got him trapped in a pen in barn/big shed and started battering him against the wall and stomping on him..
The walls were pref fab sheet metal and the bull hit him that hard one of the sheets came loose and the guy was able to crawl to safety through the gap.
His old fella heard all the commotion on the yard and came out of the house to look and on seeing the mess his son was in, promptly had a fatal heart.
I believe Sherriff Ryan Zollman may have found out Brian Wood lied on his application for employment and didn't do anything about it.
That in itself opens another can of worms in my opinion.
Glad you dished out the names,I left them out knowing to many of there friends and as I mentioned in an earlier post,Adams county has a history of hiring Valley county officers.In this case,both of the officers in question.
Now that i have been here in Cousil Idaho, the community where Jack Yantis was killed by police....I believe the names of the officers involved are Brian Wood and Cody Roland. I believe Brian Wood has some skeletons in his closet from a prior department. I believe Sherriff Ryan Zollman may have found out Brian Wood lied on his application for employment and didn't do anything about it. I believe some of the citizens in this town are afraid to say what needs to be said. I believe the officers body camera footage needs to be at least partially realeased to validate it exists. I believe if it doesn't exist there is enough evidence to charge the officers.
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
I'd not take that wager even though it seems unlikely there were people on the other side of the bull considering it's position on the edge of the road (from the picture posted earlier). Something that been in the back of my mind.....even though it was in the heat of the moment yadda yadda yadda......wouldn't it have nice if the "experienced" officer would have thought for just one second about the fact that a bolt action rifle can't be fired a second time without working the bolt and at least demanded that Yantis put the rifle down before opening fire.... Yea I know......hindsight but......
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
I'd not take that wager even though it seems unlikely there were people on the other side of the bull considering it's position on the edge of the road (from the picture posted earlier). Something that been in the back of my mind.....even though it was in the heat of the moment yadda yadda yadda......wouldn't it have nice if the "experienced" officer would have thought for just one second about the fact that a bolt action rifle can't be fired a second time without working the bolt and at least demanded that Yantis put the rifle down before opening fire.... Yea I know......hindsight but......
The picture posted was not at the time Mr. Yantis was lining up the shot.
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
I'd not take that wager even though it seems unlikely there were people on the other side of the bull considering it's position on the edge of the road (from the picture posted earlier). Something that been in the back of my mind.....even though it was in the heat of the moment yadda yadda yadda......wouldn't it have nice if the "experienced" officer would have thought for just one second about the fact that a bolt action rifle can't be fired a second time without working the bolt and at least demanded that Yantis put the rifle down before opening fire.... Yea I know......hindsight but......
Don't think for a minute that I believe this was handled correctly from the get go from my perspective a lot could have and should have been handled differently.
Could the prosecutor reveal the officer's prior "use of force" problem to a G.J.?
We've all been schooled, both on this thread and by watching "Law and Order", and know that it couldn't be used in any trial, but how about G.J. proceedings?
As far as Mr. Yantis's charges of resisting arrest, or obstruction, which accompanied his charge for DUI, I'll offer this:
Years ago it was common practice around here to tack a charge like that onto just about every DUI. Just like the officer's statement on the arrest report that the person arrested was "hostile and belligerent", no matter how subservient they actually were.
It actually gave both Lawyers extra tools in any plea bargain, which is what they both wanted.
I don't know it they still do it, or not. Been over 30 years.
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
I'd not take that wager even though it seems unlikely there were people on the other side of the bull considering it's position on the edge of the road (from the picture posted earlier). Something that been in the back of my mind.....even though it was in the heat of the moment yadda yadda yadda......wouldn't it have nice if the "experienced" officer would have thought for just one second about the fact that a bolt action rifle can't be fired a second time without working the bolt and at least demanded that Yantis put the rifle down before opening fire.... Yea I know......hindsight but......
The picture posted was not at the time Mr. Yantis was lining up the shot.
My understanding is that the bull was laying there bleeding out from wounds inflicted by Andy and Barney but I wasn't there and neither were you..... The one thing I an positive of though.....regardless of what the report says is that Yantis did not intentionally open fire on either deputy... Trigger happy???? In my mind yes....and now they need to justify it in a "report"....keeping in mind that eye witnesses are unreliable...and only these "experienced" LEO's are qualified to recall waht they saw....
Don't think for a minute that I believe this was handled correctly from the get go from my perspective a lot could have and should have been handled differently.
Definitely...
Although it will be interesting to see which deputy grabbed Jack and which put 4 bullets into his chest.If the latter is the 5 year vet that carries the lieing on his application about previous heavy handedness and the Sheriff letting it go after learning about it..That could get very interesting.
Then there is the roughing up of the wife that caused a heart attack trying to treat her husband.Where did the deputies stupidity end that night.They made all the wrong moves that evening IMHO.
Could the prosecutor reveal the officer's prior "use of force" problem to a G.J.?
We've all been schooled, both on this thread and by watching "Law and Order", and know that it couldn't be used in any trial, but how about G.J. proceedings?
Well, first...what problem are you talking about? A Grand Jury can hear anything, but it is not prudent to tell them anything that can't be sustained or is not the truth.
Not as clear cut as you think IMHO. I bet the office that tried to stop Mr. Yang is from shooting will claim that there were people in front of the bull as the rancher lined up to shoot the bull in the back of the head. The deputie either pull Yantis around or the the ranchers spun around, the rifle fired either on purpose or by accident, the officers felt they were fired and fired at Yantis
I'd wager that is what the report will indicate when complete
I'd not take that wager even though it seems unlikely there were people on the other side of the bull considering it's position on the edge of the road (from the picture posted earlier). Something that been in the back of my mind.....even though it was in the heat of the moment yadda yadda yadda......wouldn't it have nice if the "experienced" officer would have thought for just one second about the fact that a bolt action rifle can't be fired a second time without working the bolt and at least demanded that Yantis put the rifle down before opening fire.... Yea I know......hindsight but......
The picture posted was not at the time Mr. Yantis was lining up the shot.
My understanding is that the bull was laying there bleeding out from wounds inflicted by Andy and Barney but I wasn't there and neither were you..... The one thing I an positive of though.....regardless of what the report says is that Yantis did not intentionally open fire on either deputy... Trigger happy???? In my mind yes....and now they need to justify it in a "report"....keeping in mind that eye witnesses are unreliable...and only these "experienced" LEO's are qualified to recall waht they saw....
The bull may very well have been lying exactly where the pictured shows, but my point is the people may not have been in the same position as they were when the shooting occurred
I obviously don't know any more about what happened out there than anybody else, but you are probably right. If there were any clear evidence of criminal conduct, the investigating agencies would not be sitting on it. I doubt that there is any evidence to show that the Deputies were clearly justified either, or it would be released to quell the rumor mill. My guess is that it was a typical clusterf**k.
I obviously don't know any more about what happened out there than anybody else, but you are probably right. If there were any clear evidence of criminal conduct, the investigating agencies would not be sitting on it. I doubt that there is any evidence to show that the Deputies were clearly justified either, or it would be released to quell the rumor mill. My guess is that it was a typical clusterf**k.
Could the prosecutor reveal the officer's prior "use of force" problem to a G.J.?
We've all been schooled, both on this thread and by watching "Law and Order", and know that it couldn't be used in any trial, but how about G.J. proceedings?
Well, first...what problem are you talking about? A Grand Jury can hear anything, but it is not prudent to tell them anything that can't be sustained or is not the truth.
Pardon the question.
The 14 grand paid out to the victim of his heavy handedness is not a "problem", since he was not convicted of any wrongdoing.
We shouldn't believe those lyin' ass "commoners", you know. In L.A. County [I believe that's the jurisdiction I read about] over 1400 allegations of excessive force resulted in charges being filed in THREE cases.
It's REALLY hard to prosecute cops for anything they do on duty.
I obviously don't know any more about what happened out there than anybody else, but you are probably right. If there were any clear evidence of criminal conduct, the investigating agencies would not be sitting on it. I doubt that there is any evidence to show that the Deputies were clearly justified either, or it would be released to quell the rumor mill. My guess is that it was a typical clusterf**k.
It must be an awesome feeling to wake up every morning and pin the badge on and say to yourself, "if I really f*ck up bad today and kill a sumbitch, nothing will happen to me"
Don't think for a minute that I believe this was handled correctly from the get go from my perspective a lot could have and should have been handled differently.
On that we can agree.....
And don't think for a minute that I believe either deputy is guilty of murder but they do some culpability IMO.....
I'd wager that there was allot of ego and even a few F U's going on and it appears that both Yantis and the deputy participated in discharging the rifle......the deputies own everything that happened after that though....
It must be an awesome feeling to wake up every morning and pin the badge on and say to yourself, "if I really f*ck up bad today and kill a sumbitch, nothing will happen to me"
It must be an awesome feeling to wake up every morning and pin the badge on and say to yourself, "if I really f*ck up bad today and kill a sumbitch, nothing will happen to me"
Not as awesome as knowing I get paid to do it.
Do you still pin a badge on in your current position?
"Gene, do you just type whatever the Holy Spirit leads you to say?
1st its the tax payers, now its the insurance company.
I believe it is likely that you post whatever will illicit the most subjective response...."
No, Grasshopper........ No.
The Ins. Co. pays out the big bucks and the County pays its' deductible.
You with me so far?
Now, since Ins. Companies like to stay in business which means making a profit, ALL payouts come out of the pockets of policyholders in the form of premiums.
I sort of think that you already knew that, and that the Holy Spirit just showed you an opening to chastise someone who disagrees with you about cops in general, and these two cops in particular.
I sort of think that you already knew that, and that the Holy Spirit just showed you an opening to chastise someone who disagrees with you about cops in general, and these two cops in particular.
I don't mind. It keeps the thread alive.
Well its a nice stretch, but you know the intent at the time was to put the taxpayers on the direct hook, for subjective reasons, and now you aim to show that there will be no repercussions to the issue, for subjective reasons.
And no, its not because you disagree about cops; its because you selectively embrace due process.
It must be an awesome feeling to wake up every morning and pin the badge on and say to yourself, "if I really f*ck up bad today and kill a sumbitch, nothing will happen to me"
Not as awesome as knowing I get paid to do it.
And you wonder why the public has a disdain for some cops.
It must be an awesome feeling to wake up every morning and pin the badge on and say to yourself, "if I really f*ck up bad today and kill a sumbitch, nothing will happen to me"
Not as awesome as knowing I get paid to do it.
And you wonder why the public has a disdain for some cops.
I don't like to stretch out quotes on the off chance that anyone other than the two us reads this exchange, so I'll trust you to consider this as responsive to your posts:
I do not believe these two deputies had ANY good cause to shoot Mr. Yantis.
I believe that the laws encompassing this sort of event are so slanted in favor of L.E., that there will be no Justice visited on these two thugs by the Criminal Justice System.
I think that if a single Civil Suit is brought, naming the County, any other Gov't. entities, AND the Deputies as defendants, that the taxpayers are bailing the Deputies out, which is likely the last thing they want to do.
If the Plaintiff is interested only in money, this is how the deal usually ends up.
I believe Mr. Spence will get huge Judgements against these two thugs which will haunt them the rest of their lives.
All this is predicated on my belief that the citizens of Mr. Yantis's home County view this whole event pretty much as I do.
If they have YOUR viewpoint........... God help them.
I believe that the laws encompassing this sort of event are so slanted in favor of L.E., that there will be no Justice visited on these two thugs by the Criminal Justice System.
Most local governments (city and county) are self insured.
The money for payouts come directly from taxpayer dollars.
Since you said "most", I'm not disagreeing with you by noting that when the Archer County Sheriff screwed a female prisoner in his care, The County paid its 100k deductible and the Ins. Co paid 900k to settle it for the max. under the policy.
I suspect that the policy is written out of a pool administered by the State, but it is structured like any other ins. policy with a max limit and a deductible.
I believe that the laws encompassing this sort of event are so slanted in favor of L.E., that there will be no Justice visited on these two thugs by the Criminal Justice System.
What crime did these deputies commit?
None, in the eyes of Law Enforcement.
So, the question becomes what wrongs did they visit on the Yantis family and what is appropriate recompense.
I answered your question, now you answer the one I just posed.
I believe that the laws encompassing this sort of event are so slanted in favor of L.E., that there will be no Justice visited on these two thugs by the Criminal Justice System.
What crime did these deputies commit?
None, in the eyes of Law Enforcement.
So, the question becomes what wrongs did they visit on the Yantis family and what is appropriate recompense.
I answered your question, now you answer the one I just posed.
Wrongs must first be proven in a court room and at this point that has not been done, making your question hypothetical
I believe that the laws encompassing this sort of event are so slanted in favor of L.E., that there will be no Justice visited on these two thugs by the Criminal Justice System.
What crime did these deputies commit?
None, in the eyes of Law Enforcement.
So, the question becomes what wrongs did they visit on the Yantis family and what is appropriate recompense.
I answered your question, now you answer the one I just posed.
Lots of questions remain, but to answer your question directly, I don't know. You see, people can be injured without a crime being committed. It happens every day.
I'm just going a step farther and saying that just on the basis of facts not being contested, the Deputies did a terrible wrong to Mr, Yantis and his family.
Which is why I believe any transgression on Mr. Yantis's part was strictly verbal.
I would agree with that but his nephew said he did not see them talking.
What would a rancher have to say to two idiots that just riddled his bull with bullets failing to kill it?Jack was known for reloading and long range accuracy....
Is this Deputy Brian Wood originally from Texas? Because, if it were the same Brian Wood, then, yeah, he definitely has some skeletons in his closet from other departments.
To be fair,it said he left the department for a confidential personal matter..
Quote
This morning's McCall Star News reports that 79-year-old Rodney Whaley filed the claim following the incident, in which he said he was "forcefully seized by the arms and slammed to the hood of a police car, causing him to lose consciousness." Whaley was taken by ambulance to St. Luke's Hospital in McCall and was later booked into the Valley County Jail for resisting and obstructing officers. The charges were later dismissed.
The Star News said Whaley claimed to have suffered four bruised ribs and later developed pneumonia and a staph infection.
McCall Police Officer Brian Wood was involved in the incident. Wood left the department in November 2011, but city officials said his departure was a confidential personnel matter.
To be fair,it said he left the department for a confidential personal matter..
Quote
This morning's McCall Star News reports that 79-year-old Rodney Whaley filed the claim following the incident, in which he said he was "forcefully seized by the arms and slammed to the hood of a police car, causing him to lose consciousness." Whaley was taken by ambulance to St. Luke's Hospital in McCall and was later booked into the Valley County Jail for resisting and obstructing officers. The charges were later dismissed.
The Star News said Whaley claimed to have suffered four bruised ribs and later developed pneumonia and a staph infection.
McCall Police Officer Brian Wood was involved in the incident. Wood left the department in November 2011, but city officials said his departure was a confidential personnel matter.
I would not be surprised to find that the "personal confidential" matter was the formation of a local lynch mob to retaliate for his abuse. No doubt resigning preserved his ability to lateral and become another departments problem.
To be fair,it said he left the department for a confidential personal matter..
Quote
McCall Police Officer Brian Wood was involved in the incident. Wood left the department in November 2011, but city officials said his departure was a confidential personnel matter.
That's personnel not personal. Big difference.
Personnel involves HR, management, and possibly disciplinary matters.
To be fair,it said he left the department for a confidential personal matter..
Quote
McCall Police Officer Brian Wood was involved in the incident. Wood left the department in November 2011, but city officials said his departure was a confidential personnel matter.
That's personnel not personal. Big difference.
Personnel involves HR, management, and possibly disciplinary matters.
Exactly. Whomever was quoted was just saying they were not at liberty to elaborate with more details due to Brian Wood's rights as an employee-that personnel matters are confidential.
Yup..Bad Jayco...I was walking out the door as I posted that without reading the quote right. Personal/personnel..Either way quite a coincidence right after McCall had to fork out almost 15 grand for his actions in roughing up a 79 year old.
Several people over two days of interviews in Council said Mr. Yantis, who ran for sheriff himself seven or eight years ago but lost, was also a man who was not about to hold his tongue when he felt wronged.
“There is little doubt, residents and family members said, that Mr. Yantis was a tough man who had lived a tough outdoor life. He lost part of a toe in a logging accident, and just a few years ago when he was in his 50s — and still training horses — he broke his pelvis coming down on a saddle horn when the horse bucked.
He was a good man, he was an honest man, a hard worker, but he did have a bit of a temper,” said Bob Grossen, whose family has been in the Council area since the 1880s. “But if you know Jack, if you grew up around Jack, you know Jack would not be the person who would pull a gun on someone — I have no problem saying that.”
Mr. Yantis’s two daughters described him as a soft-spoken man who rarely raised his voice and who loved his animals. He trained his daughters in gun safety from the age of 5. His idea of Sunday worship was to head into Idaho’s back country.
“Let’s go see what God created,” he would say, his daughter Sarah Yantis, 42, recalled.
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
“We are in a lose-lose situation, not just for the sheriff’s office, but the community,” Sheriff Zollman said. No matter what happens with the state and federal investigations, he said, “there are always going to be people who say we should have acted differently.”
Local men who reflected local values? Doesn't sound like that to me. My experience with rural Idahonians ( born there, lived there got family from top to bottom) would suggest that shooting private citizens because they won't bow down isn't likely to reflect local values. GD
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
What? You didn't even read one page of this thread did you?
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
You sound PARTICULARLY, "inside the beltway" with this jewel of jewels.
I agree,....you did NOT read this thread before delivering this blither, did you ?
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
You sound PARTICULARLY, "inside the beltway" with this jewel of jewels.
I agree,....you did NOT read this thread before delivering this blither, did you ?
Simple yes or no will suffice.
GTC
This thread has 172 pages with many posts; no, I did not read them all. I did read about 45-50 which gave me an opinion as to how here many feel.
BTW, I now live in small-town Northern Colorado, about 1700 miles from the beltway. And, I worked in Idaho when in college (Adams and Valley Counties) as a smokejumper. I regularly visit central Idaho to see friends and I know how they feel re this situation.
Idaho has always been conservative and gone its own way. In 1963, I saw a man shot and later die outside a central Idaho bar. When the deputy sheriff arrived 2 hours later (long drive over poor roads), he got out of his car, saw the body and said (to the effect), "He was a no-good SOB anyway" He just got back in the car and drove away.
Keep in mind that the deputies were local men who reflected local values; they weren't big city cops with different values. Many (not all) who've posed in this thread have never been to Idaho, or Adams County, or Council and, might be a little fast in condemning the shooting. Let's wait until the investigations are through and a report published.
You sound PARTICULARLY, "inside the beltway" with this jewel of jewels.
I agree,....you did NOT read this thread before delivering this blither, did you ?
Simple yes or no will suffice.
GTC
This thread has 172 pages with many posts; no, I did not read them all. I did read about 45-50 which gave me an opinion as to how here many feel.
BTW, I now live in small-town Northern Colorado, about 1700 miles from the beltway. And, I worked in Idaho when in college (Adams and Valley Counties) as a smokejumper. I regularly visit central Idaho to see friends and I know how they feel re this situation.
Idaho has always been conservative and gone its own way. In 1963, I saw a man shot and later die outside a central Idaho bar. When the deputy sheriff arrived 2 hours later (long drive over poor roads), he got out of his car, saw the body and said (to the effect), "He was a no-good SOB anyway" He just got back in the car and drove away.
It seems your reputation has preceded you on this thread.
This thread has 172 pages with many posts; no, I did not read them all. I did read about 45-50 which gave me an opinion as to how here many feel.
BTW, I now live in small-town Northern Colorado, about 1700 miles from the beltway. And, I worked in Idaho when in college (Adams and Valley Counties) as a smokejumper. I regularly visit central Idaho to see friends and I know how they feel re this situation.
Idaho has always been conservative and gone its own way. In 1963, I saw a man shot and later die outside a central Idaho bar. When the deputy sheriff arrived 2 hours later (long drive over poor roads), he got out of his car, saw the body and said (to the effect), "He was a no-good SOB anyway" He just got back in the car and drove away.
Well Hillary Clinton and Company CERTAINLY wouldn't like that, would they ?
Why don't you get your azz over there, find out what's up, and report back with something a little more Western,....the beltway stink is strong in your text, Mister.
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
So you know the Yantis family personally? I wondered why you took everything on this thread so personally.
This thread has 172 pages with many posts; no, I did not read them all. I did read about 45-50 which gave me an opinion as to how here many feel.
BTW, I now live in small-town Northern Colorado, about 1700 miles from the beltway. And, I worked in Idaho when in college (Adams and Valley Counties) as a smokejumper. I regularly visit central Idaho to see friends and I know how they feel re this situation.
Idaho has always been conservative and gone its own way. In 1963, I saw a man shot and later die outside a central Idaho bar. When the deputy sheriff arrived 2 hours later (long drive over poor roads), he got out of his car, saw the body and said (to the effect), "He was a no-good SOB anyway" He just got back in the car and drove away.
Was this about the same time you killed a grizzly bear inside Glacier Park without reporting it?
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
So you know the Yantis family personally? I wondered why you took everything on this thread so personally.
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
So you know the Yantis family personally? I wondered why you took everything on this thread so personally.
Where'd I say that you drunken fu.ck?
I am pretty the sentence containing the word "we" in it.
Of course most us know that you were only trying to add to your drama theme.
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
So you know the Yantis family personally? I wondered why you took everything on this thread so personally.
What about those that have been to Idaho, council or even the Yantis ranch? Can we have an opinion?
If by representing local values you mean beating old men and losing your job only to be hired by another department where the same cop kills an unarmed man....well I don't think those are good values nor do they represent the community's values.
So you know the Yantis family personally? I wondered why you took everything on this thread so personally.
Where'd I say that you drunken fu.ck?
It's in red genius.
When you sober up maybe then you'll show me where I said I know Mr. Yantis. Until then stfu and give dink another mustache ride.
Poor Ace. He tells big whopper stories full of drama and gets his feelers hurt when he gets called on it.
Tell the story again about when you worked for the police department (though you refuse to tell what job you had there) and got all the privileged information about cops committing crimes.
This thread has 172 pages with many posts; no, I did not read them all. I did read about 45-50 which gave me an opinion as to how here many feel.
BTW, I now live in small-town Northern Colorado, about 1700 miles from the beltway. And, I worked in Idaho when in college (Adams and Valley Counties) as a smokejumper. I regularly visit central Idaho to see friends and I know how they feel re this situation.
Idaho has always been conservative and gone its own way. In 1963, I saw a man shot and later die outside a central Idaho bar. When the deputy sheriff arrived 2 hours later (long drive over poor roads), he got out of his car, saw the body and said (to the effect), "He was a no-good SOB anyway" He just got back in the car and drove away.
Well Hillary Clinton and Company CERTAINLY wouldn't like that, would they ?
Why don't you get your azz over there, find out what's up, and report back with something a little more Western,....the beltway stink is strong in your text, Mister.
this must be tough for you Cross....
The Sheriff is always right...the Rancher is always right...holy schidt, the Sheriff (s deputy) shot the Rancher.
Cognitive dissonance is what you are feeling. It happens when reality intrudes on deeply held contradictory feelings.
So, you can either clam up, or keep showing your ass....
Interesting comments from an Adams county resident.Sounds like one of the officers had more in his closet than is public.It is disturbing to know this was going on just a few miles south of me.
Living in the upper end of the county a person don't hear all that's going on.Frankly I'm appalled. If only a small portion of this is true, it is way too much. Adams County is going to really be hurting and I can find one person to blame more than any other. I was told that there are 20+ lawsuits over abuse by county cops against citizens. I also heard that there is a recall for the sheriff. I'd say that is a little late in coming. I was told that he ran his campaign on drying up Council and New Meadows. Drinking and drinking and driving are not the same. Anyone who knows me, knows what I think of drinking and driving and I consider it a criminal offense close to ipremeditated murder. But I still have to ask why has he allowed his department to get so out of hand?Cops have to uphold extremely high standards and they have not. I also heard that they threw around a 76 year old long time resident and really tore up her shoulder. Yes--I said her. Now that must have been really tough for them to have handled right. I've also heard that one of the cops who shot Jack also was involved in throwing a 71 year old man across a car hood and the man won a law suit over it. The same cop was also said to have shot a man getting out of his pickup. I still don't know the story there. This is a rural county and many of the citizens, especially the ranchers and their families have lived here for many generations. Where is this police brutality coming from? There needs to be a serious investigation into the police all over this nation.
A tribute to Jack from some of his friends...Needlessly shot by deputies for responding to dispatches request to do what ranchers do for there wounded or crippled livestock.....
Interesting comments from an Adams county resident.Sounds like one of the officers had more in his closet than is public.It is disturbing to know this was going on just a few miles south of me.
Living in the upper end of the county a person don't hear all that's going on.Frankly I'm appalled. If only a small portion of this is true, it is way too much. Adams County is going to really be hurting and I can find one person to blame more than any other. I was told that there are 20+ lawsuits over abuse by county cops against citizens. I also heard that there is a recall for the sheriff. I'd say that is a little late in coming. I was told that he ran his campaign on drying up Council and New Meadows. Drinking and drinking and driving are not the same. Anyone who knows me, knows what I think of drinking and driving and I consider it a criminal offense close to ipremeditated murder. But I still have to ask why has he allowed his department to get so out of hand?Cops have to uphold extremely high standards and they have not. I also heard that they threw around a 76 year old long time resident and really tore up her shoulder. Yes--I said her. Now that must have been really tough for them to have handled right. I've also heard that one of the cops who shot Jack also was involved in throwing a 71 year old man across a car hood and the man won a law suit over it. The same cop was also said to have shot a man getting out of his pickup. I still don't know the story there. This is a rural county and many of the citizens, especially the ranchers and their families have lived here for many generations. Where is this police brutality coming from? There needs to be a serious investigation into the police all over this nation.
To be fair, most of that is hearsay, but I think it reflects the feelings of many here on the fire.
do your eyes bulge out to the point where they're about to prolapse when you're venting your spleen, Sicko ?
I left Staten Island New York at the age of 6 ( never been back) and grew up in the deep South, Gulf and Carib. Lived in B.C. and Alberta,...ranged all over the NWT and Yukon,... I'd venture that I've spent more time on the quarter deck of a horse by mistake than you ever have intentionally,...
Really, when I try to visualize you, I see a little Pekineese dog whose eyeball finally did prolapse pop out one day. I Had to help the old lady / owner get it back in, and the little fugger bit me.
Interesting comments from an Adams county resident.Sounds like one of the officers had more in his closet than is public.It is disturbing to know this was going on just a few miles south of me.
Living in the upper end of the county a person don't hear all that's going on.Frankly I'm appalled. If only a small portion of this is true, it is way too much. Adams County is going to really be hurting and I can find one person to blame more than any other. I was told that there are 20+ lawsuits over abuse by county cops against citizens. I also heard that there is a recall for the sheriff. I'd say that is a little late in coming. I was told that he ran his campaign on drying up Council and New Meadows. Drinking and drinking and driving are not the same. Anyone who knows me, knows what I think of drinking and driving and I consider it a criminal offense close to ipremeditated murder. But I still have to ask why has he allowed his department to get so out of hand?Cops have to uphold extremely high standards and they have not. I also heard that they threw around a 76 year old long time resident and really tore up her shoulder. Yes--I said her. Now that must have been really tough for them to have handled right. I've also heard that one of the cops who shot Jack also was involved in throwing a 71 year old man across a car hood and the man won a law suit over it. The same cop was also said to have shot a man getting out of his pickup. I still don't know the story there. This is a rural county and many of the citizens, especially the ranchers and their families have lived here for many generations. Where is this police brutality coming from? There needs to be a serious investigation into the police all over this nation.
I heard if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle...
I've never seen a picture of Dink either, but you can't cram that much stupid in a regular sized body, and since his brain is obviously minuscule in size, the rest is probably in his gut.
Gittum is just a non-factor anywhere he finds himself.
Gittum is just a non-factor anywhere he finds himself.
Unless it would be a normal sized [bleep]. If he was needing to go real bad it might be an issue before he could get himself folded into one. You know, being a like 5XL type gentleman and all.
Gittum is just a non-factor anywhere he finds himself.
Unless it would be a normal sized [bleep]. If he was needing to go real bad it might be an issue before he could get himself folded into one. You know, being a like 5XL
lol How long did it take you to dig that pic up? No, it's not a Pppp...pedersoli.
Seems like if I call somebody fat, they are [bleep] FAT. Be advised that I ain't gonna look up a pic of you because, no offense, but I just don't give enough of a [bleep] too. In fact, I can't imagine caring enough that somebody called me fat to take time out to research their pic.
Gittum is just a non-factor anywhere he finds himself.
Unless it would be a normal sized [bleep]. If he was needing to go real bad it might be an issue before he could get himself folded into one. You know, being a like 5XL
Gittum is just a non-factor anywhere he finds himself.
Unless it would be a normal sized [bleep]. If he was needing to go real bad it might be an issue before he could get himself folded into one. You know, being a like 5XL
]
Hey EE, is that rifle a Ppedersoli?
Damn, it's like looking at a Chinese phone book.
Steel...leave the poor fellow alone, he makes me look anorexic so cannot be all bad.
I see that Gerry Spence has taken on this case and what I've read about Gerry, there IS going to be some questions answered. I met Gerry in Billings about twenty years ago at the Northern Hotel where he giving a talk about water rights. This guy knows his stuff.
Nope. I've been looking for updates online but the silence is deafening. If it's as blatant as the shooting of the kid in Chicago or wherever, it took them well over a year to charge the cop.
I'm sure Jayco will update as news comes available. He has been insightful thus far.
There are far worse things a man can do in his life than get fat.
You are most definitely correct Steel, throwing stones whilst living in a glass house would be one such.
This brought to mind the prince who lived in a vast crystal palace. His hobby was collecting royal furniture from throughout the world. One day, his dwelling collapsed from the weight of his collection.
The moral of the story is, of course, that people who live in glass houses shouldn't stow thrones.
There are far worse things a man can do in his life than get fat.
You are most definitely correct Steel, throwing stones whilst living in a glass house would be one such.
This brought to mind the prince who lived in a vast crystal palace. His hobby was collecting royal furniture from throughout the world. One day, his dwelling collapsed from the weight of his collection.
The moral of the story is, of course, that people who live in glass houses shouldn't stow thrones.
No idea what the facts might be here, but the most placid of stock can become an entirely different animal when wounded. Never let ones eye stray during any sort of approach.
Thought I'd check back in on this thread to see what the latest intel was on the murder of the rancher. Seems like the thread's turned into the usual Campfire back-biting name-calling cluster.
Predictable I guess if I had given it any fore-thought.
Thought I'd check back in on this thread to see what the latest intel was on the murder of the rancher. Seems like the thread's turned into the usual Campfire back-biting name-calling cluster.
Predictable I guess if I had given it any fore-thought.
Nothing but rumors now, but for the sake of Black Friday, I should share one off a facebook post that kinda makes sense,maybe,could be,maybe not?
Quote
I heard one of the cops who shot Yantis is or was in the looney bin!!!
I doubt we will here anything official until either, video from on scene is confirmed/denied and released or one of the two investigations is complete or commented on officially.If ISP is on track, were looking at about 6 months for there report findings to be announced.
In other words....you believe in ridin a horse into the ground such that ain't nothing visible except his friggin ears!!
Why not? We don't know anymore today than we did when the gossip girls got revved up 74 pages ago, right? But hey...no blacks, meskins or homosexules involved. Just a good ole, cow lovin', salt of the earth extra-white guy killed by stupid, jack-booted Obama brown shirts.
We have re-affirmed what has always been apparent ........... the Bureaucrats with badges, joined by the juvenile "hero cop types",ably abetted by those who feed at the public trough, will try to make up in volume what they lack in honesty and integrity.
Every member who does not fit in the above categories - and that is a huge majority of the membership - can look at the few bare facts and know that the Deputies had no real cause to shoot Mr.Yantis.
And we know that the investigation is being done by people who DO fit in the above categories, so that when the two deputies get away with murder, you members of the CCC will feel vindicated in your judgement.
But you are WRONG now, and you will still be WRONG no matter what the ISP investigation determines.
What is really strange is how a bunch of non productive members of a society can consider themselves among the "elites" in that society.
But you are WRONG now, and you will still be WRONG no matter what the ISP investigation determines.
At least you are starting to be honest about your agenda.
If you've not noticed my agenda before, it was not because I've kept it hidden ..... must be that you ain't all that swift.
My agenda has always been as open as yours.
The difference is that I can admit that MOST shootings by cops are legit.
There has NEVER been a shooting by a cop that you have outright condemned on this forum, as far as I can remember.
It is so hypocritical of you cops to hate politicians and lawyers as groups, and be offended when you discover that many intelligent citizens hate cops as a group.
If you've not noticed my agenda before, it was not because I've kept it hidden ..... must be that you ain't all that swift.
My agenda has always been as open as yours.
The difference is that I can admit that MOST shootings by cops are legit.
There has NEVER been a shooting by a cop that you have outright condemned on this forum, as far as I can remember.
It is so hypocritical of you cops to hate politicians and lawyers as groups, and be offended when you discover that many intelligent citizens hate cops as a group.
Everybody has noticed your agenda, and unlike you, I've never claimed to be "all that swift". I just wish some of you intelligent cop hating citizens would tell us what happened so we wouldn't have to wonder if we're being hated on more than usual, or just normal hate.
I've told you before... pay attention this time, please:
I cannot understand how a NORMAL man would accept a job that required him to exercise control over his fellow citizens.
The "mind your own business" gene must have been replaced with a "control freak" gene at birth, so,you are akin to mutants in the company of other men.
I've told you before... pay attention this time, please:
I cannot understand how a NORMAL man would accept a job that required him to exercise control over his fellow citizens.
The "mind your own business" gene must have been replaced with a "control freak" gene at birth, so,you are akin to mutants in the company of other men.
Clear enough?
I'm clear about me being a mutant and stuff, but I'm not really sure why you're mad at me all the time. People like you, pay me to take care of problems like you.
Since I haven't had so much as a traffic ticket in a lot of years, sounds like you would be out of a job if everybody else was like me.
So? I've been a cop for 33 years, never shot anybody or been sued. Do I get extra credit when somebody like you, who hasn't been arrested lately, gets better?
Since I haven't had so much as a traffic ticket in a lot of years, sounds like you would be out of a job if everybody else was like me.
So? I've been a cop for 33 years, never shot anybody or been sued. Do I get extra credit when somebody like you, who hasn't been arrested lately, gets better?
Of course, even though you were a rookie with two years at the time of my last arrest.
Deputy Accused In Jack Yantis Killing Is An FBI-Trained Sniper, Was Previously Sued For Roughing Up 79-Year-Old: TIME TO NAME THE IDAHO SHERIFFS
November 30, 2015
The first is Deputy Brian Wood. He is pictured to the left. There are more photos of him below. On September 9, 2013, Wood was switched to full time employment with the Adams County Sheriff's office. Ironically, at that same meeting, Adams County Commissoner Mike Paradis, brother in law of Jack Yantis, proposed a raise for the deputies. [ records here.] Brian Wood is actually an FBI-trained SNIPER and an elected GOP Republican Party official!! More on that below.
In July 2011, when he worked as an officer for the McCall, Idaho Police Dept., Brian Wood was accused of roughing up a 79-year old man! Rodney T. Whaley filed a civil rights lawsuit over the incident, in which he claimed he was "forcefully seized by the arms and slammed to the hood of a police car, causing him to lose consciousness." The Boise Weekly reported "Whaley was taken by ambulance to St. Luke's Hospital in McCall and was later booked into the Valley County Jail for resisting and obstructing officers. The charges were later dismissed." Despite initially demanding a jury trial, Wood and the city backed down and paid up. Wood left the department and the city paid out $14,500 to Whaley in order to settle the claim.
...Enough of Woods for now. Now we will will move on to the second Sheriff, Cody Roland. Roland is the guy who, according to my source, has a history of swaggering around acting like a jerk to his neighbors and is confident that he will be exonerated in the Jack Yantis case. When he first moved in to the 'seized' house, Cody Roland walked across the street in plain clothes, introduced himself to the homeowner (who was having a beer with friends) and said he was a deputy. The cop then started to write down everyone's license plate numbers.
....By the way, one disgusting note, these people are posting various things on Facebook within days of when Jack Yantis was killed.
Here is the Facebook Page of "CODY ROWLLAND", ('ROWLLAND' is how he spelled it, but notice the URL says his real name, 'cody roland.' Perhaps to hide from searches from the public. Cody Roland is Facebook friends with Brian Wood. Cody seems to be much more sophisticated in social media than the rest of them; he scrapped 82 mobile uploads two weeks ago and deleted 30 profile pictures a month ago, right after Jack Yantis was killed. To the right is the only picture posted on his Facebook page, so one might assume it is him, although it could be someone else.
Here is Sheriff Ryan Zollman's Facebook Page. For someone who claims that he and his family is being threatened, he sure doesn't take basic common sense precautions to provide them privacy. Unbelievable. I don't, by the way believe that the sheriff has received death threats at all. I e-mailed Zollman earlier this month asking him several pointed questions, including why, as Sheriff, hasn't he prosecuted any of these alleged death-threaters. He has refused to reply. That in itself, especially if the accusation threats were true, is proof enough that Zollman is completely incompetent. He has the state and federal governments backing him up with full force and yet he cannot even prosecute alleged people who have threatened his and his family's lives? That is beyond absurd on the face of it. Do a search for 'threats on the internet' and you will, within seconds, find hundreds of thousands of cases that have been prosecuted and people arrested.
....As far as other places where these two officers have been named; The following comment was posted via Facebook over two weeks ago on an Idaho Statesman article entitled Protesters march against the shooting of Council rancher Jack Yantis.
Facebook user Jason Patrick wrote: "Now that i have been here in Cousil Idaho, the community where Jack Yantis was killed by police....I believe the names of the officers involved are Brian Wood and Cody Roland. I believe Brian Wood has some skeletons in his closet from a prior department. I believe Sherriff Ryan Zollman may have found out Brian Wood lied on his application for employment and didn't do anything about it. I believe some of the citizens in this town are afraid to say what needs to be said. I believe the officers body camera footage needs to be at least partially realeased to validate it exists. I believe if it doesn't exist there is enough evidence to charge the officers." Like - Reply - 6 - Nov 14, 2015 5:25pm
The Idaho Statesman did not delete the comment.
The sheriffs were also named here in this discussion thread at 24hourcampfire.com.
By the way- I've posted the screenshots before. We are 'watching the watchers.' The State of Idaho has been lurking at my sites for weeks reading through all my Jack Yantis Archives (along with many other states and local governments, as well as international govts.) The Yantis family lawyer is following me on Twitter. I've got screenshots of all of it. We also know that the Sheriff knows who my sources are. They are good righteous people, and if anything happens to them - any harassment or harm whatsoever- in your podunk [bleep] town, your goose is cooked. I've given my sources names to others whom I trust in the alternative media who will release it all in a heartbeat if meed be.
That source's webpage is a host of info, like 911 being an inside job, free masonry, zionism, wars being the result of bankers, and a new section on catholocism.
I'm sure the deputy info is correct, but wow, what a moonbat.
Which I hope the guy doesn't take offense to, considering he's linking the 24hourcampfire on his page.
The Adams county sheriffs office released there names..Hummm
COUNCIL - The Adams County Sheriff's Office has released the names of the deputies involved in the fatal shooting of Council rancher Jack Yantis on Nov. 1.
The two deputies were identified Monday afternoon as Cody Rolland and Brian Wood.
The sheriff's office said Rolland has been employed as full-time deputy by the Adams County Sheriff’s Office since July 2015 but has been an Idaho certified peace officer since 2000.
Wood has been employed by the sheriff's office since June 2013.
“Out of concern for the safety of the two deputies involved in this incident and the desire for a fair and impartial investigation to be conducted, I have been hesitant to release the names. I still have concerns about threats made against the deputies but, at this time I believe that it is the right thing to do,” Zollman said in the news release that named the deputies..
The Adams county sheriffs office released there names..Hummm
“Out of concern for the safety of the two deputies involved in this incident and the desire for a fair and impartial investigation to be conducted, I have been hesitant to release the names. I still have concerns about threats made against the deputies but, at this time I believe that it is the right thing to do,” Zollman said in the news release that named the deputies..
The two deputies were revealed in other media sources like the article I posted earlier today. Looks like the sheriff has been backed into a corner by The People....
The two deputies were revealed in other media sources like the article I posted earlier today. Looks like the sheriff has been backed into a corner by The People....
It appears that way..I guess he wanted to make it official.There names have been out for quite sometime but many ignored them as rumors,not official.
Some more info on Brian Wood after McCall PD got rid of him..
According to POST, McCall police terminated Wood’s employment on Nov. 30, 2011. The McCall city clerk would not tell the Statesman whether Wood’s departure was involuntary, citing personnel privacy.
Nineteen months later, on June 27, 2013, Wood joined the Sheriff’s Office in neighboring Adams County as a part-time marine deputy. He became a full-time deputy that Sept. 20.
According to Idaho’s court records repository, Wood pleaded guilty in 2011 to two violations of Idaho Fish and Game regulations: unlawfully possessing wildlife and having no game-hunting tag. He paid $715 in fines and received a withheld judgment in 2013, which means he satisfied the terms of his sentence and no conviction was entered into his record.
Wood had four traffic infractions between 2001 and 2005, including two speeding tickets, a lack of registration and reckless driving, which was reduced to failure to obey highway lane markings.
According to Idaho’s court records repository, Wood pleaded guilty in 2011 to two violations of Idaho Fish and Game regulations: unlawfully possessing wildlife and having no game-hunting tag. He paid $715 in fines and received a withheld judgment in 2013, which means he satisfied the terms of his sentence and no conviction was entered into his record.
Wood had four traffic infractions between 2001 and 2005, including two speeding tickets, a lack of registration and reckless driving, which was reduced to failure to obey highway lane markings.
He is married.
[/i]
Nice.
Folks get all sorts of pissed when the deceased's prior criminal history was discussed, yet...
regardless, the fact that he had all these violations does show one thing. That the "thin blue line" in Idaho maybe isn't as thick as some people think.
Exactly, and a deceased individual with a history of assault is not?
History of, one time in the 90's..Sure,why not..Let it all hang out for everyone involved and let the hammer fall on those that deserve it.
No more hiding or being protected by the badge..Evidently the Idaho Statesman did a simple search on the Idaho Repository for Brian S Wood for his court records..Available to anyone, especially the Adams county sheriff whom hired him.Had the sheriff done his job, none of this would have happened either.
A police officer poaching while still employed as an officer is news worthy,especially one that was in on the needless murder of a rancher...
Exactly, and a deceased individual with a history of assault is not?
Got it.
RWE, you are nauseating. You can't see the problem, because YOU are the problem.
FIRST and FOREMOST, you have NO idea what the one, ancient, assault charge on Yantis' record was about. Then you go and insinuate that a single conviction twenty years ago is somehow equivalent to a sworn officer with three recent major proven incidents.
Who knows how many violations were kept behind the blue line?
RWE, you are worse than officer Wood. You, and your ilk behind the blue line, create pigs like him.
RWE, you are nauseating. You can't see the problem, because YOU are the problem.
FIRST and FOREMOST, you have NO idea what the one, ancient, assault charge on Yantis' record was about. Then you go and insinuate that a single conviction twenty years ago is somehow equivalent to a sworn officer with three recent major proven incidents.
Who knows how many violations were kept behind the blue line?
RWE, you are worse than officer Wood. You, and your ilk behind the blue line, create pigs like him.
You are an ignorant dick.
All I ever asked was that the rules apply evenly throught out.
Show me once, just once, in this [bleep] thread where I said the cops are innocent, you [bleep] tool.
I want to see justice done in an orderly and "thought out" fashion, not your brand of ignorant frontier justice, wrought with conjecture and innuendo.
In the interest of "thought out and orderly" procedure, you shouldn't really have any problem providing the DETAILS of Jack's 20 year old assault beef, than,...should you ?
If not , I'd be interested in hearing all about his monstrous transgression.
We're DAMNED sure going to be learning a lot more about Wood's "respect for the law".
In the interest of "thought out and orderly" procedure, you shouldn't really have any problem providing the DETAILS of Jack's 20 year old assault beef, than,...should you ?
If not , I'd be interested in hearing all about his monstrous transgression.
We're DAMNED sure going to be learning a lot more about Wood's "respect for the law".
GTC
Only that when his assault was mentioned, people pointed out that it had no bearing on his person, character, etc, because it happened long ago or wasn't directly affecting the situation and that it was just a tactic to portray Mr. Yantis in a bad light, true or not.
However, its OK then to use the officer's prior history to portray his character?
I understand that he is the public employee here, and held to a greater level of scrutiny by some, but as far as I'm concerned, let it all factor in, or none, but one shouldn't complain about sugar, while they are spooning honey.
If people want to show that the officer had character problems than one should be no less aggrieved that attempts to show that other person may have had issues as well. I understand he is dead now, but he was certainly "himself" before the event.
I think the average juror can draw their own conclusion between a 20 year old assault and a 4 year old game violation, along with other consideration, in order to come to a conclusion on someone's character.
In that light, I don't understand why people want to be one sided in their consideration unless they are agenda driven as opposed to justice driven.
I'm amazed that my faith in due process and the justice system labels me as nauseating by some.
Interesting account from a Council resident.Sounds like the Hatfields and McCoys.This applies to the other deputy,Cody.
Got that? The county commissioners hired a son-in-law to be a deputy, then housed him, and financed him. He had relatives all over this area, and felt invincible. He wandered around this neighborhood being a dick to his neighbors, and now he is being shielded from justice because if he goes down, our commissioners and Sheriff’s department is all going down with him.
Interesting account from a Council resident.Sounds like the Hatfields and McCoys.This applies to the other deputy,Cody.
Got that? The county commissioners hired a son-in-law to be a deputy, then housed him, and financed him. He had relatives all over this area, and felt invincible. He wandered around this neighborhood being a dick to his neighbors, and now he is being shielded from justice because if he goes down, our commissioners and Sheriff’s department is all going down with him.
Are you insinuating there is some sort of corruption here? Say it isn't so! Is it even possible that a cop did something wrong?! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....!!!!!!!
I had RWE pegged as a POS early on in this thread and watching her show her fat as.s as this progresses isn't surprising. There will be more of the crying and whining from her and her ilk but it appears the "assumptions" by the non cop suck ups were spot on accurate. As usual the cops took the wrong side of the law again.
Only that when his assault was mentioned, people pointed out that it had no bearing on his person, character, etc, because it happened long ago or wasn't directly affecting the situation and that it was just a tactic to portray Mr. Yantis in a bad light, true or not.
However, its OK then to use the officer's prior history to portray his character?
Recent history has more bearing than decades old history.
But you are right, both should be able to be discussed.
In my opinion, though, without context of what the assault was about there's nothing to discuss. Assault can be almost anything. Did he physically attack a neighbor over a livestock dispute? That would be very pertinent. But did he instead deck somebody at a bar who called his wife a whore? That'd make it totally irrelevant.
However, an officer of the law who is poaching and leaving carcasses lie very recently implies a LOT of bad things about the character of that officer.
Interesting account from a Council resident.Sounds like the Hatfields and McCoys.This applies to the other deputy,Cody.
Got that? The county commissioners hired a son-in-law to be a deputy, then housed him, and financed him. He had relatives all over this area, and felt invincible. He wandered around this neighborhood being a dick to his neighbors, and now he is being shielded from justice because if he goes down, our commissioners and Sheriff’s department is all going down with him.
I had RWE pegged as a POS early on in this thread and watching her show her fat as.s as this progresses isn't surprising. There will be more of the crying and whining from her and her ilk but it appears the "assumptions" by the non cop suck ups were spot on accurate. As usual the cops took the wrong side of the law again.
I'll give you the same dare as Dutch.
Show me where I have exonerated the cops in lieu of advocating due process and justice.
Seriously. All I want is an airtight execution of justice.
POS.
oh, nevermind:
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
I'd love to see some vigilante justice done for the cold blooded murder. I have zero faith that justice will be done otherwise.
However, an officer of the law who is poaching and leaving carcasses lie very recentlyimplies a LOT of bad things about the character of that officer.
^^^THIS, right here.
Not for a lot of the cops or their groupies on here. Hell there are plenty of them on this thread that would no doubt love to have a couple more crazy buddies like these 2 douche bags.
Amazing how hard it is for cops to read sign....correctly!
However, an officer of the law who is poaching and leaving carcasses lie very recentlyimplies a LOT of bad things about the character of that officer.
^^^THIS, right here.
Not for a lot of the cops or their groupies on here. Hell there are plenty of them on this thread that would no doubt love to have a couple more crazy buddies like these 2 douche bags.
Amazing how hard it is for cops to read sign....correctly!
Amazing how hard it is for you to read.
I said let it ride, but let it all ride. And let the jury decide.
But what should it matter to you, as justice won't be done in the system anyway, according to you.
Unless you mean that the recent prior criminal events are good enough to justify a lynch mob, then get your rope and get to it.
Fu.ck you RWE. You've shown your bias, your as.s and your stupidity.
You and your groupies would be smart to STFU...knowing your stupidity and inability to do so my money is on you continuing to show how silly you girls are.
Consider this: Sheriff Zollman works within his budget ($15/hr) to hire deputies. He's not getting the cream-of-the-crop as far as applicants go. In fact, he has to eventually hire somebody to fill a vacancy. If Brian "I'm a sniper!!" Wood was the best he could find to hire, just think of all of the applicants that he Did Not hire, now that's a scary thought.
P.S. I see no need for name-calling, I don't live in Adams County and most (all?) of the 24hourcampfire posters don't live there, either. It's for the residents of Adams County to deal with, they elected Ryan Zollman to be sheriff and they can remove him if his sins are that egregious.
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
I offer no apologies for expecting better.
Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?
Consider this: Sheriff Zollman works within his budget ($15/hr) to hire deputies. He's not getting the cream-of-the-crop as far as applicants go. In fact, he has to eventually hire somebody to fill a vacancy. If Brian "I'm a sniper!!" Wood was the best he could find to hire, just think of all of the applicants that he Did Not hire, now that's a scary thought.
Looking at the Adams co sheriffs office pay scale the deputies make more than 15/hr. The base salary for entry level deputies was $36,000 I believe. In any case they have enough money to buy a "sniper rifle" and night force scope....
I guess a cop can only not murder people or break laws if they are paid more.
Consider this: Sheriff Zollman works within his budget ($15/hr) to hire deputies. He's not getting the cream-of-the-crop as far as applicants go. In fact, he has to eventually hire somebody to fill a vacancy. If Brian "I'm a sniper!!" Wood was the best he could find to hire, just think of all of the applicants that he Did Not hire, now that's a scary thought.
Looking at the Adams co sheriffs office pay scale the deputies make more than 15/hr. The base salary for entry level deputies was $36,000 I believe. In any case they have enough money to buy a "sniper rifle" and night force scope....
I guess a cop can only not murder people or break laws if they are paid more.
My error, I thought that I had read previously that the pay was on the low end
Anyone who needed these latest revelations about the Deputy's criminal record to determine that he was at fault in the death of Mr. Yantis was cutting him a lot more slack than he deserved.
We have a wide open Sheriff's election next year since the incumbent is not running for re election [rumor has it he may be indicted soon] and I promise you that the quality and quantity of deputies is going to be a question ALL the candidates will have to answer.
Not for the cops it wouldn't. They'll continue to run down the reputation of a murdered rancher and make excuses for their brother in blue. But you already knew that didn't you snake?
Not for the cops it wouldn't. They'll continue to run down the reputation of a murdered rancher and make excuses for their brother in blue. But you already knew that didn't you snake?
"Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?"
That sounds very "statesmanlike" -or politically correct, put another way - except that it seldom works out that way when cops kill people.
The County will write a big check to the family of Mr. Yantis, and these two thug cops will never have to answer for their crimes.
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
I offer no apologies for expecting better.
Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?
Has this deputy been indicted or anything? I mean, is he going to be tried?
Basically a bunch of people here have been telling those who think the LEO's wrongfully killed Yantis to stfu since the thread appeared, but you feel threatened because Aces was more blunt about it? Plus, you just called Aces or somebody a POS didn't you? Then you're offended?
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
I offer no apologies for expecting better.
Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?
Has this deputy been indicted or anything? I mean, is he going to be tried?
Basically a bunch of people here have been telling those who think the LEO's wrongfully killed Yantis to stfu since the thread appeared, but you feel threatened because Aces was more blunt about it? Plus, you just called Aces or somebody a POS didn't you? Then you're offended?
Not offended.
Just trying to figure out the rules.
He called me a POS, I called him one.
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
Go play with your Pedersoli and watch for ice on the roads.
OK that was uncalled for. Figured you deserve an honest answer.
Some more info on Brian Wood after McCall PD got rid of him..
According to POST, McCall police terminated Wood’s employment on Nov. 30, 2011. The McCall city clerk would not tell the Statesman whether Wood’s departure was involuntary, citing personnel privacy.
Nineteen months later, on June 27, 2013, Wood joined the Sheriff’s Office in neighboring Adams County as a part-time marine deputy. He became a full-time deputy that Sept. 20.
According to Idaho’s court records repository, Wood pleaded guilty in 2011 to two violations of Idaho Fish and Game regulations: unlawfully possessing wildlife and having no game-hunting tag. He paid $715 in fines and received a withheld judgment in 2013, which means he satisfied the terms of his sentence and no conviction was entered into his record.
Wood had four traffic infractions between 2001 and 2005, including two speeding tickets, a lack of registration and reckless driving, which was reduced to failure to obey highway lane markings.
He is married.
Seems Mr. Wood is no stranger to coloring outside the lines.
You're a POS not because of your faith in the criminal justice system (that just proves you're a fu.cking idiot, or a democrat) but because of your responses to the murder of a man that was requested to be on scene. You're a POS because instead of empathy for him and his family you'd prefer to ignore the criminals actions because of uniform and blame the victim. You're a POS because you continue to hold fast ideas that have been proven false but your ego doesn't allow admission of your falsely held notions.
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
I offer no apologies for expecting better.
Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?
Has this deputy been indicted or anything? I mean, is he going to be tried?
Basically a bunch of people here have been telling those who think the LEO's wrongfully killed Yantis to stfu since the thread appeared, but you feel threatened because Aces was more blunt about it? Plus, you just called Aces or somebody a POS didn't you? Then you're offended?
Not offended.
Just trying to figure out the rules.
He called me a POS, I called him one.
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
Go play with your Pedersoli and watch for ice on the roads.
The roads are fine today. How many times do you have to be informed that I no longer own a Pedersoli or are you just posting disinformation for its own sake or fun? The pic is of a Shiloh Sharps. I probably have some pics of the Pedersoli(s) I used to own if you're interested. I also don't "play" with guns and haven't since I had toys as a kid. This is yet another example of why you earned being called "son". But hey, maybe you're 80 but still surveying, wishing you were still in LE, wishing you had the money for a Pedersoli and playing with guns, in which case, I apologize for calling you son, grandpa.
George---You are correct in that some of us are biased against cops beating old people, getting fired, getting rehired by another agency after committing more crimes and then killing an innocent man.
I offer no apologies for expecting better.
Somehow, by me expecting that someone accused of this should be tried in a court of law, to the most prudent extent possible, than sentenced accordingly if found guilty, I am somehow a suck up and all sorts of foulness?
Has this deputy been indicted or anything? I mean, is he going to be tried?
Basically a bunch of people here have been telling those who think the LEO's wrongfully killed Yantis to stfu since the thread appeared, but you feel threatened because Aces was more blunt about it? Plus, you just called Aces or somebody a POS didn't you? Then you're offended?
Not offended.
Just trying to figure out the rules.
He called me a POS, I called him one.
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
Go play with your Pedersoli and watch for ice on the roads.
OK that was uncalled for. Figured you deserve an honest answer.
LOL! IDGAF what you think of me being fat, are somehow offended that I didn't recommend a Pedersoli over a Shiloh or don't like my choice in hats. You and some others on here think it's cute to spread misinformation about people and then gig others for "trolling". I guess some like to stick to what they do best.
Only that the lynch mob apparently takes over a month to saddle their horses.
It took a month for the public to ferret out information that should have been made public by a number of authorities within one news cycle.
A lynch mob may be what it takes to break that thin blue line. When the pressure from the people becomes high enough that the brothers in blue will throw one of their own under the bus to save their own sorry skin.
Only that the lynch mob apparently takes over a month to saddle their horses.
It took a month for the public to ferret out information that should have been made public by a number of authorities within one news cycle.
A lynch mob may be what it takes to break that thin blue line. When the pressure from the people becomes high enough that the brothers in blue will throw one of their own under the bus to save their own sorry skin.
This and the fact that I have seen no lynch mob being formed due to posts on this thread, but now I and some others will probably be condemned for just sitting around "bitching" or "whining" (pick your own negative description) instead of doing something.
After the recent actions of the ISP in another investigation I think many who are skeptical of their impartial involvement in this situation are not off base.
LOL! IDGAF what you think of me being fat, are somehow offended that I didn't recommend a Pedersoli over a Shiloh or don't like my choice in hats. You and some others on here think it's cute to spread misinformation about people and then gig others for "trolling". I guess some like to stick to what they do best.
Actually, I didn't opine on your weight. Appreciate your information on the perdersoli, didn't appreciate you [bleep] on the pic thread with an insult on Jstuart, thought the pedersoli comments were appropo under the circumstances.
As for trolling, I'm just trying to get someone to tell me that anyone that believes in due process is a POS.
Seriously, the whole time been asking for equal treatment of all parties, fair and equal disclosure, a complete investigation, all available facts and not conjecture, and if need be, a vigorous prosecution.
Actually when we knew the names and dirt on the Scum bag deputies all the others here whose nature it is to defend scumbags in uniform told us to quit speculating.
We just quit speculating...now comes the part of the thread where the cops and groupies deny and obscure their previous stance.
I hear OJ is going to look for the killer until he dies. I feel pretty good about that. I trust him.
Personally I think that OJ watched the old Nevada Smith movie on late night cable and got inspired to get himself thrown in the joint so he can continue his search for Nicole's killer in the big house.
It took a month for the public to ferret out information that should have been made public by a number of authorities within one news cycle.
A lynch mob may be what it takes to break that thin blue line. When the pressure from the people becomes high enough that the brothers in blue will throw one of their own under the bus to save their own sorry skin.
Meanwhile, the body of Jack Yantis 'lies mouldering in the grave'. He didn't go out to shoot any deputies, no trial needed to establish that Fact. Sheriff Zollman should have been out in front of this whole mess by now, he's playing catch-up and his career as a sheriff is all over except for the crying.
Due process? Like the deputies gave Mr. Yantis? Like they afforded Mrs. Yantis? Like Brian Wood afforded the 79 year old man 4 years ago? Like folks like you afforded Mr. Yantis' reputation?
Our speaking out on this subject and our anger at the abuse of power and force in NO way usurps due process.
You are a POS because you can't or won't see the difference. You're a POS because you want to stifle free speech under s false pretense.
Consider this: Sheriff Zollman works within his budget ($15/hr) to hire deputies. He's not getting the cream-of-the-crop as far as applicants go. In fact, he has to eventually hire somebody to fill a vacancy. If Brian "I'm a sniper!!" Wood was the best he could find to hire, just think of all of the applicants that he Did Not hire, now that's a scary thought.
Looking at the Adams co sheriffs office pay scale the deputies make more than 15/hr. The base salary for entry level deputies was $36,000 I believe. In any case they have enough money to buy a "sniper rifle" and night force scope....
I guess a cop can only not murder people or break laws if they are paid more.
Assuming the $36,000 per anum holds water!
36,000 divided by 52 weeks divided by 40 hours yields $17.30/hour.
If a bit of that is overtime to cover shifts when another deputy is sick or on vacation, or in court, or if the deputy is working nights and also has to make a court appearance that same day. That could well knock the pay scale back to or even below the stated $15.00/hr.
$15.00 per hour is entry level wage at the corp. I work, a 75 minute drve from Council. That is what we pay the guys to wash down the floors or sweep. They _get a darned nice benifits package as well including ten paid holidays per year, great health insurance, sick pay, and vacation.
But low pay is no excuse for being an azzhole on or off the job.
If the pay is not right, go where it is. Unless, of course, your record precludes you from being hired anywhere else!
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
How much faith in the criminal justice system did you have after OJ Simpson's acquittal in his criminal trial for Nicole Brown's murder?
You know , there are STILL a lot of "RIP Brian Terry" bumper sticker, and rear window decals to be seen around this part of the world.
It's looking back with complete satisfaction, fondness, and starry eyed gushiness that I remember the way the "Justice System" handled the F&F "Operation,....carried out by a particularly upright and ethical crowd.
THAT is what gives me such overwhelming faith in the "criminal justice system",....
I mean I'm so HAPPY with it,..... I could just schitt.
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
How much faith in the criminal justice system did you have after OJ Simpson's acquittal in his criminal trial for Nicole Brown's murder?
You know , there are STILL a lot of "RIP Brian Terry" bumper sticker, and rear window decals to be seen around this part of the world.
It's looking back with complete satisfaction, fondness, and starry eyed gushiness that I remember the way the "Justice System" handled the F&F "Operation,....carried out by a particularly upright and ethical crowd.
THAT is what gives me such overwhelming faith in the "criminal justice system",....
I mean I'm so HAPPY with it,..... I could just schitt.
GTC
My bowels are moving as I type this.
Another thing that bears mentioning again is the treatment of Mrs. Yantis. I got no words...
If the pay is not right, go where it is. Unless, of course, your record precludes you from being hired anywhere else!
And THAT it would seem, would take us right down to the solid, seamy and sordid nitty gritty of this lamentable fiasco.
A few years ago I had a conversation with my county commissioner (North Texas) and he allowed how being a deputy was a job of last resort if you couldn't find any other line of work. He was referring to the 1930's/1940's/1950's. I asked my Mother (Oklahoma) her opinion of this and she emphatically agreed.
There's good sheriff departments, bad sheriff departments, and sheriff departments that should be shut down yesterday....
A few years ago I had a conversation with my county commissioner (North Texas) and he allowed how being a deputy was a job of last resort if you couldn't find any other line of work. He was referring to the 1930's/1940's/1950's. I asked my Mother (Oklahoma) her opinion of this and she emphatically agreed.
There's good sheriff departments, bad sheriff departments, and sheriff departments that should be shut down yesterday....
Your Mom was absolutely correct. Most people can not be trusted with the power of the vote.
To be fair and balanced(laughing) the officers dad and lawyer speaks out...
One of the sheriff’s deputies involved in the shooting death of an Adams County rancher on Nov. 1 told his father that he believes his actions that night were justified — and that “God never intended for man to kill another man.”
The family is hurting on our side, the family is hurting on their side. There’s no good that comes out of this,” Steve Wood said. “The fallout from this is more severe than I thought, and the threat is higher than I thought.”
Wood said his son did not confide in him about specifics of what happened. Still, he believes public opinion will shift dramatically when all of the facts surrounding the incident come to light. “The first to bring an accusation is always thought right until the facts are known,” he said.
Wood wants his son to consider other career options rather than stay in law enforcement, but said Brian Wood intends to stay with the sheriff’s office.
“He totally intends to go back to work,” Wood said.
“I do not think it appropriate for either of the deputies involved to publicly comment on the incident until the investigation is completed,” Dinius told the Statesman. “Suffice it to say, we have reviewed the Yantis family members’ version of events and they are not accurate in numerous material respects.”
To be fair and balanced(laughing) the officers dad and lawyer speaks out...
One of the sheriff’s deputies involved in the shooting death of an Adams County rancher on Nov. 1 told his father that he believes his actions that night were justified — and that “God never intended for man to kill another man.”
The family is hurting on our side, the family is hurting on their side. There’s no good that comes out of this,” Steve Wood said. “The fallout from this is more severe than I thought, and the threat is higher than I thought.”
Wood said his son did not confide in him about specifics of what happened. Still, he believes public opinion will shift dramatically when all of the facts surrounding the incident come to light. “The first to bring an accusation is always thought right until the facts are known,” he said.
Wood wants his son to consider other career options rather than stay in law enforcement, but said Brian Wood intends to stay with the sheriff’s office.
“He totally intends to go back to work,” Wood said.
“I do not think it appropriate for either of the deputies involved to publicly comment on the incident until the investigation is completed,” Dinius told the Statesman. “Suffice it to say, we have reviewed the Yantis family members’ version of events and they are not accurate in numerous material respects.”
To be fair and balanced(laughing) the officers dad and lawyer speaks out...
One of the sheriff’s deputies involved in the shooting death of an Adams County rancher on Nov. 1 told his father that he believes his actions that night were justified — and that “God never intended for man to kill another man.”
The family is hurting on our side, the family is hurting on their side. There’s no good that comes out of this,” Steve Wood said. “The fallout from this is more severe than I thought, and the threat is higher than I thought.”
Wood said his son did not confide in him about specifics of what happened. Still, he believes public opinion will shift dramatically when all of the facts surrounding the incident come to light. “The first to bring an accusation is always thought right until the facts are known,” he said.
Wood wants his son to consider other career options rather than stay in law enforcement, but said Brian Wood intends to stay with the sheriff’s office.
“He totally intends to go back to work,” Wood said.
“I do not think it appropriate for either of the deputies involved to publicly comment on the incident until the investigation is completed,” Dinius told the Statesman. “Suffice it to say, we have reviewed the Yantis family members’ version of events and they are not accurate in numerous material respects.”
What are you laughing about?
The only thing missing is the part about him being an aspiring rapper and how he was just getting his life together .......
Just trying to determine if its because of my faith in the criminal justice system that I am a POS, that's all.
How much faith in the criminal justice system did you have after OJ Simpson's acquittal in his criminal trial for Nicole Brown's murder?
You know , there are STILL a lot of "RIP Brian Terry" bumper sticker, and rear window decals to be seen around this part of the world.
It's looking back with complete satisfaction, fondness, and starry eyed gushiness that I remember the way the "Justice System" handled the F&F "Operation,....carried out by a particularly upright and ethical crowd.
THAT is what gives me such overwhelming faith in the "criminal justice system",....
I mean I'm so HAPPY with it,..... I could just schitt.
GTC
My bowels are moving as I type this.
Another thing that bears mentioning again is the treatment of Mrs. Yantis. I got no words...
I am sorry that the OJ trial didn't turn out the way you wanted.
Sorry that the President and administration has [bleep] the Brian Terry event.
Not sorry for the otherwise million times a day, nationwide that the system, even at the lowest levels, works.
I understand how the Terry event is integral in the lives of southwestern people and would therefore guide their level of angst,
But for the life of me, I wonder if you actually dated Nicole, in order to cite the trial so frequently (although it appears you have since deleted your post).
You know, re Mrs. Yantis, putting an old lady on the ground for no reason is really reprehensible, IMO. Anyone doing so, unjustified, should be prosecuted, tried, and if convicted, sentenced to the fullest extent of the law. If jailed, the person should be ass raped in gen-pop.
(I received an pm that said that unless I agreed with folks more, I will continue to be called names and ridiculed, so I hope that helps)
What does one do with a non-compliant 80 year-old?
What legal authority does a Cop have to require you to return to your vehicle and what offense have you committed if you do not?
If you let the irate old guy roam around out there and he gets run over are you liable?
Does department policy ALLOW you any leeway in how you react to such non-compliance?
I gotta say, listening to the old guy video I didn't hear a Cop gleefully roughing up an old guy, sounded more like a Cop not knowing what else to do but apply force. Maybe he had no options I dunno.
I'll bet if he woulda just stood there with the old guy for five or ten minutes more than 'three seconds' and let him vent, and then patiently explain why he pulled him over things woulda gone different tho.
I gotta say, listening to the old guy video I didn't hear a Cop gleefully roughing up an old guy, sounded more like a Cop not knowing what else to do but apply force. Maybe he had no options I dunno.
And there is the problem. I remember well the day the Des Arc city police detained us for a while for riding in the stock trailer with some pigs. Lost the insert in the trailer gate on the way home from a sale, and one bred gilt had already fallen/jumped out. Scuffed her up and she later aborted the pigs, but she lived. Policeman did not like us acting as a gate. Took over an hour to convince him that we had no option. miles
Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman said Tuesday that he’s relying on the county’s insurer to help determine the timeline for the return of two deputies involved in the fatal shooting of rancher Jack Yantis.
“When they tell me they’re good to go,” Zollman said. “Some come back quicker, some come back later. I’m not sure what other agencies use as a guideline. I’m using ICRMP (Idaho Counties Risk Management Program) as my source. They haven’t given me any idea.”
Extra patrols were put at their homes after Yantis’ death. One lives in Adams County and the other in Valley County. Previous reports that the deputies left their homes due to safety concerns were incorrect, Zollman said.
He said he hopes that any threats against him and the deputies are hollow, but he’s taking extra precautions.
“I sleep with shotgun by the door and a pistol on the headboard. Those are the realities of my life,” said Zollman.
He said he has no second thoughts about running for re-election next year.
I feel for the residents of Council and Adams county...
Picture of the two deputies via Idaho Statesman paper.
"I understand how the Terry event is integral in the lives of southwestern people and would therefore guide their level of angst,"
I think the above comment sums up your smartassed attitude. It illustrates the general frivolity with which you seem to take things like the death of an apparently decent and productive man and the general decline of peacekeeping in this country. To summarize the post I deleted because I realized afterwards you were talking about a completely different thread than this one...it also illustrates how it is rich you worrying about somebody messing up your own thread about beautiful Carolina sunsets.
I gotta say, listening to the old guy video I didn't hear a Cop gleefully roughing up an old guy, sounded more like a Cop not knowing what else to do but apply force. Maybe he had no options I dunno.
And there is the problem. I remember well the day the Des Arc city police detained us for a while for riding in the stock trailer with some pigs. Lost the insert in the trailer gate on the way home from a sale, and one bred gilt had already fallen/jumped out. Scuffed her up and she later aborted the pigs, but she lived. Policeman did not like us acting as a gate. Took over an hour to convince him that we had no option. miles
Dropping a pig in the road will make anybody following a trifle nervous.
"I understand how the Terry event is integral in the lives of southwestern people and would therefore guide their level of angst,"
I think the above comment sums up your smartassed attitude. It illustrates the general frivolity with which you seem to take things like the death of an apparently decent and productive man and the general decline of peacekeeping in this country. To summarize the post I deleted because I realized afterwards you were talking about a completely different thread than this one...it also illustrates how it is rich you worrying about somebody messing up your own thread about beautiful Carolina sunsets.
So, you attribute spontaneously calling a man "kangaroo [bleep]" as simply "messing up a sunset thread". Pretty frivolous.
Seems you are trying to say I have no respect for Terry with your gratuitous "decent and productive" statement. I got a litany of correspondence with Senator Burr, then Senator Hagan, now Senator Tillis, and Rep Hudson about Fast & Furious and the border issue. Considering my level of frustration, I assume the folks on the border are considerably more angered, especially since I DON'T KNOW everything going on there, so how can I judge exactly their level of frustration? Eh, son?
"I understand how the Terry event is integral in the lives of southwestern people and would therefore guide their level of angst,"
I think the above comment sums up your smartassed attitude. It illustrates the general frivolity with which you seem to take things like the death of an apparently decent and productive man and the general decline of peacekeeping in this country. To summarize the post I deleted because I realized afterwards you were talking about a completely different thread than this one...it also illustrates how it is rich you worrying about somebody messing up your own thread about beautiful Carolina sunsets.
So, you attribute calling a man "kangaroo [bleep]" as simply "messing up a sunset thread". Pretty frivolous.
Seems you are trying to say I have no respect for Terry with your gratuitous "decent and productive" statement. I got a litany of correspondence with Senator Burr, then Senator Hagan, now Senator Tillis, and Rep Hudson about Fast & Furious and the border issue. Considering my level of frustration, I assume the folks on the border are considerably more angered, especially since I DON'T KNOW everything going on there, so how can I judge exactly their level of frustration? Eh, son?
I have no idea what you actually think of the F&F fiasco but given your history of being a smartass one could certainly assume your commentary was sarcastic.
I don't recall calling Stuart "Kangarooshit" but it's an accurate description Gramps.
What does one do with a non-compliant 80 year-old?
What legal authority does a Cop have to require you to return to your vehicle and what offense have you committed if you do not?
If you let the irate old guy roam around out there and he gets run over are you liable?
Does department policy ALLOW you any leeway in how you react to such non-compliance?
I gotta say, listening to the old guy video I didn't hear a Cop gleefully roughing up an old guy, sounded more like a Cop not knowing what else to do but apply force. Maybe he had no options I dunno.
I'll bet if he woulda just stood there with the old guy for five or ten minutes more than 'three seconds' and let him vent, and then patiently explain why he pulled him over things woulda gone different tho.
Birdwatcher
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
Doing 35 in a 25 mph zone...... the old bastard needed a whuppin'.
Badge heavy cops are cowards at heart and when they paint themselves into a corner by issuing orders, enforcing that order becomes paramount in their mind. There is no re-consideration as to how necessary the order actually is, or how serious a circumstance the failure to comply actually would create.
I said from the git-go that this "failure to obey" would be the extent of Mr. Yantis's transgressions unless you count a "F U" as justification for murder.
Upon first reading of the account of Mr Yantis's death AND the treatment of his wife, the only proper emotion for a real man is "outrage".
Any "feeling", any "thought", aside from outrage marks a man as cowardly as these two deputies in my opinion.
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
What would have been proper procedure in that case? Wood did say that it was for his safety. Not trying to be a smart ass, I'd just like to know and not necessarily from you Paul.
Looks like they were pulled over in a parking lot.
IMO, when a cop asks you to get back in the car, you get back in the car.
Doing 35 in a 25 mph zone...... the old bastard needed a whuppin'.
Badge heavy cops are cowards at heart and when they paint themselves into a corner by issuing orders, enforcing that order becomes paramount in their mind. There is no re-consideration as to how necessary the order actually is, or how serious a circumstance the failure to comply actually would create.
I said from the git-go that this "failure to obey" would be the extent of Mr. Yantis's transgressions unless you count a "F U" as justification for murder.
Upon first reading of the account of Mr Yantis's death AND the treatment of his wife, the only proper emotion for a real man is "outrage".
Any "feeling", any "thought", aside from outrage marks a man as cowardly as these two deputies in my opinion.
You know, I can't find a thing here I don't agree with.
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
What would have been proper procedure in that case? Wood did say that it was for his safety. Not trying to be a smart ass, I'd just like to know and not necessarily from you Paul.
Looks like they were pulled over in a parking lot.
IMO, when a cop asks you to get back in the car, you get back in the car.
Can't see how roughly he handled the man, but from listening to it I'm having a hard time finding fault with the cop on that one. He gave him really specific orders. If I get out of my car at a traffic stop and the cop tells me to get back in I figure I better get back in. Does the other guy not have to do what the cop says because he's old? Again, can't see how roughly he handled the man, could change things, but it doesn't sound like he put some big azz beating on him..... The officer actually sounded like he was trying to avoid putting hands on the guy. I was expecting something a lot rougher than that.
What does one do with a non-compliant 80 year-old?
What legal authority does a Cop have to require you to return to your vehicle and what offense have you committed if you do not?
If you let the irate old guy roam around out there and he gets run over are you liable?
Does department policy ALLOW you any leeway in how you react to such non-compliance?
I gotta say, listening to the old guy video I didn't hear a Cop gleefully roughing up an old guy, sounded more like a Cop not knowing what else to do but apply force. Maybe he had no options I dunno.
I'll bet if he woulda just stood there with the old guy for five or ten minutes more than 'three seconds' and let him vent, and then patiently explain why he pulled him over things woulda gone different tho.
Birdwatcher
Anybody can look at the aftermath of something and write a report. Dealing with the subject of the report in real time is a different issue. I'm with you guys, he should have let the obnoxious old bastard get hit by a truck.
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
What would have been proper procedure in that case? Wood did say that it was for his safety. Not trying to be a smart ass, I'd just like to know and not necessarily from you Paul.
Looks like they were pulled over in a parking lot.
IMO, when a cop asks you to get back in the car, you get back in the car.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I am very sorry to hear you are not still in LE. We could use a LOT more guys with your attitude.
There’s not much to see on the Dash-cam footage provided to our newsroom by the McCall Police Department, but the audio is compelling. Below is some of the transcript.
Wood: "Go and have a seat in the car."
Whaley: "What do I look like? A crook?"
Wood: "Sir, I'm telling you to go sit in your car. I'm not telling you you look like a crook, just go sit down in your car."
Whaley: "I resent your attitude young man."
Wood: "Sir, I'm not giving you any attitude, but I'm not giving you any option. Go sit down in your car right now."
Whaley: "Yes. You're giving me an option because I didn't do anything wrong."
Wood: "Go to your car right now. Sir, right now. I'm not asking."
Whaley: "I'm 80 years old, and I don't like your attitude."
Wood: "I can arrest you or you can go to your car. It's up to you right now. You have three seconds to decide."
Whaley: "Okay, arrest me." Wood: "Okay."
On the video, the incident continues to escalate.
Whaley: "Let go of me! Let go of me!"
Wood: "Sir, sir, I'm not going to let go. I don't want to hurt you. Sir, stop."
Whaley: "Let go of me. Let go of me."
Whaley sued Wood, and the McCall Police Department after the incident, claiming excessive force.
Whaley: "call the EMTs."
Wood: The EMTs is called. You're still resisting. You're telling me you have medical trouble, and yet you can still fight me. Put your hands behind your back.
Whaley: "You young little whippersnappers, who do you think you are? Huh? Who do you think you are?"
Wood: "I'm a police officer, I've given you an order, it’s for my safety and you have to obey it."
I think Wood asked him 6 times to go sit in his car (maybe only 5 depending on how you read it). Wood's tone in the audio was not what I was expecting. I expected him to be a smart azz, sounded calm and like he was trying to get Whaley to cooperate as best he could. Again, can't see how he was treating the guy physically but doesn't sound like a beat down....
Everything I'm hearing about the rancher incident sounds like the cops are at fault, but I've only heard one side. Waiting to hear the cops' side before I throw them under the bus.
Everything I'm hearing about the rancher incident sounds like the cops are at fault, but I've only heard one side. Waiting to hear the cops' side before I throw them under the bus.
Pretty sure that type of opinion will get you in timeout here.
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
What would have been proper procedure in that case? Wood did say that it was for his safety. Not trying to be a smart ass, I'd just like to know and not necessarily from you Paul.
Looks like they were pulled over in a parking lot.
IMO, when a cop asks you to get back in the car, you get back in the car.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
Upon first reading of the account of Mr Yantis's death AND the treatment of his wife, the only proper emotion for a real man is "outrage".
A "real man" believes every account that he reads?
Texan logic?
Travis
I believe the Deputies restrained Mrs. Yantis, causing her to have a heart attack.
I believe the Sheriff tried to downplay this event in his statement to the news media, inferring that the widow was NOT an eyewitness to the murder of her husband.
Working backward from those two FACTS, it makes the family's account believable.
It strains credibility to imagine a scenario where two armed Deputies felt LEGITIMATELY threatened by a rancher with a bolt action .204 [yeah, I have one] who had the rifle for a legitimate reason.
So, Yeah, it is OUTRAGEOUS on it's face.
What's even more outrageous is the knowledge that the two deputies will likely suffer no harmful consequences for their actions.
I believe the Deputies restrained Mrs. Yantis, causing her to have a heart attack.
I believe the Sheriff tried to downplay this event in his statement to the news media, inferring that the widow was NOT an eyewitness to the murder of her husband.
Working backward from those two FACTS, it makes the family's account believable.
It strains credibility to imagine a scenario where two armed Deputies felt LEGITIMATELY threatened by a rancher with a bolt action .204 [yeah, I have one] who had the rifle for a legitimate reason.
So, Yeah, it is OUTRAGEOUS on it's face.
What's even more outrageous is the knowledge that the two deputies will likely suffer no harmful consequences for their actions.
You should be a private investigator. Your fact finding abilities are uncanny.
I bet you learned all this, and never even left Texas!
Did you hear any deescalation employed by the paid police professional? Maybe something like this "Mr. Smith, I am a little bit worried about the traffic here, so could you help me keep things safe by waiting in your car please sir?"
What would have been proper procedure in that case? Wood did say that it was for his safety. Not trying to be a smart ass, I'd just like to know and not necessarily from you Paul.
Looks like they were pulled over in a parking lot.
IMO, when a cop asks you to get back in the car, you get back in the car.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
Excellent post. Great to know there are still some out there like you, rather than just the ones here on the fire with the " you shall suck my dick, and suck it NOW " attitude.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
You sucked your own ass so well, you inspired others to join in!
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
You sucked your own ass so well, you inspired others to join in!
Impressive!
Clark
One day your smartass mouth may get your head stove in.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
What's even more outrageous is the knowledge that the two deputies will likely suffer no harmful consequences for their actions.
Yup..The sheriffs announcement that he is ready to put them both back to work insinuates he has knowledge of just that, from the ISP investigation.
Like most everyone else in Idaho/Adams and Valley county,the sheriff felt it necessary to announce he sleeps with a pistol by his head board and a shotgun close by.REALLY...I just wonder where he keeps his bullet..
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
Hey, that's a good point.
What federal LE entity does police work? Help us out, Andy.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
Hey, that's a good point.
What federal LE entity does police work? Help us out, Andy.
Dave
Yea....I don't know why that jumped out at me but it did. Personally....if a federal cop pulled me over for speeding I'd be prone to tell him to GFY....
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
Hey, that's a good point.
What federal LE entity does police work? Help us out, Andy.
Dave
He states he was a reserve deputy, both of you are such smart asses, you're really dumb asses.
Yea....I don't know why that jumped out at me but it did. Personally....if a federal cop pulled me over for speeding I'd be prone to tell him to GFY....
Not me.
After Fireball's stern warning, I am going to stop being a smart ass.
There’s not much to see on the Dash-cam footage provided to our newsroom by the McCall Police Department, but the audio is compelling. Below is some of the transcript.
Wood: "Go and have a seat in the car."
Whaley: "What do I look like? A crook?"
Wood: "Sir, I'm telling you to go sit in your car. I'm not telling you you look like a crook, just go sit down in your car."
Whaley: "I resent your attitude young man."
Wood: "Sir, I'm not giving you any attitude, but I'm not giving you any option. Go sit down in your car right now."
Whaley: "Yes. You're giving me an option because I didn't do anything wrong."
Wood: "Go to your car right now. Sir, right now. I'm not asking."
Whaley: "I'm 80 years old, and I don't like your attitude."
Wood: "I can arrest you or you can go to your car. It's up to you right now. You have three seconds to decide."
Whaley: "Okay, arrest me." Wood: "Okay."
On the video, the incident continues to escalate.
Whaley: "Let go of me! Let go of me!"
Wood: "Sir, sir, I'm not going to let go. I don't want to hurt you. Sir, stop."
Whaley: "Let go of me. Let go of me."
Whaley sued Wood, and the McCall Police Department after the incident, claiming excessive force.
Whaley: "call the EMTs."
Wood: The EMTs is called. You're still resisting. You're telling me you have medical trouble, and yet you can still fight me. Put your hands behind your back.
Whaley: "You young little whippersnappers, who do you think you are? Huh? Who do you think you are?"
Wood: "I'm a police officer, I've given you an order, it’s for my safety and you have to obey it."
I think Wood asked him 6 times to go sit in his car (maybe only 5 depending on how you read it). Wood's tone in the audio was not what I was expecting. I expected him to be a smart azz, sounded calm and like he was trying to get Whaley to cooperate as best he could. Again, can't see how he was treating the guy physically but doesn't sound like a beat down....
Everything I'm hearing about the rancher incident sounds like the cops are at fault, but I've only heard one side. Waiting to hear the cops' side before I throw them under the bus.
Right? I've had harsher first date conversations. Of course the above should get Curdog and gang all saddled up to get some frontier justice.
32 days and counting, still lots of talk, but no action from the lynch mob.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
You sucked your own ass so well, you inspired others to join in!
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
Let me lend assistance to the contextually impaired here. Some feds do traffic stops. I didn't as a fed. I did mention that I was a reserve deputy. Reserve deputies do traffic stops. I did. All that aside, one needn't do traffic stops to understand how verbal deescalation works.
Which as we know is JUST like being a Detroit cop.
Oh no, quite far from it. It would be much more difficult to ply the LE trade with my ideals if I were a street cop working a bad area. That said, I wouldn't do the job if I couldn't do it with my value system intact.
These goobers don't understand small counties in the south, over half of the deputies on the road in the county I live in are reserve deputies. We can't afford to have all the paid ones we need, most are retired from somewhere else, some just get their rocks off by playing Barnie. They all do traffic stops, actually the reserves probably more than the paid ones.
Which as we know is JUST like being a Detroit cop.
Oh no, quite far from it. It would be much more difficult to ply the LE trade with my ideals if I were a street cop working a bad area. That said, I wouldn't do the job if I couldn't do it with my value system intact.
Actually, most of the times I was arrested were in Ar.,Ms.,La., and Tx.
I only had one in Idaho, just N W of Rigby.
Bartenders are pretty much the same everywhere.
Except South Louisiana.
Cute, Gittem..... cute.
There's a real good chance that I had my last alcoholic beverage BEFORE you were born.
But don't let that stop you from lying......... it's what you do.
Laughin...
Let me dumb it down to your intellectual capacity....... If you are 31 Years old and still as stupid as you obviously are, you have led a very sheltered life.
Around here, you would have become much better educated.
Of course, the persona you display on here probably resembles you not at all.
DINK is probably the only cop/member who really is as stupid as he appears on this forum.
These goobers don't understand small counties in the south, over half of the deputies on the road in the county I live in are reserve deputies. We can't afford to have all the paid ones we need, most are retired from somewhere else, some just get their rocks off by playing Barnie. They all do traffic stops, actually the reserves probably more than the paid ones.
Nobody ever accused the south of having their schit together.
Actually, most of the times I was arrested were in Ar.,Ms.,La., and Tx.
I only had one in Idaho, just N W of Rigby.
Bartenders are pretty much the same everywhere.
Except South Louisiana.
Cute, Gittem..... cute.
There's a real good chance that I had my last alcoholic beverage BEFORE you were born.
But don't let that stop you from lying......... it's what you do.
Laughin...
Let me dumb it down to your intellectual capacity....... If you are 31 Years old and still as stupid as you obviously are, you have led a very sheltered life.
Around here, you would have become much better educated.
Of course, the persona you display on here probably resembles you not at all.
DINK is probably the only cop/member who really is as stupid as he appears on this forum.
Really, what is the point of posting anything intelligent, or thought provoking on this thread. Things like that have been posted several times, but get ignored or responded to with a PM stating..."you're gonna continue to be chastised until you see it our way". With that, poking fun is the more more entertaining thing to do....
These goobers don't understand small counties in the south, over half of the deputies on the road in the county I live in are reserve deputies. We can't afford to have all the paid ones we need, most are retired from somewhere else, some just get their rocks off by playing Barnie. They all do traffic stops, actually the reserves probably more than the paid ones.
Nobody ever accused the south of having their schit together.
Dave
I wouldn't say that. The S.Tex. guy that blew away the fat assed deputy that came busting in his house a couple years ago seemed to have HIS schit together.
The late deputy....... not so much.
If someone at the scene of the Yantis murder had killed both the deputies as soon as they killed Mr. Yantis, they wouldn't have been charged with anything either, just ike the S.Tex. guy.
Not all citizens are as stupid as you cops have been led to believe.
I wouldn't say that. The S.Tex. guy that blew away the fat assed deputy that came busting in his house a couple years ago seemed to have HIS schit together.
Which as we know is JUST like being a Detroit cop.
Oh no, quite far from it. It would be much more difficult to ply the LE trade with my ideals if I were a street cop working a bad area. That said, I wouldn't do the job if I couldn't do it with my value system intact.
You were a civilian not a blue suit, correct?
I did 20 years as an active duty CG member assigned primarily to stations where the missions were LE and SAR. I also did a tour as a member of a tactical counter narcotics team. My stint as a reserve deputy was limited. Katrina happened and my life changed. I guess I did it for about a year and a half. I still work for the CG, but in a civilian non-LE capacity.
I spent 20 years in federal LE and some time as a reserve deputy as well. I developed a reputation of being very good at gaining verbal compliance. Here's why. I didn't always expect blind obedience. I was humble enough to accept that my fellow countryman, a freeman, would sometimes want to question authority. In fact I kinda expected it from a fellow American. In many situations (the subject traffic stop included) the tactical situation allows a little soft handing and deescalation. You know, a little Andy Griffith. Consequently, he was my professional role model. If cops aren't willing to entertain a little passive questioning of their authority, they are in the wrong position and out of touch with the patriotic spirit of this country.
I wasn't aware that Feds do traffic stops but hey...it's your story...tell it any way you want to...
Let me lend assistance to the contextually impaired here. Some feds do traffic stops. I didn't as a fed. I did mention that I was a reserve deputy. Reserve deputies do traffic stops. I did. All that aside, one needn't do traffic stops to understand how verbal deescalation works.
In other words you just added the "Federal LEO" ditty to give your Andy Griffith bed-side manner during traffic stops more credibility....got it....like I said...."it's your story"......
"In other words you just added the "Federal LEO" ditty to give your Andy Griffith bed-side manner during traffic stops more credibility....got it....like I said...."it's your story"......"
I've never understood how some people can get the idea that they are important enough to be lied to on an internet forum.
Since all the Californian's, Texans, and Oregonians (AKA retards) are migrating to one thread; what did you all think of that armored car rescuing the hostages in Colorado Springs?
Right? I've had harsher first date conversations. Of course the above should get Curdog and gang all saddled up to get some frontier justice.
32 days and counting, still lots of talk, but no action from the lynch mob.
Surprising, NO.
Can't see how that exchange could possibly surprise you. The cop's conversation lacked respect, perspective, and wisdom.
Just like you do.
You're absolutely right, addressing someone's as sir and asking him numerous times to go sit in his car, without compliance, then telling him to sit in the car while still a dressing him as sir, and continuing to use a calm conversational level voice while still continuing to address him as sir after the guy tells him "ok, arrest me", is highly unrespectful, and just downright derogatory
Recall an elected sheriff in Idaho...It would not surprise me after the investigation is over.
Quote
Idaho* Const. Art. 6, §6Idaho Code §34-1701 et seq. Every public officer in the state of Idaho, excepting the judicial officers. Specifically includes: County officers--members of the board of county commissioners, sheriff, treasurer, assessor, prosecuting attorney, clerk of the district court, and coroner. City officers-mayor, members of the city council. Special district elected officers for whom recall procedure is not otherwise provided by law.
Recall may commence after 90 days in office. No specific grounds are required. Time for gathering signatures is 60 days. Signature requirement is number equal to 20% of the number of electors registered to vote at the last regular election at which the officer was elected. For special district elected officers, requirement is 50% instead of 20%.
You're absolutely right, addressing someone's as sir and asking him numerous times to go sit in his car, without compliance, then telling him to sit in the car while still a dressing him as sir, and continuing to use a calm conversational level voice while still continuing to address him as sir after the guy tells him "ok, arrest me", is highly unrespectful, and just downright derogatory
So as long as you call someone "Sir", you can escalate to your heart's content?
Kinda like calling someone an [bleep] followed by "bless his heart"?
Recall an elected sheriff in Idaho...It would not surprise me after the investigation is over.
Quote
Idaho* Const. Art. 6, §6Idaho Code §34-1701 et seq. Every public officer in the state of Idaho, excepting the judicial officers. Specifically includes: County officers--members of the board of county commissioners, sheriff, treasurer, assessor, prosecuting attorney, clerk of the district court, and coroner. City officers-mayor, members of the city council. Special district elected officers for whom recall procedure is not otherwise provided by law.
Recall may commence after 90 days in office. No specific grounds are required. Time for gathering signatures is 60 days. Signature requirement is number equal to 20% of the number of electors registered to vote at the last regular election at which the officer was elected. For special district elected officers, requirement is 50% instead of 20%.
That is precisely the legal remedy allowed.
That is also demonstrative of the value of having "local government" instead of a "National Police Force" where no local control is given.
Threats of vigilante justice and such takes us all down a notch.
Justice and accountability should be high priority. I hope some light is shed on this incident soon.
Can you give some evidence of how much force was used?
Enough that he made grandpa bleed..Listen to the tape at the end when the other officer arrives.
Now,just how much force is needed to subdue/cuff an 80 year old grandpa?
He could have-Called for another officer since grandpa had an issue with him..
All this for 10mph over the speed limit that was thrown out of court and cost the city a pay out and cost his job.Now the same officer killed an older guy for over what?
That's strike two for this kids ability to deal with older men..Ya,he shoved Jack also and i'm sure Jack did not like that and we all know what happened next.
Can you give some evidence of how much force was used?
Enough that he made grandpa bleed..Listen to the tape at the end when the other officer arrives.
Now,just how much force is needed to subdue/cuff an 80 year old grandpa?
He could have-Called for another officer since grandpa had an issue with him..
All this for 10mph over the speed limit that was thrown out of court and cost the city a pay out and cost his job.Now the same officer killed an older guy for over what?
That's strike two for this kids ability to deal with older men..Ya,he shoved Jack also and i'm sure Jack did not like that and we all know what happened next.
I'm betting if grandpa had ju st sat in his car, he wouldn't have gotten arrested. But when you get told "go sit in your car or you're gonna be arrested", and your response is ok, arrest me then...well you've signed up for the handcuffs, and if you continue to fight while he is trying you cuff you, your probably gonna get tossed around a bit.. regardless of age. As
As far s the lawsuit...I see why they paid him 14 grand.
It was much cheaper to do that than pay attorneys for years to win a lawsuit that really wouldn't amount to anything
I'm betting if grandpa had ju st sat in his car, he wouldn't have gotten arrested. But when you get told "go sit in your car or you're gonna be arrested", and your response is ok, arrest me then...well you've signed up for the handcuffs, and if you continue to fight while he is trying you cuff you, your probably gonna get tossed around a bit.. regardless of age
And I'll bet if Jack would have stayed home and disregarded the plea for him from dispatch to come take care of his bull,he would still be alive.
Two old men,one dead and one won a lawsuit against him and the city he worked for.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
LOOK OUT! ATV runnin' down the roadside! Call SWAT! CALL "EM NOW!!!
true story, deputy friend of mine noticed a atv running balls to the wall up in the mountains. He does a vehicle stop but ncis is down. He could only hold so long, so he had to turn the guy loose who then disappeared, about 20minutes later ncis comes up, the guy was wanted for first degree murder out of california. They don't wear signs on their forehead saying i am a bad guy. I remember arresting a guy one night who was really drunk, and crying. I guess he should have been because we caught him. Couple of hours earlier he put a bullet in a guy's head on whiskey row. I think he is still down at the az. state prison.
I have been pretty much following this whole thread, and would freely state there are some bad apples in law enforcement. Like a guy that took certification same time i did and ended up with a career with the highway patrol. Until the guy was found with all that child porn on his computer. Having said that, almost all police are pretty decent people, but there is a fraternity of sorts. Has to be. After running into all the crud in the universe on a daily basis you get kind of jerky about the average person until you know different. My time was a long time ago. But i remember various members of other departments that got arrested for dui as courtesy only went so far.
I'm betting if grandpa had ju st sat in his car, he wouldn't have gotten arrested. But when you get told "go sit in your car or you're gonna be arrested", and your response is ok, arrest me then...well you've signed up for the handcuffs, and if you continue to fight while he is trying you cuff you, your probably gonna get tossed around a bit.. regardless of age.
If you read the documentation, this guy had just come out of the hospital for heart surgery, still had the staples in his chest.
Chances are he wasn't running a marathon that day or the next day.
Serious question. WHY do you think the logical end to a cantankerous feeble old man refusing to get into his car is to arrest him?
As an observation, though, we know ONE THING that officer Wood learned that day: don't turn your dash cam on, it'll bite you int the arse......
You're absolutely right, addressing someone's as sir and asking him numerous times to go sit in his car, without compliance, then telling him to sit in the car while still a dressing him as sir, and continuing to use a calm conversational level voice while still continuing to address him as sir after the guy tells him "ok, arrest me", is highly unrespectful, and just downright derogatory
So as long as you call someone "Sir", you can escalate to your heart's content?
Kinda like calling someone an [bleep] followed by "bless his heart"?
Bless your badge heavy little heart......
Yeah, that whole "sir" routine isn't really very effective. It has an impersonal tenor to it. I have never seen it have any appreciable deescalating effect.
Yeah, that whole "sir" routine isn't really very effective. It has an impersonal tenor to it. I have never seen it have any appreciable deescalating effect.
Seriously..He was hospitalized in McCall after the injury and later in Boise Idaho for injuries suffered in the incident.
It sounds like he struggled instead of complying with the deputy's request to go sit in the car.
On the tape I can't detect an escalation by the deputy. It was an old guy being an old guy, as far as I hear it, and I'm an old guy.
Nah, the cop just kept repeating himself expecting a different result. Brilliantly effective wasn't it? He showed that 80 year old to the tune of a monetary loss for the taxpayers and to the tune of losing his job as a result. Certainly the kind of results oriented person I'd want in my employ.
Seriously..He was hospitalized in McCall after the injury and later in Boise Idaho for injuries suffered in the incident.
I got that wrong..To much info..
Quote
Whaley wore two hearing aids, suffered from severe arthritis and had undergone two heart surgeries. His chest had been stapled closed, and his doctor told him to be careful in his activities. He was driving a car with an Idaho license plate for people with disabilities.
Quote
Whaley was taken to McCall Memorial Hospital, where he was treated for abrasions. When he was released later that day, Wood took him to the Valley County Jail, where Whaley was charged with resisting and obstructing officers.
Whaley posted a bond and left the jail. The next day, his daughter took him to a Lewiston hospital for further treatment of injuries on his hands and four bruised ribs. Whaley returned to the McCall hospital July 25 and July 28 to be treated for breathing difficulties, high blood pressure, staph infection and pneumonia.
I'm betting if grandpa had ju st sat in his car, he wouldn't have gotten arrested. But when you get told "go sit in your car or you're gonna be arrested", and your response is ok, arrest me then...well you've signed up for the handcuffs, and if you continue to fight while he is trying you cuff you, your probably gonna get tossed around a bit.. regardless of age.
If you read the documentation, this guy had just come out of the hospital for heart surgery, still had the staples in his chest.
Chances are he wasn't running a marathon that day or the next day.
Serious question. WHY do you think the logical end to a cantankerous feeble old man refusing to get into his car is to arrest him?
As an observation, though, we know ONE THING that officer Wood learned that day: don't turn your dash cam on, it'll bite you int the arse......
My suspicion is that he never really thought he was going to have to arrest him, but once the bluff is called by "ok arrest me then"..he had to follow through.
Now a question for you.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
In Idaho a car or truck hitting cattle or deer in the road happens every week. But anyone getting shot by a cops over this is a first! The Idaho State Police and the federal attorney are investigating how this lethal clusterf*ck happened. We're all wondering how this went down so bad. I expect the Sheriff will be out of Office next election.
Seriously..He was hospitalized in McCall after the injury and later in Boise Idaho for injuries suffered in the incident.
I got that wrong..To much info..
Quote
Whaley wore two hearing aids, suffered from severe arthritis and had undergone two heart surgeries. His chest had been stapled closed, and his doctor told him to be careful in his activities. He was driving a car with an Idaho license plate for people with disabilities.
Quote
Whaley was taken to McCall Memorial Hospital, where he was treated for abrasions. When he was released later that day, Wood took him to the Valley County Jail, where Whaley was charged with resisting and obstructing officers.
So he was treated for abrasions from the incident. And apparently he listens to his physician ad welland he does cops
How was the officer to have any clue about his other health ailments?
Whaley posted a bond and left the jail. The next day, his daughter took him to a Lewiston hospital for further treatment of injuries on his hands and four bruised ribs. Whaley returned to the McCall hospital July 25 and July 28 to be treated for breathing difficulties, high blood pressure, staph infection and pneumonia.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
Time for some..What medications does a person take after open heart surgury...
Not going to comment on what I think because what I say or think will have no bearing on this case.
However I would be curious to know how many folks on here have actually sat on a jury in a criminal case, that lasted three days or more, since this very well could decide the fate of the people involved in this thread?
From my limited experience in such a situation many here would might never make it past the opening round of questioning prospective jurors. This might seem okay but it actually might help the very people that are the most despised in this thread. Getting all twelve people to agree on something while locked in a room generally won't be accomplished by some of the dialog seen here. All it takes is one person to disagree and some of the arguments seen here probably won't help convince that one person to agree with you.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
Time for some..What medications does a person take after open heart surgury...
My suspicion is that he never really thought he was going to have to arrest him, but once the bluff is called by "ok arrest me then"..he had to follow through.
Now a question for you.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
Now we come to the crux of the matter. Wood issued a threat to the old man trying to bully him back into the car. The old man called him on it. Wood escalated, then the old man escalated. They both were [bleep], the only difference being that Wood is the [bleep] with the badge and the gun that's paid not to be an [bleep].
The old fart being arrested is not the logical end to the sequence. As a matter of fact, I'll dare to suggest the old fart had a habit of coming out of his car when pulled over, and this was not the first time he had a confrontation with the cops over it.
It's just that Wood was unable, and if I were defense council I'd say unwilling, to achieve compliance without violence.
Now your assignment, compare and contrast with the Yantis case.......
My suspicion is that he never really thought he was going to have to arrest him, but once the bluff is called by "ok arrest me then"..he had to follow through.
Now a question for you.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
Now we come to the crux of the matter. Wood issued a threat to the old man trying to bully him back into the car. The old man called him on it. Wood escalated, then the old man escalated. They both were [bleep], the only difference being that Wood is the [bleep] with the badge and the gun that's paid not to be an [bleep].
The old fart being arrested is not the logical end to the sequence. As a matter of fact, I'll dare to suggest the old fart had a habit of coming out of his car when pulled over, and this was not the first time he had a confrontation with the cops over it.
It's just that Wood was unable, and if I were defense council I'd say unwilling, to achieve compliance without violence.
Now your assignment, compare and contrast with the Yantis case.......
The paid police professional ran out of creativity at "get back in the car," with an implied "because I said so." That was bound to go over well.
I frankly don't believe the cop has to be any more creative than that. Our rights get infringed a hell of a lot more than that every day and nobody does anything about it. That old man needed to get a sense of proportion.
My suspicion is that he never really thought he was going to have to arrest him, but once the bluff is called by "ok arrest me then"..he had to follow through.
Now a question for you.
Where is the logic in a cantankerous feeble old man who has staples still in his chest, d3cising that it was a good idea to push the cop to actually arrest him.
Now we come to the crux of the matter. Wood issued a threat to the old man trying to bully him back into the car. The old man called him on it. Wood escalated, then the old man escalated. They both were [bleep], the only difference being that Wood is the [bleep] with the badge and the gun that's paid not to be an [bleep].
The old fart being arrested is not the logical end to the sequence. As a matter of fact, I'll dare to suggest the old fart had a habit of coming out of his car when pulled over, and this was not the first time he had a confrontation with the cops over it.
It's just that Wood was unable, and if I were defense council I'd say unwilling, to achieve compliance without violence.
Now your assignment, compare and contrast with the Yantis case.......
The paid police professional ran out of creativity at "get back in the car," with an implied "because I said so." That was bound to go over well.
I sure appreciate your common sense. Seems like effective communication is a lost art among LE today. It's all about the citizen having zero rights, and the officer can ask them to do any damn thing he/she wants, and it better be done and right now, HOW HIGH SHALL I JUMP SIR?!!!
I frankly don't believe the cop has to be any more creative than that. Our rights get infringed a hell of a lot more than that every day and nobody does anything about it. That old man needed to get a sense of proportion.
Alexander Hamilton included these words in his instruction to his Revenue Cutter Service commanding officers.
While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and firmness, I feel no less solicitude, that their deportment may be marked with prudence, moderation and good temper. Upon these last qualities, not less that the former, must depend 4 the success, usefulness and consequently continuance of the establishment in which they are included. They cannot be insensible that there are some prepossessions against it, that the charge with which they are intrusted [sic] is a delicate one, and that it is easy by mismanagement, to produce serious and extensive clamour, disgust and odium. They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore, refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence.
More timeless words of LE value may have never been penned. I never certified a soul to conduct CG LE unless they knew these words and embraced them. They may be more on point today than ever before.
Alexander Hamilton included these words in his instruction to his Revenue Cutter Service commanding officers.
While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and firmness, I feel no less solicitude, that their deportment may be marked with prudence, moderation and good temper. Upon these last qualities, not less that the former, must depend 4 the success, usefulness and consequently continuance of the establishment in which they are included. They cannot be insensible that there are some prepossessions against it, that the charge with which they are intrusted [sic] is a delicate one, and that it is easy by mismanagement, to produce serious and extensive clamour, disgust and odium. They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore, refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence.
More timeless words of LE value may have never been penned. I never certified a soul to conduct CG LE unless they knew these words and embraced them. They may be more on point today than ever before.
Most of our local campfire LEO don't believe a word of that.
Good post Paul. You seem to be the type of fellow LE needs a lot more of. I encountered a few like myself and yourself during my time in LE but we're certainly a minority. I've impressed those ideals in my son who's currently a USMC MP, I sincerely hope he never abandons them.
Good post Paul. You seem to be the type of fellow LE needs a lot more of. I encountered a few like myself and yourself during my time in LE but we're certainly a minority. I've impressed those ideals in my son who's currently a USMC MP, I sincerely hope he never abandons them.
One of these asshats will be along in a few to call you a liar, they'll wanna know where you son is stationed.
Good post Paul. You seem to be the type of fellow LE needs a lot more of. I encountered a few like myself and yourself during my time in LE but we're certainly a minority. I've impressed those ideals in my son who's currently a USMC MP, I sincerely hope he never abandons them.
It's important to note that I dealt largely with a good and compliant slice of society. My heart goes out to officers who deal with the dregs day in and day out. Their job is much tougher than mine was. Still though, those words should be a guiding light for all who ply the LE trade.
Alexander Hamilton included these words in his instruction to his Revenue Cutter Service commanding officers.
While I recommend in the strongest terms to the respective officers, activity, vigilance and firmness, I feel no less solicitude, that their deportment may be marked with prudence, moderation and good temper. Upon these last qualities, not less that the former, must depend 4 the success, usefulness and consequently continuance of the establishment in which they are included. They cannot be insensible that there are some prepossessions against it, that the charge with which they are intrusted [sic] is a delicate one, and that it is easy by mismanagement, to produce serious and extensive clamour, disgust and odium. They will always keep in mind that their countrymen are freemen, and, as such, are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit. They will, therefore, refrain, with the most guarded circumspection, from whatever has the semblance of haughtiness, rudeness, or insult. If obstacles occur, they will remember that they are under the particular protection of the laws and that they can meet with nothing disagreeable in the execution of their duty which these will not severely reprehend. This reflection, and a regard to the good of the service, will prevent, at all times a spirit of irritation or resentment. They will endeavor to overcome difficulties, if any are experienced, by a cool and temperate perseverance in their duty--by address and moderation, rather than by vehemence or violence.
More timeless words of LE value may have never been penned. I never certified a soul to conduct CG LE unless they knew these words and embraced them. They may be more on point today than ever before.
Most of our local campfire LEO don't believe a word of that.
You likely can't identify "most". You dn sure are ignorant about what many believe.
I have no dog in this fight. No preconceived notions. I am not a cop hater or lover. Having thus staked my tent in neutrality, I will opine this:
Reading the transcript between Whaley and Wood, I cannot place blame on Wood. Sounds like he handled it right and Whaley should be ashamed of his actions. Who did he think he was, someone important?
As for the Yantis case, sad deal. It sounds like this is possibly a LE error given the family's story. But before I rush to judgement, I will wait to hear the other story and maybe some video footage. I think to place 100% of your eggs in either basket is jumping to conclusions. Remember how we all bagged on Obama for jumping to conclusions when he came to the defense of that black college professor...was it in Georgetown? Obama defended him then looked like the ass he is when it turned out the other way. So just because it looks like LE error from what we know now, there may be some evidence that something else happened.
If the dash or body cam footage favored the police you can be dam sure it'd be released already. Probably editing out 86 minutes of unnecessary footage...
I walked out of the theater when "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" was debuting. That was 40 years ago. I just couldn't believe that so many people were that crazy. Now I realize that there are far more nuts than most will ever realize, and those nuts will always be the wheel that squeaks the loudest.
Update..Now the sheriff is having second thoughts about bringing the deputies back after a backlash of negative comments after releasing there names.(Good)
Quote
BOISE -- Earlier this week, Adams County Sheriff Ryan Zollman identified Brian Wood, 31, and Cody Roland, 38, as the two deputies involved in the shooting death of Council rancher Jack Yantis. Zollman said that identifying the two deputies has sparked a new wave of angry emails and phone calls to the Adams County Sheriff's Office.
"With the release of the names it's definitely flared up again," said Zollman. "They don't believe they should come back to work ever as a sheriff's deputy."
That decision of when, and if, the men will return to active duty is one that weighs heavily on Zollman.
"I am absolutely concerned about that," said Zollman, "You know I think the two deputies are very intelligent, and you know they're very good deputies. But with that said, there's always going to be a few out there that don't feel that way and it will definitely affect their jobs."
Both deputies are on paid administrative leave right now. Zollman says that is where they will remain at least until the ISP investigation is complete.
"ICRMP, our liability insurance, has decided that they are going to reimburse the county for their salaries to keep them on paid administrative leave until the ISP investigation is completed," said Zollman.
According to its website, ICRMP is a casualty insurance program created exclusively for Idaho local government.
In a written statement, Executive Director Rick Ferguson explained his decision to reimburse Adams County.
"With such a small law enforcement staff, there is pressure to either bring the officers back to alleviate the stress and overtime costs that come with having to fill shifts by the remaining active officers, including the Sheriff himself, or to hire temporary officers to fill those shifts. Either way there is extra financial cost to the county, which operates on a thin budget."
The results of the ISP investigation will decide if Wood and Roland will face charges.
But for Zollman, he fears that negative backlash they've already received might be too much for his deputies to overcome.
"I've had long conversations with both of them, discussing that exact thing whether they feel like this is the best place for them to continue their careers," said Zollman.
I walked out of the theater when "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" was debuting. That was 40 years ago. I just couldn't believe that so many people were that crazy. Now I realize that there are far more nuts than most will ever realize, and those nuts will always be the wheel that squeaks the loudest.
I've never been able to watch the movie all the way through. Nicholson was one of the trial subjects for LSD when the government was developing it, if I'm not mistaken. At any rate, I've spent a good enough portion of my life around crazy folks that they neither fascinate nor entertain me. Same with movies focusing on insanity. The irony is though, that IIRC, the movie/book was about a sane criminal who got himself purposely committed to avoid prison over murder.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
But hey....keep tryin
Why was Wood let go then? Isn't that an admission of guilt? Also non-defense of the lawsuit makes the city appear guilty.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
Why was Wood let go then? Isn't that an admission of guilt?
No.
A friend of mine was let go from a position because he wanted to fight the issue in a court of law versus the higher ups decision to settle.
He threatened to take his case public if they settled, and they decided to terminate him to save all the PR and court headaches - even though the employee was not at fault.
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Also non-defense of the lawsuit makes the city appear guilty.
Maybe to low information folks that don't know its all about money. Very few people care about the facts in an issue anymore.....
Your friend could have still taken the issue public, even more so after whatever entity you're speaking of terminated him. Regardless of what you think, the question is rhetorical and non-defense and a payout does make the city look guilty as does the termination of Wood. It is the equivalent of pleading the 5th. Jurors may be ordered to not consider that in some judgement, but the public always sees it as some sort of admission of guilt.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
Why was Wood let go then? Isn't that an admission of guilt?
No.
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Also non-defense of the lawsuit makes the city appear guilty.
Maybe to low information folks that don't know its all about money. Very few people care about the facts in an issue anymore.....
People who believe either of these things tend to have little experience of the private sector. Or they have been sleepwalking through life.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
Why was Wood let go then? Isn't that an admission of guilt?
No.
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Also non-defense of the lawsuit makes the city appear guilty.
Maybe to low information folks that don't know its all about money. Very few people care about the facts in an issue anymore.....
People who believe either of these things tend to have little experience of the private sector. Or they have been sleepwalking through life.
Most folks do have little experience of the things I feel you are talking about. Thankfully they will never be arrested for a crime they didn't commit and then told by a lawyer to do a plea bargain because their defense will be too expensive. Anybody that thinks something like that doesn't brand you as guilty to the general public, is either a [bleep] liar or an idiot.
but the public always sees it as some sort of admission of guilt.
Hence my low-information comment.
Probably the same type of people that form virtual lynch mobs.
Probably the same type of people who lie about [bleep] on the internet and then turn around and try to act holier than thou. Kind of like people who said and keep saying Hawkeye got kicked out of the police academy. IOW, liars.
Anybody that thinks something like that doesn't brand you as guilty to the general public, is either a [bleep] liar or an idiot.
What do we call anybody that exploits the ignorance of the public in this regard or allows it to fester rather than at least trying to explain possibilities to the contrary?
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by RWE
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
but the public always sees it as some sort of admission of guilt.
Hence my low-information comment.
Probably the same type of people that form virtual lynch mobs.
Probably the same type of people who lie about [bleep] on the internet and then turn around and try to act holier than thou. Kind of like people who said and keep saying Hawkeye got kicked out of the police academy. IOW, liars.
Anybody that thinks something like that doesn't brand you as guilty to the general public, is either a [bleep] liar or an idiot.
What do we call anybody that exploits the ignorance of the public in this regard or allows it to fester rather than at least trying to explain possibilities to the contrary?
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by RWE
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
but the public always sees it as some sort of admission of guilt.
Hence my low-information comment.
Probably the same type of people that form virtual lynch mobs.
Probably the same type of people who lie about [bleep] on the internet and then turn around and try to act holier than thou. Kind of like people who said and keep saying Hawkeye got kicked out of the police academy. IOW, liars.
The majority of the cop/cop supporters on this thread, and other like threads, have one thing in common....... anyone who disagrees with them is deemed an idiot. Many of them attempt to bolster that assessment by outright slander.
The majority of the cop/cop supporters on this thread, and other like threads, have one thing in common....... anyone who disagrees with them is deemed an idiot. Many of them attempt to bolster that assessment by outright slander.
That is straight out of the Liberal playbook.
So is giving a specific name or label to a group you are at odds with.
Like "CCC"
it's why I stopped calling you collectively "the ilk" as opposed to making discussions more focused.
It's likely a whole lot of tactics outside Roberts Rules of order have transpired in the last 200+ pages of this fact finding mission.
Wrong...the guy didn't win a lawsuit. He accepted a settlement, a very, very low one. Which tells me that it was cheaper to pay him, than for the city to spend money on lawyers to win the lawsuit.
But hey....keep tryin
Why was Wood let go then? Isn't that an admission of guilt? Also non-defense of the lawsuit makes the city appear guilty.
Anybody that thinks something like that doesn't brand you as guilty to the general public, is either a [bleep] liar or an idiot.
What do we call anybody that exploits the ignorance of the public in this regard or allows it to fester rather than at least trying to explain possibilities to the contrary?
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by RWE
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
but the public always sees it as some sort of admission of guilt.
Hence my low-information comment.
Probably the same type of people that form virtual lynch mobs.
Probably the same type of people who lie about [bleep] on the internet and then turn around and try to act holier than thou. Kind of like people who said and keep saying Hawkeye got kicked out of the police academy. IOW, liars.
Hawk was in the police academy?
Thanks for proving my point.
Sugar spike from the 6 dozen Doughnuts you had this morning?
The majority of the cop/cop supporters on this thread, and other like threads, have one thing in common....... anyone who disagrees with them is deemed an idiot. Many of them attempt to bolster that assessment by outright slander.
That is straight out of the Liberal playbook.
Here is a condensed version of that "playbook" for those who want to identify who, is using what, from it. ___
Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people.
…The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
…the fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
…the fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
…the sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.
…the seventh rule is: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.
…the eighth rule: Keep the pressure on.
…the ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.
…The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.
…The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.
…The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
The majority of the cop/cop supporters on this thread, and other like threads, have one thing in common....... anyone who disagrees with them is deemed an idiot. Many of them attempt to bolster that assessment by outright slander.
That is straight out of the Liberal playbook.
How the [bleep] does a man have 5 ex-wives? Somewhere along the way you gotta say 'He, maybe the problem is me' dontcha?
Definition of an idiot, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
"CCC" is much easier to type than "Campfire Cop Contingent". There is nothing inherently derogatory in the term.
It just describes those members who seem to be compelled to make posts in defense of cops who have committed acts other members have deemed "indefensible".
We have a lot of cop/members who don't belong to the CCC. Their personal integrity, as far as the forum, outweighs any sense of "loyalty" to other cops.
And we have lots of members of the CCC who aren't cops.They are a mystery.
Update..Now the sheriff is having second thoughts about bringing the deputies back after a backlash of negative comments after releasing there names.(Good)
Quote
"I've had long conversations with both of them, discussing that exact thing whether they feel like this is the best place for them to continue their careers," said Zollman.
I hope they start their new careers at the Idaho State Pen
"CCC" is much easier to type than "Campfire Cop Contingent". There is nothing inherently derogatory in the term.
It just describes those members who seem to be compelled to make posts in defense of cops who have committed acts other members have deemed "indefensible".
We have a lot of cop/members who don't belong to the CCC. Their personal integrity, as far as the forum, outweighs any sense of "loyalty" to other cops.
It was just reported that ISP is wrapping up there investigation and should have there report in the next couple weeks.
Also...
Questions have also been raised about the firearm used in the Nov. 1 shooting in Adams County. Sheriff Zollman has confirmed one of the firearms used by deputies Wood and Roland was an AR-15.
That's actually pretty quick for an ISP investigation.
[quote=logcutter]It was just reported that ISP is wrapping up there investigation and should have there report in the next couple weeks.
Also...
Questions have also been raised about the firearm used in the Nov. 1 shooting in Adams County. Sheriff Zollman has confirmed one of the firearms used by deputies Wood and Roland was an AR-15.
That's actually pretty quick for an ISP investigation. [/quot
I want to know how many bullets were in the bull esp from the AR,could set the stage for over exuberant gun activity and total waste of meat and was it Wood on the trigger end????????????????????????????
Any one heard much about the next Chicago shooting tape that will be released in a couple weeks?
If the rumors are even close there will be fires.
Couldn't happen to a more deserving mayor (Rahm Emanuel). If he puts it down with brute force the media will carry his water precisely because he is a fellow traveler.
I hope you're right friend but the fact that ID State Police investigating the shooting leaves me skeptical..you gotta admit...their reputation in these matters is less than stellar.....
In cases I have seen like this, the FBI civil rights investigation will wait until the state level investigation is completed.
Then they will compare notes and evidence with state and federal prosecutors involved.
If the feds find civil rights violations, they will offer a deal for the state to prosecute on the state level. It leaves the state no choice but to file charges.
If the state declines to file charges if the feds feel charges are warranted, then the feds will file civil rights violation charges themselves. Most of the time, state's prosecutors will prefer to handle the prosecution, and exclude the feds.
The trick is getting the two levels of govt. to agree as to whether charges are warranted. If evidence is overwhelming, then they pretty much play ball like I described above.
And these two won't be charged either....the fix is clearly in or the sheriff wouldn't be talking about putting them back to work...
Their civil liability (wrongful death lawsuit's) will be their demise though...and that includes the sheriff....the families lawyer ain't no joke....
I was suprised when the Sheriff mentioned putting them back to work. It made me think there may be more to the incident than we are hearing from the family. Could be like FG mentioned, but I wouldn't think the sheriff would want them back unless he felt it was the right thing to do...but again, I'm thinking the way I would look at it, not the way he might be looking at it.
Oh....you mean the same "Feds" that just gave Lois Learner a pass and can't seem to find anything wrong with Hilary sending out 1000 classified e-mails....or do you mean the "Justice" dept who's chief just promised to go hard against Muslim "hate speech" while turning a blind eye to BLO's chants to kill cops......sorry the Feds plus an already suspect law enforcement agency's combined efforts to investigate one of their own doesn't give a warm fuzzy feeling.....
Good, bad, or indifferent, I disregard whatever the Idaho Statesman reports. They're a bag of schitt. And yes, I've followed all the history of the various shootings over the years.
I hope you're right friend but the fact that ID State Police investigating the shooting leaves me skeptical..you gotta admit...their reputation in these matters is less than stellar.....
Did you hear that the Federal Attorney for Idaho has a separate investigation?
And these two won't be charged either....the fix is clearly in or the sheriff wouldn't be talking about putting them back to work...
Their civil liability (wrongful death lawsuit's) will be their demise though...and that includes the sheriff....the families lawyer ain't no joke....
I was suprised when the Sheriff mentioned putting them back to work. It made me think there may be more to the incident than we are hearing from the family. Could be like FG mentioned, but I wouldn't think the sheriff would want them back unless he felt it was the right thing to do...but again, I'm thinking the way I would look at it, not the way he might be looking at it.
Still waiting to hear details from the officers.
The two Deputies haven't been charged yet. And if they are, they're still innocent until proven Guilty. We're getting ahead of ourselves
It was reported on ktvb(Boise) that ISP is wrapping this up and will be handed over to the Idaho Attorney's office within the next two weeks and that was last week, so I assume for this guy to be speaking out publicly as he has,that it is a done deal now.
Opps....well, it can be read if flipped through on the linked site.
Friends, The last five weeks have been the most trying of my life. I'd elaborate, but I've come to realize I don't need to because I'm not experiencing this alone, I'm not hurting alone. You have shown me that you love me, that you trust me, and that you are hurting with me. It's pretty demoralizing to get several messages, calls, texts, and e-mails each day telling me I'm a murdering piece of _____, a baby killer, and everything in between. These people have no real clue what happened that night, but it still adds up to weigh a person down. That's why I'm so grateful for you. YOU, my friends, have sent me so many messages and texts that I've had to upgrade my phone plan TWICE! Your messages, texts, e-mails, calls, and letters mean the world to me. That you would offer your support, your love, and your trust... I can't describe how much that helps! Every time I see something negative, I'm encouraged by one of you. A call, an invite to dinner, a prayer, a sliced up newspaper smile emoticon, a hug, an offer to help. Sometimes it's just an understanding look. Really, you have changed everything. Thank you! MacKenzie, I never had to guess or wonder how you'd react, what you'd say, or what you'd think. Thank you! I'll say the rest in private smile emoticon Cody, those who want to hate us always will, regardless of what the investigation shows. First, we were “Barney Fife rookies” and that was bad. When the opposite was proven true, we were evil for FBI sniper training or overseas service. No apology for being so completely wrong, just blind ignorant hatred. But isn't that the reason our profession exists? Law enforcement exists because there is a small percentage of people who aren't reasonable, who don't treat people fairly, who would rather harm innocent people than take the time to educate themselves, who hate good and glorify evil. I know what happened. You know what happened. Hopefully soon, the world will know what happened. In the mean time, know that MacKenzie and I are deeply grateful for you, for who you are, and for your actions. We all learn in grade school that forming an opinion before hearing both sides is foolish (Proverbs 14:15, 18:13 and 18:17). This is constantly reinforced through personal experiences, as every person knows the pain of being lied about, and the frustration of watching people blindly believe those lies. To those who have expressed anger toward the people who are believing and repeating false information, remember that you, me, all of us, have done the same thing. It's so easy to hear one side and take it as fact, but it's stupid, and incredibly hurtful, so let's all resolve to never again do that to someone else! There are other people and issues I'd like to address but right now I'm not allowed to. Please pray for peace and healing for all the families affected by this. When you see an ugly comment, take an extra minute to pray for that person, or if you know them, reach out to them. Please don't correct them or argue with them. Just be there. Chances are, they are hurting and really need you. With grateful love, Brian
Brian sounds so full of love and sensitivity that I'll bet he is hardly even enjoying all his free, paid, time off, what with him hurting so much inside because of the terrible things people are saying about him and his partner.
While he's feeling so sorry for himself, I wonder if he has given even one thought to the rancher he murdered and that man's family.
Old Brian doesn't sound very introspective. A sane man would probably STFU and be thinking really hard what he could have done to have averted that situation even if he was technically in the right.
Just thinking out loud..... how much support is Wood going to get from anyone during the civil trial? I'm assuming the insurance company is going to throw in the policy. The county doesn't have a pot to pee in..... He's gong to be the lone ranger in that courtroom.
By the pictures of the 2 deputies they look soft. Both "fellas" looked a little light in their loafers. That might 'splain the utter lack of self control and the fan club.
What sort of "evidence" will convince you that they are guilty of wrongdoing?
Are you "outsourcing" your opinion to the ISP?
Am I outsourcing my opinion that we should evaluate and obtain evidence? Sure, on this forum. If the ISP gives a [bleep] what I say, then they have my opinion.
As far as evidence goes, I guess I'll know when I see it all. You put "evidence" in quotes. Does that mean there is something special about it?
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
So..... what evidence can the ISP produce to prove to your satisfaction that these witnesses are truthful? There is none, and you know it.
Since it has always been a foregone conclusion that the deputies will claim that they feared for their lives, all those counseling that "we should wait on the facts to come out" are really just saying that they believe the deputies were justified in the shooting.
It's just a dishonest way of appearing to be open-minded, when you are not.
What sort of "evidence" will convince you that they are guilty of wrongdoing?
Are you "outsourcing" your opinion to the ISP?
Am I outsourcing my opinion that we should evaluate and obtain evidence? Sure, on this forum. If the ISP gives a [bleep] what I say, then they have my opinion.
As far as evidence goes, I guess I'll know when I see it all. You put "evidence" in quotes. Does that mean there is something special about it?
ISP was pretty much discredited by their own actions in another investigation. Do you expect anybody to believe they are unbiased in this?
If you are waiting for all the evidence, you will wait forever. Dash cam, body cam, physical evidence, witness accounts...... you can believe all of it has been preserved and will be considered.
That's like believing all the evidence will be used to bring justice to Lois Lerner or Hillary Clinton.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
So..... what evidence can the ISP produce to prove to your satisfaction that these witnesses are truthful? There is none, and you know it.
Since it has always been a foregone conclusion that the deputies will claim that they feared for their lives, all those counseling that "we should wait on the facts to come out" are really just saying that they believe the deputies were justified in the shooting.
It's just a dishonest way of appearing to be open-minded, when you are not.
It's common to the CCC.
Glad you are steadfast in your decision about both the cops, and anyone that believes contrary to your view.
Sure makes it easier going through life not having to think critically, I bet.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
So..... what evidence can the ISP produce to prove to your satisfaction that these witnesses are truthful? There is none, and you know it.
Since it has always been a foregone conclusion that the deputies will claim that they feared for their lives, all those counseling that "we should wait on the facts to come out" are really just saying that they believe the deputies were justified in the shooting.
It's just a dishonest way of appearing to be open-minded, when you are not.
It's common to the CCC.
Glad you are steadfast in your decision about both the cops, and anyone that believes contrary to your view.
Sure makes it easier going through life not having to think critically, I bet.
I employed critical thinking to arrive at my decision that the two thug deputies were wrong in shooting Mr. Yantis.
How much critical thinking did you do to come to the conclusion that the ISP is going to present conclusive evidence that establishes their guilt, or innocence?
Either Mr. Yantis, or the two deputies, are due the benefit of the doubt.
I say it's him and you say it's the deputies.
The County's insurance company will agree with me.
Either Mr. Yantis, or the two deputies, are due the benefit of the doubt.
I say it's him and you say it's the deputies.
The County's insurance company will agree with me.
It can't be "both"? I've always gone into scenarios involving multiple parties with the intent of making a decision based on the " stories " from both sides as they relate to the evidence at hand. I'll then make my decision based on the totality of those facts and "stories".
I've also spent too much te telling guys who were clearly righteous in a given situation not to worry that the lawyers were offering a payout in said situation to put any credibility in what they do. In that regard, it's cost/benefit analysis, not right/wrong.
George
ETA..... I agree there's going to be a large settlement.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
So..... what evidence can the ISP produce to prove to your satisfaction that these witnesses are truthful? There is none, and you know it.
Since it has always been a foregone conclusion that the deputies will claim that they feared for their lives, all those counseling that "we should wait on the facts to come out" are really just saying that they believe the deputies were justified in the shooting.
It's just a dishonest way of appearing to be open-minded, when you are not.
It's common to the CCC.
Glad you are steadfast in your decision about both the cops, and anyone that believes contrary to your view.
Sure makes it easier going through life not having to think critically, I bet.
I employed critical thinking to arrive at my decision that the two thug deputies were wrong in shooting Mr. Yantis.
How much critical thinking did you do to come to the conclusion that the ISP is going to present conclusive evidence that establishes their guilt, or innocence?
Either Mr. Yantis, or the two deputies, are due the benefit of the doubt.
I say it's him and you say it's the deputies.
The County's insurance company will agree with me.
So, you have the 'backing' of the insurance company.
Does that mean its about the money? Because you've pointed that out a lot lately.
Doesn't everyone involved merit the benefit of a doubt? Contrary to your need to paint my efforts, I've advocated that benefit to all parties. It may appear that I've focused it one the deputies, but I guess when you compare it to the lynch mob default, it would definitely seem that way.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
So..... what evidence can the ISP produce to prove to your satisfaction that these witnesses are truthful? There is none, and you know it.
Since it has always been a foregone conclusion that the deputies will claim that they feared for their lives, all those counseling that "we should wait on the facts to come out" are really just saying that they believe the deputies were justified in the shooting.
It's just a dishonest way of appearing to be open-minded, when you are not.
It's common to the CCC.
The ISP's interviews with other witnesses should back up the family. A description of the angles, where the family was standing, exactly how the shooting took place, what was said, orders given by the officers, pre/post shooting interactions, etc. There are countless things that can confirm the family's description and incriminate the officers.
Also need to hear the officers' side and description. We know 1/2 the story right now. Someone can make a decision knowing 1/2 or wait until they know it all(or as close as they can get). I know how it appears to me right now, but I'd like to hear both sides.
Is there any evidence that the ISP investigation can provide that would prove to your satisfaction that the shooting was justified?
I know this has been said previously, but why is it that citizens are deemed guilty until proven innocent but the elite cops are innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of doubt?
"Is there any evidence that the ISP investigation can provide that would prove to your satisfaction that the shooting was justified?"
No.
The deputies' actions just after shooting Mr. Yantis condemn them as arrogant, badge heavy, criminals.
There is no way to spin that into two public servants who shot Mr. Yantis out of fear for their lives.
So they don't deserve an investigation? Get that lynch mob started.....
...just for consideration.... What if the investigation shows that Mr. Yantis pointed and fired his rifle directly at the officers after refusing their orders to put down his firearm while he was cussing them repeatedly for how they had shot up the bull? An armed man has fired at them....would it change your thoughts?
It sounds like it does stink, but I've looked at things before and come to a decision before I knew the whole story....only later to hear important details that changed everything.
It sounds like it does stink, but I've looked at things before and come to a decision before I knew the whole story....only later to hear important details that changed everything.
And how often have you seen L.E. withhold evidence that put them in a good light in a high profile incident?
There is little doubt that you will "hear important details" in the ISP report.
Whether they are believable to a critical observer is another matter.
I read yesterday where the first cop to the scene in San Bernadino arrived and sat in his car for two minutes waiting for backup to arrive. He wouldn't or wasn't allowed to go in alone. I don't think I could sit for two minutes thinking people were being murdered inside when I could save some.
Honestly, I hope what I read isn't true. It bothers me. If it is, that's a problem. If it is true, I'm sure it's "prudent" or dept policy or some such. I wouldn't make a good cop under those circumstances.
I'd be going in that building before my patrol car had rolled to a stop. It's not just a job, it's about serving people. If you are in to write tickets and slap around old women, you're in the wrong profession.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
Do you really think that their attorney, the attorney who is in it for the money, is going to release a full and honest statement?
You don't think he is going to craft the statement that puts his clients in the best position to get a cash settlement that he gets his 33.3 percent of?
I read yesterday where the first cop to the scene in San Bernadino arrived and sat in his car for two minutes waiting for backup to arrive. He wouldn't or wasn't allowed to go in alone. I don't think I could sit for two minutes thinking people were being murdered inside when I could save some.
Honestly, I hope what I read isn't true. It bothers me. If it is, that's a problem. If it is true, I'm sure it's "prudent" or dept policy or some such. I wouldn't make a good cop under those circumstances.
I'd be going in that building before my patrol car had rolled to a stop. It's not just a job, it's about serving people. If you are in to write tickets and slap around old women, you're in the wrong profession.
In the military, let's say your column is strung out a mile with guys spaced fifty yards apart. You outnumber the enemy something like three-to-one and it will be easy to overcome them. You can't just keep marching into their fire though. You have to have a rally point and then attack en-masse in order to win. You aren't going to do the people inside any good by becoming a casualty.
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
Do you really think that their attorney, the attorney who is in it for the money, is going to release a full and honest statement?
You don't think he is going to craft the statement that puts his clients in the best position to get a cash settlement that he gets his 33.3 percent of?
Do YOU really think that greedy attorney is going to let them release a statement they can't swear to at a later date?
THAT'S the importance of a vetted statement. I'm surprised you didn't know that
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
Do you really think that their attorney, the attorney who is in it for the money, is going to release a full and honest statement?
You don't think he is going to craft the statement that puts his clients in the best position to get a cash settlement that he gets his 33.3 percent of?
Do YOU really think that greedy attorney is going to let them release a statement they can't swear to at a later date?
THAT'S the importance of a vetted statement. I'm surprised you didn't know that
what does the attorney do to vet an account like these in the absence of investigatory material being released?
In this case, does he simply get everyone to say non-contradictory statements in order to alleviate that level of challenge?
To that extent, isn't it just a statement that has been polished?
You have read the statements of the family members who witnessed the shooting. You have read that their statements were vetted by their attorney.
Do you really think that their attorney, the attorney who is in it for the money, is going to release a full and honest statement?
You don't think he is going to craft the statement that puts his clients in the best position to get a cash settlement that he gets his 33.3 percent of?
Do YOU really think that greedy attorney is going to let them release a statement they can't swear to at a later date?
THAT'S the importance of a vetted statement. I'm surprised you didn't know that
It is HIS statement. Not theirs. They will have to testify to what happened, not him. The prior statement that the attorney released could POSSIBLY be used to impeach their testimony, but the bottom line is the attorney's statement is his opinion of what happened, it is not testimony, and it doesn't lay out from which witnesses he is drawing his opinion.
It is a statement to the media, it doesn't have any legal weight.
His statement is clearly not a full disclosure, he completely glosses over the fact that YANTIS discharged his rifle. We don't know the circumstances yet as to that discharge, but it is TELLING to me that he completely avoids mentioning it. That right there tells you that he is not trying to give a full picture of what happened.
He is being smart as far as Mr. Yantis shooting his rifle. Make the deputies give their version of his rifle firing first.
They will do that as part of the ISP investigation.
There is always a chance that the two deputies will disagree about what happened. One may even tell the truth if it saves HIS ass.
I guess what I am saying is you have made up your mind due in large part based on what the family's talking head has thrown out to the media, and now you agree it is only a partial accounting of events, manipulated by him to suit his purposes, that is what lawyers do after all.
Guess he is manipulating more that just the statement.
I keep getting the opinion that these two deputies carried some baggage from some of the locals opinions.
Quote
I know in my heart that if any other sheriff on duty Ryan- Jeff -Chris, any of them that knew Jack, he would sill be alive. What those two officers did is beyond imaginable.
Believe it or not,I do have an open mind on this thing..I just can't imagine what could have happened that warranted the death of the rancher or the rough treatment of his wife or the inability of an FBI trained sniper to put down a wounded bull.
I'm sure ISP will get the facts straight in this supposedly, he said/she said tragedy.The deputies say.....The witnesses/family say....How can they be so different...
In 5 days we know the life time stories of the foreign terrorist shooters in California, yet we still don't know if even one video camera was used during this killing.
Or why so many lives were ruined over a dead bull, the silence is deafening.No one is going to be happy when or if the facts are ever known.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
F U C K you...the woman witnessed her husband being shot down....was thrown on the ground and handcuffed....and then suffered a heart attack ya stupid sack of chit....
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
F U C K you...the woman witnessed her husband being shot down....was thrown on the ground and handcuffed....and then suffered a heart attack ya stupid sack of chit....
Lol. Didn't Yantis' neighbor(s) say he had anger issues, or do we overlook that and his drunken past ? I don't know, just guessing with you guys. Do you know Donna didn't drink? Yeah, me either.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
You have posted a lot of very stupid things but this one is over the top. You should be ashamed of yourself but you are not. Probably proud of your idiotic statement.
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
A = Alert L = Lockdown I = Inform C = Counter E = Evacuate
It's a tool box not a recipe that must be followed in order exactly. Use what applies directly to the situation you find yourself in. Not static unless that is the most appropriate defense for the situation at that particular moment. The user chooses the tool(s) as needed.
That's a nice try at the old liberal "deflection" ploy. Make it about the Lawyer.
Fact is, the wife and nephew had told their stories long before the Lawyer released the statement.
They won't find any of the Lawyer's bullets in Mr. Yantis's body.
Ahem. You made it about the lawyer when you crowed about the "vetting" that he did. No deflection. My understanding was the wife and nephew refused to make a statement until it was sanitized by the lawyer.
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
A = Alert L = Lockdown I = Inform C = Counter E = Evacuate
It's a tool box not a recipe that must be followed in order exactly. Use what applies directly to the situation you find yourself in. Not static unless that is the most appropriate defense for the situation at that particular moment. The user chooses the tool(s) as needed.
I'm very familiar with it and if I knew how to do it better, I'd say so. There are weaknesses though.
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
A = Alert L = Lockdown I = Inform C = Counter E = Evacuate
It's a tool box not a recipe that must be followed in order exactly. Use what applies directly to the situation you find yourself in. Not static unless that is the most appropriate defense for the situation at that particular moment. The user chooses the tool(s) as needed.
I'm very familiar with it and if I knew how to do it better, I'd say so. There are weaknesses though.
Familiar enough to know it isn't a completely static program yet you stated it was static anyway. Fits right in with all the other BS in this screwed up thread. Carry on...
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
A = Alert L = Lockdown I = Inform C = Counter E = Evacuate
It's a tool box not a recipe that must be followed in order exactly. Use what applies directly to the situation you find yourself in. Not static unless that is the most appropriate defense for the situation at that particular moment. The user chooses the tool(s) as needed.
I'm very familiar with it and if I knew how to do it better, I'd say so. There are weaknesses though.
Familiar enough to know it isn't a completely static program yet you stated it was static anyway. Fits right in with all the other BS in this screwed up thread. Carry on...
It depends on what you mean by static. How is this something to get twisted about? Some of y'all will go to any length to argue and twist things.
The problem with ALICE training and lots of other best practices or policies is their static nature in a fluid situation. It's difficult to maintain control over your assets though, without such things, especially in the age of litigation.
A = Alert L = Lockdown I = Inform C = Counter E = Evacuate
It's a tool box not a recipe that must be followed in order exactly. Use what applies directly to the situation you find yourself in. Not static unless that is the most appropriate defense for the situation at that particular moment. The user chooses the tool(s) as needed.
I'm very familiar with it and if I knew how to do it better, I'd say so. There are weaknesses though.
Familiar enough to know it isn't a completely static program yet you stated it was static anyway. Fits right in with all the other BS in this screwed up thread. Carry on...
If this thread is so screwed up, why are you reading it, let alone commenting? That doesn't make sense.
There is also an ongoing independent investigation of the incident by the law firms involved.
LOL. Good one.
Giggling...Ya,I normally would agree with you on what you highlighted except when it includes Gerry(Never lost a case)Spence.I'm sure he has atleast a Matlock equivalent doing the investigation, if not Horacio himself.
There is also an ongoing independent investigation of the incident by the law firms involved.
LOL. Good one.
Giggling...Ya,I normally would agree with you on what you highlighted except when it includes Gerry(Never lost a case)Spence.I'm sure he has atleast a Matlock equivalent doing the investigation, if not Horacio himself.
It is no more laughable than the ISP investigating their local counterparts.
I honestly don't have any recommendations. IMO most of the government, at whatever level, is compromised at this point. Specifically in Idaho, I don't feel expert enough to offer much, but from what I've seen of the ISP, they don't seem a good choice. Obviously the lawyers for the Yantis' will be looking out for their interests too. Just like many things in the country right now, it's a hard situation with few seemingly viable solutions.
A lot has been said about how at-risk the officers who perpetrated this are right now, I guess from the Yantis' themselves, their friends, and the population of Idaho at-large. Nothing has been said about the Yantis' being at risk though. Sorry, but I wouldn't want to be in their shoes. I hope they are keeping some means of self-defense handy and have the ability to document things.
I'm quickly losing faith in documentation of evidence.
It is no more laughable than the ISP investigating their local counterparts.
ISP has history in investigating there counter parts in Idaho which in itself, needed investigated.The FBI also has history in Idaho with FBI trained snipers taking out children and mothers holding a baby.
Idahoans should feel confident with both there history of events here.
It only gets better as this lags on..Thanks ISP...
BOISE - One of Idaho’s highest profile attorneys is now on the Jack Yantis case.
Boise's Chuck Peterson has joined the Gerry Spence law firm, which is heading up the case of the Council rancher who was shot and killed by Adams County deputies.
Peterson told KTVB they are conducting an independent investigation into the case with a close eye on the state and the federal investigations.
And he said he believes they will all come to the same conclusion.
“We feel good about the facts and we feel like the facts will be discovered by the federal, state and our investigation that will show that Jack Yantis died needlessly.” said Peterson.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
As I've posted before: The primary value of threads such as this is the revelation of other member's character. Some can disagree with me - often vehemently - and still be welcome in my camp.
But there are always a few who are revealed to be totally lacking in the intangibles which make up a person fit to be in the company of MEN.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
As I've posted before: The primary value of threads such as this is the revelation of other member's character. Some can disagree with me - often vehemently - and still be welcome in my camp.
But there are always a few who are revealed to be totally lacking in the intangibles which make up a person fit to be in the company of MEN.
The lesson is not to go to police with a firearm while they are at scene of an incident. The rancher made poor choice and unfortunately paid ultimate price for his bad judgement.
The lesson is not to go to police with a firearm while they are at scene of an incident. The rancher made poor choice and unfortunately paid ultimate price for his bad judgement.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
As I've posted before: The primary value of threads such as this is the revelation of other member's character. Some can disagree with me - often vehemently - and still be welcome in my camp.
But there are always a few who are revealed to be totally lacking in the intangibles which make up a person fit to be in the company of MEN.
Couldn't agree more.....^^^^^^^^^
Despicable....
I reached out to him when he moved to Oregon. Offered to help him with areas to hunt, etc. Let's just say the guy's a complete tool.
The lesson is not to go to police with a firearm while they are at scene of an incident. The rancher made poor choice and unfortunately paid ultimate price for his bad judgement.
The sheriff's office dispatch called him to go there and dispatch his bull, you dumb [bleep].
The lesson is not to go to police with a firearm while they are at scene of an incident. The rancher made poor choice and unfortunately paid ultimate price for his bad judgement.
You are a total idiot.
I assure you he didn't bother to find out how this tragic event started....he just wanted to say something provocative.....no different than GreatWapitool or a few of the other mouth breathers around here.....
The lesson is not to go to police with a firearm while they are at scene of an incident. The rancher made poor choice and unfortunately paid ultimate price for his bad judgement.
You are a total idiot.
Yes "he" is. But that doesn't stop the foreign subject from opining about American politics. Pretty funny that "he" thinks we GAF about anything "he" says.
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
Character Problem? Mental illness? Just flat out mean and nasty disposition ?
....There's something wrong with you.
GTC
Sad little bitch looking for attention....nothing more....
I wonder if he'd have a different opinion if his mother was treated in such a manner.....or his father needlessly gunned down by a couple of trigger happy cowards.....
Don't worry this will not happen again next time the police will bring enough gun. I recommend 7,62x51 SOCOM 16 made by Springfield Armory.
I see the quality and class of trolls here has been severely downgraded. This has got to be one of the dumbest statements I've read here in a great while - and I doubt if this guy can figure out why.
All y'all are really jumping the gun with all this speculation.
That's a nice try at the old liberal "deflection" ploy. Make it about the Lawyer.
Fact is, the wife and nephew had told their stories long before the Lawyer released the statement.
They won't find any of the Lawyer's bullets in Mr. Yantis's body.
Ahem. You made it about the lawyer when you crowed about the "vetting" that he did. No deflection. My understanding was the wife and nephew refused to make a statement until it was sanitized by the lawyer.
As any smart person should do that does not want to go to jail. Honest factual discrepancies can and will bring charges of lying to the police.
I wonder if he'd have a different opinion if his mother was treated in such a manner.....or his father needlessly gunned down by a couple of trigger happy cowards.....
There is a code of MEN. A young man does not beat on or physically abuse women, children nor old people. And a man does not gun down citizens pets such as scary barking dogs either, nor does a MAN inhumanely cause more unnecessary suffering to a wounded bull. If you do, you’re not a man.
But for these legalese enforcers,” immediate submission = compliance is required, immediately. It doesn’t matter that you’re not any sort of threat to them or anyone else. You must obey. Now. And if you do not immediately obey, you can expect to be violently made to obey. Their safety supersedes all else, especially the safety of the citizen they are detaining based off of some legalese crap written by some lawyer. Thats right, they’ll kill you over the code of them.
There is a code of MEN. A young man does not beat on or physically abuse women, children nor old people. And a man does not gun down citizens pets such as scary barking dogs either, nor does a MAN inhumanely cause more unnecessary suffering to a wounded bull. If you do, you’re not a man.
But for these legalese enforcers,” immediate submission = compliance is required, immediately. It doesn’t matter that you’re not any sort of threat to them or anyone else. You must obey. Now. And if you do not immediately obey, you can expect to be violently made to obey. Their safety supersedes all else, especially the safety of the citizen they are detaining based off of some legalese crap written by some lawyer. Thats right, they’ll kill you over the code of them.
The reality of this has been shown time and time again, with nourmous cops screaming orders at people that one minute ago were going about there daily lives and a simple driving violation turns into utter cayous with guns drawn and orders being screamed from several directions and when the confused driver fails to imeadatly follow these orders the shooting starts. It seems to happen all to often,, the new case in Ohio with the cops killing another child, a handicapped child at that shows just how far we have gone from "To serve and to protect".
As long as they go home safe, we care more about collateral damage in foreign countries than we do here on US citizens. Fuggin bullsheit if you ask me.
As I've posted before: The primary value of threads such as this is the revelation of other member's character. Some can disagree with me - often vehemently - and still be welcome in my camp.
But there are always a few who are revealed to be totally lacking in the intangibles which make up a person fit to be in the company of MEN.
You sure do consider yourself overly important. Truth is, I wouldn't walk across the street to see you if you owed me money.
As I've posted before: The primary value of threads such as this is the revelation of other member's character. Some can disagree with me - often vehemently - and still be welcome in my camp.
But there are always a few who are revealed to be totally lacking in the intangibles which make up a person fit to be in the company of MEN.
You sure do consider yourself overly important. Truth is, I wouldn't walk across the street to see you if you owed me money.
It only gets better as this lags on..Thanks ISP...
BOISE - One of Idaho’s highest profile attorneys is now on the Jack Yantis case.
Boise's Chuck Peterson has joined the Gerry Spence law firm, which is heading up the case of the Council rancher who was shot and killed by Adams County deputies.
Peterson told KTVB they are conducting an independent investigation into the case with a close eye on the state and the federal investigations.
And he said he believes they will all come to the same conclusion.
“We feel good about the facts and we feel like the facts will be discovered by the federal, state and our investigation that will show that Jack Yantis died needlessly.” said Peterson.
Wondering who Chuck Peterson is....off to Google I go, but I doubt he is in the same class as Gerry Spence.
Some more about Chuck Peterson..If I had Gerry Spence and this crew working to convict me,I would definitely be worried!
I have also been lucky enough to practice in association with Gerry Spence’s law firm in Jackson, Wyoming. Those lawyers are some of the most committed and brilliant minds in the country, so when I get the chance to spend time and work cases with them, I go to Jackson. Like each of them, I am a graduate of the Trial Lawyers College.
My work in defense of Randy Weaver in the Ruby Ridge case is discussed in “Every Knee Shall Bow,” by Jess Walter (Regan Books/Harper Collins 1995), and in “Ambush at Ruby Ridge,” by Alan W. Bock (Dickens Press 1995). I received the Clarence Darrow Award from the American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho for my work on the defense of Sami Al-Hussayen. I am listed in The Best Lawyers In America, 2008 – 2012 Editions, and for fifteen years I have received the “Preeminent AV” rating from Martindale-Hubbell, the country’s premier lawyer rating service. Less than 5% of the lawyers in the country have this rating.
Does anyone really think anything but deciding on how much the cash payout is going to be is really going on?
Even by podunk standards the Investigation has got to be winding down, unless y'all only have grand Jury 2 times a year or something and they are waiting for that possibly.
Does anyone really think anything but deciding on how much the cash payout is going to be is really going on?
Even by podunk standards the Investigation has got to be winding down, unless y'all only have grand Jury 2 times a year or something and they are waiting for that possibly.
Mike
When the truth is unacceptable to the public, the only choice you have is to wait as long as possible in it's release, to make it less relevant.
Does anyone really think anything but deciding on how much the cash payout is going to be is really going on?
Even by podunk standards the Investigation has got to be winding down, unless y'all only have grand Jury 2 times a year or something and they are waiting for that possibly.
Mike
When the truth is unacceptable to the public, the only choice you have is to wait as long as possible in it's release, to make it less relevant.
You have several possible scenarios, disregarding what we already know witnesses have said.
Yantis was trying to kill one or more LEO's.
Yantis turned around with a gun, sweeping the LEO's who then reacted and killed him.
LEO's accidentally killed Yantis.
LEO's shot Yantis on purpose.
This isn't Ferguson. If Yantis was trying to kill one or more of the LEO's people aren't going to riot. This is the most likely scenario you're talking about. There are going to be hard feelings over this one way or the other and withholding findings only serves to make things worse IMO.
The second scenario would still leave hard feelings, leave the county open to lawsuits, etc.
Quite honestly, I don't know when it is acceptable for the government to withhold findings, evidence, etc. in order to manipulate public opinion. I know it will be said that it is done all the time. That's a problem.
The last two scenarios don't leave any real problems as long as the public feels like justice will then be served. If the public doesn't because it isn't going to be served then that's a problem.
Does anyone really think anything but deciding on how much the cash payout is going to be is really going on?
Even by podunk standards the Investigation has got to be winding down, unless y'all only have grand Jury 2 times a year or something and they are waiting for that possibly.
Mike
When the truth is unacceptable to the public, the only choice you have is to wait as long as possible in it's release, to make it less relevant.
The same waiting period applies if the investigation is designed to cover up the truth.
Spence's involvement is the only incentive the State has to tell the truth.
Whatever the findings are,I doubt they will come out just before Christmas for obvious reasons..If the deputies are found guilty of anything,jail time would not be a good Christmas present for fellow officers.If there not guilty by ISP standards,then the family gets fu-cked for Christmas....
Spence's involvement is the only incentive the State has to tell the truth.
My experiences lead me to believe that Governments, Local, State or Federal, are not big on telling the truth. miles
Thanks to someone like Gerry(Never lost a case)Spence's involvement,it is all but impossible for the deputies to come out of this unscathed.One or both will pay one way or the other(legally)...
Even a rookie should know better than grabbing a guy with a loaded weapon whom was called by dispatch to dispatch his property.One or both deputies are just to full of themselves.
What kind of person would put 4 .223 bullets to the chest of a neighbor over a misunderstanding or the need to be "Incharge" regardless...
I imagine Jack was totally pi$$ed after seeing what the sniper did to his bull and probably had some choice words for them,who wouldn't?
Thanks to someone like Gerry(Never lost a case)Spence's involvement,it is all but impossible for the deputies to come out of this unscathed.One or both will pay one way or the other(legally)...
Thanks to someone like Gerry(Never lost a case)Spence's involvement,it is all but impossible for the deputies to come out of this unscathed.One or both will pay one way or the other(legally)...
Is that the goal?
Justice is about making someone pay, one way or the other, legally, it appears.
I do not see how anyone could possibly think that once the case is made public,possibly in the deputes favor,that's the end of it.
It won't happen that way..If ISP clears the Deputies then Spence will step in with a bunch of law suits against the deputies.It will not end with ISP's investigation as the final word..The deputies will be sued, at the very least,I would imagine.
Spence will not let it end until someone is held liable for Jacks death or he never would have got involved at all.
If ISP clears the deputies then as for as the state is concerned that is the final word criminally speaking, as far as the state is concerned. ISP's decision is not the final word criminally as for as the Feds are concerned nor are they the final word in a civil trail.
I do not see how anyone could possibly think that once the case is made public,possibly in the deputes favor,that's the end of it.
It won't happen that way..If ISP clears the Deputies then Spence will step in with a bunch of law suits against the deputies.It will not end with ISP's investigation as the final word..The deputies will be sued, at the very least,I would imagine.
Spence will not let it end until someone is held liable for Jacks death or he never would have got involved at all.
Him not stupid man...
Right, they could be cleared of wrong doing, have proof, and the civil suits come in regardless.
I do not see how anyone could possibly think that once the case is made public,possibly in the deputes favor,that's the end of it.
It won't happen that way..If ISP clears the Deputies then Spence will step in with a bunch of law suits against the deputies.It will not end with ISP's investigation as the final word..The deputies will be sued, at the very least,I would imagine.
Spence will not let it end until someone is held liable for Jacks death or he never would have got involved at all.
Him not stupid man...
Right, they could be cleared of wrong doing, have proof, and the civil suits come in regardless.
Justice.
It's what I said.
Just a guess, but I seriously doubt there is any proof that "clears" them.
More likely a lack of proof to charge them. Like no footage from the dash cam or body cam.
Poor deputy pussy whistle will just have to deal with with whatever happens.
Maybe he'll log onto the Fire and start a GoFundMe account.
Just because ISP says they did know wrong and feared for there lives does not mean that was the case.It means they accepted the deputies version over the others that were there.
ISP is not the judge and jury..Step in Gerry Spence..Know one,especially Gerry Spence, picks a fight they will loose.He chose to get involved in this, just like Ruby Ridge,and will win such law suit.
He will take the deputies Nampa lawyer to the wood shed.
I'm just confused that we had 50 pages of rabble rousing against the deputies for obvious murder, and now folks are slapping themselves on the back because a lawyer famed for getting money out of the government is working the case on behalf of the deceased's family.
1 high profile case turns to [bleep] and you guys got a banner for eternity.
I used the OJ case as an example of what most people feel is a miscarriage of justice. I haven't "backslapped" anybody and to S Head, I've never said anything about going up to Idaho and dispensing justice. It's up to the locals up there or the people on the state level to see that justice is done. I pointed out the the Idaho State Police whether they do this investigation properly or not, may not be an entity that is trusted by the people due to their recent past history. Certainly I have an interest in seeing justice done up there just like every other honest citizen should. If the deputies acted properly, then they should not suffer either criminally or civilly. If they acted wrongly, then justice should be done according to whatever wrong they are guilty of.
Certainly you and S Head, just to name the ones right here, right now, are guilty of instigating and overstating what some of us have said here on this thread. FWIW I totally disagree with withholding results for whatever political aim be they results that uphold the Yantis' side of events or whatever the deputies claim happened.
Does anyone really think anything but deciding on how much the cash payout is going to be is really going on?
Even by podunk standards the Investigation has got to be winding down, unless y'all only have grand Jury 2 times a year or something and they are waiting for that possibly.
Mike
When the truth is unacceptable to the public, the only choice you have is to wait as long as possible in it's release, to make it less relevant.
That's laughable....not so very long ago you were preaching to us about waiting until both sides of the story were out before passing judgement.....f*cking hypocrite.....
I do want to here the other side of the story although I can't see how it could be so different..The Yantis side was out immediately without time for collaboration,the deputies not so much.
The only muck in the whole thing is what happened when Jack was grabbed from behind and his rifle went off followed by the deputies firing into Jack..
I say it went off by accident because he was grabbed from behind and shoved with a loaded weapon ready to fire.They must say Jacks rifle was fired intentionally at them and they feared for there lives.
The deputies versus the families versions..Whom's is correct?
That's laughable....not so very long ago you were preaching to us about waiting until both sides of the story were out before passing judgement.....f*cking hypocrite.....
What are you talking about? I don't any of those people and ain't withholding any information.
Any bets on which deputy was the grabber?They both have history of being aggressive to old people and even women...
My point being,after all the garbage has came out on these deputies past,right or wrong,how could they possibly return to there currant jobs as Adams county deputies....If they do,I ain't going through Adams county anymore and that's the main road south.
I do want to here the other side of the story although I can't see how it could be so different..The Yantis side was out immediately without time for collaboration,the deputies not so much.
The only muck in the whole thing is what happened when Jack was grabbed from behind and his rifle went off followed by the deputies firing into Jack..
I say it went off by accident because he was grabbed from behind and shoved with a loaded weapon ready to fire.They must say Jacks rifle was fired intentionally at them and they feared for there lives.
The deputies versus the families versions..Whom's is correct?
It's obvious that the cops and cop suck ups on here discounted the family's version from the git-go or we wouldn't have all this "Wait until all the facts are in" B.S. from most of them.
Of course The tenny weeny wapiti already has figured out that Mr. Yantis drank the first half of a bottle and Mrs.Yantis drank the rest.
If anyone doubts that cops as a group hold their fellow citizens in disdain, they have only to read this thread.
According to some here, just having a gun in the presence of a cop is reason enough to be shot.
Regardless of what the ISP report says, the only way true justice will be served in this case is if both these thug deputies are found gutshot in a borrow ditch.
Exactly what Jack should have done as soon as he got there. Then it would be one sided the other way with no sorry thug deputies to plot their defense story.
I know enough about Adams and especially Valley county that if it hasn't already,it will have a few fist fights over the matter as the different sides discuss the issues,especially over a beer.
I am not anti-cop..I have and had good friends who were officers and at one time,I new everyone on the McCall police force as friends and family.Loved it when my wife and her pardner did the bar check..Hi honey..(laughing)
I just cannot see how this was Jack's fault.Officers should de-escalate rather than escalate problems especially when the victim was called by dispatch to do what he was going to do until what happened, happened.
We all know nothing but bad is going to happen when you grab and jerk someone ready to fire a hot weapon..Nothing good is going to happen when one does that and they should have known it.
So in the mean time,the bull and Jack layed dieing on highway 95 near Council Idaho,neither getting help or in the bulls case,euthanized,which Jack was called there to take care of.
Whatever the outcome from ISP,one can rest assured, it won't end there!This shoulda never happened.....
I truly hope I'm wrong about that, because I have family who are personal friends with some of the involved.
I agree completely..I looked at both the deputies facebook friends and low and behold,a lot of my old friends are there..I was quite surprised, which leaves me wondering why this even happened.
I do know one thing for sure though from experience,there are officers that are the coolest people ever but once some of them put on the badge and sidearm,there whole demeener(sp) changes.I saw that way to many times in McCall, especially for a couple reserve guys.Cool guys and friends one minute then suit'em up and azzholes the next.
Some handle it very well and others don't,it's like there 10 feet tall and bullet proof...
I truly hope I'm wrong about that, because I have family who are personal friends with some of the involved.
I agree completely..I looked at both the deputies facebook friends and low and behold,a lot of my old friends are there..I was quite surprised, which leaves me wondering why this even happened.
I do know one thing for sure though from experience,there are officers that are the coolest people ever but once some of them put on the badge and sidearm,there whole demeener(sp) changes.I saw that way to many times in McCall, especially for a couple reserve guys.Cool guys and friends one minute then suit'em up and azzholes the next.
Some handle it very well and others don't,it's like there 10 feet tall and bullet proof...
I perceive that a lot of this is also related to poor training. Not a lack of training, but just plain bad policy. That's why so many get a pass for behavior that should never be acceptable. This isn't just me blowin' hot air. I hear it from insiders I know.
That's why so many get a pass for behavior that should never be acceptable.
It didn't used to be that way..Just one example of a fine officer in McCall whom served as a Navy Seal prior to his coming there as an officer..A very good dedicated officer but it was found out he lied on his application about having tried pot years and years ago prior to the Navy,the Academy yanked his certification right then...
Not the case here it appears, as either the Sheriff or Academy let prior incidents slide that should have been looked at better.
There should not be skeletons in an officers closet at all, as showed up for these two deputies making them less than likely to get support from the whole community if it turns out there re-hired.
Just not a good situation for the future of Adams county unless some kind of a bombshell comes out of this investigation...
Regardless of what the ISP report says, the only way true justice will be served in this case is if both these thug deputies are found gutshot in a borrow ditch.
You sure talk a tough game. Saddle up cowboy, what's stopping you?
Regardless of what the ISP report says, the only way true justice will be served in this case is if both these thug deputies are found gutshot in a borrow ditch.
You sure talk a tough game. Saddle up cowboy, what's stopping you?
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
You have posted a lot of very stupid things but this one is over the top. You should be ashamed of yourself but you are not. Probably proud of your idiotic statement.
Regardless of what the ISP report says, the only way true justice will be served in this case is if both these thug deputies are found gutshot in a borrow ditch.
You sure talk a tough game. Saddle up cowboy, what's stopping you?
They ain't my kin.
So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?
Maybe Donna had the other half a bottle. I mean, as long as we're guessing...
You have posted a lot of very stupid things but this one is over the top. You should be ashamed of yourself but you are not. Probably proud of your idiotic statement.
What's the Facebook jury say today, Jayco? Spence going to unseal his verdict before Christmas?
The verdict was unsealed the day Spence took the case.He does not loose.
You apparently have guilty and settlement confused, and they don't always go hand in hand. Spit out your gum, might make it easier for you to stay on task.
Idaho State Police and the FBI are still investigating an officer-involved shooting in Adams County that killed and a man.
Jack Yantis was shot and killed by two Adams County deputies, after Yantis was called to put his bull down that had been hurt in a car accident.
Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, who is the special prosecutor in the case, says they are working cooperatively with the federal government on the investigation. “The important point here is this, we only have one opportunity to get this right and we need to be very diligent in reviewing the information, taking the time necessary to make sure that we understand the facts.”
Wasden says they also have to be very careful at giving out information to the public because it could harm the jury pool, if the case does go to court
"So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?"
Change "from this thread" to "newspaper articles" and I'll give you a short answer.
Yes, depending on his exact relationship to me. Were he a distant relative, I'd let a family member closer to him have the honor.
"So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?"
Change "from this thread" to "newspaper articles" and I'll give you a short answer.
Yes, depending on his exact relationship to me. Were he a distant relative, I'd let a family member closer to him have the honor.
Wow, dude. If taken at your word, you are flirting with the “danger to others” standard for an involuntary commitment for a mental health evaluation, which comes with a free firearm disability. You also probably do not comprehend the hypocrisy of condemning police officers for making a split-second lethal force decision when an auto crash investigation went sideways while having no problem being a judge, jury and premeditated executioner based on unsworn hearsay gleaned from a newspaper! Did I read somewhere that you used to wear a badge? If so, I’m glad you gave that up, because your mental predisposition appears to be worse than that of the people whom you routinely condemn on these pages.
If you didn't wear a badge, then that's for the better. You were not a good candidate. Thanks for clearing that up.
You don't meet the involuntary criteria this instant, but your predisposition is toward violent tendencies and your posts evidence a lack of concern about the law or the judicial system if your own private concerns are involved. You also are the kind of person police can use as Exhibit A when they talk about nut cases walking around in public flying under the radar, yet predisposed to taking "lone wolf" actions if the stars and planets line up a certain way one day.
I have no dog in the hunt in terms of what happens to the deputies in this case. I have more confidence in the rule of law and the judicial system than Internet forum blather, though.
If you didn't wear a badge, then that's for the better. You were not a good candidate. Thanks for clearing that up.
You don't meet the involuntary criteria this instant, but your predisposition is toward violent tendencies and your posts evidence a lack of concern about the law or the judicial system if your own private concerns are involved. You also are the kind of person police can use as Exhibit A when they talk about nut cases walking around in public flying under the radar, yet predisposed to taking "lone wolf" actions if the stars and planets line up a certain way one day.
I have no dog in the hunt in terms of what happens to the deputies in this case. I have more confidence in the rule of law and the judicial system than Internet forum blather, though.
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
No, I am not threatening him with government intervention. If my post is interpreted that way, then I clarify it by affirmatively saying that is not my intent. I specifically stated that his words do not amount to an immediate problem, but they do seem to set out a mindset that, if combined with other things down the road, could be a problem down the road (not that I am going to waste any of my time on it). Of course, it all could be Internet bravado, too.
No, I am not threatening him with government intervention. If my post is interpreted that way, then I clarify it by affirmatively saying that is not my intent. I specifically stated that his words do not amount to an immediate problem, but they do seem to set out a mindset that, if combined with other things down the road, could be a problem down the road (not that I am going to waste any of my time on it). Of course, it all could be Internet bravado, too.
lol Your whole tone is threatening. Nice try though.
"So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?"
Change "from this thread" to "newspaper articles" and I'll give you a short answer.
Yes, depending on his exact relationship to me. Were he a distant relative, I'd let a family member closer to him have the honor.
Wow, dude. If taken at your word, you are flirting with the “danger to others” standard for an involuntary commitment for a mental health evaluation, which comes with a free firearm disability. You also probably do not comprehend the hypocrisy of condemning police officers for making a split-second lethal force decision when an auto crash investigation went sideways while having no problem being a judge, jury and premeditated executioner based on unsworn hearsay gleaned from a newspaper! Did I read somewhere that you used to wear a badge? If so, I’m glad you gave that up, because your mental predisposition appears to be worse than that of the people whom you routinely condemn on these pages.
On the advice of some who claim to know you, I'm retracting my comment regarding what I would do if someone murdered a member of my family.
So..... if any of you are intending to murder one of my family members, you have nothing to fear from me. There will be no reprisal on my part.
See.... as long as we have censors among the members, Rick can leave us be.
But if I ever find the son of a bitch who accused me of being a cop, I'm taking back my vow of non-violence.
No, I am not threatening him with government intervention. If my post is interpreted that way, then I clarify it by affirmatively saying that is not my intent. I specifically stated that his words do not amount to an immediate problem, but they do seem to set out a mindset that, if combined with other things down the road, could be a problem down the road (not that I am going to waste any of my time on it). Of course, it all could be Internet bravado, too.
lol Your whole tone is threatening. Nice try though.
Paranoid people always think that someone is out there trying to get them, so they can interpret things as threatening that are not meant to be. I have been posting for a long time, and threatening people on an Internet forum is just not what I do. In fact, I don't threaten people even in person.
No, I am not threatening him with government intervention. If my post is interpreted that way, then I clarify it by affirmatively saying that is not my intent. I specifically stated that his words do not amount to an immediate problem, but they do seem to set out a mindset that, if combined with other things down the road, could be a problem down the road (not that I am going to waste any of my time on it). Of course, it all could be Internet bravado, too.
lol Your whole tone is threatening. Nice try though.
Paranoid people always think that someone is out there trying to get them, so they can interpret things as threatening that are not meant to be. I have been posting for a long time, and threatening people on an Internet forum is just not what I do. In fact, I don't threaten people even in person.
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Truthfulness ain't never been your long suit.
Tell me where I'm wrong Gene. The only thing I've changed is the quote boxes for me and Cheyenne where you quoted us by going "". Since after nearly 15 years you still haven't figured out how to use the quote button.
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
Originally Posted by curdog4570
Originally Posted by GreatWaputi
Originally Posted by curdog4570
Regardless of what the ISP report says, the only way true justice will be served in this case is if both these thug deputies are found gutshot in a borrow ditch.
You sure talk a tough game. Saddle up cowboy, what's stopping you?
They ain't my kin.
So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?
Originally Posted by curdog4570
Originally Posted by Cheyenne
So, if I understand the meaning of your posts correctly, you believe that you have learned enough from this thread to justify your personally killing deputies, had the deceased rancher been a relative. Is that correct?
Change "from this thread" to "newspaper articles" and I'll give you a short answer.
Yes, depending on his exact relationship to me. Were he a distant relative, I'd let a family member closer to him have the honor.
Even I forgot some of the important facts.I suppose that is what they want..
Shot in the chest and abdomen, Jack Yantis fell to the ground. Neither deputy went to check on him. Paradis and Donna Yantis started running toward him.
“And then they threatened me and my nephew ... threw us on the middle of Highway 95, searched us and handcuffed us, and wouldn’t let us go take care of Jack,” Donna Yantis said.
The rifle’s barrel was about 2 feet from the bull, and Jack Yantis’ finger was on the trigger.
“Everything was going as planned. … I did not notice any conversation at all” between Jack Yantis and the deputies, Paradis said. “Then the one cop turned around and grabbed his shoulder and jerked him backwards.”
The deputy came from behind, spun Yantis around and grabbed the rifle’s scope, Paradis said.
The deputy pushed Yantis. The rifle was still in Yantis’ hands, its barrel pointed at the ground. Yantis was trying to regain his footing.
Calling either of them Barney Fife is a slam to old Barney.
I'm not OK with anything you write Gene, because you're crazy. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I mean that I honestly believe you're mentally unstable. You're so crazy that you can't even keep up with all the crazy things you've said, this is a perfect example of that.
Mentally unstable people are dangerous. Mentally unstable people that are delusional about past persecution, irrationally paranoid about current events and who voice violent fantasies to strangers....are especially dangerous.
So no, I'm not OK with your response. I think you're crazy and that the internet would be better without your nonsense.
And please explain to me how I was untruthful. All the quotes are available to you. Just because you pinked out on your statement later and changed it doesn't mean that I was untruthful about what you had already said.
FBI trained snipers don't have the best record in Idaho..
Meanwhile, the bull was still alive, slowly bleeding out on the roadway. Family members asked the deputies to put it down to end its suffering. No one did.
“The bull ended up lying there for two hours,” Paradis said, “suffocating in his own lung blood because they shot him in the gut.”
I'm not OK with anything you write Gene, because you're crazy. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I mean that I honestly believe you're mentally unstable. You're so crazy that you can't even keep up with all the crazy things you've said, this is a perfect example of that.
I don't think Gene is crazy, Just that he grew up in a different time and place. Back years ago, in lots of rural area's, men stomped their own snakes. miles
Well, Blue, you are entitled to your opinion about me. As for as my opinion of you, I offer this:
A couple or three years ago, on a thread similar to this one, in fact it was along about the first time you posted your "eat a bag of dicks" comment to me, I said this in response to another poster; "Naw.. Blue's a good kid. If any of my family ever have to call a cop, I hope one like Blue shows up". Makes no difference to me if you never saw it, it was not directed at you. I stand by that comment today. Nothing you have posted on these "bad cop" threads takes away from the fact that you appear to be a good Father, shooter, and outdoorsman, and I'm betting you are a good cop.
And I never heard of Jack Yantis until he was shot dead. But the information about him from his friends and family paint a picture of the kind of man he was.
I grew up among men like him, right down to the occasional DUI's. They were oilfield trash and cattlemen, for the most part. They were men's men and I vowed I would be like them when I grew up. I damn sure nailed the DUI part as a young man, and I like to think I got the rest of it right as well. So I identify with Jack Yantis.
And I've encountered cops like these two deputies. Their actions AFTER they shot Jack Yantis make the witness accounts of their actions prior to, and during, the shooting eminently believable.
And IF the witness accounts are to be believed, there is no way the deputies could have been in fear for their lives, which is the only justification they could have for shooting him.
So... if they walk, and they probably will, It will be a moral outrage.
I'm not OK with anything you write Gene, because you're crazy. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I mean that I honestly believe you're mentally unstable. You're so crazy that you can't even keep up with all the crazy things you've said, this is a perfect example of that.
Mentally unstable people are dangerous. Mentally unstable people that are delusional about past persecution, irrationally paranoid about current events and who voice violent fantasies to strangers....are especially dangerous.
So no, I'm not OK with your response. I think you're crazy and that the internet would be better without your nonsense.
It's a wonder that I got a CHL, ain't it?
Or had a successful business career in the private sector.
Or raised four kids who are doing quite well [all in the private sector, btw]
Safariman has a CHL, was successful in scamming people for years, raised (apparently) good kids and has lots of friends and supporters....somebody even gave him a kidney.
Then one day folks started realizing how crazy he was, or had become.
I'm pretty sure that Gene and I came in to this world at about the same time, maybe I have a 6-8 year head start on him. Cops then were not at all like most are today. The only ones in my state that had any training at all were the Highway Patrolmen and the few of them I became acquainted with were pretty good guys.
A bully town cop slapped me when I was twelve years old and later said he thought I was some one else. There was no such thing as police brutality back then so they were free to do whatever they wanted to. I quickly learned to hate and distrust any and all cops for what this one did to me. Ten years later, he had quit being a cop so I made a trip back there to hunt him down and get even. Ended up me getting far more than even. I wanted to kill him but stopped a little short of my goal.
Anybody that had any desire to be a lawman could easily find that position in most any of those small Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, or New Mexico towns. Usually they had to furnish their own car and whatever gun they wanted to pack. No black uniforms, just whatever they wanted to wear. Twice I was offered the job by the town council but I could make more money doing just about anything else so I passed the offer up.
I doubt that I will ever feel that most police are on my side even though I have had some very good friends that were cops. Very few times have I been stopped by one but whenever that has happened I can feel the anxiety build up come on pretty fast.
I doubt you can make them understand anything about our upbringing even if they were interested..... and they ain't.
My experience with cops is similar to yours and my attitude toward them is identical. It used to be said that if you were too lazy to farm and too scared to steal, you could get a job as a cop. That hasn't changed in these rural areas.
FWIW... I think we are about the same age. I just turned 74, so if any of these yahoos are gonna cause me any trouble for anything I've posted, they better get started.
" It used to be said that if you were too lazy to farm and too scared to steal, you could get a job as a cop. That hasn't changed in these rural areas."
Same as I used to hear! HA!
I just hit 81 in November so we came from about the same era.
Times have changed and a lot of the change is not for the better.
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene didn't threaten anybody but it is as you say, Cheyenne did.
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene didn't threaten anybody but it is as you say, Cheyenne did.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene didn't threaten anybody but it is as you say, Cheyenne did.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
I'm not OK with anything you write Gene, because you're crazy. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I mean that I honestly believe you're mentally unstable. You're so crazy that you can't even keep up with all the crazy things you've said, this is a perfect example of that.
Mentally unstable people are dangerous. Mentally unstable people that are delusional about past persecution, irrationally paranoid about current events and who voice violent fantasies to strangers....are especially dangerous.
So no, I'm not OK with your response. I think you're crazy and that the internet would be better without your nonsense.
It's a wonder that I got a CHL, ain't it?
Or had a successful business career in the private sector.
Or raised four kids who are doing quite well [all in the private sector, btw]
Or have friends all over the world, literally.
Damn, I hope they don't find out I'm crazy.
You ever been wrong about someone, Blue?
Ever?
I don't know either one of you Texas tuff guys but if I had to choose one to share a campfire with I"d choose Gene over a bike-cop from "Austin" (the San Francisco of Texas)....
You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene didn't threaten anybody but it is as you say, Cheyenne did.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
I don't understand what you're saying.
This is what he said
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
Seems easy to understand.
It doesn't surprise me that you have knowledge of supersized "bags'o'dicks". I'm not personally interested so since you've demonstrated your own interest jwp, you're welcome to whatever proposal Bluedreaux is making.
I hope those deputies enjoy there Christmas with there families,something the Yantis family can't do now..There paid vacation is coming to an end and they will be spending a lot of time in court watching Gerry Spence take them and there attorney to the wood shed.
Justice will prevail,one way or the other, for these guys.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
Seems easy to understand.
It doesn't surprise me that you have knowledge of supersized "bags'o'dicks". I'm not personally interested so since you've demonstrated your own interest jwp, you're welcome to whatever proposal Bluedreaux is making.
Has the old boys toxicology report been released yet?
What are you expecting?
Nothing, but it won't help the families case if a guy known to have a bad temper was on something too.
I would think a defense attorney would immediately ask what the basis was for the assertion of Yantis having had a bad temper.
By "on something" do you mean a specific drug? Old folks can be "on" a lot of stuff. Yantis doesn't fit "my" admittedly non-professional profile of a substance abuser unless you're talking about alcohol. Alcohol was already tossed out here as a possibility.
Remember, they called him, he didn't just show up. It would not surprise me if they had a drink or two with dinner. They did have company.. And on that note, there friend for dinner was right there also and thrown to the ground and cuffed trying to help Jack.
I'm surprised they didn't run out of cuffs. Probably why they didn't cuff the emt's and fire responders.
Also don't forget that one deputy was found guilty of poaching and wasted the meat while employed as an officer in McCall.
I suppose one could say he thinks he can do anything and get away with it. We will see....
If you read it all,you have heard the statements of two of the family members that were there and you have seen Jack's daughter give hers on video from the scene and you have also seen the backgrounds of the officers involved and the official Idaho State Police first report...
I would say that you now know as much as anyone except those directly involved.
It would take a computer nut jog to search out on his own all the clips on this event..Here,there all done for you,the reader.
But therein lies the problem...everyone involved were the "good guys". The bad guys showed up later, not wasting the opportunity to pimp their agenda on what will prove to be a tragic combination of mistakes.
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
But therein lies the problem...everyone involved were the "good guys". The bad guys showed up later, not wasting the opportunity to pimp their agenda on what will prove to be a tragic combination of mistakes.
The first MISTAKE belongs to the Sheriff when he pinned badges on a couple of thugs. Absent that mistake, we wouldn't be discussing this.
Has the old boys toxicology report been released yet?
What are you expecting?
Nothing, but it won't help the families case if a guy known to have a bad temper was on something too.
I would think a defense attorney would immediately ask what the basis was for the assertion of Yantis having had a bad temper.
By "on something" do you mean a specific drug? Old folks can be "on" a lot of stuff. Yantis doesn't fit "my" admittedly non-professional profile of a substance abuser unless you're talking about alcohol. Alcohol was already tossed out here as a possibility.
Jaycolumbo posted an account right here in this very thread from Yantis' neighbor(s) saying he was known to have a bad temper, but don't let that fact cloud your judgement.
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
Has the old boys toxicology report been released yet?
What are you expecting?
Nothing, but it won't help the families case if a guy known to have a bad temper was on something too.
I would think a defense attorney would immediately ask what the basis was for the assertion of Yantis having had a bad temper.
By "on something" do you mean a specific drug? Old folks can be "on" a lot of stuff. Yantis doesn't fit "my" admittedly non-professional profile of a substance abuser unless you're talking about alcohol. Alcohol was already tossed out here as a possibility.
Jaycolumbo posted an account right here in this very thread from Yantis' neighbor(s) saying he was known to have a bad temper, but don't let that fact cloud your judgement.
"Fact"? That would immediately be disputed in court with questions about the witnesses' expertise on what constituted a "bad temper". At best it is somebody's opinion and you could find somebody to say something derogatory about most folks if you looked long enough.
I'm not making a "judgement" here and how would that cloud it?
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
This makes it seem as the deputies did???
Paradis sounds like a star witness....
How is Paradis' credibility in question, other than saying something you evidently don't like? Do you know something the rest of us don't or is it wild speculation like not only accusing Yantis of being drunk but his wife as well?
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
This makes it seem as the deputies did???
Paradis sounds like a star witness....
How is Paradis' credibility in question, other than saying something you evidently don't like? Do you know something the rest of us don't or is it wild speculation like not only accusing Yantis of being drunk but his wife as well?
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation. Got it.
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation
It is when the other eye witness that was on scene agree's 100% with what he said.
Can't imagine two neighbors disagreeing on something with one calling the other a hot head.I am surprised he didn't say they got into a fist fight, which is very common in this area of Idaho.Usually,there is very little arguing until punches are thrown..
That's just the way it is in a logging/ranching community.
Paradis said he does not know whether the rifle fired, but he thinks it might have discharged accidentally when the deputy grabbed Yantis and spun him, or when one of the deputy’s bullets pierced Yantis’ hand holding the rifle, hitting the gun and damaging it.
This makes it seem as the deputies did???
Paradis sounds like a star witness....
How is Paradis' credibility in question, other than saying something you evidently don't like? Do you know something the rest of us don't or is it wild speculation like not only accusing Yantis of being drunk but his wife as well?
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation. Got it.
To clarify, I never said that. Yantis' neighbor's account is speculation elicited by somebody, either police or press no doubt. The other is eyewitness testimony, ostensibly sworn to. One is an opinion, the other is an account.
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation
It is when the other eye witness that was on scene agree's 100% with what he said.
Can't imagine two neighbors disagreeing on something with one calling the other a hot head.I am surprised he didn't say they got into a fist fight, which is very common in this area of Idaho.Usually,there is very little arguing until punches are thrown..
That's just the way it is in a logging/ranching community.
So the other eyewitness doesn't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired? Good hell, Paradis by his own account posted by you doesn't know what happened and that's the point others have been trying to make. No one knows a damn thing, but a few of you sure think you do.
There's nothing saying Yantis or his wife were drunk or not, but I can guess right along side you.
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation
It is when the other eye witness that was on scene agree's 100% with what he said.
Can't imagine two neighbors disagreeing on something with one calling the other a hot head.I am surprised he didn't say they got into a fist fight, which is very common in this area of Idaho.Usually,there is very little arguing until punches are thrown..
That's just the way it is in a logging/ranching community.
So the other eyewitness doesn't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired? Good hell, Paradis by his own account posted by you doesn't know what happened and that's the point others have been trying to make. No one knows a damn thing, but a few of you sure think you do.
There's nothing saying Yantis or his wife were drunk or not, but I can guess right along side you.
That's not correct. Paradis' account presents his version of events. As such Paradis "knows" much of what happened, he just honestly doesn't know what went on with the gun itself. Several people know things about what happened that night. Would you also say the cops don't "know a damn thing"?
No evidence has been presented of Yantis being drunk. Certainly no evidence that we are aware of has been presented of Yantis' wife being drunk. The latter is what you authored, to the best of my knowledge. Nobody else.
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation
It is when the other eye witness that was on scene agree's 100% with what he said.
Can't imagine two neighbors disagreeing on something with one calling the other a hot head.I am surprised he didn't say they got into a fist fight, which is very common in this area of Idaho.Usually,there is very little arguing until punches are thrown..
That's just the way it is in a logging/ranching community.
So the other eyewitness doesn't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired? Good hell, Paradis by his own account posted by you doesn't know what happened and that's the point others have been trying to make. No one knows a damn thing, but a few of you sure think you do.
There's nothing saying Yantis or his wife were drunk or not, but I can guess right along side you.
That's not correct. Paradis' account presents his version of events. As such Paradis "knows" much of what happened, he just honestly doesn't know what went on with the gun itself. Several people know things about what happened that night. Would you also say the cops don't "know a damn thing"?
No evidence has been presented of Yantis being drunk. Certainly no evidence that we are aware of has been presented of Yantis' wife being drunk. The latter is what you authored, to the best of my knowledge. Nobody else.
And don't you think knowing what happened with the gun is vital to the events that took place? And as I've stated every time, I can guess right along with everyone else whether alcohol was involved or not.
This is part of the only to date, ISP report on this investigation logged 11-02-2015 the day after the incident.
As deputies prepared to put the injured bull down, the owner of the bull, Jack Yantis, 62 of Council, arrived on scene with a rifle. The events that transpired over the course of the next few minutes are under investigation but, at this time, it is believed that two deputies and Mr. Yantis all fired their weapons. Mr. Yantis sustained fatal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. One deputy sustained a minor injury
No mention of dispatch calling Jack or other points that the sworn and video statements from the family say.There is also the guest for dinner that has stayed quiet through this so far.I doubt you will see any disagreements in his statement either.
This ISP report is based solely on the deputies report,I assume.The final report coming soon will include all the witness's claims of what they saw or heard...
You can be sure the EMT's/Fire responders and the wrecker crew all have there versions also which only the locals know for now and why the community is split...
If and only if the other locals on scene tell a much different story of the events that happened,I will retract my feelings these deputy dudes are bonified Barney Fife nut jobs.Either way,Gerry Spence will have his way with them and there attorney or he would never have taken the case.
ISP and the FBI have history with Spence in Idaho and they did not fair well and neither will the two deputies in the end.
Still waiting to hear from the two people there that have the most knowledge of what happened...especially interested in their "why". Trying to hold my opinion until then.
Concerning Mr. Gerry Spence... I don't know the man, he may be a solid, trustworthy, good person. I can't say, never met the man or heard of him before. However, after reading some of the posts here it sounds like "he's gonna make them pay" whether they are innocent or guilty. No matter, they are gonna pay. Sounds kinda like an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson....
So Paradis' word is golden, but Yantis' neighbors account of his bad temper is speculation
It is when the other eye witness that was on scene agree's 100% with what he said.
Can't imagine two neighbors disagreeing on something with one calling the other a hot head.I am surprised he didn't say they got into a fist fight, which is very common in this area of Idaho.Usually,there is very little arguing until punches are thrown..
That's just the way it is in a logging/ranching community.
So the other eyewitness doesn't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired? Good hell, Paradis by his own account posted by you doesn't know what happened and that's the point others have been trying to make. No one knows a damn thing, but a few of you sure think you do.
There's nothing saying Yantis or his wife were drunk or not, but I can guess right along side you.
That's not correct. Paradis' account presents his version of events. As such Paradis "knows" much of what happened, he just honestly doesn't know what went on with the gun itself. Several people know things about what happened that night. Would you also say the cops don't "know a damn thing"?
No evidence has been presented of Yantis being drunk. Certainly no evidence that we are aware of has been presented of Yantis' wife being drunk. The latter is what you authored, to the best of my knowledge. Nobody else.
And don't you think knowing what happened with the gun is vital to the events that took place? And as I've stated every time, I can guess right along with everyone else whether alcohol was involved or not.
You can guess to whomever you want to, but don't imply that I'm in on your guessing game, because I'm not. As to the gun, certainly it is a big piece of information, but if Paradis doesn't know, he doesn't know.
This is part of the only to date, ISP report on this investigation logged 11-02-2015 the day after the incident.
As deputies prepared to put the injured bull down, the owner of the bull, Jack Yantis, 62 of Council, arrived on scene with a rifle. The events that transpired over the course of the next few minutes are under investigation but, at this time, it is believed that two deputies and Mr. Yantis all fired their weapons. Mr. Yantis sustained fatal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. One deputy sustained a minor injury
No mention of dispatch calling Jack or other points that the sworn and video statements from the family say.There is also the guest for dinner that has stayed quiet through this so far.I doubt you will see any disagreements in his statement either.
This ISP report is based solely on the deputies report,I assume.The final report coming soon will include all the witness's claims of what they saw or heard...
You can be sure the EMT's/Fire responders and the wrecker crew all have there versions also which only the locals know for now and why the community is split...
If and only if the other locals on scene tell a much different story of the events that happened,I will retract my feelings these deputy dudes are bonified Barney Fife nut jobs.Either way,Gerry Spence will have his way with them and there attorney or he would never have taken the case.
ISP and the FBI have history with Spence in Idaho and they did not fair well and neither will the two deputies in the end.
But you keep posting accounts from "eyewitnesses" who readily admit even they don't know everything that happened, including what is likely the most critical piece of the puzzle, when or if Yantis' gun was fired. Maybe the deputies fugged up, maybe Yantis fugged up. My point all along has been neither you nor I know [bleep] at this point and it's all a guessing game.
This is part of the only to date, ISP report on this investigation logged 11-02-2015 the day after the incident.
As deputies prepared to put the injured bull down, the owner of the bull, Jack Yantis, 62 of Council, arrived on scene with a rifle. The events that transpired over the course of the next few minutes are under investigation but, at this time, it is believed that two deputies and Mr. Yantis all fired their weapons. Mr. Yantis sustained fatal injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. One deputy sustained a minor injury
No mention of dispatch calling Jack or other points that the sworn and video statements from the family say.There is also the guest for dinner that has stayed quiet through this so far.I doubt you will see any disagreements in his statement either.
This ISP report is based solely on the deputies report,I assume.The final report coming soon will include all the witness's claims of what they saw or heard...
You can be sure the EMT's/Fire responders and the wrecker crew all have there versions also which only the locals know for now and why the community is split...
If and only if the other locals on scene tell a much different story of the events that happened,I will retract my feelings these deputy dudes are bonified Barney Fife nut jobs.Either way,Gerry Spence will have his way with them and there attorney or he would never have taken the case.
ISP and the FBI have history with Spence in Idaho and they did not fair well and neither will the two deputies in the end.
But you keep posting accounts from "eyewitnesses" who readily admit even they don't know everything that happened, including what is likely the most critical piece of the puzzle, when or if Yantis' gun was fired. Maybe the deputies fugged up, maybe Yantis fugged up. My point all along has been neither you nor I know [bleep] at this point and it's all a guessing game.
Not at all. You are acting like nothing is known and that is far from the case. Many facts are known and several accounts are known. There are pieces of the puzzle that are missing and likely will never be known. I expect that's the case in most criminal investigations.
One possibility the witness brought up is that Yantis' gun was never fired at all.
JCUBIC posted a reply I can't find now questioning who Gerry Spence is...Some history in Idaho and Spence representing Randy Weaver and why.
Randy Weaver's wife was dead, shot through the head while she clutched her child to her breast. His son was shot, twice. First they shot the child's arm, probably destroyed the arm. The child cried out. Then, as the child was running they shot him in the back. Randy Weaver himself had been shot and wounded and Kevin Harris, a kid the Weavers had all but adopted was dying of a chest wound. The blood hadn't cooled on Ruby Hill before the national media announced that I had taken the defense of Randy Weaver. Then all hell broke loose. My sister wrote me decrying my defense of this "racist". There were letters to the editors in several papers that expressed their disappointment that I would lend my services to a person with Weaver's beliefs. And I received a letter from my close friend Alan Hirschfield, the former chairman of chief executive officer of Columbia Pictures and Twentieth Century Fox, imploring me to withdraw.
And so my friend Alan, if I were to withdraw from the defense of Randy Weaver as you request, I would be required to abandon my belief that this system has any remaining virtue. I would be more at fault than the federal government that has murdered these people, for I have not been trained to murder but to defend. I would be less of a man than my client who had the courage of his convictions. I would lose all respect for myself. I would be unable to any longer be your friend, for friendship must always have its foundation in respect. Therefore as my friend, I ask that you not require this of me. I ask instead for your prayers, your understanding and your continued love.
As ever,
Gerry Spence Jackson Hole, Wyoming
Basically he sticks up for those who have been wronged by the powers to be..
The defense team consisted of Spence, his son Kent, an Idaho lawyer named Chuck Peterson, and his partner Gary Gilman. Kevin Harris would be represented by David Nevin, who took the case largely for the opportunity to work with Spence. The defense team was unpaid, but for a token fee to Peterson for court appointed counsel.
Generally speaking, people at traffic court are there because they are accused of committing traffic violations which usually aren't met with attempted murder on the part of the government.
Spence got some justice for a guy injured by Federal Cops.
That's all these 'fire cops have to know to slander him.
And when the County's Ins. Co. has to pay out the max - twice actually, once for killing her husband and again for their treatment of her - and hopefully getting judgements against the two thug deputies, Gerry Spence will be an even bigger ahole in their eyes.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
He took the Fed's to the cleaners here in Idaho and he will do it again..Notice...The Fed's never got involved in this case until "after" Gerry Spence took it.
The last press release I posted earlier from the Idaho attorney generals office last week, mentioned the jury pool and possible trial.
This is somewhat like the Weaver case with the needless killing of an individual by FBI trained personnel and in Idaho.The same legal team now as before with Randy Weaver..
Jack was as familiar with guns as anyone here on this forum.An avid reloader with emphasis on long range accuracy..He was weapons smart before either of these deputies were even born,I know because the oldest deputy is the age of my middle boys and the youngest went to the same school as my boys..McCall-Donnelly.
What would you do if some young person grabbed your hot weapon when you were ready to fire?I would hold on for dear life hoping not to get shot by my own firearm from the thug tugging it.In the struggle with the 30 year old,the weapon went off most likely with the deputy at the barrel end of it...
Then just like on the Bull,the barrage of fire started and with a belly shot, none the less..Go figure.
Jack did not come to the scene to shoot a deputy,he came to put his wounded bull out of it's misery and remove it from the roadway as asked by the sheriffs dispatch..Nothing more..
At no point was there ever a statement or evidence that he shot at or intended to shoot anything but his Bull.
The deputies f-ucked up and they know it...They should never wear a badge again as evidence in there past with old women and men.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
I can't speak for others but I've had a cop that I considered myself on congenial terms with make two disparaging remarks against me due to the Yantis homicide. I haven't made any disparaging remarks against cops due to it, that I recall. I certainly have made none against the one in question nor against any others on this site due to this.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
It's funny George, the only one I see here that projects the "us against them" mentality is Curdog
I'm not surprised that neither of you can look at the BIG picture regarding these bad cop threads. It is obvious to anyone who looks at it objectively:
There exist on this forum a sort of "Cyberspace camaraderie" evolving from our shared interests in hunting and shooting. It is enhanced by our sharing of experiences and opinions.
There is one dynamic that sets itself apart from the usual flareups and disagreements. It's the way some of you cops band together and insult fellow members whom you "know" a lot better than you "know" some cop in a far away place.
And you are PROUD of doing that. At least the ones I know in real life are PROUD of their bond with other cops, no matter the disparity in their actual jobs.
I just returned from a Christmas Eve celebration at Peggy's sister's house. One of the guests whom I had not met before is a retired Federal LEO. He told me that the main reason he and Dan - Peggy's BIL and retired Tx DPS Trooper - were such good friends is that they both were cops. There was also a N.M. State Trooper there, Peggy's Nephew, but nothing was mentioned about him being considered "close".
This inflated sense of importance is not found in other occupations. Professions... yes... but not in occupations. A good welder, for instance, will be proud of his abilities, but doesn't feel compelled to defend other welders who are accused of shoddy work.
I can post about how I hate democrats for what they represent and get a trainload of attaboys, many of them from cop/members.
Thug cops are a greater threat to me personally, and all the other members for that matter, than democrats are, but when I opine about them, I get a bunch of little yapping lap dogs posting insults, veiled threats and outright lies, all on this one thread.
I make a good many of the campfire get-togethers, and have hunted with several members. I've never seen any of you heel-biters there.
If you can make up your own definition of a man out of the same whole cloth with which you create facts you can be as manly as you wish. I am happy for you that you can decide such things for yourself.
It must be amazing to wake up in your head everyday.
Please go locate a quote in this thread where I've insulted/disparaged anyone. I've seen some fairly "vile" comments levied by the non-LEOs as well (wives, etc. being dragged in).
I've made several of the CF hog "hunts" and have hunted outside those with other members. Haven't had any issues getting along with the vast majority there (mostly nin-LEIs) but haven't made any in TX yet.
I guess I'm not overly concerned with your definition of 'MEN'.......especially after the hypocrisy your own post reveals.
George, I just looked back at this thread and see that you had a post sandwiched between Gitme and Wapo, the two my comments were directed to. I usually preface my comments with "some cops" since a couple of my best hunting pards among the membership are retired LEO's.
It was not my intention to lump you in with the heel biters.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
I can't speak for others but I've had a cop that I considered myself on congenial terms with make two disparaging remarks against me due to the Yantis homicide. I haven't made any disparaging remarks against cops due to it, that I recall. I certainly have made none against the one in question nor against any others on this site due to this.
No disparaging remarks to anyone? Oh really?
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
[quote=EthanEdwards]You're way out of line. Basically you don't like what Curdog is saying here so you're threatening him with government "intervention". You may be a Democrat if...
That's rich.
Gene can say that he'd murder a cop based on a newspaper article and he's GTG. But nobody can threaten Gene with a mental health evaluation based on Gene actually saying crazy stuff.
Gene didn't threaten anybody but it is as you say, Cheyenne did.
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
I don't understand what you're saying.
This is what he said
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
Originally Posted by jwp475
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
I don't understand what you're saying.
Seems easy to understand.
Then you posted this and changed the quotes
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards
Originally Posted by jwp475
This is what he said
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
I suppose you'll want your bag'o'dicks supersized.
Seems easy to understand.
It doesn't surprise me that you have knowledge of supersized "bags'o'dicks". I'm not personally interested so since you've demonstrated your own interest jwp, you're welcome to whatever proposal Bluedreaux is making.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
It's funny George, the only one I see here that projects the "us against them" mentality is Curdog
I'm not surprised that neither of you can look at the BIG picture regarding these bad cop threads. It is obvious to anyone who looks at it objectively:
There exist on this forum a sort of "Cyberspace camaraderie" evolving from our shared interests in hunting and shooting. It is enhanced by our sharing of experiences and opinions.
There is one dynamic that sets itself apart from the usual flareups and disagreements. It's the way some of you cops band together and insult fellow members whom you "know" a lot better than you "know" some cop in a far away place.
And you are PROUD of doing that. At least the ones I know in real life are PROUD of their bond with other cops, no matter the disparity in their actual jobs.
I just returned from a Christmas Eve celebration at Peggy's sister's house. One of the guests whom I had not met before is a retired Federal LEO. He told me that the main reason he and Dan - Peggy's BIL and retired Tx DPS Trooper - were such good friends is that they both were cops. There was also a N.M. State Trooper there, Peggy's Nephew, but nothing was mentioned about him being considered "close".
This inflated sense of importance is not found in other occupations. Professions... yes... but not in occupations. A good welder, for instance, will be proud of his abilities, but doesn't feel compelled to defend other welders who are accused of shoddy work.
I can post about how I hate democrats for what they represent and get a trainload of attaboys, many of them from cop/members.
Thug cops are a greater threat to me personally, and all the other members for that matter, than democrats are, but when I opine about them, I get a bunch of little yapping lap dogs posting insults, veiled threats and outright lies, all on this one thread.
I make a good many of the campfire get-togethers, and have hunted with several members. I've never seen any of you heel-biters there.
I suspect I won't. You won't fit in with MEN.
One of the big issues here is that you are incapable of objectivity. In fact I challah get you to find a post where I have defended these two deputies, when all any of the "campfire cops" have pointed out is there is too little actual fact and evidence to make a decision one way or another.
You've been slinging feces at each other for over a 100 pages to date. How about stopping the bickering for the night and go drink some nog and find a family member and give them a big hug!....
... And don't forget that your heart is pumping blood and your lungs are still sucking air!
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
I can't speak for others but I've had a cop that I considered myself on congenial terms with make two disparaging remarks against me due to the Yantis homicide.
I'm assuming you may be talking about me and although I only recall making one disparaging remark toward you, I won't contest the fact...I get carried away sometimes.
My bag'o'dicks remark was on the thread about Yantis, but it certainly wasn't "due to the Yantis homicide". It was made because I fundamentally disagree with the notion that murdering the two cops based on newspaper articles is OK.
I personally take offense to that notion as a matter of fact because ignorant actions like that have resulted in the children of cops spending this Christmas without a dad. And macho statements like what Gene made only encourage more of that nonsense. I don't want to die any time soon, but if I do I want it to be in a hail of gunfire with badguys, not being ambushed by some coward on drive-by-media-fueled crusade like Gene advocated.
So when you say that Gene didn't threaten anyone, you're full of it. He advocated the murder of two people based on newspaper articles. Newspaper articles have also told us what a good kid Treyvon was, that global warming is going to kill us all and that the Obama administration isn't responsible for Benghazi. So pardon my skepticism.
Once upon a time newspaper articles told everyone in my community what a terrible person I was. They told everyone exactly what I did, but they never told why. And the why was important. The why, and knowing all of the evidence that the "news" didn't bother to report, is why it took a jury just a few minutes to rule in my favor.
And I had crazy people in my community posting the same nonsense that crazy Gene posted about these guys. They actively encouraged my murder based on the story that the news told, which wasn't even half of the truth of what happened.
Gene didn't directly threaten anyone to their face, but he did advocate their murder based on his hypothesis about their guilt. And that's a terrible thing to do, no matter how you slice it.
You've been slinging feces at each other for over a 100 pages to date. How about stopping the bickering for the night and go drink some nog and find a family member and give them a big hug!....
... And don't forget that your heart is pumping blood and your lungs are still sucking air!
You've been slinging feces at each other for over a 100 pages to date. How about stopping the bickering for the night and go drink some nog and find a family member and give them a big hug!....
... And don't forget that your heart is pumping blood and your lungs are still sucking air!
I'm assuming you may be talking about me and although I only recall making one disparaging remark toward you, I won't contest the fact...I get carried away sometimes.
Gene didn't directly threaten anyone to their face,
I took the liberty of heavily editing your post into what I considered the pertinent facts to what I myself posted. I will go back and re-read your post because I found it interesting, and try to digest it better.
I was taken aback when you lit into me and implied I was nuts and post a lot of tinfoil horse [bleep] all the time on a thread related to this thread on the Handguns forum close to when this thread started.
I personally have not speculated much at all on this thread. I will say that I don't think it looks good for the coppers as far as them being clean. I have no idea how it will play out in the courts. Gerry Spence is old and not Superman, but I would want him on my side in a court battle.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
It's funny George, the only one I see here that projects the "us against them" mentality is Curdog
I'm not surprised that neither of you can look at the BIG picture regarding these bad cop threads. It is obvious to anyone who looks at it objectively:
There exist on this forum a sort of "Cyberspace camaraderie" evolving from our shared interests in hunting and shooting. It is enhanced by our sharing of experiences and opinions.
There is one dynamic that sets itself apart from the usual flareups and disagreements. It's the way some of you cops band together and insult fellow members whom you "know" a lot better than you "know" some cop in a far away place.
And you are PROUD of doing that. At least the ones I know in real life are PROUD of their bond with other cops, no matter the disparity in their actual jobs.
I just returned from a Christmas Eve celebration at Peggy's sister's house. One of the guests whom I had not met before is a retired Federal LEO. He told me that the main reason he and Dan - Peggy's BIL and retired Tx DPS Trooper - were such good friends is that they both were cops. There was also a N.M. State Trooper there, Peggy's Nephew, but nothing was mentioned about him being considered "close".
This inflated sense of importance is not found in other occupations. Professions... yes... but not in occupations. A good welder, for instance, will be proud of his abilities, but doesn't feel compelled to defend other welders who are accused of shoddy work.
I can post about how I hate democrats for what they represent and get a trainload of attaboys, many of them from cop/members.
Thug cops are a greater threat to me personally, and all the other members for that matter, than democrats are, but when I opine about them, I get a bunch of little yapping lap dogs posting insults, veiled threats and outright lies, all on this one thread.
I make a good many of the campfire get-togethers, and have hunted with several members. I've never seen any of you heel-biters there.
I suspect I won't. You won't fit in with MEN.
Just a bit arrogant and pompous, ehh? And Texans wonder why we're given hell...grin...
I've declined several invitations because I knew you'd be there. So my reason for not attending had nothing manliness.
It seems a poor reason to decline an invitation to a Campfire gathering. I have nothing against you, but I am glad that Gene came and you did not. I have had several long and good talks with Gene and even stood side by side with Him, while holding one end of a tarp during a tornado. It was covering us and protecting against flying debris, as much as rain. I would wish for no better by My side. I do figure that there was room for both. miles
I've declined several invitations because I knew you'd be there. So my reason for not attending had nothing manliness.
It seems a poor reason to decline an invitation to a Campfire gathering. I have nothing against you, but I am glad that Gene came and you did not. I have had several long and good talks with Gene and even stood side by side with Him, while holding one end of a tarp during a tornado. It was covering us and protecting against flying debris, as much as rain. I would wish for no better by My side. I do figure that there was room for both. miles
I've declined several invitations because I knew you'd be there. So my reason for not attending had nothing manliness.
It seems a poor reason to decline an invitation to a Campfire gathering.
Why? I'm not going to go and pretend that I don't want to push him into the campfire. I'm not going to go and spend the weekend avoiding him. And I'm not going to go and end up in an argument and ruin everyone's good time.
The "us against them mentality" on the part of LEO's can not be displayed more clearly than around this virtual campfire by the cops posting here.
Laffin'.......yeah, clearly just cops on display in that regard.
George
I can't speak for others but I've had a cop that I considered myself on congenial terms with make two disparaging remarks against me due to the Yantis homicide.
I'm assuming you may be talking about me and although I only recall making one disparaging remark toward you, I won't contest the fact...I get carried away sometimes.
My bag'o'dicks remark was on the thread about Yantis, but it certainly wasn't "due to the Yantis homicide". It was made because I fundamentally disagree with the notion that murdering the two cops based on newspaper articles is OK.
I personally take offense to that notion as a matter of fact because ignorant actions like that have resulted in the children of cops spending this Christmas without a dad. And macho statements like what Gene made only encourage more of that nonsense. I don't want to die any time soon, but if I do I want it to be in a hail of gunfire with badguys, not being ambushed by some coward on drive-by-media-fueled crusade like Gene advocated.
So when you say that Gene didn't threaten anyone, you're full of it. He advocated the murder of two people based on newspaper articles. Newspaper articles have also told us what a good kid Treyvon was, that global warming is going to kill us all and that the Obama administration isn't responsible for Benghazi. So pardon my skepticism.
Once upon a time newspaper articles told everyone in my community what a terrible person I was. They told everyone exactly what I did, but they never told why. And the why was important. The why, and knowing all of the evidence that the "news" didn't bother to report, is why it took a jury just a few minutes to rule in my favor.
And I had crazy people in my community posting the same nonsense that crazy Gene posted about these guys. They actively encouraged my murder based on the story that the news told, which wasn't even half of the truth of what happened.
Gene didn't directly threaten anyone to their face, but he did advocate their murder based on his hypothesis about their guilt. And that's a terrible thing to do, no matter how you slice it.
Spot on! No way to establish guilt or innocence simply by reading media accounts.
Spot on! No way to establish guilt or innocence simply by reading media accounts.
I can agree some of the news media putting a spin on things but the live interviews from the victims is as close as you can get to the real real on the facts.They can't stray far from there sworn statements.
Spot on! No way to establish guilt or innocence simply by reading media accounts.
I can agree some of the news media putting a spin on things but the live interviews from the victims is as close as you can get to the real real on the facts.They can't stray far from there sworn statements.
M eye witness accounts are not always 100% correct
M eye witness accounts are not always 100% correct
I'm not sure if we should call them eye witness's or victims..They were thrown to the ground and cuffed trying to help Jack...
They have given sworn statements and the two officers have filed there reports and I suppose have by now given there sworn statements...Who would we believe just as the jury might have to decide?
Two officers discussing there reports prior to writing them so they agree on all counts and don't appear to have different memory of the events or those by the victims and again,not to forget the one who is not talking but was cuffed and thrown to the ground.
JWP..I know your smarter than to think whatever the officers say is exactly what happened with them both knowing this could be the end of there careers.Gunning down a neighbor over a Bull and they had to know Jack did not come there to harm them,he came because he was called,most likely by the deputies, I would only assume.
The sheriff said both deputies were cattle wise yet neither new how to dispatch a hurt bull and they both shot only to anger the bull more and belly shoot him.Jack new how but was grabbed and pushed at the moment of ignition,most likely.
Last but not least,Gerry Spence would not have taken the case if the officers did not step over the line,just like Ruby Ridge.
It was reported by KTVB in Boise three weeks ago the investigation was all but done and to expect the release within the next couple weeks..3 weeks later nothing...
But it is Christmas and I'm sure that played a hand..
M eye witness accounts are not always 100% correct
I'm not sure if we should call them eye witness's or victims..They were thrown to the ground and cuffed trying to help Jack...
They have given sworn statements and the two officers have filed there reports and I suppose have by now given there sworn statements...Who would we believe just as the jury might have to decide?
Two officers discussing there reports prior to writing them so they agree on all counts and don't appear to have different memory of the events or those by the victims and again,not to forget the one who is not talking but was cuffed and thrown to the ground.
JWP..I know your smarter than to think whatever the officers say is exactly what happened with them both knowing this could be the end of there careers.Gunning down a neighbor over a Bull and they had to know Jack did not come there to harm them,he came because he was called,most likely by the deputies, I would only assume.
The sheriff said both deputies were cattle wise yet neither new how to dispatch a hurt bull and they both shot only to anger the bull more and belly shoot him.Jack new how but was grabbed and pushed at the moment of ignition,most likely.
Last but not least,Gerry Spence would not have taken the case if the officers did not step over the line,just like Ruby Ridge.
I would definate want to hear both sides, something that you obviously aren't interested in.
I feel that scientific testing of evidence collected is being tested and may not be complete. You only have media reports to base your rush to judgement on.
I would definate want to hear both sides, something that you obviously aren't interested in.
Excuse me...I want to here both sides also..I have a stake in this..I sure would like to here that the two deputies in a joining county to mine on a road I travel all the time,are not gun happy gunmen waiting for the next senior to drive into there county.
Do I have an opinion based on the victims statements,yes I do but I also realize all the t's aren't crossed in the investigation and that isn't the way we do things.Once that is done,we'll see.
Either way Jack is dead and there on paid leave thinking they did no wrong, as stated by Brian Wood.If nothing else,there both guilty of not giving a $hit shown by there actions at the scene after Jack was down and the Bull still layed suffering and throwing an old women trying to help her husband to the pavement.That was all wrong..F-uck the book..
I would definate want to hear both sides, something that you obviously aren't interested in.
Excuse me...I want to here both sides also..I have a stake in this..I sure would like to here that the two deputies in a joining county to mine on a road I travel all the time,are not gun happy gunmen waiting for the next senior to drive into there county.
Do I have an opinion based on the victims statements,yes I do but I also realize all the t's aren't crossed in the investigation and that isn't the way we do things.Once that is done,we'll see.
Either way Jack is dead and there on paid leave thinking they did no wrong, as stated by Brian Wood.If nothing else,there both guilty of not giving a $hit shown by there actions at the scene after Jack was down and the Bull still layed suffering and throwing an old women trying to help her husband to the pavement.That was all wrong..F-uck the book..
You are basing a lot of opinion on one side and only media reports, not something I would do.
You are basing a lot of opinion on one side and only media reports, not something I would do
Let's see,two deputies with a history of violence on people over 60, with one a convicted poacher while a police officer in McCall Idaho and the other worked five departments in 15 years..I'll go out on a limb here and say they both have some serious issues.Certainly not Idaho's finest.
They make it not to hard to believe the victims yet like the rest of you,I want to here the other side.
They both need horse whipped for roughing up Jacks wife and helping in giving here a major heart attack.Rowdy is a big boy and can take it,Donna not so much and I didn't mean it was alright to do what they did to Rowdy,it wasn't.
Let's see,two deputies with a history of violence on people over 60, with one a convicted poacher while a police officer in McCall Idaho and the other worked five departments in 15 years..I'll go out on a limb here and say they both have some serious issues.Certainly not Idaho's finest.
Funny how Jack's DUI is relevent but LEO and their groupies ignore the two officers past history.....
Let's see,two deputies with a history of violence on people over 60, with one a convicted poacher while a police officer in McCall Idaho and the other worked five departments in 15 years..I'll go out on a limb here and say they both have some serious issues.Certainly not Idaho's finest.
Funny how Jack's DUI is relevent but LEO and their groupies ignore the two officers past history.....
No one is ignoring anything, but it is prudent to not rush to judgement based on the media.
I left out the name but here is one event that the grandson posted about Cody Rolland,the other deputy with 15 years experience.
Quote
Rooland used to work for Parma PD and is an aggressive person.He through my grandma down off her steps,a 65 year old woman at the time without a reason.
So why would anyone question either of these two deputies obvious nature to use force on senior citizens.Yes,I believe Rowdy and Donna's account of what went on..It just fits but I still want to here the other side as most do.
Hear no evil, see no evil. Just wait long enough for people to lose interest and any hope for justice, so it can be swept under the rug and business as usual.
Hear no evil, see no evil. Just wait long enough for people to lose interest and any hope for justice, so it can be swept under the rug and business as usual.
Let's just hang the deputies now, hell no need to wait for all facts to be in and no need for a trail, right?
OK time to let this die UNTIL the courts decide. All we have now is a bunch of clap trap arguing and pissing in each others wheaties going on. Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
OK time to let this die UNTIL the courts decide. All we have now is a bunch of clap trap arguing and pissing in each others wheaties going on. Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
No way for that to happen, makes too much logical sense.
Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
That would fine if the "courts" were indeed deciding...but they aren't....the ISP....who have a record of coruption.....will deceide who to believe.....course.....their history of coruption in these types of investigations probably isn't relevent either.....
Don't like facebook,huh..They have some cool stuff there like Lobo Watch..I took a snapshot just for you..Interesting reads there like this grandpa that killed 11,000 Coyotes through his years.
I would re-post what I just posted with the name but I already have if you look back in the post.
Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
That would fine if the "courts" were indeed deciding...but they aren't....the ISP....who have a record of coruption.....will deceide who to believe.....course.....their previous history probably isn't relevent either.....
Silly me I always thought an investigation preceded a trial
The problem with waiting for the evidence is that neither the ISP, nor the Sheriff's department have any credibility.
We know the history of the Deputies -- but not because the ISP or the Sheriff have released any information.
We haven't seen dash cam or body cam footage. And we don;t have faith that it has been preserved. Especially Wood learned from the McCall case that having it turned off is less trouble.
So, why are we waiting? Pray, tell, WHY do we have to wait? Why are the records of the deputies not released, like Yantis' record was so swiftly released?
Oh, that's right. We're preserving the jury pool. There's a knee slapper. That's probably why they were so quick to release the Yantis record, right?
The longer ISP waits, the more obvious it is they are doing what they have done in previous investigations: hide evidence and intimidate witnesses.
Let's see,two deputies with a history of violence on people over 60, with one a convicted poacher while a police officer in McCall Idaho and the other worked five departments in 15 years..I'll go out on a limb here and say they both have some serious issues.Certainly not Idaho's finest.
Funny how Jack's DUI is relevent but LEO and their groupies ignore the two officers past history.....
No one is ignoring anything, but it is prudent to not rush to judgement based on the media.
I'm not so sure about that.....why just yesterday a LEO chimed in asking if Jack's toxicology report was out yet but wasn't in the least bit curious as to whether Adams county has released the deputies drug test records....or if they even conduct drug tests....
Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
That would fine if the "courts" were indeed deciding...but they aren't....the ISP....who have a record of coruption.....will deceide who to believe.....course.....their previous history probably isn't relevent either.....
Silly me I always thought an investigation preceded a trial
Corrupt cops investigating incompetent trigger happy cops....this thing stinks on ice and you know it.....
At least three of you live in Idaho. If you don't trust the ISP and/or the SO, what are you doing about it, besides bitching about it here?
I have said numerous times on this thread,I have and had friends that are officers including ISP,infact one is at post now.ISP investigations has the not so good reputation,not the ground pounders.The ISP ground pounders are pretty hard core with no wiggle room..An old friend that was ISP was often told by fellow officers he would arrest his own mother.
"Most" officers are good folk but like anything else, you have the rogue cops in the mix.Sometimes the comradery goes to far when a spade, should be called a spade.
I am not bitching about any officers except the two in this case and the fact that ISP investigations has a bad reputation for officer involved tragedies.
Maybe since this is has a higher profile with Spence and all,it might turn out different but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Let the courts decide and then we can argue facts.
That would fine if the "courts" were indeed deciding...but they aren't....the ISP....who have a record of coruption.....will deceide who to believe.....course.....their previous history probably isn't relevent either.....
Silly me I always thought an investigation preceded a trial
Corrupt cops investigating incompetent trigger happy cops....this thing stinks on ice and you know it.....
But that's OK cause so does Spence.....
I don't know any more than you do which isn't much and that is the point.
If you have faith in Mr. Spence to acquire justice, then what is the problem?
Spot on! No way to establish guilt or innocence simply by reading media accounts.
I can agree some of the news media putting a spin on things but the live interviews from the victims is as close as you can get to the real real on the facts.They can't stray far from there sworn statements.
That is only part of the story though and we know that those same eyewitnesses are unclear on certain important aspects of the incident.
Hopefully, forensics on the rifle will determine if it was fired or not, and the testimony of the Deputies will answer some of the "Why's"...
My own take is that the Deputies have a whole lot of explaining to do about the entire episode not just the shooting, but they should be afforded that opportunity.
My own take is that the Deputies have a whole lot of explaining to do about the entire episode not just the shooting, but they should be afforded that opportunity.
The reality is that the conduct of the two deputies BEFORE the Yantis shooting was so egregious they should have been summarily canned.
My own take is that the Deputies have a whole lot of explaining to do about the entire episode not just the shooting, but they should be afforded that opportunity.
The reality is that the conduct of the two deputies BEFORE the Yantis shooting was so egregious they should have been summarily canned.
They probably should've never been hired, to hear the way yall talk about them. But I'd imagine the county got exactly what they paid for.
"No one is ignoring anything, but it is prudent to not rush to judgement based on the media."
When someone posts a newspaper article about cops killing a gangbanger, y'all are quick to accept the account as factual and trip all over one another high fiving.
And you don't know a damn thing about it except what the media reported.
Hopefully, forensics on the rifle will determine if it was fired or not, and the testimony of the Deputies will answer some of the "Why's"...
This is the one item not in question. From written witness reports we do know Mr Yantis's rifle was definitely discharged at some point after a deputy laid hands upon him.
What is in question is where exactly the muzzle was pointed at that moment.
And I question also just how, self proclaimed, highly trained and experienced deputies could possibly believe they were in any danger from a bolt action rifle which had been discharged, but not cycled.
I can understand, possibly the mistake made by the deputy shooting Mr Yantis in the stomach after he made the mistake of laying hands on the man for no reason.
But I can find no excuse for the second deputy standing off at some distance who chose to pump four more rounds into Mr Yantis's chest.
The Sheriff's statements indicate one deputy used an AR. I understand the dangers of making an assumption, but I have a hard time imagining the first deputy grabbing Mr Yantis by the shoulder, then grabbing the rifle scope with one hand while simultaneously controlling his own rifle and firing.
It only makes sense that the first deputy had a pistol in his hand when he accosted Mr Yantis. And it makes sense that he fired that pistol by reflex when the rifle discharged in close proximety.
But the second deputy, if he chose at that moment to pump several rifle rounds into a man's chest who could not possibly bring lethal force to bear on him, is guilty of murder.
Were it private citezins who had shot a man under these exact same circumstances, they would be in jail right now awaiting trial. Instead, several weeks later the two deputies are sitting at home collecting their paychecks and accruing benefits.
Some might wonder if ISP has not released findings yet, because they are still searching for an appropiately sized Adams Co Sheriff's Office uniform with a 20 cal bullet hole and powder burns.
This is the one item not in question. From written witness reports we do know Mr Yantis's rifle was definitely discharged at some point after a deputy laid hands upon him.
What is in question is where exactly the muzzle was pointed at that moment.
And I question also just how, self proclaimed, highly trained and experienced deputies could possibly believe they were in any danger from a bolt action rifle which had been discharged, but not cycled.
I can understand, possibly the mistake made by the deputy shooting Mr Yantis in the stomach after he made the mistake of laying hands on the man for no reason.
But I can find no excuse for the second deputy standing off at some distance who chose to pump four more rounds into Mr Yantis's chest.
The Sheriff's statements indicate one deputy used an AR. I understand the dangers of making an assumption, but I have a hard time imagining the first deputy grabbing Mr Yantis by the shoulder, then grabbing the rifle scope with one hand while simultaneously controlling his own rifle and firing.
It only makes sense that the first deputy had a pistol in his hand when he accosted Mr Yantis. And it makes sense that he fired that pistol by reflex when the rifle discharged in close proximety.
But the second deputy, if he chose at that moment to pump several rifle rounds into a man's chest who could not possibly bring lethal force to bear on him, is guilty of murder.
Were it private citezins who had shot a man under these exact same circumstances, they would be in jail right now awaiting trial. Instead, several weeks later the two deputies are sitting at home collecting their paychecks and accruing benefits.
Some might wonder if ISP has not released findings yet, because they are still searching for an appropiately sized Adams Co Sheriff's Office uniform with a 20 cal bullet hole and powder burns.
Another eyewitness who was at the scene. I hope they got your statement, or at the very least, a sit-down with you and Spence.
And have you seen the statements from at least two other star witnesses saying they don't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired or not?
My own take is that the Deputies have a whole lot of explaining to do about the entire episode not just the shooting, but they should be afforded that opportunity.
The reality is that the conduct of the two deputies BEFORE the Yantis shooting was so egregious they should have been summarily canned.
They probably should've never been hired, to hear the way yall talk about them. But I'd imagine the county got exactly what they paid for.
And that right there is a sad FACT.
Also a little scary as Adams County payscale is surely comparable to most any rural Idaho county, and assuredly higher than paid by many small rural municipalities.
Idaho counties and towns may be quite well populared by uniformed trigger happy fools.
As mentioned before, it is no secret that highly employable officers quickly migrate from the small rural forces into the greater Boise metro area where pay is much higher, and the best move toward ISP.
Another eyewitness who was at the scene. I hope they got your statement, or at the very least, a sit-down with you and Spence.
And have you seen the statements from at least two other star witnesses saying they don't know when or if Yantis' rifle was fired or not?
Nope, did not claim to be a witness. I actually passed the incident site about two hours before dark that evening, and can verify that no bull was on the road at that time.
So, you doubt that the rifle was fired? Is that your point?
That one witness can not verify a fact does not impugn the testimony of the witness who is unable to confirm that fact. Non LEO witnesses are quoted as saying Mr Yantis's rifle discharged.
I fail to understand why any police officer would jump to defend the officer who is an aberation and commits heinous acts under the protection of his badge.
I would think that all police would be anxious to have such criminals purged from their ranks.
The point is, I have no idea everything that took place, you have no idea everything that took place, Jayco has no idea everything that took place, Curdog doesn't know [bleep] about anything, Fieldgrade apparently has to smell stinky cooter, and that's the facts as I see them.
I said it before, maybe the deputies fugged up, maybe Yantis fugged up, no one knows for sure at this point (witnesses can't even agree on or confirm/deny key elements), but a whole lot of guesses are being made, and it apparently doesn't matter what ISP's investigation finds because they're corrupt and incompetent to begin with.
I thought ISP was corrupt and incompetent, or is that just more guesswork from your fellow statesmen?
There is strong evidense that some indiviguals within ISP conspired to protect a Payette Co deputy after he killed a man on highway 30 while traveling in excess of 105 mph where posted at 55.
That incident was reported ealier in this thread.
Does that negate my statement that they pay better than any other dept. in the state and have their choice of the best and brightest from other depts.
They probably should've never been hired, to hear the way yall talk about them. But I'd imagine the county got exactly what they paid for.
"They should have paid em more but they didn't so they got what they deserved".....you should make that your tag line since it seems to be your default answer to any cop killing......
They probably should've never been hired, to hear the way yall talk about them. But I'd imagine the county got exactly what they paid for.
"They should have paid em more but they didn't so they got what they deserved".....you should make that your tag line since it seems to be your default answer to any cop killing......
Nobody deserves to have idiots policing their community. But some people shouldn't be surprised by it.
Nobody deserves to have idiots policing their community. But some people shouldn't be surprised by it.
Many of us are not surprised.
Some of us have watched total idiots grow up and weasel their way into local police depts.
One example I am aware of served as a reserve officer in a tiny town for years until he finally became the least objectionable candidate for an open position in a dept. of three.
When the town disbanded their dept and contracted the county to take over police duties, this man transitioned to the county. He is now, thirty years later, a detective.
This, desite the fact that he is not smart enough to clear the chamber on a loaded pistol before attempting to disassemble it for cleaning. Thus he shot himself through the hand several years before becoming an employed officer.
And despite the fact that he attempted in Boise to thread his way through a traffic jam by placing a magnetic flashing light on top of his sedan. He was cited for "impersonating an emergency vehicle" by city police. Again several years before becoming an employed afficer.
This is not to say that I think he is typical of our police depts. The majority of our depts are comprised of smart, honest, ethical officers. But aberations are present.
"Least objectionable candidate".....Therein lies the problem. Either they're worth hiring or they're not. If you don't have anyone worth hiring you can either attract better people or close up shop. That's how it works for regular businesses and there's no reason a police department should be any different.
FWIW-I've never seen a community served by a three man department that wouldn't have been better off without a department at all.
"Least objectionable candidate".....Therein lies the problem. Either they're worth hiring or they're not. If you don't have anyone worth hiring you can either attract better people or close up shop. That's how it works for regular businesses and there's no reason a police department should be any different.
FWIW-I've never seen a community served by a three man department that wouldn't have been better off without a department at all.
Several of our local towns are biginning to think the same way and contracting with the county for police protection. That seems to work well most of the time.
But I do miss the days when our county had three deputies and many of the towns had one policeman. The one problem being that the one deputy on duty was often forty minutes away at the other end of the county when you needed him.
But folk often tended to be pretty self reliant in those days anyway.
"Least objectionable candidate".....Therein lies the problem. Either they're worth hiring or they're not. If you don't have anyone worth hiring you can either attract better people or close up shop. That's how it works for regular businesses and there's no reason a police department should be any different.
FWIW-I've never seen a community served by a three man department that wouldn't have been better off without a department at all.
Bingo. There it is. I was thinking the same thing two pages back but you beat me to it with a better summary than I could have provided. The problem in rural areas that don't have a lot of income not provided by agriculture, is that they are too freaking poor to hire somebody decent. In the absence of decency, nothing is preferable to something since by definition, that something is indecent.
One example I am aware of served as a reserve officer in a tiny town for years until he finally became the least objectionable candidate for an open position in a dept. of three.
When the town dibanded their dept and contracted the county to take over police duties, this man transitioned to the county. He is now, thirty years later, a detective.
This, desite the fact that he is not smart enough to clear the chamber on a loaded pistol before attempting to disassemble it for cleaning. Thus he shot himself through the hand several years before becoming an employed officer.
And despite the fact that he attempted in Boise to thread his way through a traffic jam by placing a magnetic flashing light on top of his sedan. He was cited for "impersonating an emergency vehicle" by city police. Again several years before becoming an employed afficer.
This is not to say that I think he is typical of our police depts. The majority of our depts are comprised of smart, honest, ethical officers. But aberations are present.
IS is holding back. Unfortunately, there are other examples he could be piling on. The part that is puzzling is how the departments tolerate and cover for these types. But then, I guess it hurts to admit the mistake of hiring them in the first place. As usual, I blame management types for this - same as any other profession.
"Least objectionable candidate".....Therein lies the problem. Either they're worth hiring or they're not. If you don't have anyone worth hiring you can either attract better people or close up shop. That's how it works for regular businesses and there's no reason a police department should be any different.
FWIW-I've never seen a community served by a three man department that wouldn't have been better off without a department at all.
Bingo. There it is. I was thinking the same thing two pages back but you beat me to it with a better summary than I could have provided. The problem in rural areas that don't have a lot of income not provided by agriculture, is that they are too freaking poor to hire somebody decent. In the absence of decency, nothing is preferable to something since by definition, that something is indecent.
There are many communities that rely on a Sheriff's Department and the State Police to enforce the laws and investigate crimes. As Ethan noted they don't have enough money to set up, and run, a three-man department. The county I worked in was surrounded by much poorer counties. Two of them had small Sheriff's Departments, often the Sheriff and 2 or 3 deputies. The deputies were placed in various communities throughout the county and lived there. They were on call 24/7/365 and were paid poverty wages. If there was ever a need for an in-depth investigation of a major crime the Texas Department of Public Safety CID took over and investigated the case.
Shooter,as you know,New Meadows to the north of Council is contracted out to Adams county for police protection as well as Riggins to the north of there whom is contracted out to Idaho county for police protection.Neither has a police department.
It's easy to forget earlier post and the fact that the family was not the only witness's..Just one from facebook for the great Wapiti.I am sure there are more taken so many were there..
As you also remember the disagreement between Yantis and the deputies seemed to be from Jack wanting to shoot the bull in a way to preserve the meat, as reported by someone who was there.
Ranchers are generally lucky to break even which probably explains why cops are so much better.
I'm not sure why it's always farmers and ranchers who get touted as "barely breaking even". Some years they pay their bills, some years they go into debt, some years they put a little money away.
Evidently not, because I have no idea what any of that meant.
I was just making an observation that farmers and ranchers don't have the market cornered on being "lucky to break even". There are lots of folks in that predicament.
Ranchers are generally lucky to break even which probably explains why cops are so much better.
I'm not sure why it's always farmers and ranchers who get touted as "barely breaking even". Some years they pay their bills, some years they go into debt, some years they put a little money away.
That describes probably 70% of this country.
Maybe it is because they do usually barely break even though many not familiar with the business assume otherwise.
Evidently not, because I have no idea what any of that meant.
I was just making an observation that farmers and ranchers don't have the market cornered on being "lucky to break even". There are lots of folks in that predicament.
Self-employed compared to a paid salary are too completely different things.
Some who makes $800 a week and barely breaks even, is living above their means. When someone self employeed and the market decides good/bad year its different.
Evidently not, because I have no idea what any of that meant.
I was just making an observation that farmers and ranchers don't have the market cornered on being "lucky to break even". There are lots of folks in that predicament.
Self-employed compared to a paid salary are too completely different things.
Some who makes $800 a week and barely breaks even, is living above their means. When someone self employeed and the market decides good/bad year its different.
No, they're living above your arbitrary standard of what someone's "means" are. You have no idea what other people have to do with their money.
My wife knows EXACTLY how much money she is going to make in a month/year. She is a salaried wage earner which makes it incredibly easy to budget and live within her means.
She also invests $0 into her job which makes it pretty tough to go broke working. Of course she(or anyone else with a job) could get fired and then she would have to find another job. Happens all the time, hell it happened to me when the construction industry took a hit back in 2009. I moved on and found another job. Took a big pay cut it sucked but I didn't lose my ass and go bankrupt.
Now if you're self employed and have a yearly operating loan, land payments, cattle payments, machinery payments, feed payments not to mention the everyday costs of living it is a little different deal.
Living within your means takes a whole new meaning when the markets go to hell and you lose more money than you make. And obviously this holds true for any small business.
Honestly I am happy to get paid every month, don't have the personality to gamble and take out big loans.
I've been in both camps and each one has its advantages and drawbacks.
I believe that it takes a little more LUCK to make it in a small business than it does to have a good career working for someone else.
It seems that at one time a small business could get "right sized" and stay there. Now, the "Grow or go" dynamic makes survival a lot more "iffy". My deceased FIL did well farming and ranching until he started expanding to make room for his son in the business. Then he went broke and lost everything.
This officer that was involved in the Jack Yantis shooting, clearly believes he is above the law.He committed this crime while still a McCall PD police officer..His employment ended shortly after.
It clearly shows that he believes he is above the law and can do whatever he wants without reprimand. Although his employment as a police officer in McCall ended shortly after the poaching incident,according to the records .
Another officer involved shooting in Idaho but handled correctly..They had there body camera's on and first aid was administered to the victim,something Jack did not get.
Just to show how wrong the Yantis shooting was handled.
Donahue said investigators believe Heredia fired his gun, but it's unclear whether the suspect or the officers shot first. The Canyon County Sheriff's Office crime lab is working to determine the sequence of events, he said.
Paramedics performed first aid at the scene, before taking Heredia to Saint Alphonsus in Boise in an ambulance. Neither of the officers were hurt. Both have been placed on paid administrative leave. Donahue said the officers involved had multiple years of experience.
Donahue said at least one of the officers was wearing a body camera when the shooting happened; the audio and video captured by the device has been turned over to investigators. The Critical Incident Task Force was activated after the shooting, and the Canyon County Sheriff's Office will act as the lead investigating agency.
Four children and a male relative of inside the house when the shooting happened. Investigators who searched Heredia's house after the shooting found several other firearms, Donahue said.
It clearly shows that he believes he is above the law and can do whatever he wants without reprimand. Although his employment as a police officer in McCall ended shortly after the poaching incident,according to the records .
You're right. If you've ever committed a crime you clearly think you're above the law and can do whatever you want without reprimand. Just be sure to apply that to the two criminal cops, Yantis, and every witness. I'd be totally fine with that and not believing a word that any of them say.
This officer that was involved in the Jack Yantis shooting, clearly believes he is above the law.He committed this crime while still a McCall PD police officer..His employment ended shortly after.
Either wasn't convicted or the Idaho POST Council must not give a chit. Probably a cover-up by the ISP F&G....
We'd need the jaws-of-life to get Bristoe's mouth off his dick.
Dave
I don't know if there are 12 step groups for guys suffering from a fascination with male genitalia, but you and Steelhead could start one.
One more thing for the both of you to think about:
Given all the years y'all have fed at the Gov't trough, it's too late for you ever to match mine, Bristoe's, and Greg's accomplishments. But one day you will be older than we are now.
Unless your smart mouths forget one day that you are in the real world, not cyberspace, and some guy brings your cuteness to a sudden halt.
I know. Why do you think I left your hunting camp early? [bleep] driving around with loaded/chambered rifles on 4 wheelers. You walking around showing me stuff with a chambered rifle on your shoulder and the muzzle swinging by my head a couple of times.
Didn't take long to realize what an unsafe bunch you were.
Of course you are GREAT at reading sign, that's why you have 5 ex-wives, TFF.
You truly can't make this stuff up. But you are correct, I aspire to be divorced 100 times, kicked out of the military and be such a [bleep] up mess of a drunk that the only one that will talk to me is Jesus.
Only then can I be a TRUE Christian solider such as you!
Just be sure to apply that to the two criminal cops, Yantis, and every witness. I'd be totally fine with that and not believing a word that any of them say.
You can't be serious.Police policing by day and robbing by night..Are not police officers to be held to a higher standard than a logger having one to many?
How can you compare an active police officer violating the law he swore to uphold to an old logger having one to many and getting a DUI?
The guy poached and wasted the meat while employed by the McCall PD and his employment ended shortly after..He got re-hired by Adams county and look what followed,more cowboy $hit instead of reasonable interpretation and counter measures that did not include the needless killing of an innocent man trying to do what he was called to do by dispatch.
Not attempting to compare incident's except the that both fella's were shot by local Idaho LE and a county sheriff deputy, about 80 miles apart. How quickly LE releases information on one the next day, and weeks after Yantis we don't even know if a body camera was on..
Is it me, or does something not feel right with this picture?
Not attempting to compare incident's except that both fella's were shot by a local Idaho LE and a county sheriff deputy, about 80 miles apart. How quickly LE releases information on one the next day, and weeks after Yantis we don't even know if a body camera was on..
Is it me, or does something not feel right with this picture?
How can you compare an active police officer violating the law he swore to uphold to an old logger having one to many and getting a DUI?
Because I always thought a lot of lumberjacks. I assumed that they were intelligent enough to know what was right and wrong and had the wherewithal to do the right thing.
Are you saying I shouldn't expect so much of them? Is it because they're too dumb to know right from wrong or too lazy to bother doing the right thing?
Because I always thought a lot of lumberjacks. I assumed that they were intelligent enough to know what was right and wrong and had the wherewithal to do the right thing.
Are you saying I shouldn't expect so much of them? Is it because they're too dumb to know right from wrong or too lazy to bother doing the right thing?
Somehow I missed that post..If you are giving the green light to an employed police officer to break the law in any way he feels necessary such as poaching big game animals and letting them waste,that's okay for him to do huh?
Jack on the other hand was convicted of a DUI clear back in the 90's which is not even close in time or severity to a active duty police officer poaching and then wasting the meat.This alone tells me the guy thinks he is a cowboy and can do anything he wishes without reprimand or until he gets caught.
Lumberjacks as you call them, are normal people that work very hard physically to support there families, just as everyone else does.Cops on the other hand are supposed to set an example in following the laws they enforce,not break them as this deputy did.
Coming to a theater near you very soon!
Quote
Idaho State Police Crawling All Over Council, Hometown of Jack Yantis: Whitewash Expected Soon
As readers may recall, LibertyFight.com broke the story identifying the kilers of Jack Yantis on November 30th.Our source in Council who gave us the two officers names alerts us that something is afoot, and the discerning source predicts that whitewash of the two killers, Sheriffs Brian Wood and Cody Roland, is expected soon
What is it about lumberjacks that makes it OK for them to break the law? Because they work hard?
How hard do you have to work before you can break a law? How big of a law does lumberjacking allow you to break? If a lumberjack works a double shift, can he break two laws on the way home? If a cop is a lumberjack on the weekends, how many weekends does he have to work before he can break a law? I watched a lumberjack show on TV once and learned all about greenhorns, are they only allowed to break little laws until they learn the trade?
It sounds lile indulgences can be bought with hard work rather than money. What other careers buy you indulgences? I knew a plumber who didn't work very hard but his job was really gross....does that count? When I removed asbestos for a living my job was hard, but I took about six showers a day so I stayed pretty clean. Does the job have to be hard AND dirty?
Thanks for your responses, this is all very interesting to me.
In my case, I'm judged according to the law. If I did kill a person, claiming it was justifiable is a defense against prosecution for murder, manslaughter,etc.
In the case of a cop, he is "judged" by his department's POLICY on deadly force. Only if his actions are found to be outside the policy guidelines is he then on a level playing field with me.
The video showing the cop killing the guy as he was getting out of his overturned car is a perfect example of the disparity between cops and the rest of us. Initially, the D A announced he would not prosecute him, even though the cop was in zero danger.
The poacher is now accused of murder, the DUI recipient is dead.
A police officer breaking the law carries more weight than a civilian drinking one to many. Just look at the news and the reputation police officers are getting these days. Not good, right or wrong.
I can't believe some think it is just hunky dory for a police officer to openly break the laws be swore to uphold.
The poacher is now accused of murder, the DUI recipient is dead.
A police officer breaking the law carries more weight than a civilian drinking one to many. Just look at the news and the reputation police officers are getting these days. Not good, right or wrong.
I can't believe some think it is just hunky dory for a police officer to openly break the laws be swore to uphold.
Cut 'em some slack......... they are shorthanded. Great Whoopee is late to the party this morning.
In my case, I'm judged according to the law. If I did kill a person, claiming it was justifiable is a defense against prosecution for murder, manslaughter,etc.
In the case of a cop, he is "judged" by his department's POLICY on deadly force. Only if his actions are found to be outside the policy guidelines is he then on a level playing field with me.
The video showing the cop killing the guy as he was getting out of his overturned car is a perfect example of the disparity between cops and the rest of us. Initially, the D A announced he would not prosecute him, even though the cop was in zero danger.
1st paragraph-You're not presumed guilty.
2nd paragraph-That's not even close to being accurate. Thanks for the response though.
3rd paragraph-Inhabe no idea what video you're talking about. But talking about a video doesn't answer my questions anyway so I won't bother with it.
I look forward to you answering the questions I asked. Thank you.
No,I am comparing an active duty police officer accused of murder and poor judgement committing a crime, to a civilian drinking one to many beers in a community of police officers, that in the end killed him.See any history there?
A crime is a crime,but this is about a sheriff's deputy accused on several counts, as having poor judgement and previously fired for such activity,now accused of murder by numerous witness's,not about a DUI by an old logger in the 1990's...
The poacher is now accused of murder, the DUI recipient is dead.
A police officer breaking the law carries more weight than a civilian drinking one to many. Just look at the news and the reputation police officers are getting these days. Not good, right or wrong.
I can't believe some think it is just hunky dory for a police officer to openly break the laws be swore to uphold.
1st paragraph-True. Irrelevant to my questions, but true. Good job, I think.
2nd paragraph-I know that's your position. I'm wondering how much weight breaking various laws carries for various professions. There must be a sliding scale or something.
3rd paragraph-Me either. That's terrible.
Please answer my questions about which laws it's OK for lumberjacks to break. Thank you.
If I kill someone, I AM "guilty" of a homicide. There is no presumption that it was justifiable..... I have to offer proof of that, or be prosecuted under the laws of my state.
THAT'S my answer to your first point.
Your second point is just a denial with no facts to back it up, so you are due no response.
Your third point was addressed by a specific case, which is what you asked for. I'm surprised you didn't look at the video since it's been posted several times in the last few days.
Police Code of Ethics Every criminal justice profession and association has “codes” of ethics, “canons” of professional responsibility, “statements” of values, “principles” of conduct, “standards” of practice, and “oaths” of office, along with “pledges”, “vows”, “maxims”, “credos”, “prayers”, “tenets”, and “declarations”. Some are directed to God; others to superiors or the profession; and still others to society as a whole. They all make promises that people commit to keeping as a standard of performance.
A code of ethics if it is to be used for occupational purposes, must set a standard above ordinary morality. Otherwise there’s no need for a code of ethics at all. This is especially relevant to police work where it’s going to take more than just a commitment to being an ordinary, decent human being.
Computer programmers don't take that oath either, but they don't work as hard as lumberjacks. Are they allowed to break as many laws as lumberjacks?
Is anyone who didn't take that oath allowed to break the law?
You keep mentioning DUI, is that the only law people are allowed to break if they didn't take that oath?
Alcoholism and alcohol related illnesses, both physical and emotional, are not a laughing matter. Please show more consideration to lumberjacks struggling with these issues. Thank you.
Please answer my questions this time. I'm trying to understand your point of view.
Police Code of Ethics Every criminal justice profession and association has “codes” of ethics, “canons” of professional responsibility, “statements” of values, “principles” of conduct, “standards” of practice, and “oaths” of office, along with “pledges”, “vows”, “maxims”, “credos”, “prayers”, “tenets”, and “declarations”. Some are directed to God; others to superiors or the profession; and still others to society as a whole. They all make promises that people commit to keeping as a standard of performance.
A code of ethics if it is to be used for occupational purposes, must set a standard above ordinary morality. Otherwise there’s no need for a code of ethics at all. This is especially relevant to police work where it’s going to take more than just a commitment to being an ordinary, decent human being.
Are you saying lumberjacks aren't ethical? That's rude. And not true.
If I kill someone, I AM "guilty" of a homicide. There is no presumption that it was justifiable..... I have to offer proof of that, or be prosecuted under the laws of my state.
THAT'S my answer to your first point.
Your second point is just a denial with no facts to back it up, so you are due no response.
Your third point was addressed by a specific case, which is what you asked for. I'm surprised you didn't look at the video since it's been posted several times in the last few days.
You don't understand how proof of guilt and innocence works.
OK
A case that we can review with evidence and transcripts and appeal opinions. A YouTube video isn't a case, anywhere but here.
I'm trying to politely ask questions to better understand your position regarding lumberjacks and cops breaking the law. If you can't answer my simple questions don't bother responding. I'm not interested in arguing, just understanding.
I'm trying to politely ask questions to better understand your position regarding lumberjacks and cops breaking the law. If you can't answer my simple questions don't bother responding. I'm not interested in arguing, just understanding.
Blue
I answered it already..I believe it is more of a crime for a police officer to commit the same crime as a lumberjack,as you like to say.
Yes,if they both commit the same crime at the same time,I believe the active officer should receive a stiffer penalty do to his commitment and oath to protect and serve the laws of the land.
Yes there both guilty, but the officer has ruined the faith of the people he swore under oath to protect and serve from just that, which he commited.
How could that officer arrest someone who broke the same law he broke himself?He should be fired,at the least.
No. I already knew what you thought. I'm trying to understand the effects that opinion has on society and other professions.
You don't have to try any more.
I have no problem with LEO's not being held to a higher standard as long as when a crime is committed against one the penalty is no stiffer than it is when the same crime is committed against an average citizen and also when an officer testifies in court his word carries no more weight than an average citizen.
Bluedreaux, you seem to be saying that conventional wisdom doesn't apply here, because it certainly used to be that most folks felt like people in positions of authority should be held to a higher standard.
I'm trying to understand the effects that opinion has on society and other professions.
I suppose it depends on where you live. In this area where this occurred, it is pretty much how everyone feels.Seems a lot of people get a DUI at some point in there life but poaching is a tar and feather offense.
I wouldn't expect anyone who does not live in the middle of Idaho's best hunting and fishing to agree. This is a rural area with the closest Walmart close to 100 miles away and 200 to a freeway.
Poaching is probably only second to murder and theft here ... This deputy did two of the three.
I'm trying to establish how low of a standard other people are held to.
As I said,it depends on the area and the people of that area..For instance,if I were to go out and blow a .081(roughly 4 beers) and get a DUI,everyone would laugh and say I told you so but if I went out and poached a big Elk,I would expect to get the $hit knocked out of me multiple times by multiple people.
It would totally depend on the crime committed as to how the population in these parts looked at it.
You don't understand how proof of guilt and innocence works.
I think I do. And you haven't shown where I'm wrong.
Quote
A YouTube video isn't a case, anywhere but here.
But, HERE is where we are right now. One of the Cop/Members here only had to view the video to pronounce the cop wrong. Are you interested in seeing it?
I have no problem with cops being held to a higher standard EE.
I'm trying to establish how low of a standard other people are held to.
Obeying the law is the lowest standard "other people" should be held to. We just want the police to also be held to the same low standard. It seems as though the cops are continually striving to go lower. That's why there's a lower standard for murder when it involves the cops.
Does that answer the question you really don't want to hear the answer to?
The police do, as a matter of fact, get a much higher level of protection under the law, than does the general public.
As do all officers of the court.
One can not deny the increased effort for the apprehension of a suspected killer of a LEO, judge, or prosecuting attorney.
I, for one, feel that such enhanced protection should be accompanied by enhanced behavior.
It is SOP in this nation to hold a person in authority to a higher level of scrutiny than an average citizen.
There is an enhanced penalty for the teacher who molests or abuses a student vs the typical child molester. The same is true of preists vs the general public.
We have rules and laws which prohibit undue contact between a physician and a vulnerable patient.
And, if I am not mistaken, it is a felony for a Corrections Officer to have intimate contact with his wards.
That the public expects a police officer to abide by a higher code of conduct than the typical citizen abides by should come as no surprise to any seasoned officer.
I was under the impression that each officer actually swears to do so upon taking up the badge.
The police do, as a matter of fact, get a much higher level of protection under the law, than does the general public.
As do all officers of the court.
One can not deny the increased effort for the apprehension of a suspected killer of a LEO, judge, or prosecuting attorney.
I, for one, feel that such enhanced protection should be accompanied by enhanced behavior.
It is SOP in this nation to hold a person in authority to a higher level of scrutiny than an average citizen.
There is an enhanced penalty for the teacher who molests or abuses a student vs the typical child molester. The same is true of preists vs the general public.
We have rules and laws which prohibit undue contact between a physician and a vulnerable patient.
And, if I am not mistaken, it is a felony for a Corrections Officer to have intimate contact with his wards.
That the public expects a police officer to abide by a higher code of conduct than the typical citizen abides by should come as no surprise to any seasoned officer.
I was under the impression that each officer actually swears to do so upon taking up the badge.
No freakin' duh. Nobody argued against any of that.
I want to know what laws lumberjacks are allowed to break, how often they can break them, and what other professions are held to a similarly low standard of behavior.
I'm not surprised you don't understand. You don't want to understand, you're here to argue, demean the victim and defend your fellow brothers in blue. It's unfortunately who you are.
No. I've experienced enough death and despair to not need another video of it. I'm sure of several things...... 1-The video depicts something tragic. 2-The tragic video doesn't contain all of the tragicness of what happened. 3-My opinion of the tragicness ultimately won't matter a hill of beans to anyone here.
I'm not surprised you don't understand. You don't want to understand, you're here to argue, demean the victim and defend your fellow brothers in blue. It's unfortunately who you are.
I'm not surprised I don't understand your point of view either. That's why I'm asking questions. I've already made that clear.
If you'd like to point out where I've demeaned the victim or defended the cops feel free to. I haven't, but if you feel better thinking that I have then feel free to.
"....and what other professions are held to a similarly low standard of behavior."
None. That's the point. Cops are held to reasonable standards and constantly prove to not abide such standards.
You're good with poaching and wastage and lying to investigators as long as a cops as.s is on the line. Some of us are saying that it's not okay even if a cops as.s is on the line. There is a difference which you're either unwilling to see or too fu.cking stupid to see. I think both.
You cops were willing to indict Mr. Yantis because of a decades old DUI but won't be consistent with your hatred towards law breakers when the cops are the ones with more extensive and recents criminal convictions.
No freakin' duh. Nobody argued against any of that.
I want to know what laws lumberjacks are allowed to break, how often they can break them, and what other professions are held to a similarly low standard of behavior.
Loggers, farmers, teachers, grocery store clerks, and stock boys shall all be expected to abide by the rule of law. Or they shall expect to be arrested and serve the sentence handed down through the courts.
To keep matters in perspective, illegal harvest of game and malicios waste of game are citation offenses. While DUI is a misdemeanor at least and possibly a felony. (though I do not think it was a felony offense in the case under discussion.
Still, any LEO whom deliberately transgresses game laws is showing obvious contempt for the law he has sworn to uphold.
If I kill someone, I AM "guilty" of a homicide. There is no presumption that it was justifiable..... I have to offer proof of that, or be prosecuted under the laws of my state.
Originally Posted by curdog4570
Originally Posted by Bluedreaux
You don't understand how proof of guilt and innocence works.
I think I do. And you haven't shown where I'm wrong.
Sec. 2.01. PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. All persons are presumed to be innocent and no person may be convicted of an offense unless each element of the offense is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that he has been arrested, confined, or indicted for, or otherwise charged with, the offense gives rise to no inference of guilt at his trial.
(b) A person commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual; (2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual;
Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.
Quote
Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another: (1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
So no, you DO NOT have to prove your innocence. Being asked, "Why did you shoot that guy?" is not shifting the burden of proof to you.
And by offering an explanation of what happened you don't have to prove your innocence anyway, but it's an opportunity for the jury to evaluation your explanation and have reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case.
The justifications in Chapter9 aren't a list of things you have to prove. They're a list of reasons you can shoot someone. You don't have to prove that you're innocent. But if you are, it would make sense to explain to someone why you killed the bad guy.
Those quotes are in the handbook I got years ago when I got my CHL.
There is a difference between presumption of innocence and a defense against prosecution.
If I deny killing someone, I don't even have to offer a defense. The prosecution must prove me guilty...... the burden is on them.
If I don't contest the fact that I killed someone, I can claim self-defense as MY defense against prosecution, but the burden is on me. There is certainly no presumption of self-defense. I have to make statements and provide evidence that it was a self defense situation.
If you think a cop doesn't have a tremendous edge over a non-cop in self defense shootings that would be a ridiculous assertion.
So do you still believe that to be found not-guilty you have to prove that you're innocent?
Yes, moron.
You've adeptly slung your stupidity enough on this thread.
When the prosecution proves a death, and argues (with or without justification, but that's for a jury to decide), that you shouldn't have killed the dumb SOB, the burden shifts to the DEFENDANT to prove that the shooting was justified, Stoolhead for brains.
So, if cur shoots some SOB that deserved it, he can get arrested and prosecuted.
Only a jury, and thousands of dollars, can set him free.
Since you're too big a pu$$y to watch the video, I'll use this example for argument:
1 - Somebody rolls their auto late at night on a public road;
2 - curdog drives up on the scene;
3 - curdog approaches the vehicle to try and help whoever needs it;
4 - the driver of the rolled auto, laying on its side, stands up through the passenger window to exit the rolled vehicle;
5 - curdog shoots the mfer dead.
6 - curdog picks up the ejected shells, to hide the crime;
7 - curdog fails to mention to the arriving EMTs that he just happened to shoot someone.
Does cdog get arrested?
Bet your bluedreaux he does.
Does he get prosecuted?
Bet your bluedreaux he does.
Does your ex-spurt opinion differ, in this fact situation?
Do you have to prove that you're innocent to be found not-guilty?
The answer is "no". No matter what CD read in a pamphlet or what video of a car wreck you watched, the answer is going to be "no".
As for the rest of whatever that was, I have no idea what you're talking about. If you're asking me if Gene should go to jail my answer is definitely "no", he's a swell guy.
So do you still believe that to be found not-guilty you have to prove that you're innocent?
FWIW there are circumstances where this may be the case. These are usually referred to as "affirmative defenses". I had a quick look at the Texas Penal Code and it provides for a couple of examples, including insanity and duress (see Title 2 Ch. 8). The Texas Penal Code provides at s. 2.04 as follows:
Quote
Sec. 2.04. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. (a) An affirmative defense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is an affirmative defense to prosecution . . . ." (b) The prosecuting attorney is not required to negate the existence of an affirmative defense in the accusation charging commission of the offense. (c) The issue of the existence of an affirmative defense is not submitted to the jury unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense. (d) If the issue of the existence of an affirmative defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that the defendant must prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of evidence.
(emphasis added)
It doesn't appear that self defense is an affirmative defense in Texas though. There may be jurisdictions where it is, but there again I'm not licensed to practise law in any of the states of the US.
Now ask yourself again, in order to be found not-guilty....Do you have to prove that you're innocent?
Well I did ask myself, and here is what I got in reply.
The law states that we are innocent until proven guilty, but the fact is, all of that has changed over the years and in actuality, we are guilty until we prove ourselves innocent. Not the law, but the real world that we live in. miles
When the prosecution proves a death, and argues (with or without justification, but that's for a jury to decide), that you shouldn't have killed the dumb SOB, the burden shifts to the DEFENDANT to prove that the shooting was justified ...
No. Something else has to happen before the burden shifts.
Quote
So, if cur shoots some SOB that deserved it, he can get arrested and prosecuted.
Yes.
Quote
Only a jury, and thousands of dollars, can set him free.
No. There are other things that can happen to set him free.
Quote
I'll use this example for argument:
1 - Somebody rolls their auto late at night on a public road;
2 - curdog drives up on the scene;
3 - curdog approaches the vehicle to try and help whoever needs it;
4 - the driver of the rolled auto, laying on its side, stands up through the passenger window to exit the rolled vehicle;
5 - curdog shoots the mfer dead.
6 - curdog picks up the ejected shells, to hide the crime;
7 - curdog fails to mention to the arriving EMTs that he just happened to shoot someone.
Does cdog get arrested? ...
Why would he be arrested? He hid the evidence of his crime.
Is it in fantasy land that you have to prove your innocence?
Sec. 2.04. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. (a) An affirmative defense in this code is so labeled by the phrase: "It is an affirmative defense to prosecution . . . ." (b) The prosecuting attorney is not required to negate the existence of an affirmative defense in the accusation charging commission of the offense. (c) The issue of the existence of an affirmative defense is not submitted to the jury unless evidence is admitted supporting the defense. (d) If the issue of the existence of an affirmative defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that the defendant must prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of evidence."
Wow. Over a hunnert pages of high blood pressure and heartburn on both sides. Me? I feel great today. My plan is to wait for all the reports to come out before I hyperventilate. It ain't gonna change the heartbreak and tragedy for either side no matter what the findings, but I hope we get answers.... and justice.
Wow. Over a hunnert pages of high blood pressure and heartburn on both sides. Me? I feel great today. My plan is to wait for all the reports to come out before I hyperventilate. It ain't gonna change the heartbreak and tragedy for either side no matter what the findings, but I hope we get answers.... and justice.
And the irony is.......90% of the bickering and name calling ain't got chit to do with the incident and everything to do with the posters' ego....
I'm sorry I used a fill in the blank on you. How about this.....Reasonable Doubt.
Think about reasonable doubt and then think really hard about what a jury determines about your innocence. Then ask yourself again...."Do I have to PROVE MY INNOCENCE?"
Wow. Over a hunnert pages of high blood pressure and heartburn on both sides. Me? I feel great today. My plan is to wait for all the reports to come out before I hyperventilate. It ain't gonna change the heartbreak and tragedy for either side no matter what the findings, but I hope we get answers.... and justice.
And the irony is.......90% of the bickering and name calling ain't got chit to do with the incident and everything to do with the posters' ego....
That's because the "cops are evil" crowd don't give two flips about the dead man. This is just fuel for their agenda.
I'm not mourning his loss either, I never knew him. But I'm not going on a crusade "in his name".
Then ask yourself again...."Do I have to PROVE MY INNOCENCE?"
It seems to me that if you leave it in the hands of the prosecuting attorney and the jury, only, you will be in jail. The Prosecuting attorney has already determined that you are guilty, and is trying to convince the jury, and you simply getting on the stand and saying that you are not guilty will not be enough. You, through your defense attorney has to prove your innocence or at least reasonable doubt. That varies on the type of trial is going on. miles
That's what some of us have been saying for three pages.....
And what we have been saying is that it is up to you, not the law to do so. The law wants you to be guilty. It has not always been that way, but it seems to be so now. miles
You are hung up on semantics, Blue. It's similar to; " A Not guilty verdict doesn't mean you are innocent".
Technically, that's right. In the real world, they have the same meaning.
You may say that "reasonable doubt" is the objective, and an "affirmative defense" is the vehicle to reach it.
But... back to the original point..... "actions being within policy guidelines" is an affirmative defense commonly used by cops that is not available to the rest of us. And they still get to use the same self defense standard that we do in addition to that.
So it is much harder to prosecute a cop for wrongful death than it is for the rest of us.
If you can introduce reasonable doubt YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.
If you introduce reasonable doubt, you *have* proven your innocence.
Your stupid is showing again.
You post stupid shat.
Then post more stupid shat, in order to explain that the stupid shat you posted before isn't as stupid as it looks.
Normally, it's harmless.
But in this case, people need to be advised to keep both hands over their a$$ and get legal advice in the event they have to shoot someone, not that they can just not worry about evidence and have nothing to worry about.
Since the jury didn't witness the alleged "crime" one is being charged with, the defendant and his lawyer have to try to convince the jury of his innocence, or reasonable doubt of his guilt, to win his freedom. This takes action and effort.
Assuming that the prosecution can't overcome the burden of "reasonable doubt", and to do little to fight for ones acquittal, would certainly suggest to the jury that there is "reasonable doubt" about the defendants innocence.
Jurors are human. Logic and emotion will both play into their decisions during deliberation.
If you can introduce reasonable doubt YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.
If you introduce reasonable doubt, you *have* proven your innocence.
So OJ PROVED that he was INNOCENT?
O J walked. Just like the cop who shot the guy crawling out of his overturned vehicle.
But O J had to hire a Dream Team of lawyers in order to walk.
It didn't cost the cop a dime........... and, unlike O J..... there was video showing the cop walking up, pulling his pistol, shooting the guy once, holstering his pistol and searching for the spent cartridge case.
If a defendant is guilty, he may fight hard to try to create reasonable doubt (e.g. OJ Simpson).
If a defendant is innocent, he had better fight like heck to "prove his innocence". In the absence of very hard facts to prove his innocence, (in which case he probably wouldn't be charged in the first place), the best he can do is build a good case of reasonable doubt for the jury to base their decision on.
I wish some of you folks would stop getting into such stupid arguments over semantics, just for the sake of arguing.
Wow. Over a hunnert pages of high blood pressure and heartburn on both sides. Me? I feel great today. My plan is to wait for all the reports to come out before I hyperventilate. It ain't gonna change the heartbreak and tragedy for either side no matter what the findings, but I hope we get answers.... and justice.
And the irony is.......90% of the bickering and name calling ain't got chit to do with the incident and everything to do with the posters' ego....
That's because the "cops are evil" crowd don't give two flips about the dead man. This is just fuel for their agenda.
I'm not mourning his loss either, I never knew him. But I'm not going on a crusade "in his name".
LOL.....climb down off your high-horse there turbo......Clearly....your intentions are no more pure than the "cops are evil" (your derogatory term, not mine) crowd....
That's what some of us have been saying for three pages.....
If you can introduce reasonable doubt YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE.
Let me butt in there, a second, Blue.
I know what you mean, but for the benefit of the audience, let me point out that a defendant doesn't have to introduce reasonable doubt.
The prosecution can put on its evidence ...
The defendant and his lawyer can both sit there, mute as stumps, and not even move to scratch themselves, and ...
The jury can say to themselves, "The prosecution's case doesn't seem to make sense to me. I've got a lot of doubt about this."
Theoretically, anyway. In actual practice, the defendant's lawyer is going to stand up and argue that the prosecution's case doesn't make much sense and the jury should have a lot of doubt about this. But even then, the defendant's lawyer doesn't have to introduce anything by way of evidence.
Reasonable doubt does not prove innocence nor does a guilty verdict prove guilt. People have been wrongly convicted, just as reasonable doubt have allowed guilt to go free. It works both ways
Just a note, in our legal system, neither side is concerned with uncovering the truth, only with convincing the jury of the truth as they wish it to be.
EVEN WITHOUT PROVING YOUR INNOCENCE, you'll be found not-guilty.
Maybe in a perfect world, but juries don't always work that way. Juries a lot of times, weigh the preponderance of evidence in determining guilt or innocence...hiring the best defense attorney you can, merely increases your chances at a favorable outcome, unless of course you can PROVE your innocence...
Two and a half months and not a word from the "investigators", Im guessing some behind the scenes negotiations are going on to get a settlement acceptable to the Yantis family and the county.
Before the details are released and all hell breaks loose.
Two and a half months and not a word from the "investigators", Im guessing some behind the scenes negotiations are going on to get a settlement acceptable to the Yantis family and the county.
Before the details are released and all hell breaks loose.
They need to release the facts and let the chips fall where they may...
I see about five to five and a half million is the going price for an obamason on the inner city market, so whats the number going to be that gets the Spence team of lawyers and Jacks family to sign off on this killing with sealed lips?
After this much time has passed, its only logical to believe the cops can't show any legitimate reason for killing him, so now we to find a middle ground that's acceptable to everyone involved, and that's just a dollar amount.
After this much time has passed, its only logical to believe the cops can't show any legitimate reason for killing him, so now we to find a middle ground that's acceptable to everyone involved, and that's just a dollar amount.
There isn't a dollar amount that can buy off justice for some. Once it was for most.
Vigilantism doesn't pay what it used to, and you can't buy a life to give back to Jack, our his family, so at this point money is all the government has to offer, and thats because the government doesn't have a soul.
The Government is not going to prosecute the Deputies, and they don't want Spence going after them in Civil Court where a finding in favor of the Family would put the Government in a bad light.
So........ they want to throw money at them to keep them from suing the Deputies.
I don't have the time to read however many pages this thread has turned into but I was wondering - how is the wife - is she back home and if so, has she talked to the press about what has happened?
I don't have the time to read however many pages this thread has turned into but I was wondering - how is the wife - is she back home and if so, has she talked to the press about what has happened?
She is back home and gave her statement in the hospital and also did an interview on the local news.
I hope Curdog is wrong.I want the deputies prosecuted for there crime so there will not be another time which there history shows they do.At the very least,fired...Neither seems to learn by there mistakes of abuse to the elderly...
Throwing an elderly unarmed woman to the pavement that is trying to aid her dying husband is unforgivable, as she laid there watching her husband and the bull suffer to there death without any aid from anyone, she suffered a major heart attack..
BOISE - The Idaho State Police is nearing completion of its investigation into the shooting death of Council rancher Jack Yantis.
Yantis was shot and killed by two Adams County Sheriff’s Department deputies during a late-night altercation on the highway near his ranch on Nov. 1 of last year.
The Idaho State Police began an investigation soon after the incident.
ISP spokeswoman Teresa Baker declined to discuss details, citing an ongoing investigation. But she stated, “We’ve conducted a series of interviews and gathered evidence. As far as our investigation, we have gone as far as we can at this point. We’re now just waiting to hear back from the (out-of-state forensic analysis) labs.”
Once the lab results are received, “We may still have to do some follow-up investigation,” Baker said.
The completed report will then be turned over the Idaho Attorney General’s Office for review.
Maybe they are raising a new bull so they can do a recreation of the killing.
It does not take months to say if there is video, or to do the blood work, the negotiating must be pretty in depth, as even the Yantis family is silent, and there is only one reason for that, the Spence team has told them to do so.
The County should just pay the maximum under their Insurance Coverage. Chances are they are trying to shield the Deputies from a Civil suit..... but I can't figure out why.
The State Police should just own up to the fact that they are not going to bring charges against the Deputies.
If I lived in Idaho, I'd be pissed that my tax money was being spent prolonging this charade.
Three months ago, two sheriff’s deputies shot and killed rancher Jack Yantis on a highway near his ranch in west-central Idaho. So far, state and Adams County law enforcement officials have told the public little other than that weapons were fired.
Idaho State Police says its investigation into the Nov. 1 shooting is still underway.
“We are hoping that we will be receiving lab results back in the next week or so,” ISP spokesperson Teresa Baker said Friday.
Once the investigation is complete, ISP will submit its findings to Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s office, which will determine whether there were any state criminal violations.
Spokesman Todd Dvorak said that once Wasden’s office receives ISP’s report, “We will have our investigators, our criminal division and our attorneys review it. We will start the process of looking at the evidence that has been gathered and the statements and begin the process of making a decision on how to handle this case.”
The Attorney General’s Office does not know how long that will take. “We will try to do this as efficiently as possible,” Dvorak said. “We will only get one chance at this, so we want to be thorough and do our jobs diligently.”
...“We are hoping that we will be receiving lab results back in the next week or so,” ISP spokesperson Teresa Baker said Friday... Spokesman Todd Dvorak said that once Wasden’s office receives ISP’s report, “We will have our investigators, our criminal division and our attorneys review it. We will start the process of looking at the evidence that has been gathered and the statements and begin the process of making a decision on how to handle this case”...
...“We are hoping that we will be receiving lab results back in the next week or so,” ISP spokesperson Teresa Baker said Friday... Spokesman Todd Dvorak said that once Wasden’s office receives ISP’s report, “We will have our investigators, our criminal division and our attorneys review it. We will start the process of looking at the evidence that has been gathered and the statements and begin the process of making a decision on how to handle this case”...
Unfrigginbelievable!
Do you want them to proceed on a case without reviewing the evidence?
Some lab results don't get done quickly.
But, to be fair, it seems like enough time has passed that they would have had it all in by now.
"Consider your verdict," the King said to the jury. "Not yet, not yet!" the rabbit hastily interrupted. "There's a great deal to come before that." "Call the first witness," said the King...
Not until some in this place see those deputies tarred, feathered, rode out of town on a rail, then put on the rack and have their limbs pulled from their torsos.
Apparently LEOs don't deserve their constitutional rights to due process in these parts.
Whatever. I'm headed for the basement to check the .223AI thread.
COUNCIL, ID - The Idaho State Police says it will be handing over the results of its four month investigation into the deputy-involved fatal shooting of a Council rancher to the Idaho Attorney General's Office in the coming days. That office is acting as the special prosecutor in this case. The Adams County Sheriff's Office had requested ISP to investigate the November 1st shooting of 62-year-old Jack Yantis following a vehicle crash on US 95 that involved a bull owned by him. During the incident, Yantis, who was armed with a rifle, was fatally shot. "We want the individuals, families and community to know that this investigation has been at the top of our priority list and we are eager for its conclusion," according to Captain Bill Gardiner. "As with all investigations, the work must be thoroughly and accurately completed. We appreciate the patience displayed by all involved." Over the course of the investigation, ISP Detectives have interviewed 42 people, with many of them interviewed multiple times. "Detectives gathered and comprehensively examined all evidence available at the scene of the incident. The twenty-eight items of evidence collected were sent to four different laboratories for forensic analysis. There are still two reports from forensic laboratories that detectives are waiting on to close the investigation. ISP has been informed that the analysis by both labs is complete and that the reports will arrive at any time, however a firm date has not been provided," a press release states. When the final two reports are received, ISP will officially turn the case over to the Attorney General's Office. The agencies have worked together during the course of the investigation in an effort to speed the investigation along as quickly as possible, officials say. ISP will inform the public when the investigation has concluded.
... "We want the individuals, families and community to know that this investigation has been at the top of our priority list and we are eager for its conclusion," according to Captain Bill Gardiner. "As with all investigations, the work must be thoroughly and accurately completed...
Reads like standard boiler plate cut and paste. And with the same sincerity.
Ya,what a paid vacation huh...Kill a guy you called for help and get a payed (with benefits) vacation in Central Idaho.Snowmobiling/hunting/fishng and the McCall winter carnival on the tax payers and the Stealhead are hot this year,everyone is catching fish ...
The news yesterday was that the State Police have about wrapped up the investigation. They'll send it to the prosecutor to decide whether to file charges.
The police say they've interviewed 40 some witnesses, some of them several times. I can't even guess what their findings were.
We don't have a chapter of Rancher Lives Matter in Idaho.
Sure we do,it's called Justice for Jack whom rallied at the court house in Boise.
Jerry Spence and crew are also doing an investigation along with the several others doing there's.Should be interesting how the investigations differ.
One thing for sure whatever the outcome is,when Spence is done with them monetarily, they will be scavenging the garbage cans behind McDonalds for dinner.
Protesters marched in Council in solidarity with the family of Jack Yantis, a rancher who was shot to death by deputies in November. The organizers said they hoped to see the deputies involved go to prison and to see a new candidate run for sheriff.
Protesters marched in Council in solidarity with the family of Jack Yantis, a rancher who was shot to death by deputies in November. The organizers said they hoped to see the deputies involved go to prison and to see a new candidate run for sheriff.
I would guess they are searching for sources of money, the cost of this killing is going to be monumental, just recently a couple of cities have paid out over twenty million each for the cop caused deaths of a couple of drug dealing thugs, this is going to be costly for the tax payers of Idaho.
I would guess they are searching for sources of money, the cost of this killing is going to be monumental, just recently a couple of cities have paid out over twenty million each for the cop caused deaths of a couple of drug dealing thugs, this is going to be costly for the tax payers of Idaho.
I doubt the payout will come from anywhere other than insurance and Adams Co. And I imagine Adams Co would have to float a special 99 year bond to cover anything over $100K.
Who needs facts? Some on here have all of the answers already. They should be manning the psychic hotlines.
Unless there is a trial,there will not be any facts,just opinions based on the ISP/FBI investigations handed over to Lawrence Wasden for his final opinion on the matter...
Totally based on police investigating police, so it should be the truth and nothing but the truth,right....
COUNCIL, Idaho (KBOI) — Idaho State Police has finished its investigation into the deadly shooting of Council rancher Jack Yantis.
On Thursday, ISP said detectives have interviewed more than 40 people, examined evidence and reviewed forensic reports. The investigation is now in the hands of the Idaho Attorney General's Office.
"I commend our detectives for their dedication in completing a thorough investigation of this incident in light of the unique circumstances presented," said Captain Bill Gardiner. "We appreciate the patience displayed by the individuals involved, as well as the public during the investigation."
Adam County deputies responded to a vehicle crash on Highway 95 involving a bull owned by Yantis on Nov. 1. He died after an altercation with two Adams County deputies near Council. Yantis arrived on scene with a rifle and all three fired their guns.
Family members who were on scene say the death was not justified.
The FBI is also investigating the case separately.
How long does wrapping it up take? 1 week, 2 weeks? They must have a lot of wrapping to do. I suppose they better wrap that turd as good as possible if they want to absolve the cops.
After the recent FBI coverups in the Oregon shootings, can't wait to see how they coverup on this case. The OSP/FBI report was a total lie and we are supposed to believe this ISP/FBI report...
I think.... No, I know, the Yantis families front row seats account of what happened carries far more credibility than anything coming from cops investigating cops and lieing through there teath to protect there brothers!
“We just got the case this afternoon. ... At this point we cannot comment on what we have and what we do not have for evidence,” said spokesman Todd Dvorak.
The office’s special prosecutions unit will review the case and determine if the shooting was justified or if criminal charges, such as voluntary or involuntary manslaughter, are warranted against either of the deputies. Dvorak said officials do not know how long that will take.
“We recognize this is an important case that has a lot of public interest,” Dvorak said. “We will only get one chance at this, so we want to be thorough and do our jobs diligently.”
The U.S. Attorney’s Office is conducting its own inquiry into the shooting for any civil rights violations, including possible excessive use of force.
“We anticipate we will be wrapping up soon on the federal side as well,” said Wendy J. Olson, the U.S. attorney for Idaho.
Olson said she expects to decide “relatively soon.”
COUNCIL, ID - The Idaho State Police says it will be handing over the results of its four month investigation into the deputy-involved fatal shooting of a Council rancher to the Idaho Attorney General's Office in the coming days. That office is acting as the special prosecutor in this case... "Detectives gathered and comprehensively examined all evidence available at the scene of the incident. The twenty-eight items of evidence collected were sent to four different laboratories for forensic analysis. There are still two reports from forensic laboratories that detectives are waiting on to close the investigation. ISP has been informed that the analysis by both labs is complete and that the reports will arrive at any time, however a firm date has not been provided," a press release states. When the final two reports are received, ISP will officially turn the case over to the Attorney General's Office. The agencies have worked together during the course of the investigation in an effort to speed the investigation along as quickly as possible, officials say..."
Originally Posted by logcutter
The Idaho AG's office reply...
“We just got the case this afternoon. ... At this point we cannot comment on what we have and what we do not have for evidence,” said spokesman Todd Dvorak...
I will give the Government credit, they have successfully blocked all information from the people of Idaho, five months and not a peep if there was even a video camera turned on.
The local people should be raising some serious hell, a man was shot to death in front of his family and dozens of witnesses yet not a peep.
Is the money all that stands between truth and honesty or simply another cover up of government agents killing a citizen?
There is no reason for this kind of delay other than to construct a cover up, we are taking about an incident that was over in a matter of moments, how and why was this man shot to death?
First you need to create the dash cam malfunctioned story, and be sure you can't be tripped up on that. Then you need to make sure witnesses are convinced "they really don't want to be involved in this" Then you have got to perfect the "he was a violent drunk with a history of violence against LE" story.
In the meantime you send out feelers as to how much of a settlement will his family accept.....
Wendy J. Olson (born 1964) is the current United States Attorney for the District of Idaho. She was appointed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, replacing Thomas E. Moss. As one of 93 US Attorneys nationwide, she represents the United States in all civil and criminal cases within her district.[2]
Wendy J. Olson (born 1964) is the current United States Attorney for the District of Idaho. She was appointed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, replacing Thomas E. Moss. As one of 93 US Attorneys nationwide, she represents the United States in all civil and criminal cases within her district.[2]
This isn't a federal case (yet)......the Idaho "State" Police are investigating the "County" deputies who clearly defended themselves by emptying their weapons into an old man with a bolt action rifle that didn't have a round in the chamber and then threw an old woman to the ground and handcuffed her (which induced a heart attack) when she tried to go to the aid of her dead husband..............the state is currently awaiting DNA tests that will clear the matter up so the Deputies can end their paid vacation and get back to protecting the citizens of Adams county....
This isn't a federal case (yet)......the Idaho "State" Police are investigating the "County" deputies who clearly defended themselves by emptying their weapons into an old man with a bolt action rifle that didn't have a round in the chamber and then threw an old woman to the ground and handcuffed her when she tried to go to the aid of her dead husband..............the state is currently awaiting DNA tests that will clear the matter up so the Deputies can end their paid vacation and get back to protecting the citizens of Adams county....
That's correct.
The Feds can pursue their own case if they have determined a civil rights violation has occurred.
Murder, and the lesser charges clear down to manslaughter is a state crime. The state prosecutor handles those.
This is the kind of stuff you read about in Iran, or North Korea, WTF.
Do they have two part timers with a shared Ipad doing the investigation?
The huge payout can be the only reason That the Spence team isn't tightening the screws on these "investigators" , Is there no news paper in Idaho, or is it state run also?
Who are the newspapers going to squeeze the story out of on the state, or even federal level?
I'm sure they have tried.
There were plenty of witnesses, according to the early reports, emergency personnel, hospital employees, people do talk. Hell the road was blocked for hours, some one seen something.
4 months isn't really all that long for a contested cop shooting. Some here take years!
Phil
Only because it is accepted, it is a cluster of incompetency, costly and only adds to the controversy.
Are they raising a new bull to butcher slowly. Maybe checking the sugar content of the cops morning donuts, or just wasting a couple of hundred days of bad feelings before releasing a bundle of baffling B.S. full of double talk and non sense of how they just can't see how the dangerous duo had any other choice than kill this slobbering drunk cop hating rebel, before some real damage came to that bull. And be happy we have well trained men to kill our unruly citizens when they don't follow the orders that they were clearly given.
There is no reason for this kind of delay other than to construct a cover up, we are taking about an incident that was over in a matter of moments, how and why was this man shot to death?
Well, it took about a year to get the correct story concocted back in 1963, and that was with a "blue ribbon" panel.
Wendy J. Olson (born 1964) is the current United States Attorney for the District of Idaho. She was appointed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, replacing Thomas E. Moss. As one of 93 US Attorneys nationwide, she represents the United States in all civil and criminal cases within her district.[2]
... This isn't a federal case (yet)......the Idaho "State" Police are investigating the "County" deputies who clearly defended themselves by emptying their weapons into an old man with a bolt action rifle that didn't have a round in the chamber and then threw an old woman to the ground and handcuffed her when she tried to go to the aid of her dead husband..............the state is currently awaiting DNA tests that will clear the matter up so the Deputies can end their paid vacation and get back to protecting the citizens of Adams county....
Who are the newspapers going to squeeze the story out of on the state, or even federal level?
I'm sure they have tried.
There were plenty of witnesses, according to the early reports, emergency personnel, hospital employees, people do talk. Hell the road was blocked for hours, some one seen something.
And what pray tell would the newspaper in South Peyton Place do to right this wrong jimy....
Wendy J. Olson (born 1964) is the current United States Attorney for the District of Idaho. She was appointed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, replacing Thomas E. Moss. As one of 93 US Attorneys nationwide, she represents the United States in all civil and criminal cases within her district.[2]
Wendy J. Olson (born 1964) is the current United States Attorney for the District of Idaho. She was appointed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, replacing Thomas E. Moss. As one of 93 US Attorneys nationwide, she represents the United States in all civil and criminal cases within her district.[2]
OMG! REALLY?!
Nice cleavage
I dunno,...that transverse horizontal scar above where cleavage usually starts,...did somebody saw that things head off, and than sew it back on ?
Just another month of no news, this is going t0 be costly, if there was any evidence that this was a "good shoot" you would have heard it by now, this is looking like a piss poor cover up. They are talking about the killers going back to work, yea that sounds like a good idea.
Nope. They're still wrapping it up. Every week or so they make that announcement.
I thought this was getting wrapped up? Still wrapping? If this cover up sticks or those guys go back to work I sincerely hope someone from the militia or another concerned citizen does what's right and protects their community from lawless murderers....in defense of life and property.
If it was a "good shoot" they'd have tooted that out right away. As previously mentioned they're trying figure how to spin this so it becomes just a tragic accident or some other BS.
Given the delay, I'd say the results are going to be inconclusive. Generally, it makes sense that, if you can't take a position, at least vet both sides ad nauseam, then let the lawyers (criminal and civil) deal with it. That's my guess, anyway.
I doubt it's inconclusive based upon eyewitness accounts and the delay is the Sheriff trying to figure out how to avoid the uprising that will come when they call it a mistake or justifiable. I agree with you on the rest.
Something I did not know until today was Jack was shot 11 times..My gawd,really...The FBI trained sniper must not have paid attention in class riddling Jack the same as the bull.
Quote
"Enough is Enough" ELEVEN BULLETS…. In recent discussion of the need to use 11 bullets to kill Jack Yantis
And the idiot is out shooting gophers on paid leave as we talk...
Lucky for the Gophers it's a trained FBI sniper after them.
Given the delay, I'd say the results are going to be inconclusive. Generally, it makes sense that, if you can't take a position, at least vet both sides ad nauseam, then let the lawyers (criminal and civil) deal with it. That's my guess, anyway.
Not necessarily. It took the police months to compile the evidence. It could take the AG an equal amount of time to read and study it all.
Something I did not know until today was Jack was shot 11 times..My gawd,really...The FBI trained sniper must not have paid attention in class riddling Jack the same as the bull.
Quote
"Enough is Enough" ELEVEN BULLETS…. In recent discussion of the need to use 11 bullets to kill Jack Yantis
And the idiot is out shooting gophers on paid leave as we talk...
Lucky for the Gophers it's a trained FBI sniper after them.
Damn that is funny!!!!!!!!!!
But 11 shots???? Incredible!!! That alone is enough to push the whole thing right over the edge. Obviously the toxicology report did not come out the way they wanted it to or that would have been leaked by now...
I was of the view that Idaho is a place where such events are investigated and decided in a prompt and straightforward manner. Looks like I was mistaken. The rancher was shot 11 times?? Did he ever fire a shot? If so, where in the shooting sequence?
Did he ever fire a shot? If so, where in the shooting sequence?
Eye witness reports say Jack was grabbed from behind and almost yanked off his feet as he was getting ready to pull the trigger and put his bull out of it's misery and his rifle fired.
He was called to the scene by sheriff's dispatch to dispose of his bull,he didn't just show up with a firearm,and his reward was 11 bullets and death for doing as requested by dispatch.
His wife and nephew thrown to the pavement and ruffed up with Donna having major heart attack trying to help Jack in some way but were denied by the two deputies.
Not even Barney and Goober would treat a neighbor trying to help as instructed, as these two did.
He was called to the scene by sheriff's dispatch to dispose of his bull,he didn't just show up with a firearm,and his reward was 11 bullets and death for doing as requested by dispatch.
Be interesting to find out if dispatch relayed that to the officers.
The sad part of this whole thing is the divide it has caused to the Council residents.One side versus the other...I have friends who are friends with both sides and I just do not understand it.
According to the sheriff everything happened within 2 minutes of Jack being on scene, which is absolutely different than witness accounts.
An exert from a view of a published news article interview with the Sheriff.
Quote
The Statements of Witnesses at the scene of the Murder/Killing... DO NOT MATCH the Statements of Ryan Zollman and His 2 Deputy's who Are still being Characterized as being Traumatized and Troubled by THEIR ACTIONS... These 2 Cowardly men Freely Chose to Physically Attack and Escalate the Shooting of JACK YANTIS.... Freely Chose to Shoot 11 Bullets into the Body of JACK YANTIS... Freely Chose to HANDCUFF, FRISK, and place Guns to the back of Donna Yantis and Rowdy Paradis heads, and Freely Chose to Refuse Medical Attention or Aid to an INNOCENT RANCHER or Allow anyone else to render Aid after they had Brutally Shot JACK YANTIS...
I'm sure the multiple independent eyewitness accounts are "wrong" and the only accounts considered authentic are the ones from the murdering bastard cops. Since the statements don't jive they're trying to figure out how to prosecute, discredit and impeach the witnesses. This whole clusterpuck is the responsibility of the sheriff and his reluctance to take the side of justice in defense of his boys in blue.
Two,in there prime,deputies needed 11 bullets to kill this man,Jack Yantis and threw to the ground/handcuffed and put a gun to the head of his wife(Donna) trying to help her husband,Jack.
So it takes five months to figure out how to cover up a shooting that took two minutes to execute, this has the makings of a Saturday night live skit, I wonder who they can get to play the bull dyke Attorney general?
Eleven shots, I wonder why they stopped shooting so soon?
Watch and see...I'm thinking that the next big news day i.e. School shooting, terrorist attack, BLM riot, etc they'll bury the murder of Jack Yantis on page 7. If Mr. Yantis had done anything wrong they'd have leaked it by now. If the cops shooting him 11 times and roughing up the wife was justified, they'd have leaked that by now. Their silence is deafening.
In the absence of transparency and Justice what else would you expect? Since the verdict is in I'll volunteer to be shooter on the firing squad. I'll bring my own rifle and ammo.
Regardless of the final report, in the sure to come civil suit, the LEO's are going to have a real problem with trying to explain why he was shot 11 times.
Regardless of the final report, in the sure to come civil suit, the LEO's are going to have a real problem with trying to explain why he was shot 11 times.
MM
They need to explain that at their criminal trial first.
...the LEO's are going to have a real problem with trying to explain why he was shot 11 times.
MM
Pretty sure they'll find that it falls within department guidelines...somehow. And that the officers set a new record for number of hits vs number of shots fired per dead, innocent citizen.
Sources familiar with the investigation into the killing of Jack Yantis tell The Free Thought Project that the emerging official narrative is that Jack Yantis was a “hard drinker,” and that he was intoxicated on the evening of November 1 when he received the call from the Adams County Sheriff’s Office to come attend to a bull that had been struck by a car on Highway 95, which bisects his property.
“The idea is that what we see here is a case where ‘guns and alcohol don’t mix,'” one source said by way of summarizing what may prove to be the official rationale for the killing. Confronted with a drunk, obstreperous man with a gun and a “history” with law enforcement, the deputies perceived themselves to be in danger and acted in accordance with the “reasonable officer” standard in the Supreme Court’s 1989 Graham v. Connor ruling — or so the official story could run. According to his father, Deputy Wood is convinced that the shooting will be fully vindicated.
The drunk accusation doesn't make sense. I believe Mr Yantis arrived at the scene without a gun, and had someone go up to the house to retrieve a rifle. If he were drunk, I can not believe the officers on the scene allowed him to be handed a rifle.
With what sounds like a lot of observers on the scene, I am quite sure the officers sole duty when Jack Arrived was to ask him to dispatch the animal,while they observed. Still confusing about him with the rifle mounted and ready to shoot and an officer grabbing Jack while he was "hot to shoot".
Sources familiar with the investigation into the killing of Jack Yantis tell The Free Thought Project that the emerging official narrative is that Jack Yantis was a “hard drinker,” and that he was intoxicated on the evening of November 1...
“The idea is that what we see here is a case where ‘guns and alcohol don’t mix,'” one source said by way of summarizing what may prove to be the official rationale for the killing. Confronted with a drunk, obstreperous man with a gun and a “history” with law enforcement, the deputies perceived themselves to be in danger and acted in accordance with the “reasonable officer” standard...
So two officers put 11 bullets into an old man because he had been drinking? That's the best these trigger happy dick weasels "reasonable officers" could come up with?
Well we are a hand full of days short of six months since the murder of this man, and yet not a word from the killers or the attorney general, this is just bullchit!
The big lesson is don't bring firearms when members of police are around. Unless you stage mass demonstration nothing is going to come of this unfortunate event. Finito.
They have had enough time to reach some conclusions.
This is the problem with our current Society...We allow ourselves to be distracted by more current news and tend to not follow up on past events. It is a fallacy that should be corrected because the past dictates the future.
The agenda is that they hope everyone will just forget about the whole thing. Know what? It is working...
Dr Robert Owens, A Professor and good Friend of mine who teaches History, Political Science, and Religion has a great motto about what he teaches and shares...
"The History of the Future"
Really worth taking the time to read the Wisdom of this Gentleman, He tends to tap the true issues and what will play out in the end. Real nice guy who has a full understanding of the real world obstacles we are up against going forward.
That ultimate symbol of mischievous scamp Bart Simpson in Season One of the longest running show in TV history when caught red-handed offered up one of his signature phrases, “I didn’t do it, nobody saw me do it, there’s no way you can prove anything.”
This came to mind when I was thinking about Hillary “They’ll Never Indict Me” Clinton and her morally challenged obviously corrupt character. Donald Trump has said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Hillary could say, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t get indicted.”
Everyone in the country knows that if any of us common people did one hundredth of what she has done in the email scandal alone we would have already been indicted along with the ten year Navy Vet indicted for taking a selfie on a submarine. The Obama Justice Department is not going to indict Mrs. Clinton no matter what the FBI recommends. She is above the law and she knows it or as she infamously said in the Benghazi hearing with regard to our four dead heroes, “What does it matter now?”
As a person who has been involved with and has closely followed the American political scene for more than fifty years this is the first time in my personal memory or Historical knowledge that a potential candidate for one party has promised to prosecute a potential candidate of the other party if elected.
As Secretary of State, Hillary’s accomplishments include the failed reset with Russia and of course her debacle in Libya. As a United State Senator what did she accomplish? In eight years she only sponsored three inconsequential laws:
S.3145, which designated a portion of U.S. Route 20A, located in Orchard Park, N.Y., as the “Timothy J. Russert Highway,” after the former “Meet the Press” host. 1. 3613, which renamed the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2951 New York Highway 43 in Averill Park, New York, as the “Major George Quamo Post Office Building.” 2.1241 which made the brick house of 19th century female union leader Kate Mullany a national historic site.
Her major accomplishment is that she married a man who became the most ethically challenged president in American History. As the wife of Bill Clnton she was deeply involved in smothering the serial bimbo eruptions which grew out of his long history of having affairs, sexually harassing women who worked for him, and assaulting others. This is the person who portrays herself as an advocate of women’s rights.
To highlight just one of her hypocritical faux stances for women’s rights look at her advocacy for equal pay. The Clinton Foundation pays women executives 38% less than their male counterparts. During her time in the Senate she paid women 72 cents for every dollar she paid men. According to public records her current campaign pays women staffers less than she pays men. So much for putting your money where your mouth is!
Looking back once more to the email scandal that Hillary so nonchalantly dismisses if as she maintains she never received nor sent any classified material during her entire term as our Secretary of State my question is, what was she doing besides traveling the world at our expense? Was she out of the loop and merely Secretary of State in name only? It is inconceivable that anyone could be the Secretary of State and not send or receive any classified material. That is beyond belief and a lie so transparent it shows total contempt for those it is meant to fool.
In the current election the Great Impresario likes to label people. In many ways it is an effective form of political shorthand. It sums up the thoughts, accusations, and beliefs about a person and brings them crashing in whenever they hear the catcall. Lyin Ted and Little Marco have taken their toll picked up and repeated by the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media and their pet FOX. Now we have Crooked Hillary. The others were just effective. This one seems appropriate.
If Hillary wins the presidency it will be a watershed just as the election and then re-election of her husband was. As his marked the end of public morality hers will mean the end of the rule of law. It will become evident to anyone observant enough to note the sunrise that enforcement of the bewildering lattice of laws and regulations are only aimed at the common folk not at our masters.
If such a legally challenged individual can fool enough of the people all the time to sit in the oval office it reminds me of what Bart said to Homer after it was revealed he had cheated on an important test, “I cheated on the intelligence test. I’m sorry. But I just want to say that the past few weeks have been great. Me and you have done stuff together. You’ve helped me out with things and we’re closer than we’ve ever been. I love you, Dad. And I think if something can bring us that close it can’t possibly be bad.”
Doing bad things for good purposes is the operational rational of Progressive Liberalism. The ends justify the means was the operational rational of all the megalomaniac dictators of world History. Please explain the difference.
Yesterday, TVOI News received a copy of an “Officer Safety/Extra Patrol” alert that was issued by the Ada County Sheriff’s Office for two locations near Meridian. The alert was issued last January and the subject of the alert was Brian Steele Wood, the Deputy Sheriff who was involved in the shooting death of rancher Jack Yantis in November of 2015. The alert said that Wood’s whereabouts were unknown, that he was separating from his wife and that there had been some domestic violence issues, that he had made threats to the police, that he had been observed collecting guns from a fifth-wheel trailer on his sister-in-law’s property, and that Wood claimed to have access to explosives. Following all of that, the alert said that Wood’s in-laws had requested extra patrols and they didn’t feel safe. There was emphasis on the last line: “NO CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED ON WOOD. ACSO IS NOT CURRENTLY INVESTIGATING ANY CRIME INVOLVING WOOD. OFFICER SAFETY ONLY* *USE EXTREME CAUTION* Obviously nothing came from that alert so in itself, it is not news. The reason given for providing the report to TVOI News is because of the alleged continuing erratic behavior of Deputy Wood. He and the other Deputy involved in the shooting death of Jack Yantis, Cody Roland are both on paid leave while the incident is being investigated. The Adams County Sheriff turned the case over to the Idaho State Police (ISP) to investigate. In March, ISP completed their investigation and turned it over to the Idaho State Attorney General’s office where it seems to have been dropped into a dark hole. KTVB reported that Todd Dvorak, spokesman for the attorney general said there was no timeline for reviewing the ISP’s report. In the meantime, Brian Steele Wood and Cody Roland are on paid vacation at the expense of the Adams County taxpayers.
I was just thinking about this today... I can't believe they're still waiting for DNA results....hell...you can send Ansestery.com a swab and they'll run your DNA in a week or two.....probably do it for under a hundred bucks too....
No stall tactics or cover up here....nothing to see....move along....
I was just thinking about this today... I can't believe they're still waiting for DNA results....hell...you can send Ansestery.com a swab and they'll run your DNA in a week or two.....probably do it for under a hundred bucks too....
No stall tactics or cover up here....nothing to see....move along....
I was just thinking about this today... I can't believe they're still waiting for DNA results....hell...you can send Ansestery.com a swab and they'll run your DNA in a week or two.....probably do it for under a hundred bucks too....
No stall tactics or cover up here....nothing to see....move along....
The pig data base can't be that extensive.
I'm not really sure what you mean by that but I don't like calling LEO "pigs"....they're men and should be treated as such....and if they've done wrong...should be punished as such in a timely fashion...and without predjudice or special treatment...
I was just thinking about this today... I can't believe they're still waiting for DNA results....hell...you can send Ansestery.com a swab and they'll run your DNA in a week or two.....probably do it for under a hundred bucks too....
No stall tactics or cover up here....nothing to see....move along....
The pig data base can't be that extensive.
I'm not really sure what you mean by that but I don't like calling LEO "pigs"....they're men and should be treated as such....and if they've done wrong...should be punished as such in a timely fashion....
People here, in this thread advocated lynching the cops. Yet, despite the fact that they had means, they remain free. Odd.
His statement either shows off the reservation, drunk and stupid, emotional distress from his separation, or countless other things that apparently haven't got people to pull a warrant yet.
Maybe if Idaho had laws like California or Connecticut, you guys could have him arrested and all his guns seized?
I'll freely admit it sounds odd.
Maybe the feds have him under investigation along with a lot of other off the reservation types?
Of course, you miss and/or ignore the fact that his was a rather more specific threat involving an ongoing situation rather than general running off at the mouth about hypothetical situations that will most likely never occur.
But it is telling how some here are more offended by this name-calling than by the murder of an innocent citizen.
I am not offended by the murder of this innocent citizen, I am outraged by the murder of this innocent citizen. I still don't like the name calling of LEOs even though there are a few who never need to see the light of day again.
I don't call all LEO pigs, but these two here are even below pigs. I consider them lower than pig sheit, so are the ones covering and protecting them. Sounds to me like there are a bunch of PIGS in Idaho, 'cause they ain't doing sheit about bringing these two to justice.
I'm not really sure what you mean by that but I don't like calling LEO "pigs"....they're men and should be treated as such....and if they've done wrong...should be punished as such in a timely fashion...and without predjudice or special treatment...
Jim Yantis didn't have the luxury of having the deputies grievances aired out in court "in a timely fashion", he was summarily tried and executed. IMO, the ACSO should be dissolved with the same haste shown in the murder of Jim Yantis. Without a spanking other LEO's will see that there are no repercussions for "making an error in judgement" that results in the deaths of more citizens/dogs/etc.
In Current Law Enforcement Circles Mr Brian Wood is considered ARMED and DANGEROUS...
USE EXTREME CAUTION IF APPROACHED...AND MR BRIAN WOOD IS CONSIDERED MENTALLY UNSTABLE !!!
In the First part of 2016 Mr Brian Wood admitted himself into a VA Mental Hospital in Spokane Washington and shortly there after at his own volition checked himself OUT OF THAT FACILITY...
...In the First part of 2016 Mr Brian Wood admitted himself into a VA Mental Hospital in Spokane Washington and shortly there after at his own volition checked himself OUT OF THAT FACILITY...
[/i]
Had this been a veteran, he would have had his firearms taken away from him.
Amazing! We have not solved this case yet, normally only takes 100 pages for a solution. I myself don't have a clue, but am interested in any official pronouncement.
The citizens of Idaho are waiting for the State Attorney General and the U.S. Attorney to quit stalling and make a decision whether to prosecute the two deputies of the the death of Jack Yantis
I've sent two e-mails to the Governors office over the last few months reminding him that ISP works for him and he works for me and that the stalling in this case won't be forgotten when I'm standing in the voting booth but no response....surprised....I'm not.....
I'll send the AG an e-mail too....I won't hold my breath though....
That's all we can do other than voting these pricks that care nothing about right and wrong out of office....
They didn't waste any time arresting the author of the article I posted yesterday..
Quote
The Author of the the Article, JACK YANTIS case Revisited, through TVOI NEWS has been arrested by the FBI and it appears that part of the Charges are Soliciting Sensitive Law Enforcement Documents on the Internet...
They didn't waste any time arresting the author of the article I posted yesterday..
Quote
The Author of the the Article, JACK YANTIS case Revisited, through TVOI NEWS has been arrested by the FBI and it appears that part of the Charges are Soliciting Sensitive Law Enforcement Documents on the Internet...
How dare someone inform the public about a dangerous, armed, mentally unstable cop on paid leave for murder. The nerve of some folks that think the public has a right to know who they employ to keep them safe. It's unfortunate that justice isn't applied fairly for all and that a protected class exists that is virtually beyond reproach.
They didn't waste any time arresting the author of the article I posted yesterday..
Quote
The Author of the the Article, JACK YANTIS case Revisited, through TVOI NEWS has been arrested by the FBI and it appears that part of the Charges are Soliciting Sensitive Law Enforcement Documents on the Internet...
In other words, don't even question the FBI, or we'll find some way to railroad you.....
The FBI is proving time and again it is rotten to it's core.
Yeah there's something wrong when a flyer gets circulated amongst local law enforcement and a reporter gets arrested for alerting us to the alert BUT Hilary disseminates a ton of top secret material and she's still free.
I guess it was supposed to be a super quiet alert. Makes it harder to cover up now....crazy cop shoots rancher that didn't show enough respect. Now he's beating his wife and scaring the snot out of his in laws all the while threatening to shoot any cops that come for him.
The Attorney General’s Office does not know how long that will take. “We will try to do this as efficiently as possible,” Dvorak said. “We will only get one chance at this, so we want to be thorough and do our jobs diligently.”
The FBI is conducting its own investigation for possible federal violations. U.S. Attorney Wendy Olson said that investigation is continuing. Olson’s office will determine whether federal charges are warranted.
On Nov. 1, a car struck one of Yantis’ bulls on U.S. 95 near Council, injuring the occupants. Emergency responders, including two Adams County sheriff’s deputies, Cody W. Roland and Brian S. Wood, went to the scene. Adams County dispatch had also called Yantis to go to the scene to take care of his bull, which was alive but seriously wounded. Yantis, 62, was killed by the deputies. His wife, Donna, who witnessed the shooting, had a heart attack and was hospitalized. She has since been released from the hospital and is recovering at home.
The Statesman continues to receive questions from readers regularly about the investigations’ status. Several inquiries followed Tuesday’s officer-involved shooting in Oregon, where Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, one of the armed militants who took over offices of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, was killed.
Within 48 hours, the FBI released a statement detailing the incident and an unedited 30-minute video taken from an airplane of the traffic stop where Finicum was shot.
“We want to do what we can to lay out an honest and unfiltered view of what happened and how it happened,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Greg Bretzing.
Within 48 hours, the FBI released a statement detailing the incident and an unedited 30-minute video taken from an airplane of the traffic stop where Finicum was shot.
“We want to do what we can to lay out an honest and unfiltered view of what happened and how it happened,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Greg Bretzing.
Threatening (fellow)police officers/domestic abuse/collecting guns and with access to explosives!!!!!!
Naw,this deputy could never lose it and just kill an innocent rancher and rough up his wife.
If I was a local I'd be inclined to make a hundred color copies and post that alert all over the county. Based upon his history and current instability seeming to align, not to mention his status as a police officer, being extra cautious around him could save your life. Sure wouldn't hurt to make sure everyone knows who he is and that flyer seems to do that succinctly.
If Jack Yantis had turned the tables and put 11 bullets in either or both of those cops bodies do you think he'd be on paid leave while things got sorted out?
If Jack Yantis had turned the tables and put 11 bullets in either or both of those cops bodies do you think he'd be on paid leave while things got sorted out?
If you ask that question to Adams county sheriff Ryan Zolliman, the answer would be yes followed by a re-cant of no,then yes again and no depending on the day asked,I guess.Never seen an official as wishy washy as he.He makes Barney Fife look intelligent.
And Brian Wood is going to open up for an interview to a non biased reporter that has been fair to him...This chit is Mayberry revisited...
I'm sure Gerry Spence is rolling his eyes waiting for this to be finalized so he can crucify the remains.
Edit to say..The 11 bullets came from the autopsy report handed to the Yantis family.
Seems Barney has a bomb...It really isn't funny and the AG office needs to finalize this crap soon before someone else gets dead.
I have information about Brian Wood possessing explosives within the past few weeks. You can also contact the Valley County sheriff office. They also have pictures of the explosives at Brian Woods residences and have interviewed people about these explosives. Brian Wood bought a case of Helix explosive from Omni in 2014. He had an ATF explosive license at the time. His license expired in 2014 and he was still in possession of these explosives this month. Don't know why an LEO would need a private explosives license. The Valley County Sheriffs office has pictures of the explosives with a fuse in them. ATF and FBI have also been contacted by numerous people about Brian Wood having these explosives.
Turdcutter, did you pass along that info to Mr. Spence during your weekly phone conference? A bombshell like that could be crucial to the case. I hope Facebook archived that message.
Wapoozy...I forgot to mention it to Gerry but just incase it is not archived,I should post some more of that here now..Thanks for the reminder....
Upon Receiving this Information the Admin made a Call to the Valley County Sheriff Dispatch to Inquire about Authenticity of this Information and Learned that IN FACT Valley County Sheriff Office had received Several Complaints and Requests for the Search of These Explosives and had sent out Deputies to Investigate but to date had not Discovered any Evidence other than the pictures in Question.. THIS HAS OCCURRED WITHIN THE PAST WEEK !!!!
Turdcutter, did you pass along that info to Mr. Spence during your weekly phone conference? A bombshell like that could be crucial to the case. I hope Facebook archived that message.
You're a f u c k i n g idiot....you need to concentrate on stuff you know something about....like picking your butt and smelling your finger....and let the folks that live in ID worry about what happens in ID....
Maybe they're trying to round up the explosives before releasing the report and arresting the murderers. It looks as though at least one of the paid murdering SOBs is unstable and untrustworthy enough to cause great concern over his illegal possession of explosives and weapons of mass destruction. What a total and complete clusterpuck. I wish there was a practical solution to the out of control nature of so many departments across this country. We the people need to reign in the neo-military attitudes and practices of those we entrust (erroneously) with our safety. Some dude takes over a bird refuge and the local and federal jerk offs execute him on a lonely road in broad daylight then coverup their deeds by stealing and removing evidence. Apparently murdering someone with 11 rounds at point blank range and having many pounds of explosives is not high enough on law enforcements radar, especially when it's one of their own that's lost it.
Some people found a suspicious package in a field near McCall Idaho last week- described as "a really weird package and it has a Fuse in the middle of it.." One of the people was allegedly a "licensed Explosive Expert". The package contained "3 bottles of Activator and a Fuse in the middle with writing on the Bottles." It was described as "Type 2 Explosives and the Bottles have Writing on them which also has the Manufacture Name which is Omni..and Phone # Listed.. He calls the # and Danielle with Omni answers the phone.. he tells her what he has and she without Hesitation tells him that those Explosives which are numbered and labeled were sold to Mr Brian Wood in 2014 who had a Valid Explosive License at the Time ... This bundle of Explosives are 30 ft from where Brian Wood is currently living in McCall Idaho...
Some people found a suspicious package in a field near McCall Idaho last week- described as "a really weird package and it has a Fuse in the middle of it.." One of the people was allegedly a "licensed Explosive Expert". The package contained "3 bottles of Activator and a Fuse in the middle with writing on the Bottles." It was described as "Type 2 Explosives and the Bottles have Writing on them which also has the Manufacture Name which is Omni..and Phone # Listed.. He calls the # and Danielle with Omni answers the phone.. he tells her what he has and she without Hesitation tells him that those Explosives which are numbered and labeled were sold to Mr Brian Wood in 2014 who had a Valid Explosive License at the Time ... This bundle of Explosives are 30 ft from where Brian Wood is currently living in McCall Idaho...
Sasquatch left it, you dumbphuck. And while you're at it, what does Facebook say about Bigfoot?..
That sounds about right. We all knew that all along though. Where are the cops claiming how long this investigation will take? Where is RWE claiming that those of us who think the two cops are guilty are vigilantes?
Where are the cops claiming how long this investigation will take?
It's an unwritten rule that exists among nearly all cops not to negatively comment on a fellow cop's errors, misconducts, or crimes. They mostly remain silent regarding another cop's wrongdoing.
Just one of the reasons cops are so 'endearing' to many Americans.
Every officer should chime in on a convicted poacher,even if he is a cop.Brian Wood is a loose cannon and has know respect for the law he was hired to uphold.
He is a guilty of poaching and other crimes yet is on paid leave as a sheriffs deputy..
04/05/2012 Disposition With Hearing 04/05/2012 Judgment Of Reimbursement - Idaho Dept of F & G 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 445.00 charge: I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 145.00 charge: I36-409(C) F/G-Game Tag-No Appropriate Tag 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Incarceration (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Confinement terms: Jail: 10 days. May substitute 200 hours of community service in lieu of jailtime 04/05/2012 Probation Ordered (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Probation term: 1 year. (Unsupervised)[/i]
Every officer should chime in on a convicted poacher,even if he is a cop.Brian Wood is a loose cannon and has know respect for the law he was hired to uphold.
He is a guilty of poaching and other crimes yet is on paid leave as a sheriffs deputy..
04/05/2012 Disposition With Hearing 04/05/2012 Judgment Of Reimbursement - Idaho Dept of F & G 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 445.00 charge: I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 145.00 charge: I36-409(C) F/G-Game Tag-No Appropriate Tag 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Incarceration (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Confinement terms: Jail: 10 days. May substitute 200 hours of community service in lieu of jailtime 04/05/2012 Probation Ordered (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Probation term: 1 year. (Unsupervised)[/i]
What community hires a poacher to be a cop? That's ridiculous. (I am assuming that this is more than just a guy shooting at a legal game bird who accidentally hits a deer out of season and fesses up to the game and fish people.) Why should officers around the country express outrage at what the citizens of Idaho decided to hire to protect them? You got what you wanted and now want to complain.
Every officer should chime in on a convicted poacher,even if he is a cop.Brian Wood is a loose cannon and has know respect for the law he was hired to uphold.
He is a guilty of poaching and other crimes yet is on paid leave as a sheriffs deputy..
04/05/2012 Disposition With Hearing 04/05/2012 Judgment Of Reimbursement - Idaho Dept of F & G 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 445.00 charge: I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 145.00 charge: I36-409(C) F/G-Game Tag-No Appropriate Tag 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Incarceration (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Confinement terms: Jail: 10 days. May substitute 200 hours of community service in lieu of jailtime 04/05/2012 Probation Ordered (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Probation term: 1 year. (Unsupervised)[/i]
You won't get any of our campfire cops to condemn this piece of sheit. They never have and they never will, it's that thin blue line bullsheit once again.
Every officer should chime in on a convicted poacher,even if he is a cop.Brian Wood is a loose cannon and has know respect for the law he was hired to uphold.
He is a guilty of poaching and other crimes yet is on paid leave as a sheriffs deputy..
04/05/2012 Disposition With Hearing 04/05/2012 Judgment Of Reimbursement - Idaho Dept of F & G 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 445.00 charge: I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Pay Fine 145.00 charge: I36-409(C) F/G-Game Tag-No Appropriate Tag 04/05/2012 Sentenced To Incarceration (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Confinement terms: Jail: 10 days. May substitute 200 hours of community service in lieu of jailtime 04/05/2012 Probation Ordered (I36-502(B) F/G-Wildlife-Unlawful Possession of) Probation term: 1 year. (Unsupervised)[/i]
What community hires a poacher to be a cop? That's ridiculous. (I am assuming that this is more than just a guy shooting at a legal game bird who accidentally hits a deer out of season and fesses up to the game and fish people.) Why should officers around the country express outrage at what the citizens of Idaho decided to hire to protect them? You got what you wanted and now want to complain.
A very good point.
Many of Idaho's smaller communities don't consider poaching to be more serious than skinny dipping. Most of them don't care to pay for quality service.
I wrote to the AG requesting an explanation for the delay in the Yantis investigation results a couple weeks ago. No response so far.
Why is Brian wood not in custody for the multitude of crimes he's committed? I'm not even talking about the murder of Jack Yantis, just the DV, threats of shooting and violence, illegal possession or disposal of explosives, etc? If that were a "civilian" they'd have been locked up months ago. This biased application of "justice" will be remedied, eventually. The number of dead cops will continue to rise and zero tears will be shed unless and until they are held to the same standards as everyone else. The pendulum is swinging back the other way and if the cops don't figure it out and clean house they will continue to bury their blue "brothers" and society will not give 2 shlts either way. This entire abortion of a murder by cop stinks to high hell and has only gotten worse since the facts have been trickled out.
Why should officers around the country express outrage at what the citizens of Idaho decided to hire to protect them? You got what you wanted and now want to complain.
When's the last time you, as a citizen, participated in hiring a deputy?
I also should add that I voted with my feet when I lived in a place that had bad police and the community preferred to have bad police than to pay to hire good ones.
Where are the cops claiming how long this investigation will take?
It's an unwritten rule that exists among nearly all cops not to negatively comment on a fellow cop's errors, misconducts, or crimes. They mostly remain silent regarding another cop's wrongdoing..................
I also should add that I voted with my feet when I lived in a place that had bad police and the community preferred to have bad police than to pay to hire good ones.
Citizens shouldn't have to uproot their family, change schools and leave old friends just to get away from bullying and harassment by douche bags in uniform. Citizens aren't involved in the hiring of cops nor are citizens asked to be involved. When citizen groups form, out of necessity because of rampant abuse, to oversee various aspects of law enforcement it's always met with strict defiance and obfuscation by the police and their union. Ignoring or running from the problem isn't a solution, in fact I'd posit that it encourages other departments to do what they want since any oversight comes from within. That's why our quality of cops has gone down significantly in the last 2 decades. What's interesting is how divided the campfire is right down the middle. Cops almost without exception excuse or diminish bad or illegal activity done by the police while everyone else is appalled at the same crime. The killing of a man that was not a suspect or even participant until his help was requested and the initial comments by the campfire cop crowd are illustrative of the divide and symptomatic of the problem nationwide.
I also should add that I voted with my feet when I lived in a place that had bad police and the community preferred to have bad police than to pay to hire good ones.
Citizens shouldn't have to uproot their family, change schools and leave old friends just to get away from bullying and harassment by douche bags in uniform. Citizens aren't involved in the hiring of cops nor are citizens asked to be involved. When citizen groups form, out of necessity because of rampant abuse, to oversee various aspects of law enforcement it's always met with strict defiance and obfuscation by the police and their union. Ignoring or running from the problem isn't a solution, in fact I'd posit that it encourages other departments to do what they want since any oversight comes from within. That's why our quality of cops has gone down significantly in the last 2 decades. What's interesting is how divided the campfire is right down the middle. Cops almost without exception excuse or diminish bad or illegal activity done by the police while everyone else is appalled at the same crime. The killing of a man that was not a suspect or even participant until his help was requested and the initial comments by the campfire cop crowd are illustrative of the divide and symptomatic of the problem nationwide.
Police are a reflection of the community. They are what the majority of the community wants. It doesn't come to light until something bad happens. Did the sheriff of this Idaho county pass over a Harvard law grad applicant to hire a poacher or did he pick the least worst alternative to having a slot go vacant? Most people in the community want the cheapest services they can get for the same reason they shop at Walmart instead of paying more at a mom and pop store. Nobody cares until something bad happens or the wrench they bought at Walmart breaks.
Uh...no. Police are a reflection of the government. The same tyrranical and corrupt government that everyone here b!tches about. Police are it's 'enforcers'. As pointed out here before, there are very damn few situations that are made 'better' as a result of the police entering into them.
Where are the cops claiming how long this investigation will take?
It's an unwritten rule that exists among nearly all cops not to negatively comment on a fellow cop's errors, misconducts, or crimes. They mostly remain silent regarding another cop's wrongdoing.
Just one of the reasons cops are so 'endearing' to many Americans.
You need to ask the State and Federal Government that question.
I also should add that I voted with my feet when I lived in a place that had bad police and the community preferred to have bad police than to pay to hire good ones.
Citizens shouldn't have to uproot their family, change schools and leave old friends just to get away from bullying and harassment by douche bags in uniform. Citizens aren't involved in the hiring of cops nor are citizens asked to be involved. When citizen groups form, out of necessity because of rampant abuse, to oversee various aspects of law enforcement it's always met with strict defiance and obfuscation by the police and their union. Ignoring or running from the problem isn't a solution, in fact I'd posit that it encourages other departments to do what they want since any oversight comes from within. That's why our quality of cops has gone down significantly in the last 2 decades. What's interesting is how divided the campfire is right down the middle. Cops almost without exception excuse or diminish bad or illegal activity done by the police while everyone else is appalled at the same crime. The killing of a man that was not a suspect or even participant until his help was requested and the initial comments by the campfire cop crowd are illustrative of the divide and symptomatic of the problem nationwide.
Not just cops either...after 911, the NYC Departments had some real internal issues when the surviving cops reported ATM's hacked apart by fire personnel.
Uh...no. Police are a reflection of the government. The same tyrranical and corrupt government that everyone here b!tches about. Police are it's 'enforcers'. As pointed out here before, there are very damn few situations that are made 'better' as a result of the police entering into them.
While I can see a better argument at the national level, it falls apart at the lowest rung of government, i.e., the local/county level, even more so in places with tiny populations. The government at the local level is totally the fault of the locals, because it is elected by a majority of the people who bother to show up to vote and is intended to affect only the geographical location of the voters. A person on the wrong end of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location. Griping about it is a waste of time and brain cells although some people may find comfort in it.
Cheyenne, I agree that in theory cops are a reflection of society but in reality they are not. They individually exist in society but are separate in the collective sense. They have privileges not extended to all and there is an unwritten code that suspects the cop only when every other explanation, no matter how outlandish, is exhausted. Even in the face of almost insurmountable evidence the cop is presumed innocent. If anyone of us had DV accusations or threatened bloodshed or had several pounds of high explosives illegally in our possession we'd be locked up long ago but when the perp is a cop every excuse and fabricated possibility is used to prevent his arrest. This case is a classic example. Not only has the POS cop not been arrested for what he's done and continues to do, the reporter that made the alert public was arrested!!! And the cops wonder why the public doesn't trust them.....crooked, corrupt bastards!!!
Most cops run with other cops. They often have very few close friends that aren't cops and I know many cops that said they had no non-cop friends. The cops choose to sequester themselves and by doing so remove themselves from normal society and no longer reflect society, rather they are a reflection of "the cop culture". Looking at the pictures and social media of those 2 douche bags show they fancied themselves the very personification of a cop. The cop culture fosters and fuels the us against the world attitude and they do themselves a disservice by doing so.imho
Most cops run with other cops. They often have very few close friends that aren't cops and I know many cops that said they had no non-cop friends. The cops choose to sequester themselves and by doing so remove themselves from normal society and no longer reflect society, rather they are a reflection of "the cop culture". Looking at the pictures and social media of those 2 douche bags show they fancied themselves the very personification of a cop. The cop culture fosters and fuels the us against the world attitude and they do themselves a disservice by doing so.imho
Not most that I know.....
It's impossible to continue an "us vs them" without both sides assuming said stance FWIW. I see plenty right "here", much less in the "real world ".
How so George? Are you suggesting that citizen input is a common practice in all cop hirings?
There is no 'all' cop hiring. Methods of hiring are variable between bordering Towns, let alone Counties or States. That's always been my point.
I'll use my Department's last promotional process as an example, though. Not a single "cop" on it. Three community members on the panel.......one was a retired cop, though, if that matters.
Your citizens are part of the hiring process? If so that's great but it's so far from the norm it's not even funny. I've been googling it and I found 1 department so far that has any citizen input. Most departments of any size eschew citizen input.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
OK, that clears it up for all of us. Thanks. It's Jack Yantis's fault that he's dead because he didn't have the "foresight" to be directly involved in the actual hiring of the 'local' cops who killed him...! That's all you had to say. End of thread.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
OK, that clears it up for all of us. Thanks. It's Jack Yantis's fault that he's dead because he didn't have the "foresight" to be directly involved in the actual hiring of the 'local' cops who killed him...! That's all you had to say. End of thread.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol
Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
You, Sir are a completely rank and deluded Azzwhole. "Full of one's self", doesn't even START to describe the way you come across to anybody halfway squared away with what's commonly called the American way.
This was a county sheriff department. Whenever I have moved to a new county I see how the deputes react with the public and see how well they do their jobs. I believe that is a reflection of the man at the top. If the the deputies are doing a good job then That sheriff is the right man for the job, if not get rig of the bad apple and elect a good one.
I have been lucky, The last three counties I have lived in had good men from top to bottom. The voters need vote this guy out just on the fact alone he has not cleaned house.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol
Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
You, Sir are a completely rank and deluded Azzwhole. "Full of one's self", doesn't even START to describe the way you come across to anybody halfway squared away with what's commonly called the American way.
GTC
GTC
Well, I disagree with your assessment of my personal qualities, although you certainly are entitled to your opinion. I realize that my response was a bit sarcastic, but it was in response to a sarcastic post. It further is backed by my personal belief, based on a great deal of reflection, that I bought an extra 20 years (so far) of a great quality of life by not waiting until the 3 dot sights were on my back to relocate. Now, your opinion plus my opinion combined, plus about $1.50, will buy us a cruddy cup of coffee made by a guy whose 22 year old assistant manager boss probably earns a salary within strike distance of what the deputies involved in this incident earned.
I pay taxes, I vote in every election & I've yet to see a prospective LEO hire on the ballot, or a Chief of Police either.
The only LEO position, nationwide, generally elected by the public is the county sheriff's position.
The CoP is hired by the city commission the then the CoP hires whomever he might want as an officer. The public has zero direct say; to imply otherwise is either ignorance or disingenuous.
Indirectly, city commissioners are voted on, but changing them or the CoP is never a short term proposition.
Hey Dink, have I told you to go fugg yourself lately? Your the kind of piece of sheit that won't condemn these low life scumbags. I'm sure we'll read about you in the news as some point. I hope it's some low life you kill, not an honorable cattleman like Mr. Yantis.
Hey Dink, have I told you to go fugg yourself lately? Your the kind of piece of sheit that won't condemn these low life scumbags. I'm sure we'll read about you in the news as some point. I hope it's some low life you kill, not an honorable cattleman like Mr. Yantis.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
OK, that clears it up for all of us. Thanks. It's Jack Yantis's fault that he's dead because he didn't have the "foresight" to be directly involved in the actual hiring of the 'local' cops who killed him...! That's all you had to say. End of thread.
No, Mr Yantis did have the foresight. He simply lost the election when he ran for Sheriff.
You think there might have been residual bad blood from that election??????
I pay taxes, I vote in every election & I've yet to see a prospective LEO hire on the ballot, or a Chief of Police either.
The only LEO position, nationwide, generally elected by the public is the county sheriff's position.
The CoP is hired by the city commission the then the CoP hires whomever he might want as an officer. The public has zero direct say; to imply otherwise is either ignorance or disingenuous.
Indirectly, city commissioners are voted on, but changing them or the CoP is never a short term proposition.
YMMV, but I kinda doubt for most of the country.
MM
It still boils down to what the public is willing to tolerate in taxes and spending priorities, and what the local culture is willing to tolerate in unethical or illegal behavior. When the locals have had enough to roll some figurative heads, things change. Seen it. Done it.
A person on the 'wrong end' of that has a choice to either accept it, try to change it by getting involved, or find an alternative location.
lol Unless you're 'dead' because you were murdered by one of these 'local' cops...!
It pays to have some foresight.
OK, that clears it up for all of us. Thanks. It's Jack Yantis's fault that he's dead because he didn't have the "foresight" to be directly involved in the actual hiring of the 'local' cops who killed him...! That's all you had to say. End of thread.
Public Employees defending Public Employees can border on Manic Depressive Bipolor behavior....
They don't give a rats azz what the taxpayers want or believe in. They live with an organized crime family mentality and pay only lip service to Democracies.
Don't believe this....walk into your next Town Meeting or Election and announce you are going to work to reform public government and it's employee's.....
You will find out right quickly what kind of a Democracy you actually live in.
Another call from dispatch,Yantis cows on the road again!
Donna Yantis wrote:
I did get a call from Adams Co. dispatch that there were cows on the road, I went down to the highway to check it out. Deputy was there with lights on. He had already chased some off the road, Separated a bull and cow from the group and they went down the road. I was a little scared to talk to him. I had my hands up all the time, I told him to leave the bull and cow alone and they would come back to where they were suppose to be. After he left, my neighbor helped me get them in.
That had to be hard after what happened, for Jacks wife to respond to the recent dispatch's request to take care of there cows that were on the road again..
But this is free range and Barney and Goober were not present so all went well as it should have back in November when Jack was shot.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Wow, been months and about 50 pages back for you to find this to quote. That is some truly obsessive and creepy behavior.
Tough? Me? Not so much. I just want to watch when some loud mouthed jerk comes in from out of state and starts to disparage a murder victim to his dear friends and family.
I imagine the loud mouthed jerk would learn a new definition of tough. I know it would be a show I would pay to watch.
Tough? Me? Not so much. I just want to watch when some loud mouthed jerk comes in from out of state and starts to disparage a murder victim to his dear friends and family.
I imagine the loud mouthed jerk would learn a new definition of tough. I know it would be a show I would pay to watch.
You might ought to tone down the rhetoric unless you want him to threaten to notify your local Law Enforcement Agencies that you are a dangerous person.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Wow, been months and about 50 pages back for you to find this to quote. That is some truly obsessive and creepy behavior.
No it's not,....
Aces didn't WRITE what he just quoted,....YOU did, IIRC.
.......man ( small m) the dancin' around you did afterwards was something to watch,.....and a study in squirmy polit-speak.
WRITING that chit in the first place was "obsessive and creepy,"
Tough? Me? Not so much. I just want to watch when some loud mouthed jerk comes in from out of state and starts to disparage a murder victim to his dear friends and family.
Sorry, but the squirming whorseshit that has come from this screams cover-up of the worst kind. There is no excuse for not putting out an official update at this point. My acceptance of the bullschit they are going to pull now is near zero.
Sorry, but the squirming whorseshit that has come from this screams cover-up of the worst kind. There is no excuse for not putting out an official update at this point. My acceptance of the bullschit they are going to pull now is near zero.
I pretty much agree but with the thought of the Ruby Ridge team next up to bat in this case, probably causes some great concern as they didn't do well in that one.
Spence don't lose and they know that.Reguardless if the deputies are charged or not,there lives will never be as they once were once everything is said and done.
Who doubted this was murder from the start, please raise your hand.
Me.....I never thought it was "murder" and still don't but that doesn't mean I don't think the deputies are guilty of a crime either....
I'm still trying to keep from condemning but it's getting harder. The longer the wait with no explainations or results to explain...I guess I'm impatient.
If it had been a black family there would be no end to the scrutiny the police would be under.
Brian Woods is already discovering the direction his life will be taking from this point forward. His actions have subjected him to scrutiny he never expected to live under.
With recent revelations of Woods's character and history, his career as LEO is definitely finished. He better milk this current paid vacation for all it is worth.
He will probably have to move to Florida to obtain work as a garbage collector.
He precipitated his own death, and won't get any tears from me.
Don't think a "mindset" about how police are going to react to an armed man interfering their attempts to rescue injured people is going to change much from coast to coast.
Wow, been months and about 50 pages back for you to find this to quote. That is some truly obsessive and creepy behavior.
No it's not,....
Aces didn't WRITE what he just quoted,....YOU did, IIRC.
.......man ( small m) the dancin' around you did afterwards was something to watch,.....and a study in squirmy polit-speak.
WRITING that chit in the first place was "obsessive and creepy,"
Tough crowd to play to, this "Campfire Bunch"
GTC
I stand by every word I said then. Ive seen nothing to change my mind. No dancing on my part then or now.
I do think it is obsessive and creepy to take the time to go back 50 pages to find a quote of someone who hasnt posted on this topic in months. That aint normal behavior.
Who doubted this was murder from the start, please raise your hand.
Me.....I never thought it was "murder" and still don't but that doesn't mean I don't think the deputies are guilty of a crime either....
I'm still trying to keep from condemning but it's getting harder. The longer the wait with no explainations or results to explain...I guess I'm impatient.
If it had been a black family there would be no end to the scrutiny the police would be under.
Yea...the stalling's sure making it look like a cover-up.... ISP's record of lying and corruption doesn't help matters either....
Course they could be waiting for the FBI's findings.....which should be out just as soon as they wrap up Hildogs e-mail caper...
I stand by every word I said then. Ive seen nothing to change my mind. No dancing on my part then or now.
I do think it is obsessive and creepy to take the time to go back 50 pages to find a quote of someone who hasnt posted on this topic in months. That aint normal behavior.
What a whiny little pusssy you are. Pull your big girl pants up and deal with it or go The fuuck away. Trust me when I say you won't be missed.
You've proven that you're nothing but a shlt-stirring, sensitive little pusssy.
I do think it is obsessive and creepy to take the time to go back 50 pages to find a quote of someone who hasnt posted on this topic in months. That aint normal behavior.
Well, somebody throw this yammering trained seal a goddam FISH.
Thanks for getting us all up to speed as to what's "normal behavior" there, Ann Landers.
I don't think princess pusssy realizes that to click on page 15 and quote his ridiculous ramblings took all of 10 seconds. She showed her ass early on and continues to prance bare back on her pony through the entire thread. Not atypical for a cop to feign helpless or clueless but it's always fun to watch.
I stand by every word I said then. Ive seen nothing to change my mind. No dancing on my part then or now.
I do think it is obsessive and creepy to take the time to go back 50 pages to find a quote of someone who hasnt posted on this topic in months. That aint normal behavior.
What a whiny little pusssy you are. Pull your big girl pants up and deal with it or go The fuuck away. Trust me when I say you won't be missed.
You've proven that you're nothing but a shlt-stirring, sensitive little pusssy.
Interesting that you accuse me of [bleep] stirring when you felt compelled to go back and quote things when I hadnt posted on this thread in awhile. Clearly it was you attempting to elicit a response. That would kind of be the defintion of [bleep] stirring.
Sorry, but the squirming whorseshit that has come from this screams cover-up of the worst kind. There is no excuse for not putting out an official update at this point. My acceptance of the bullschit they are going to pull now is near zero.
Why do you suppose the FBI is covering up anything for some minimum wage cops and a two-bit cow farmer in Bumfuct, Idaho?
Saddest part of this entire deal is the fact that you can't trust anyone.
It's called the "halo effect". People trust people that they have something in common with...whether they're trustworthy, or not. It's a very common mistake.
Ive found any engagement with Police is best done sober, be courteous and follow their directions. Like you they just want to get the job done and with the minimum of fuss.
Its a [bleep] job they do and the daily stress and general lack of respect doing it only doesnt make it an attractive occuptation.
I'll wait for the full report before making judgement
This has not one thing to do with a sheriff's wages. It has much more to do with the war on drugs (actually the war against US citizens) and what that has done to separate our country's law enforcement from we the people.
This has not one thing to do with a sheriff's wages. It has much more to do with the war on drugs (actually the war against US citizens) and what that has done to separate our country's law enforcement from we the people.
It has everything to do with what wages the deputies make, and what sort of administrator the sheriff is.
If it doesn't make any difference, then keep what ya got, and see how things work...
Me too. However no community is safe as witnessed in the OP. I'm sure rural Idaho thought they were immune but the cancer spreads.
I don't think so as far as being immune to corruption. I've lived in rural Idaho my entire life and have seen situations where the clock gets turned back 50-100 years on how things are handled by county law enforcement in the smaller population counties. Citizens turn their heads simply because they have grown up in a culture where its best to not get to involved. Boss Hog is alive and well in some areas...
This has not one thing to do with a sheriff's wages. It has much more to do with the war on drugs (actually the war against US citizens) and what that has done to separate our country's law enforcement from we the people.
It has everything to do with what wages the deputies make, and what sort of administrator the sheriff is.
If it doesn't make any difference, then keep what ya got, and see how things work...
I'd agree that better wages allow you to attract better employees, in general, but it is far from a direct correlation.
Hell, the LAPD has more than a few that make well over six figures and they still shoot up old ladies trying to deliver the mail.
This has not one thing to do with a sheriff's wages. It has much more to do with the war on drugs (actually the war against US citizens) and what that has done to separate our country's law enforcement from we the people.
It has everything to do with what wages the deputies make, and what sort of administrator the sheriff is.
If it doesn't make any difference, then keep what ya got, and see how things work...
Total and complete unadulterated BULLCHIT. The biggest and most well paid departments have the exact same problem as small and "underpaid" departments. It has not one thing to do with wages and everything to do with modern police culture and attitudes. Trying to blame low wages or 3 year old cruisers is not only wrong and ignorant but not unexpected.
Total and complete unadulterated BULLCHIT. The biggest and most well paid departments have the exact same problem as small and "underpaid" departments. It has not one thing to do with wages and everything to do with modern police culture and attitudes. Trying to blame low wages or 3 year old cruisers is not only wrong and ignorant but not unexpected.
So.
To you, cops are all just rotten apples.
Better paid departments that can be competitive with hiring higher educated deputies, with better work records are the same as departments that have to take who they can with a minimum wage.
Got it.
Since nothing will change, why even bother electing a sheriff, or using that form of checks and balances afforded to you by the constitution?
Don't put words in my mouth. I just call bullshlt on your statement. There are WELL paid cops that do bad things just as there are lessor paid cops that are good. High wages don't equal good cops. It doesn't hurt your recruiting effort but the wages those guys made per COL were fair enough.
money has nothing to do with it, a person is either good or bad, money don't change that.
Thankfully there are sane folks here. I agree.
Lolol. It wasn't until I "made it" that I was allowed into the fold. That's when I realized that I didn't approve of the type of person a lot of cops were. My sergeant had 20 years and told me the same thing.
The firefighter career treated me well and I have no regrets at all. I suppose I could aspire to be a burnt out jaded cop with over 40,000 posts on an Internet forum whose best days are in the rear view mirror, but I'll pass.
Same old chit here on the fire. "We ain't paid enough", yada, yada, yada. They will never admit that these two are pieces of chit that killed a man for nothing.
money has nothing to do with it, a person is either good or bad, money don't change that.
You can not pay an egotistical, domineering, [bleep] enough money to turn him into a good cop.
But you can offer a pay scale which will attract the better applicants, rather than just settle for the dregs which have been rejected from neighboring depts.
Malhuer Co, Or is having this problem. The Sheriff is trying to circumvent the issue by hiring experienced officers and installing them at higher than entry level positions.
He does not have to get a pay scale change past the Commissioners that way. And can still offer a decent incentive to recruits.
This is a surprise to me,I would have bet it was Brian Wood that started this mess..Wrong,Cody Rowland did and Brian followed up with the AR-15 for a toatal of 11 rounds into Jack....
4 eye Witnesses account:
It has become Apparent over the Course of 7 months that the Attempt to Hide and Deny the Testimony of People who actually saw.. #1.. Cody Roland step to JACK YANTIS and Grab/Pull Him from Behind while grabbing at the rifle that JACK YANTIS held and was pointing at the Body of the Bull. and then Turn JACK YANTIS around and begin shooting into his body... #2..Brian Wood upon hearing/seeing the Assault by Cody Roland begins to fire a High Powered AR-15 Assault Rifle loaded with .223 High Powered Bullets at the chest of JACK YANTIS ... And BOTH of these Adams County Sheriff Officers ""NEVER"" said a WORD to JACK YANTIS or anyone with him ...PRIOR..OR..DURING... THIS SLAUGHTER OF A INNOCENT RANCHER..
Thi is a surprise to me,I would have bet it was Brian Wood that started this mess..Wrong,Cody Rowland did and Brian foloowed up with the AR-15....
5 Witnesses account:
It has become Apparent over the Course of 7 months that the Attempt to Hide and Deny the Testimony of People who actually saw.. #1.. Cody Roland step to JACK YANTIS and Grab/Pull Him from Behind while grabbing at the rifle that JACK YANTIS held and was pointing at the Body of the Bull. and then Turn JACK YANTIS around and begin shooting into his body... #2..Brian Wood upon hearing/seeing the Assault by Cody Roland begins to fire a High Powered AR-15 Assault Rifle loaded with .223 High Powered Bullets at the chest of JACK YANTIS ... And BOTH of these Adams County Sheriff Officers ""NEVER"" said a WORD to JACK YANTIS or anyone with him ...PRIOR..OR..DURING... THIS SLAUGHTER OF A INNOCENT RANCHER..
Who wrote that, blind retarded Katie Couric? And I'd say Yantis started it, Woods and Rowland finished it.
You're pulling some real gems from Facebook lately. I hope Spence calls you as an eggspert witness.
Who wrote that, blind retarded Katie Couric? And I'd say Yantis started it, Woods and Rowland finished it.
Your a gem,for sure!
An eye witness that was right there, that was thrown to the ground/cuffed and had a pistol against his head.
Sure,Yantis started it by doing what Sheriffs dispatch asked,come to the scene and dispatch his bull.
You seem to forget all the people that were there,his wife and Rowdy,there dinner guest whom also was thrown to the ground and cuffed,EMT's/Fire.the wrecker crew and passers by....
Why in the world did you suspect it was Brian Wood that started it?
Because he's a poacher (Either didn't happen or Idaho POST DGAF).
Because he was threatening officers and a bulletin was put out by LE (proven lie and people actually arrested for the falsification).
Because he was reported to possess unauthorized explosives and/or explosives were found near his property (Either false or ATF/FBI/ISP DGAF, probably just part of the cover up. You know, Feds covering for the local-yocales).
Because Facebook says so, and Jayco is a crack detective
Why in the world did you suspect it was Brian Wood that started it?
Didn't see this on my cell phone but to answer it,Wood is the one that appears to be the unstable one with the bulletin out to law enforcement, to approach with caution whom supposedly had a 19 year old girl friend that started the whole domestic violence thing and of course,his poaching conviction while employed by the McCall police department.
I new who Cody was and he is related to a good friend...But as I said,I was wrong....
I worked in and around Council Idaho for years,new alot of people there..I was a baseball coach for the McCall team whom we took to Council on several occasions to play meeting more of the friendly people from Council.Many people from Mcacall moved to the Council area because of the warmer climate and commuted to McCall for work.
The guy that ran the jammer for a McCall logging company I worked with every day, was Jacks close neighbor..
I really can't believe this even happened except for the fact that I saw first hand, what a badge and a gun did to several people in that area that were normally good people but when on duty or called to duty,completely different people and azzholes.....
Source for 11 shots into Jack-Autopsy report given to family. Source for the 12th shot into the ground that ISP recovered-Local friend of family privy to things that are not public yet..
Don't forget the other investigation by Gerry Spence and Peterson law offices,the attorneys for the family also did a complete investigation.
As time goes by without an official reaction from the AG office,I expect more of what happened to slowly leak out.
Source for 11 shots into Jack-Autopsy report given to family. Source for the 12th shot into the ground that ISP recovered-Local friend of family privy to things that are not public yet..
12th shot (and you have no idea what order they came in) couldn't have come from Yantis' rifle when he tried to shoot the officer(s), could it?
Source for 11 shots into Jack-Autopsy report given to family. Source for the 12th shot into the ground that ISP recovered-Local friend of family privy to things that are not public yet..
12th shot (and you have no idea what order they came in) couldn't have come from Yantis' rifle when he tried to shoot the officer(s), could it?
Source for 11 shots into Jack-Autopsy report given to family. Source for the 12th shot into the ground that ISP recovered-Local friend of family privy to things that are not public yet..
Don't forget the other investigation by Gerry Spence and Peterson law offices,the attorneys for the family also did a complete inves
tigation.
As time goes by without an official reaction from the AG office,I expect more of what happened to slowly leak out.
Yes, the always present close friend privy to information.....
Yes, the always present close friend privy to information.....
Pretty much,this ain't LA..We will see though when it is all said and done, and all comes out..Either my quotes are right or there wrong...Having only taken the quotes from family members speaking out, that were there,I feel confident there spot on.
On the other hand,your Council Idaho knowledge amazes me.
For Gitem and Wapiti....Interesting there are two openings now for Adams county deputies..One for each of ya'
Adams County Deputy Sheriff Opening
The Adams County Sheriff's Office is accepting applications for the position of Deputy Sheriff / Patrol sergeant.
Written testing, psychological testing, drug testing and/or a background investigation may be conducted. Interviews shall be granted based upon a review of application and supporting documentation. All applicants shall successfully complete the Idaho P.O.S.T. physical fitness test prior to being hired. Failure of the physical fitness test shall result in immediate disqualification from the hiring process.
All applicants shall be at least 21 years of age.
Additionally the successful applicant is required to
• Possess a current Idaho driver’s license, high school diploma or equivalent/G.E.D. • Achieve Idaho P.O.S.T. Law Enforcement officer certification within one year of employment or possess a current Idaho P.O.S.T. Law Enforcement officer certification. • Additional qualifications include the ability to use common computer based applications e.g. Power Point, Word, Excel, and proprietary record management software.
Who wrote that, blind retarded Katie Couric? And I'd say Yantis started it, Woods and Rowland finished it.
Your a gem,for sure!
An eye witness that was right there, that was thrown to the ground/cuffed and had a pistol against his head.
Sure,Yantis started it by doing what Sheriffs dispatch asked,come to the scene and dispatch his bull.
You seem to forget all the people that were there,his wife and Rowdy,there dinner guest whom also was thrown to the ground and cuffed,EMT's/Fire.the wrecker crew and passers by....
There all liars,huh......
Tell us why they were cuffed? Dicking with evidence, perhaps?
For Gitem and Wapiti....Interesting there are two openings now for Adams county deputies..One for each of ya'
Adams County Deputy Sheriff Opening
The Adams County Sheriff's Office is accepting applications for the position of Deputy Sheriff / Patrol sergeant.
Written testing, psychological testing, drug testing and/or a background investigation may be conducted. Interviews shall be granted based upon a review of application and supporting documentation. All applicants shall successfully complete the Idaho P.O.S.T. physical fitness test prior to being hired. Failure of the physical fitness test shall result in immediate disqualification from the hiring process.
All applicants shall be at least 21 years of age.
Additionally the successful applicant is required to
• Possess a current Idaho driver’s license, high school diploma or equivalent/G.E.D. • Achieve Idaho P.O.S.T. Law Enforcement officer certification within one year of employment or possess a current Idaho P.O.S.T. Law Enforcement officer certification. • Additional qualifications include the ability to use common computer based applications e.g. Power Point, Word, Excel, and proprietary record management software.
They forgot the part about,
Must be willing to shoot a cattle rancher at a moments notice.
Maybe I'm missing something. Has there been any statement yet of whether or not there is any video evidence? Does it really take this long to find out whether cameras were on or not? Is there any legitimate reason why a simple yes/no answer to that question would take so long to answer?
No nothing yet infact,the AG's office just finished an investigation of another Adams county deputy from 2014 a couple days ago.I guess there very slow....
The accusations against Yoakum stem from an encounter on March 31, 2014, in the town of New Meadows.
Yoakum and Wood were following up with a man and woman in an out-of-town SUV who drew attention at a local market, where the male of the duo had been panhandling, Yoakum told Idaho State Police investigators. The pair left the market and parked at a local school.
The plaintiff was sitting in the driver’s seat of the SUV. She had a fifth of vodka in her lap and was intoxicated from drinking all day, her lawsuit says.
The deputies determined that the driver’s male companion, Jose Luis Morales Carillo, had outstanding warrants from Ada County. Wood took him into custody and transported him to the jail.
After Wood left, the lawsuit says, Yoakum told the woman to drive her car to a secluded area near some trees about 100 yards away and to stay there because she was too drunk to drive.
The suit alleges that he returned three times that night. The woman used her cellphone to record audio of them talking during one encounter.
The deputy “convinced [her] to exit the vehicle for the purposes of a sexual encounter,” the lawsuit says, and “placed [her] face down on the car seat of his Sheriff’s Office SUV and had intercourse.”
I guess Yoakum is underpaid also. If you don't want cops raping intoxicated women then they need to pay the cops more. Low wages in police departments lead to rape and murder by the cops. That's what some morons want us to believe anyway. F'ing fools
No nothing yet infact,the AG's office just finished an investigation of another Adams county deputy from 2014 a couple days ago.I guess there very slow....
The accusations against Yoakum stem from an encounter on March 31, 2014, in the town of New Meadows.
Yoakum and Wood were following up with a man and woman in an out-of-town SUV who drew attention at a local market, where the male of the duo had been panhandling, Yoakum told Idaho State Police investigators. The pair left the market and parked at a local school.
The plaintiff was sitting in the driver’s seat of the SUV. She had a fifth of vodka in her lap and was intoxicated from drinking all day, her lawsuit says.
The deputies determined that the driver’s male companion, Jose Luis Morales Carillo, had outstanding warrants from Ada County. Wood took him into custody and transported him to the jail.
After Wood left, the lawsuit says, Yoakum told the woman to drive her car to a secluded area near some trees about 100 yards away and to stay there because she was too drunk to drive.
The suit alleges that he returned three times that night. The woman used her cellphone to record audio of them talking during one encounter.
The deputy “convinced [her] to exit the vehicle for the purposes of a sexual encounter,” the lawsuit says, and “placed [her] face down on the car seat of his Sheriff’s Office SUV and had intercourse.”
Give the guy a break. After all - women are in short supply in Adams county. Must be hard to find a willing partner.
I still find that "drug test and background check "may be" statement disturbing. Guess those are too expensive also.
Thanks to ALL of you fellas that are keeping this thread afloat, and upgraded with the latest local developments, or maintained vacuum levels regarding same.
Pizz on this inside the beltway (wherever he lives now) clown that's calling this thread down for it's longevity, length, and continued health.
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
Just what I was thinking....
The good news is....now that they've wrapped up Hildog's case they'll have time to look into this caper before releasing their predetermined findings....
I guess the civil suit has already been filed but nothing can go forward until the outcome of this one is out.The guy who was the most informing on matters of this investigation abruptly quit and backed away from the whole thing without reason...Hummmm
Now there is to much anti-cop crap going on and I'm loosing interest in following it because I am "Not" anti-cop just "Anti-bad cop"..To bad it's going that way...
The thing that yanks my chain the worst is these two bozo's have been on paid leave for 8 months..Something is definitely wrong with that chit and sending the wrong message.
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Making a claim through the state tort claims act is a condition precedent to any suit. $500k is the maximum claim under that act apparently. There will undoubtedly be a 1983 suit in federal court later.
Interesting statistic, Idaho has only 1.6 Million people yet 61 Cops out of 3000 were killed in the line of duty.
Thats 1 in 50. Seems a dangerous place Idaho to be a LEFO
Get the story straight dumbazz
Idaho has been a state 125 years. 61 deaths total
LE was 3146 in the year 2008
According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics' 2008 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, the state had 117 law enforcement agencies employing 3,146 sworn police officers, about 206 for each 100,000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_law_enforcement_agencies_in_Idaho
Follow the link below to read when, where, and what cause
The gunfire statistic is somewhat telling. Idaho troopers used to have to use Sam Browne style closed flap holsters so many did not survive the showdowns at high noon on Main street. Since Idaho allowed troopers to choose their own holsters the survival rate went way up.
Making a claim through the state tort claims act is a condition precedent to any suit. $500k is the maximum claim under that act apparently. There will undoubtedly be a 1983 suit in federal court later.
Can you explain the "is a condition precedent to any suit" part? Because I'm familiar with several Feseral suits that didn't originate in State Court. Is that an Idaho thing?
Something you have to do before you can file suit. No suit of any kind has been filed yet. A claim merely has been made. It will go through the claims commission I assume and he may eventually be given a "right to sue letter".
You see, the doctrine of sovereign immunity says that we can't sue the state. The king is immune from suit and you can only sue the king if says you can sue him. So, to that end, states have set up tort claims acts that allow you to make a claim is you are harmed by the negligence of a state agent. Some states have claims commissions that you must go through in a quasi judicial process before you can sue, and some just allow you to go straight to court if you don't. The Feds do the same thing. If a US Marshall runs over you in his car, there is a claims process instead of going straight to court. If one goes through it and the claim is allowed, then it ends there.
Now, a federal suit in is a matter of one king allowing you to sue another king when your civil rights and due process were denied by an agent of the state under color of law. It is called a 1983 suit because it is found in a section of the US code entitled Section 1983.
I haven't been involved in too many 1983 suits so I not sure if going through the claims process where it exists is a condition precedent but I can see it being good strategy. Get the state on record and get sworn testimony from them. Make the stake out a position and a defense before filing federal suit. But it might be a condition precedent as that federal courts apply the law of the state in which the act or omission occurred in most instances.
Any idea why they'd do state court first? Why mess with $500K and show your hand when there's so much more available in federal court?
Well, like I said, it might be a condition precedent. Secondly, you know what your hand is going to be, make the state show its hand, then they are locked in to a position.
Yeah, but that works both ways. It also shows your hand and locks you into at least some parts of your story. I've been a defendant in federal court on a case that was tried twice and on the second time around the "know their hand" definitely benefited both sides. The cops are already locked into their story, as they've reported and been interviewed multiple times already. So at this point the only people that could get locked into something would be the Yantis family.
I dunno, but having been at the defendant's table the second trial is certainly more comfortable.
Yeah, but that works both ways. It also shows your hand and locks you into at least some parts of your story. I've been a defendant in federal court on a case that was tried twice and on the second time around the "know their hand" definitely benefited both sides. The cops are already locked into their story, as they've reported and been interviewed multiple times already. So at this point the only people that could get locked into something would be the Yantis family.
I dunno, but having been at the defendant's table the second trial is certainly more comfortable.
The Yantis side is already locked in. All those witnesses have given sworn statements already.
my mistake I misread the Stats page, and damn fieldgrade youre an angry bee, Hate will eat you up hommie.
anyway your complaint was justified re my stats but buddy i dont hate Merica, quite the opposite but I wont be standing by whilst a lunatic like Trump has the opportunity to wreck havic !
my mistake I misread the Stats page, and damn fieldgrade youre an angry bee, Hate will eat you up hommie.
anyway your complaint was justified re my stats but buddy i dont hate Merica, quite the opposite but I wont be standing by whilst a lunatic like Trump has the opportunity to wreck havic !
my mistake I misread the Stats page, and damn fieldgrade youre an angry bee, Hate will eat you up hommie.
anyway your complaint was justified re my stats but buddy i dont hate Merica, quite the opposite but I wont be standing by whilst a lunatic like Trump has the opportunity to wreck havic !
From the article, it sounds like the deputies truly screwed up but the prosecutor doesn't think he can get a conviction. I truly hope that Adams county sheriff's department gets rid of those two deputies. From all I've read, they sound pretty trigger happy.
Disclaimer: My opinion, and it's only my opinion, is based on the various news accounts the have been published over the last year. Since I wasn't there, I can't possibly know what really happened.
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Damn. I wish I could do that with lottery tickets.
How, in anyone's imagination could Yantis's own blood be on the bullet that he allegedly fired in the cop's direction? Was he using his foot as an aiming device?
US attorney Wendy Olsen.....it figures. Expect her to be one of Hitlary's picks for SCOTUS - and you ain't gonna like that.
Now Spence's team can go to work. Not enough evidence for a criminal conviction, but plenty for a civil suit. if Freddy Grays family got six million, I predict this Caucasian rancher's family will get about two fitty...
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Damn. I wish I could do that with lottery tickets.
How, in anyone's imagination could Yantis's own blood be on the bullet that he allegedly fired in the cop's direction? Was he using his foot as an aiming device?
US attorney Wendy Olsen.....it figures. Expect her to be one of Hitlary's picks for SCOTUS - and you ain't gonna like that.
It sounds to.me that they found the bullet in the pavement (that would explain why they were unable to match ballistics on the bullet to the rifle.. if that's the case, the blood could have easily gothen on the bullet by yantis'body falling on it or blood being transferred to it from a boot or any other source
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Damn. I wish I could do that with lottery tickets.
How, in anyone's imagination could Yantis's own blood be on the bullet that he allegedly fired in the cop's direction? Was he using his foot as an aiming device?
US attorney Wendy Olsen.....it figures. Expect her to be one of Hitlary's picks for SCOTUS - and you ain't gonna like that.
It sounds to.me that they found the bullet in the pavement (that would explain why they were unable to match ballistics on the bullet to the rifle.. if that's the case, the blood could have easily gothen on the bullet by yantis'body falling on it or blood being transferred to it from a boot or any other source
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Damn. I wish I could do that with lottery tickets.
How, in anyone's imagination could Yantis's own blood be on the bullet that he allegedly fired in the cop's direction? Was he using his foot as an aiming device?
US attorney Wendy Olsen.....it figures. Expect her to be one of Hitlary's picks for SCOTUS - and you ain't gonna like that.
It sounds to.me that they found the bullet in the pavement (that would explain why they were unable to match ballistics on the bullet to the rifle.. if that's the case, the blood could have easily gothen on the bullet by yantis'body falling on it or blood being transferred to it from a boot or any other source
Well, of course. And if that is the case (which I expect it is), then he didn't fire the gun at anybody. That was my point, but I guess you missed it.
The FBI didn't find that Hillary did anything wrong, so I'm pretty sure that these two cops are pretty safe.
At this point, I expect that they will announce a whole list of ethical and legal violations - and then add the conclusion that they should skate.....but that shouldn't suggest that any non-cop should expect the same consideration.
AG office made another stall announcement last week.
Damn. I wish I could do that with lottery tickets.
How, in anyone's imagination could Yantis's own blood be on the bullet that he allegedly fired in the cop's direction? Was he using his foot as an aiming device?
US attorney Wendy Olsen.....it figures. Expect her to be one of Hitlary's picks for SCOTUS - and you ain't gonna like that.
It sounds to.me that they found the bullet in the pavement (that would explain why they were unable to match ballistics on the bullet to the rifle.. if that's the case, the blood could have easily gothen on the bullet by yantis'body falling on it or blood being transferred to it from a boot or any other source
Well, of course. And if that is the case (which I expect it is), then he didn't fire the gun at anybody. That was my point, but I guess you missed it.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
Let me see if I have this straight. If I am in Idaho and someone hist my bull with a car them I am called to dispatch my bull I should expect to be shot a bunch of times for bringing a gun.
No charges filed. How about animal cruelty for the officer shooting the injured bull several time in the gut?
If I were to shoot an adult bull in the head as he was laying down would anyone expect a 204 round to exit?
I am anything but anti cop but this sounds more like that bulls bowel movements than justice.
Hard to believe country cops could know so little about live in their county.
I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
At least your clear about your role in forwarding that rift....so long as your okay with being as responsible for the mentality at the "bad" cops in your AO, so be it.
The good cops getting killed for whatever reason (or lack of one) and their families will, likely, get along just fine without your support.
Let me see if I have this straight. If I am in Idaho and someone hist my bull with a car them I am called to dispatch my bull I should expect to be shot a bunch of times for bringing a gun.
No charges filed. How about animal cruelty for the officer shooting the injured bull several time in the gut?
If I were to shoot an adult bull in the head as he was laying down would anyone expect a 204 round to exit?
I am anything but anti cop but this sounds more like that bulls bowel movements than justice.
Hard to believe country cops could know so little about live in their county.
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
99+% of cops are good and do their jobs fairly and honestly. At the end of their shift, they want to go home to the wife, kids and dog. Unfortunately, there are a number of thugs, uncivilized and smart-ass people who threaten or or otherwise cause alarm in them, and they react - sometimes tragically.
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
You find no responsibility for the outcome on the deceased?
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
Statement as entered into evidence was that he fired at them first. At this point that is accepted fact
I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed.
At least you're clear about your role in forwarding that rift....
It's pretty easy to understand how some productive taxpayers can come to feel the way that Aces does...given the injustices that we've seen over the years at the hands of some police officers. When an employee in the productive sector offends the company’s customer base, he can expect to the censured, sanctioned, or sacked. Customers who complain about such an employee can expect that their opinions will be listened to politely and respectfully. After all, the owners of the company are vividly aware that the public can take its business elsewhere, so retaining their loyalty is a compelling priority. In contrast, when a police officer employed in the coercive sector alienates the public through misconduct or criminal abuse, the offended 'customers' are treated with suspicion and hostility. The public will be told to accommodate the police officer’s behavior, and the 'customers' will be sternly reminded of their duty to render unconditional loyalty to the agency employing the police officer. Since law enforcement cannot 'go out of business', it doesn’t have to worry about public disaffection. The role of police is to distribute coercion, force, and violence on behalf of the government, and the government is the only clientele that the police have to please. When a police department is informed of officer misconduct, the institutional priority is to discredit the aggrieved 'customers', rather than to listen to their complaints.
Right now what I am reading here is cop posters defending the two deputies and those who think they are guilty blaming the cops.Perhaps both sides should take time and read the Idaho Statesman article and listen to the Atty Gen's explanation. At least it will give some insight into what may / may not have occurred rather than a lot of rampant speculation which is what is happening in these posts.
After reading and listening my personal view is that the two deputies instigated the incident and that Adams County will pay a lot of money for their actions. Regardless a man is dead in an incident that should have never happened and no amount of money will bring him back.
Let me see if I have this straight. If I am in Idaho and someone hist my bull with a car them I am called to dispatch my bull I should expect to be shot a bunch of times for bringing a gun.
No charges filed. How about animal cruelty for the officer shooting the injured bull several time in the gut?
If I were to shoot an adult bull in the head as he was laying down would anyone expect a 204 round to exit?
I am anything but anti cop but this sounds more like that bulls bowel movements than justice.
Hard to believe country cops could know so little about live in their county.
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
Yantis had a blood alcohol level of .104 percent, the investigative report said. A level of .08 percent is considered intoxicated for motorists in Idaho. Wasden said “there’s nothing illegal about that in terms of being at his house.”
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
Ates and Hates: You're so cute when you're being macho. And extremely narrow minded.
If you ever need a cop, you'll probably whine that they didn't get to your aid in time.
Let me see if I have this straight. If I am in Idaho and someone hist my bull with a car them I am called to dispatch my bull I should expect to be shot a bunch of times for bringing a gun.
No charges filed. How about animal cruelty for the officer shooting the injured bull several time in the gut?
If I were to shoot an adult bull in the head as he was laying down would anyone expect a 204 round to exit?
I am anything but anti cop but this sounds more like that bulls bowel movements than justice.
Hard to believe country cops could know so little about live in their county.
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
Yantis had a blood alcohol level of .104 percent, the investigative report said. A level of .08 percent is considered intoxicated for motorists in Idaho. Wasden said “there’s nothing illegal about that in terms of being at his house.”
Two readings I'm seeing here. Yantis fired his rifle "at" the deputies or Yantis fired his rifle "in the direction" of the deputies. That would be the big difference between justified shooting and overreacting.
Guy shows up with a rifle, he's drunk with bad muzzle and trigger control and has an ND in their direction, deputies kill him for that.
OR
Guy shows up with a rifle, he's drunk and careless where he's pointing the rifle, the deputy or deputies say something to him which sets him off, he deliberately fires at them, they kill him for that.
Hopefully the full forensics report will show where they found that .204 bullet.
The Attorney General determines there is insufficient evidence....
Used to be that was left up to a jury of your peers.
I'm especially confused by the testimony of both deputies saying he fired a shot towards them.
And there was an empty case in the chamber.
But the blood on the .204 bullet they found was Yantis'.
So how did Yantis fire a shot toward the deputies, and yet the bullet hit Yantis?
That would seem to put the testimony of the deputies into serious doubt.
Quote
Investigators also found a .20-caliber round at the scene, and Yantis’ .204-caliber rifle had an empty shell casing in the chamber. An FBI ballistics expert who tested the .20-caliber round could not conclusively establish that the bullet came from Yantis’ rifle. Blood on the round was tested and found to be that of Yantis, the report said.
The Attorney General determines there is insufficient evidence....
Used to be that was left up to a jury of your peers.
I'm especially confused by the testimony of both deputies saying he fired a shot towards them.
And there was an empty case in the chamber.
But the blood on the .204 bullet they found was Yantis'.
So how did Yantis fire a shot toward the deputies, and yet the bullet hit Yantis?
That would seem to put the testimony of the deputies into serious doubt.
Quote
Investigators also found a .20-caliber round at the scene, and Yantis’ .204-caliber rifle had an empty shell casing in the chamber. An FBI ballistics expert who tested the .20-caliber round could not conclusively establish that the bullet came from Yantis’ rifle. Blood on the round was tested and found to be that of Yantis, the report said.
Scroll up and you'll see a very simple explanation for that...and likely something similar happened
And it's usually up to prosecutors to determine whether they fIle charges or not
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
Statement as entered into evidence was that he fired at them first. At this point that is accepted fact
There was also a statement he was grabbed from behind and turned around. If he was ready to shoot, finger on the trigger and jerked around that would account for his shot.
But none of us were there and we will never know what really happened. As you well know four witnesses can tell 20 different accounts of the same incident.
I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
At least your clear about your role in forwarding that rift....so long as your okay with being as responsible for the mentality at the "bad" cops in your AO, so be it.
The good cops getting killed for whatever reason (or lack of one) and their families will, likely, get along just fine without your support.
George
I strive to be clear. At least your (sic) clear about your role in forwarding that rift....so long as you're okay with carrying the knowledge that bad cops nationwide along with the "good" ones that never speak out against them fosters the rift. I don't consider a cop "good" just because he hasn't murdered an innocent man. I consider a cop "good" when he doesn't accept bad behavior from his blue brothers.
As for my AO, the 3 deputies around here are good and honest men. Men that I'd run to help without a second thought. Outside of my "AO" I'll watch and ignore any pleas for help.
Your taking exception to my post but not taking exception to the murder of an innocent man is precisely the attitude that I'm talking about. And yeah those killed will get along without my support. Just like Mrs. Yantis will get along without your support. Eventually, and the day is fast approaching where you boys in blue will be begging for the support of law abiding citizens like me. Unfortunately for you guys your cries for help and support will fall on deaf ears with long memories.
A little advice from a "civilian".......If you think that by virtue of cashing a government check is enough to elevate you and yours above the law, you're in for a rude awakening. You think we need you, we don't. You damn sure need "us", if for nothing else but a paycheck. Likely much much more when the day comes
Scroll up and you'll see a very simple explanation for that...and likely something similar happened
And it's usually up to prosecutors to determine whether they fIle charges or not
If the bullet impacted near his feet close enough for him to fall on it, it again casts a LOT of doubt that he was firing at a deputy. Unless you count firing at the ground near their feet. Yeah. Sure.
Investigators also found a .20-caliber round at the scene, and Yantis’ .204-caliber rifle had an empty shell casing in the chamber. An FBI ballistics expert who tested the .20-caliber round could not conclusively establish that the bullet came from Yantis’ rifle. Blood on the round was tested and found to be that of Yantis, the report said.
Yantis' rifle had an empty .204 case in it. One .204 bullet was found at the scene, yet the FBI can't conclusively establish that the bullet came from Yantis' rifle.
Okay, that's a valid statement. They can't conclusively match the bullet to the barrel. So how many other .204 rifles were at the scene?
I think the guy on the grassy knoll was the second .204 shooter.....
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
Statement as entered into evidence was that he fired at them first. At this point that is accepted fact
There was also a statement he was grabbed from behind and turned around. If he was ready to shoot, finger on the trigger and jerked around that would account for his shot.
But none of us were there and we will never know what really happened. As you well know four witnesses can tell 20 different accounts of the same incident.
Even so...the totality of the situation, is very likely the reason no charges were brought
Scroll up and you'll see a very simple explanation for that...and likely something similar happened
And it's usually up to prosecutors to determine whether they fIle charges or not
If the bullet impacted near his feet close enough for him to fall on it, it again casts a LOT of doubt that he was firing at a deputy. Unless you count firing at the ground near their feet. Yeah. Sure.
Prosecutorial discretion - not just for Hillary.
And what If his blood had been transferred to the bullet by a first resonder,(or anyone else) who walked through his and then stepped on the bullet
Lots of cases don't get prosecuted for the same reason as this. I've seen it happen numerous times.
Do you really think a medical examiner, and the state Atty General are going to conspire and perform a cover up...risking their license's for a couple of streel cops?
It seems lore like. A man shows up legally drunk, with a firearm and one way or another discharges a round in the direction of the cops..cops return fire.
I see your point but since no one knows when he shot it leave a lot to guess about.
I have killed a lot of cows all with a 22. Never shot one in the gut and never had to use a second shot. Drunk or sober if they had let him do the job they called him to do we would not be having this discussion.
Statement as entered into evidence was that he fired at them first. At this point that is accepted fact
There was also a statement he was grabbed from behind and turned around. If he was ready to shoot, finger on the trigger and jerked around that would account for his shot.
But none of us were there and we will never know what really happened. As you well know four witnesses can tell 20 different accounts of the same incident.
Even so...the totality of the situation, is very likely the reason no charges were brought
I think charges were not brought because there is no way to really know what happened let alone prove whaat happened.
Charges weren't brought because the enforcement of law is secondary to protecting the "reputation" of the cops. Just like Hilary, there's a relatively protected class of people in this country, they're above the law in all but the most egregious or publicized events. I'm sick and fu.cking tired of DAs with no will, no balls and no ethics. I thought a jury of our peers was how the accused got justice, not by cronyism and favors from a DA or AG.
Charges weren't brought because the enforcement of law is secondary to protecting the "reputation" of the cops. Just like Hilary, there's a relatively protected class of people in this country, they're above the law in all but the most egregious or publicized events. I'm sick and fu.cking tired of DAs with no will, no balls and no ethics. I thought a jury of our peers was how the accused got justice, not by cronyism and favors from a DA or AG.
The D.A.'s ethics is not one way. He also has an ethical responsibility to the taxpayers supporting his budget. A budget that is very likely finite. Why would he waste it on a case that he admits has a very poor chance of getting a conviction.
I guarantee you that case would not be tried in the county it occurred in simply due to jury pool contamination via media attention. I'm also sure the prosecutor knew that and realized that either a change of venue or a bench trial was not going to have a high percentage for a chance of conviction...
Protecting the reputation of the cops is laughable at best...don't you think for a second that a US atty.....especially one appointed by Obama would be chomping at the bit to bring charges against cops...especially during this time?
Charges weren't brought because the enforcement of law is secondary to protecting the "reputation" of the cops. Just like Hilary, there's a relatively protected class of people in this country, they're above the law in all but the most egregious or publicized events. I'm sick and fu.cking tired of DAs with no will, no balls and no ethics. I thought a jury of our peers was how the accused got justice, not by cronyism and favors from a DA or AG.
Baltimore, ring a bell? Ferguson?
This whole damned incident reeks, yes. But a blanket statement like the one you just made is ludicrous.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
Then don't get on here pissing and moaning if somebody smokes your kid.
Exactly ..Guilty but free to make the same mistakes again and again without punishment...
The Sheriff in an interview stated both deputies would return to work in a few weeks after procedures are followed following such an event and Hillary most likely will be the POTUS.(Not by my vote)
Charges weren't brought because the enforcement of law is secondary to protecting the "reputation" of the cops. Just like Hilary, there's a relatively protected class of people in this country, they're above the law in all but the most egregious or publicized events. I'm sick and fu.cking tired of DAs with no will, no balls and no ethics. I thought a jury of our peers was how the accused got justice, not by cronyism and favors from a DA or AG.
The D.A.'s ethics is not one way. He also has an ethical responsibility to the taxpayers supporting his budget. A budget that is very likely finite. Why would he waste it on a case that he admits has a very poor chance of getting a conviction.
I guarantee you that case would not be tried in the county it occurred in simply due to jury pool contamination via media attention. I'm also sure the prosecutor knew that and realized that either a change of venue or a bench trial was not going to have a high percentage for a chance of conviction...
Protecting the reputation of the cops is laughable at best...don't you think for a second that a US atty.....especially one appointed by Obama would be chomping at the bit to bring charges against cops...especially during this time?
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Idaho also said no criminal civil rights charges will be filed against the deputies.
Exactly ..Guilty but free to make the same mistakes again and again without punishment...
The Sheriff in an interview stated both deputies would return to work in a few weeks after procedures are followed following such an event and Hillary most likely will be the POTUS.(Not by my vote)
Charges weren't brought because the enforcement of law is secondary to protecting the "reputation" of the cops. Just like Hilary, there's a relatively protected class of people in this country, they're above the law in all but the most egregious or publicized events. I'm sick and fu.cking tired of DAs with no will, no balls and no ethics. I thought a jury of our peers was how the accused got justice, not by cronyism and favors from a DA or AG.
The D.A.'s ethics is not one way. He also has an ethical responsibility to the taxpayers supporting his budget. A budget that is very likely finite. Why would he waste it on a case that he admits has a very poor chance of getting a conviction.
I guarantee you that case would not be tried in the county it occurred in simply due to jury pool contamination via media attention. I'm also sure the prosecutor knew that and realized that either a change of venue or a bench trial was not going to have a high percentage for a chance of conviction...
Protecting the reputation of the cops is laughable at best...don't you think for a second that a US atty.....especially one appointed by Obama would be chomping at the bit to bring charges against cops...especially during this time?
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Idaho also said no criminal civil rights charges will be filed against the deputies.
Why would he waste the money? Seriously? We don't prosecute murderers anymore because it's going to cost money?
There will come a time in this country when there will be a reconing. The support for the police is at historic lows among those that historically supported the cops. When an unarmed black man is killed it's easy to make excuses. When an older white rancher is called outside from the dinner table and murdered, it too is easy to excuse.
It appears that the only murder we should be worried about are when cops are killed. They are the only ones that get unquestioned sympathy and come hell or high water, justice. Bullshlt.it.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Why would he waste the money? Seriously? We don't prosecute murderers anymore because it's going to cost money?
There will come a time in this country when there will be a reconing. The support for the police is at historic lows among those that historically supported the cops. When an unarmed black man is killed it's easy to make excuses. When an older white rancher is called outside from the dinner table and murdered, it too is easy to excuse.
It appears that the only murder we should be worried about are when cops are killed. They are the only ones that get unquestioned sympathy and come hell or high water, justice. Bullshlt.it.
Your calls for "justice", frankly, sound exactly like the DA in Baltimore and the BLM bunch. You don't want justice, you want vengeance. You don't want an investigation, you want a lynching.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 a the scene and there was a 204 bullet founds in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast enough doubt to their entire statements to a jury?
If Yantis gun was the only 204 a the scene and there was a 204 bullet founds in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast enough doubt to their entire statements to a jury?
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Witness said he was grabbed from behind and the gun fired. deputies said "he pointed his gun at them and fired."
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
So, if someone starts to point a gun at you and you deflect it, but it discharges into the ground at your feet then you can't claim that you were in fear for your safety?
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
I think he is trying to say that because the deputies were not shot, that because the bullet was found in the pavement, that they could not have been in danger. And thus they are lying
And what If his blood had been transferred to the bullet by a first resonder,(or anyone else) who walked through his and then stepped on the bullet
Lots of cases don't get prosecuted for the same reason as this. I've seen it happen numerous times.
Do you really think a medical examiner, and the state Atty General are going to conspire and perform a cover up...risking their license's for a couple of streel cops?
What if this happened, what if that happened... because all of those if's might have happened, we won't present any evidence or testimony to a jury?
I never said a thing about a conspiracy. But the rule of law is for all citizens. With all of the questionable issues here, a jury should have heard it and decided.
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
I think he is trying to say that because the deputies were not shot, that because the bullet was found in the pavement, that they could not have been in danger. And thus they are lying
And what If his blood had been transferred to the bullet by a first resonder,(or anyone else) who walked through his and then stepped on the bullet
Lots of cases don't get prosecuted for the same reason as this. I've seen it happen numerous times.
Do you really think a medical examiner, and the state Atty General are going to conspire and perform a cover up...risking their license's for a couple of streel cops?
What if this happened, what if that happened... because all of those if's might have happened, we won't present any evidence or testimony to a jury?
I never said a thing about a conspiracy. But the rule of law is for all citizens. With all of the questionable issues here, a jury should have heard it and decided.
I would imagine that within the 5000 pages of evidence and statements there is a lot more detail....maybe you should submit a FOIA and read it
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
I think he is trying to say that because the deputies were not shot, that because the bullet was found in the pavement, that they could not have been in danger. And thus they are lying
Your thought process is way off base
Sorry...there just isn't mucheck on your end to work with
What if this happened, what if that happened... because all of those if's might have happened, we won't present any evidence or testimony to a jury?
I never said a thing about a conspiracy. But the rule of law is for all citizens. With all of the questionable issues here, a jury should have heard it and decided.
The shooting was investigated and the investigation included the prosecutor.
The shooting was determined to be justified.
That's not really earth shattering. It happens all over our country, every single day.
The only difference is it happened in rural Idaho and instead of a cracked out bruthah getting shot, it was a schitfaced rancher.
So go saddle up to the BLM movement. Because your beef, is their beef.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
Then don't get on here pissing and moaning if somebody smokes your kid.
Dave
If the cops kill my kid you can bet your ass I'll "piss and moan".
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
Then don't get on here pissing and moaning if somebody smokes your kid.
Dave
If the cops kill my kid you can bet your ass I'll "piss and moan".
Your kid is a cop. You missed his point, completely.
Based on what I read, one deputy was muzzle fugked (paraphrasing)when Yantis turned, things got immediately tense and Yantis' rifle was fired toward the officers shortly thereafter.
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
I'm sorry your friend is dead but it takes a lot more thatn 5 beers to get me to blow a .104.
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
.104 is more than 25% over the legal limit, and that level of inebriation can be a factor in elevating any crime committed while that drunk, for reference. It sure as Hell ain't close to sober and clear thinking.
It all boils down a he said, she said, and with two different versions, and the AG is not going to bring charges.. Real simple really.
My only point is that the bullet found in the pavement could prove the officer's testimony just as easily as it could prove the other witnesses testimony.
We have no knowledge of where the bullet was found in relation to where the officers were standing or where the bull's head was located when the event occurred.
drover, thank you for providing that link to the ID statesman
read it and while I didn't watch all the videos I watched a couple of them, one being the arrest by Wood of a senior citizen when he was employed by McCall.
only audio available, camera wasn't pointed in the correct position. But Wood seemed to handle himself okay in that instance from my perspective. Though I believe if I was him (mmqbing is such a luxury) I'd have waited for backup before cuffing the old codger.
he was a high spirited senior citizen, that evidently didn't want to be cuffed even though he asked to be arrested.
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
Officers stated he pointed the gun at them and fired. Folks on the scene said he was grabbed from behind and the gun went off.
Folks on the scene in Ferguson said Brown had his hands up, too.
Not saying one is like the other, but I seem to recall a much different reaction here to that shooting vs this one, and the following investigations.
If one is not like the other then why make any comparison at all?
Commenting on the now-infallible "witnesses on the scene" vs the other unbelievable "witnesses on the scene".
Both had extensive investigations, did they not?
One with video and forensics to support, and one with debatable forensics, and no video.
All the people involved may have been created equal, but life sent them down very different paths. So vastly different I see no common ground for any comparisun
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis [/quote
Officers stated he pointed the gun at them and fired. Folks on the scene said he was grabbed from behind and the gun went off.
Folks on the scene in Ferguson said Brown had his hands up, too.
Not saying one is like the other, but I seem to recall a much different reaction here to that shooting vs this one, and the following investigations.
If one is not like the other then why make any comparison at all?
Commenting on the now-infallible "witnesses on the scene" vs the other unbelievable "witnesses on the scene".
Both had extensive investigations, did they not?
One with video and forensics to support, and one with debatable forensics and no video.
All the people involved may have been created equal but life sent them down very different paths. So vastly different I see no common ground for any comparisun
Or, you want to see no similarity.
The investigation was as full and complete as possible. You don't agree with the outcome of this one. Blacks in Ferguson and Baltimore don't agree with the ones there.
.104 is not very high. Until recently .10 was the legal limit to drive.
Yantis didn't look like a heavy guy. 4 or 5 beers in an hour and a half could easily of put him there.
I have believe the investigation was done in good faith. It did not exonerate the officers. They simply did not have the proof needed to go forth with a prosecution. Personally, I would of liked it to go to a grand jury.
The common denominator in both cases are the people exclaiming conclusions instead of examining facts.
Travis
LE was up front pronto in one and slow and secretive in another..
Hey, Lets get the story straight before we say anything or hey we're 100% right lets tell the world now..
I find it all hard to swallow
How we're they secretive...the AG stated that the reason it took so long to come forward with anything was because they were waiting on ballistics report.
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
Yes he is.
Travis
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
He's an MP, right? What does that stand for?
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
.104 is not very high. Until recently .10 was the legal limit to drive.
Yantis didn't look like a heavy guy. 4 or 5 beers in an hour and a half could easily of put him there.
I have believe the investigation was done in good faith. It did not exonerate the officers. They simply did not have the proof needed to go forth with a prosecution. Personally, I would of liked it to go to a grand jury.
Can't really disagree there at all. However, if there wasn't enough to go forward with a prosecution then a grand jury would be either a waste of time with a no bill or a bigger waste of time if they somehow indicted and there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute.
The common denominator in both cases are the people exclaiming conclusions instead of examining facts.
Travis
LE was up front pronto in one and slow and secretive in another..
Hey, Lets get the story straight before we say anything or hey we're 100% right lets tell the world now..
I find it all hard to swallow
How we're they secretive...the AG stated that the reason it took so long to come forward with anything was because they were waiting on ballistics report.
Good grief, it took 9 month to even know if the body cams were even turned on..
What if this happened, what if that happened... because all of those if's might have happened, we won't present any evidence or testimony to a jury?
I never said a thing about a conspiracy. But the rule of law is for all citizens. With all of the questionable issues here, a jury should have heard it and decided.
The shooting was investigated and the investigation included the prosecutor.
The shooting was determined to be justified.
That's not really earth shattering. It happens all over our country, every single day.
The only difference is it happened in rural Idaho and instead of a cracked out bruthah getting shot, it was a schitfaced rancher.
So go saddle up to the BLM movement. Because your beef, is their beef.
Dave
Nah, he won't do that. He'll continue to smear cops with a VERY broad brush (except for his three buddies). Bet he listens to the 'cop killa' raps and drives around his 'hood shooting all the jobs.
ETA: He's definitely read all 5,300 pages of evidence too. I'm sure of it.
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
Yes he is.
Travis
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
He's an MP, right? What does that stand for?
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
I knew he was a Marine. I could have sworn you'd stated before he was an MP. If not, then I stand corrected on that.
GTF off your high horse. It wasn't an attack on your son; it was an incorrect recollection of what he does/did in contrast to your statement about cops being shot.
Damn, you're starting to sound like Michael Brown's mother....
The common denominator in both cases are the people exclaiming conclusions instead of examining facts.
Travis
LE was up front pronto in one and slow and secretive in another..
Hey, Lets get the story straight before we say anything
or hey we're 100% right lets tell the world now..
I find it all hard to swallow
How we're they secretive...the AG stated that the reason it took so long to come forward with anything was because they were waiting on ballistics report.
Good grief, it took 9 month to even know if the body cams were even turned on..
Where did it state that.
If you can't understand that it's stupid to give fragments of information instead of waiting to give a full report of everything at one time...then I can't help you
The common denominator in both cases are the people exclaiming conclusions instead of examining facts.
Travis
LE was up front pronto in one and slow and secretive in another..
Hey, Lets get the story straight before we say anything
or hey we're 100% right lets tell the world now..
I find it all hard to swallow
How we're they secretive...the AG stated that the reason it took so long to come forward with anything was because they were waiting on ballistics report.
Good grief, it took 9 month to even know if the body cams were even turned on..
Where did it state that.
If you can't understand that it's stupid to give fragments of information instead of waiting to give a full report of everything at one time...then I can't help you
Adams county sheriff said within a day or so of the incident that the body cams had been turned over to the ISP and he didn't know if they were turned on or not...DUH
[quote=deflave]The common denominator in both cases are the people exclaiming conclusions instead of examining facts.
Travis
LE was up front pronto in one and slow and secretive in another..
Hey, Lets get the story straight before we say anything or hey we're 100% right lets tell the world now..
I find it all hard to swallow [/quote
Because you want to, just like the people in Baltimore and Ferguson want to believe the same things, in spite of the investigations.
Fair enough, you want one outcome, I hoped for another
Actually I think Sean is on record for stating he hoped, or to the effect, that they would be put under the jail.
The difference between him and you is that he understand's that justice is not one way
There ya go, getting your thinking all fuqked up wrong again
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting for the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.
The only outcome that would equal "justice" in your mind was prosecution of the police. Your mind was made up solely based off of what you read on the Internet or "heard" third party.
The only outcome that would equal "justice" in your mind was prosecution of the police. Your mind was made up solely based off of what you read on the Internet or "heard" third party.
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
Yes he is.
Travis
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
He's an MP, right? What does that stand for?
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
I knew he was a Marine. I could have sworn you'd stated before he was an MP. If not, then I stand corrected on that.
GTF off your high horse. It wasn't an attack on your son; it was an incorrect recollection of what he does/did in contrast to your statement about cops being shot.
Damn, you're starting to sound like Michael Brown's mother....
Fu.ck you. You're constantly on your high horse and you brought my family into it. Don't like my response don't bring my son into it. You contradicted me when it came to my knowledge of what my son does. You want me to bring your wife or daughter into this discussion Sean? We'll see how high you sit on your horse when it comes to family.
The only outcome that would equal "justice" in your mind was prosecution of the police. Your mind was made up solely based off of what you read on the Internet or "heard" third party.
The only outcome that would equal "justice" in your mind was prosecution of the police. Your mind was made up solely based off of what you read on the Internet or "heard" third party.
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
Yes he is.
Travis
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
He's an MP, right? What does that stand for?
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
I knew he was a Marine. I could have sworn you'd stated before he was an MP. If not, then I stand corrected on that.
GTF off your high horse. It wasn't an attack on your son; it was an incorrect recollection of what he does/did in contrast to your statement about cops being shot.
Damn, you're starting to sound like Michael Brown's mother....
Fu.ck you. You're constantly on your high horse and you brought my family into it. Don't like my response don't bring my son into it. You contradicted me when it came to my knowledge of what my son does. You want me to bring your wife or daughter into this discussion Sean? We'll see how high you sit on your horse when it comes to family.
I didn't mention it But I thought I remembered you saying your son was an MP in the Marines too
The only outcome that would equal "justice" in your mind was prosecution of the police. Your mind was made up solely based off of what you read on the Internet or "heard" third party.
Baltimore/Ferguson mindset.
Maybe he should start a DRLM movement
Drunk ranchers lives matter
And as a cop your completely unbiased?
I'm biased to the point that I expect people to withhold judgement until an investigation is completed.
Having testified against cops I have absolute no problem with bad cops getting charged.
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
Yes he is.
Travis
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by AcesNeights
My son is NOT a "cop". You guys missed your own point completely.
He's an MP, right? What does that stand for?
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
I knew he was a Marine. I could have sworn you'd stated before he was an MP. If not, then I stand corrected on that.
GTF off your high horse. It wasn't an attack on your son; it was an incorrect recollection of what he does/did in contrast to your statement about cops being shot.
Damn, you're starting to sound like Michael Brown's mother....
Fu.ck you. You're constantly on your high horse and you brought my family into it. Don't like my response don't bring my son into it. You contradicted me when it came to my knowledge of what my son does. You want me to bring your wife or daughter into this discussion Sean? We'll see how high you sit on your horse when it comes to family.
Neither my wife or daughter are cops.
As I said, I incorrectly remembered what your son did. I INCORRECTLY thought I recalled you saying he was an MP. I didn't bring him into this; deflave did. I simply chimed in on that because, like him, I thought he was a cop (MP) and therefore your statement about cops getting killed would have been pertinent.
If you want to bring my family in based upon whatever rationale that will not at all be pertinent to the discussion, well, that's on you. I, personally, think you're a better man than that but it's your call.
I stand by the statement that you're starting to sound like Michael Brown's mother. You don't want "justice", you want vengeance. Facts and investigations aren't mattering to you; you just want lynchings of cops based upon emotion. If you calmed down long enough to see and think straight, you'd see that. Why you can't or won't is baffling.
From what has been presented, do you folks think the police did a good job that night? Would you hire them to work in your towns?
No. And, no. However, a f'k up is not necessarily a criminal act. That's what the investigation has essentially said.
The folks in that area have an opportunity to oust the sheriff in the next election and get someone who will dismiss those two, if he chooses to do so, and replace them.
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.for
Therein lies the difference.
IMO it should have been brought before a jury not decided behind closed doors by folks that in ways work together, and get pay checks from the same public.
.104 is more than 25% over the legal limit, and that level of inebriation can be a factor in elevating any crime committed while that drunk, for reference. It sure as Hell ain't close to sober and clear thinking.
Ever here of fermentation after death effecting the BAC of a dead victim?
Years ago, I was hired by the widow of a retired Army officer who drowned on a fishing trip. A life insurance policy excluded coverage if the insured was intoxicated at the time of death. An autopsy by the state medical examiner reported blood alcohol of 0.20 gr/%. But both the widow and her late husband’s fishing partner swore he had had nothing to drink. At first we thought the county coroner, on whose property the drowning occurred, might have messed with blood samples.
When I contacted an independent pathologist, I learned that fermentation could have produced the blood alcohol score
From what has been presented, do you folks think the police did a good job that night? Would you hire them to work in your towns?
No. And, no. However, a f'k up is not necessarily a criminal act. That's what the investigation has essentially said.
The folks in that area have an opportunity to oust the sheriff in the next election and get someone who will dismiss those two, if he chooses to do so, and replace them.
That's about where I'm at. May not of been criminal, but they look to suck heavily at their jobs.
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.for
Therein lies the difference.
IMO it should have been brought before a jury not decided behind closed doors by folks that in ways work together, and get pay checks from the same public.
A grand jury, perhaps, and I believe I said that. But, if there wasn't enough to prosecute then there really wasn't enough to potentially take to a grand jury, either.
Two readings I'm seeing here. Yantis fired his rifle "at" the deputies or Yantis fired his rifle "in the direction" of the deputies. That would be the big difference between justified shooting and overreacting.
Guy shows up with a rifle, he's drunk with bad muzzle and trigger control and has an ND in their direction, deputies kill him for that.
OR
Guy shows up with a rifle, he's drunk and careless where he's pointing the rifle, the deputy or deputies say something to him which sets him off, he deliberately fires at them, they kill him for that.
Hopefully the full forensics report will show where they found that .204 bullet.
Or the deputies ordered Yantis to put the gun away, and being a stubborn old coot, he told them to pound sand.
And as family and friends reported over four months ago, the rifle discharged while Yantis was being assaulted by deputies.
Only way to know for absolute if deputies are telling enhanced and choreographed stories, or family is correct. recordings which apparently do not exist.
I have a tough time imagining there is no audio of this incident.
.104 is more than 25% over the legal limit, and that level of inebriation can be a factor in elevating any crime committed while that drunk, for reference. It sure as Hell ain't close to sober and clear thinking.
Ever here of fermentation after death effecting the BAC of a dead victim?
Years ago, I was hired by the widow of a retired Army officer who drowned on a fishing trip. A life insurance policy excluded coverage if the insured was intoxicated at the time of death. An autopsy by the state medical examiner reported blood alcohol of 0.20 gr/%. But both the widow and her late husband’s fishing partner swore he had had nothing to drink. At first we thought the county coroner, on whose property the drowning occurred, might have messed with blood samples.
When I contacted an independent pathologist, I learned that fermentation could have produced the blood alcohol score
Yes, and that is factored into any decent autopsy investigation. I'd be damned surprised if any ME didn't account for that. The "years ago" part gives that away, as it's pretty commonly evaluated today, even in BFE Idaho.
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.for
Therein lies the difference.
IMO it should have been brought before a jury not decided behind closed doors by folks that in ways work together, and get pay checks from the same public.
A grand jury, perhaps, and I believe I said that. But, if there wasn't enough to prosecute then there really wasn't enough to potentially take to a grand jury, either.
I would need to go reread, and listen again, but IIRC the AG said to the effect that conflicting testimony would cause "reasonable doubt"
Still shuoda been brought before a jury IMO, then what I think don't mean squat.
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.for
Therein lies the difference.
IMO it should have been brought before a jury not decided behind closed doors by folks that in ways work together, and get pay checks from the same public.
A grand jury, perhaps, and I believe I said that. But, if there wasn't enough to prosecute then there really wasn't enough to potentially take to a grand jury, either.
I would need to go reread, and listen again, but IIRC he said to the effect that conflicting testimony would cause "reasonable doubt"
Still shiuoda been brought before a jury IMO then what I think don't mean squat.
Again, ain't much disagreement on perhaps having it taken to a grand jury, but that's a DA's call based upon the evidence and the investigation.
.104 is more than 25% over the legal limit, and that level of inebriation can be a factor in elevating any crime committed while that drunk, for reference. It sure as Hell ain't close to sober and clear thinking.
Ever here of fermentation after death effecting the BAC of a dead victim?
Years ago, I was hired by the widow of a retired Army officer who drowned on a fishing trip. A life insurance policy excluded coverage if the insured was intoxicated at the time of death. An autopsy by the state medical examiner reported blood alcohol of 0.20 gr/%. But both the widow and her late husband’s fishing partner swore he had had nothing to drink. At first we thought the county coroner, on whose property the drowning occurred, might have messed with blood samples.
When I contacted an independent pathologist, I learned that fermentation could have produced the blood alcohol score
That's nice cherry picking but you forgot a major aspect of the process
That the body was not kept cold.
Just how much fermentation do you supposed happened in november, in Idaho?
Does Idaho have heaters in their morgue instead of freezers
No he's not. He's a United States Marine. He is on a QRF.
I know you guys think you know it all but you don't. You'll also forgive me for not giving you play by play updates on his career. It's a shame how sharing a bit of pride I had, with the fellas here because there's always a group that tries to impeach another's opinion. None of you guys know me or my son so don't even pretend to. Weakness at the time I suppose, a mistake I'll not make again. This is precisely why many guys don't post pictures. There's always a know it all or two ready to show their ass.
I'm not the one that said he was an MP. You are.
And then you exclaim you've no remorse for ambushed/murdered cops.
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
On which part? I pretty plainly said that if the cops did what folks were accusing them of, then put them under the jail. Waiting the evidence and investigation, though, instead of moving to lynch them always seemed like a good plan.for
Therein lies the difference.
IMO it should have been brought before a jury not decided behind closed doors by folks that in ways work together, and get pay checks from the same public.
A grand jury, perhaps, and I believe I said that. But, if there wasn't enough to prosecute then there really wasn't enough to potentially take to a grand jury, either.
I would need to go reread, and listen again, but IIRC the AG said to the effect that conflicting testimony would cause "reasonable doubt"
Still shuoda been brought before a jury IMO, then what I think don't mean squat.
He stated that there was insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
Within legal parameters, however, is it over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles? Is it potentially a factor in elevating charges if a crime is committed?
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
In handling wrongful death and life insurance claims for clients, I learned years ago that blood alcohol tests after a person dies may not be reliable. Due to postmortem fermentation when a body is not kept cool after death, there can be “false positive” blood alcohol reports up to 0.20 grams/% — 2 ½ times the legal limit of 0.08
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
.28? SOB.... That's coma level for most everyone.
Had a .37 one night that was coherent enough to tell.me the exact number of beers he had drank. BTW that was 23
In handling wrongful death and life insurance claims for clients, I learned years ago that blood alcohol tests after a person dies may not be reliable. Due to postmortem fermentation when a body is not kept cool after death, there can be “false positive” blood alcohol reports up to 0.20 grams/% — 2 ½ times the legal limit of 0.08
And his BAC was taken when and where?
I would assume by the medical examiner.
Just how warm do you think his body got in November, in Idaho?
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
Deputies testified he fired the rifle AT AN OFFICER.
That is a distinctly different from an ND into the ground at Yantis's feet.
I for one would surely like to know which is actually more akin to the truth.
If a man threatens a cop, and/or points a weapon at a cop? Smoke his ass! yes absolutely! I sure as hell will never ask a cop to use his fists in a gun fight!
We pay cops nowhere near enough to ask them to take extraordinary risks.
But the things I have read, including the deputies' statements leave me far from convinced that in Yantis's case, the cops were ever actually threatened.
If we need a measure of the caliber of man we are talking about, in the case of one deputy, we need only remember that on the night of the shooting he was yelling that Yantis had shot him. That certainly turned out to be a total fabrication.
The DA made the call that there wasn't enough evidence to proceed with a prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Other than that, all the rest is in the 5300+ pages from the investigation.
Hey, I think the grand jury should have at least been presented the case. Were I the DA, I would have if for no other reason than to cover my ass. If the GJ indicts and a jury acquits, or a judge dismisses, the DAs office is clear. If the GJ no bills, the DAs office is clear. That said, I know a lot of DAs that think doing so is a sell out and a waste of GJ time and resources.
The folks in that area elected the sheriff and the DA. They can elect someone else later, and since no charges were brought the case could be revived (which would not be the situation had it gone to trial and ended in an acquittal).
The deputies testified he fired the rifle one time.
Unless you're reading something I didn't.
Travis
Deputies testified he fired the rifle AT AN OFFICER.
That is a distinctly different from an ND into the ground at Yantis's feet.
I for one would surely like to know which is actually more akin to the truth.
If a man threatens a cop, and/or points a weapon at a cop? Smoke his ass! yes absolutely! I sure as hell will never ask a cop to use his fists in a gun fight!
We pay cops nowhere near enough to ask them to take extraordinary risks.
But the things I have read, including the deputies' statements leave me far from convinced that in Yantis's case, the cops were ever actually threatened.
If we need a measure of the caliber of man we are talking about, in the case of one deputy, we need only remember that on the night of the shooting he was yelling that Yantis had shot him. That certainly turned out to be a total fabrication.
Not necesarily. Had the gun discharged in close proximity to him (as I suspect they were all still within arms reach of one another he could have felt the cuncussion from the muzzle blast and thought he had been shot...while in accurate, that is not a fabrication
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
.28? SOB.... That's coma level for most everyone.
Had a .37 one night that was coherent enough to tell.me the exact number of beers he had drank. BTW that was 23
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
.28? SOB.... That's coma level for most everyone.
Had a .37 one night that was coherent enough to tell.me the exact number of beers he had drank. BTW that was 23
I'm f'kin' impressed.
Drove the exsct speedlimit, or slightly under, used turn signal's and maintained his lane....however, he threw a McDonald's wrapper out the window in front of me
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
Then maybe you have a drinking problem
Buy .104 is schitfaced
Not very many years ago, .104 BAC would not even qualify for a DUI around here.
The DA made the call that there wasn't enough evidence to proceed with a prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Other than that, all the rest is in the 5300+ pages from the investigation.
Hey, I think the grand jury should have at least been presented the case. Were I the DA, I would have if for no other reason than to cover my ass. If the GJ indicts and a jury acquits, or a judge dismisses, the DAs office is clear. If the GJ no
It wasn't the DA bills, the DAs office is clear. That said, I know a lot of DAs that think doing so is a sell out and a waste of GJ time and resources.
The folks in that area elected the sheriff and the DA. They can elect someone else later, and since no charges were brought the case could be revived (which would not be the situation had it gone to trial and ended in an acquittal).
It wasn't the DA. It was the state attorney General
[quote=JoeBob]For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
.28? SOB.... That's coma level for most everyone. [/quote
Had a .37 one night that was coherent enough to tell.me the exact number of beers he had drank. BTW that was 23
I'm f'kin' impressed.
Drove the exsct speedlimit, or slightly under, used turn signal's and maintained his lane....however, he threw a McDonald's wrapper out the window in front of me
I'm even more impressed. A .37? That's fatal toxicity levels for most people, or at least puking up their lunch from last week and hoping to die level.
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
Then maybe you have a drinking problem
Buy .104 is schitfaced
Not very many years ago, .104 BAC would not even qualify for a DUI around here.
One question i have now is this:Having shot the 204 and looked for the bullet and not finding anything but small fragments,how did they prove what they found came from the rancher's rifle.
This will get the once over in court and money will be paid out but the rancher will still be dead.
Should have never happened,this goes for all parties involved.
The DA made the call that there wasn't enough evidence to proceed with a prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. Other than that, all the rest is in the 5300+ pages from the investigation.
Hey, I think the grand jury should have at least been presented the case. Were I the DA, I would have if for no other reason than to cover my ass. If the GJ indicts and a jury acquits, or a judge dismisses, the DAs office is clear. If the GJ no
It wasn't the DA bills, the DAs office is clear. That said, I know a lot of DAs that think doing so is a sell out and a waste of GJ time and resources.
The folks in that area elected the sheriff and the DA. They can elect someone else later, and since no charges were brought the case could be revived (which would not be the situation had it gone to trial and ended in an acquittal).
It wasn't the DA. It was the state attorney General
Ah. That's even further up the food chain. A state AG is a career politician. Never met or saw one they wouldn't throw two piss ant local cops under the bus in a heartbeat if they thought it would benefit them in a future election. They'd have handed the case to a deputy AG for prosecution and any loss would have been on the deputy AG.
I'd be far more inclined to buy the local DA being in cahoots with local cops and letting this slide than for a state AG to give a rat's ass about to low end deputies.
One question i have now is this:Having shot the 204 and looked for the bullet and not finding anything but small fragments,how did they prove what they found came from the rancher's rifle.
This will get the once over in court and money will be paid out but the rancher will still be dead.
Should have never happened,this goes for all parties involved.
said it was the same caliber as the ranchers rifle, not that it was from his gun
One question i have now is this:Having shot the 204 and looked for the bullet and not finding anything but small fragments,how did they prove what they found came from the rancher's rifle.
This will get the once over in court and money will be paid out but the rancher will still be dead.
Should have never happened,this goes for all parties involved.
They didnt, and that is stated in thepress release. They found one .204 projectile but we're not able to.match it to his rifle, but the rifle did have a spent she'll casing in the chamber.
For that matter they did not specify that yantis blood was found on the projectil, just that it was on the round
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
WTF are grand juries for? A 9 month investigation into the murder of a man that wasn't a suspect at all by 2 cops that are more than a little dirty doesn't warrant convening a grand jury? An elected official that is part and parcel of the police department gets to make the decision?
And people wonder how cover ups are successful or why there is no faith in the system. From Hilary all the way to BFE Idaho this country is crooked. Give it to a grand jury and let the facts speak, anything else is pure corruption. I have a hell of a lot more faith in a panel of citizens than I do in some god-like lawyer.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
Correct, but the number is the legal standard, is it not?
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
WTF are grand juries for? A 9 month investigation into the murder of a man that wasn't a suspect at all by 2 cops that are more than a little dirty doesn't warrant convening a grand jury? An elected official that is part and parcel of the police department gets to make the decision?
And people wonder how cover ups are successful or why there is no faith in the system. From Hilary all the way to BFE Idaho this country is crooked. Give it to a grand jury and let the facts speak, anything else is pure corruption. I have a hell of a lot more faith in a panel of citizens than I do in some god-like lawyer.
Which elected official that is part and parcel to the police depth made thedecision?
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
Correct, but the number is the legal standard, is it not?
It is a legal standard for operating a vehicle and for nothing else. It does not apply to any other activity and really shouldn't even be mentioned unless you are trying to set up a narrative that may or may not be true.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
Correct, but the number is the legal standard, is it not?
It is a legal standard for operating a vehicle and for nothing else. It does not apply to any other activity and really shouldn't even be mentioned unless you are trying to set up a narrative that may or may not be true.
One question i have now is this:Having shot the 204 and looked for the bullet and not finding anything but small fragments,how did they prove what they found came from the rancher's rifle.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Doesn't mean the law is always correct. It was not that long ago some poor sap was doing life in Nevada for being a three time looser with small possessions of pot.
WTF are grand juries for? A 9 month investigation into the murder of a man that wasn't a suspect at all by 2 cops that are more than a little dirty doesn't warrant convening a grand jury? An elected official that is part and parcel of the police department gets to make the decision?
And people wonder how cover ups are successful or why there is no faith in the system. From Hilary all the way to BFE Idaho this country is crooked. Give it to a grand jury and let the facts speak, anything else is pure corruption. I have a hell of a lot more faith in a panel of citizens than I do in some god-like lawyer.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
It would not get you a public intox charge because as you well know, people aren't tested when they are charged with public intox. The cop's statement will read like the public intox statute and that is enough. Why is that? Because there is no BAC standard for public intox. You are intoxicated if the arresting officer says you exhibited certain traits, not if you test out at a certain BAC.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
WTF are grand juries for? A 9 month investigation into the murder of a man that wasn't a suspect at all by 2 cops that are more than a little dirty doesn't warrant convening a grand jury? An elected official that is part and parcel of the police department gets to make the decision?
And people wonder how cover ups are successful or why there is no faith in the system. From Hilary all the way to BFE Idaho this country is crooked. Give it to a grand jury and let the facts speak, anything else is pure corruption. I have a hell of a lot more faith in a panel of citizens than I do in some god-like lawyer.
He's not part and parcel of the PD. The PD is local; the AG is state. Huge difference. A local DA that has to work with the SO on cases daily might factor in stuff he/she shouldn't on an investigation like this. An AG who is far removed and couldn't care less about a small SO will have NO qualms about throwing two deputies into the ringer. None.
You keep blathering about corruption at all levels and not even thinking about the levels involved or how they interact. The State Police ran the investigation. Never seen an SP that would cover for an SO at all; almost always the opposite. Never seen a State AG that wouldn't fry a local cop at the drop of a hat to be able to say they were "fair, impartial, and no one is above the law".
If this had been an SO investigation and local DA call, then I could see your point. SP and State AG? No. Not at all. You're not going to get a more impartial, or in fact likely skewed toward finding reasons to prosecute the deputies, situation that this. And yet, still no indictment.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
It would not get you a public intox charge because as you well know, people aren't tested when they are charged with public intox. The cop's statement will read like the public intox statute and that is enough. Why is that? Because there is no BAC standard for public intox. You are intoxicated if the arresting officer says you exhibited certain traits, not if you test out at a certain BAC.
I didn't ask about public intox. I asked about operating motor vehicles and increased charges for any crimes committed.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
It would not get you a public intox charge because as you well know, people aren't tested when they are charged with public intox. The cop's statement will read like the public intox statute and that is enough. Why is that? Because there is no BAC standard for public intox. You are intoxicated if the arresting officer says you exhibited certain traits, not if you test out at a certain BAC.
I didn't ask about public intox. I asked about operating motor vehicles and increased charges for any crimes committed.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Doesn't mean the law is always correct. It was not that long ago some poor sap was doing life in Nevada for being a three time looser with small possessions of pot.
I didn't say it was correct. I was stating what the laws actually are.
[quote=JoeBob]Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
It would not get you a public intox charge because as you well know, people aren't tested when they are charged with public intox. The cop's statement will read like the public intox statute and that is enough. Why is that? Because there is no BAC standard for public intox. You are intoxicated if the arresting officer says you exhibited certain traits, not if you test out at a certain BAC.
I didn't ask about public intox. I asked about operating motor vehicles and increased charges for any crimes committed. [/quote
Was I responding to you?
I've noticed that you won't, especially on this one.
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
I bet you splattered all over a Claude Dallas photo after that post.
Intoxication is not a scientific term. It is purely subjective. Fifteen years ago the legal standard was .1. Today it is .08. And if MAAD gets its way, it will soon be .05. There are people you know and see every single day who never get below a .15 who are more "sober" than the soccer mom who drank half a margerita before dinner last night and who wouldn't test out at .01. You can talk about horizontal gaze nystagmus and all that, but they said the same thing about .1 that they now say about .08 and that they will say about .05.
People are individuals. At .10, some people are flying high and some wouldn't even be out of the gate.
No disagreement. However, when speaking in terms of legal implications, .10 is well over the legal limit to operate motor vehicles, and in some states (at least) it can lead to increased charges for any incidents/crimes committed, can it not?
Here it would also get you a public intox charge, and you would no longer be conside red he coherent enough to.make decisions for yourself such as denying medical attention
It would not get you a public intox charge because as you well know, people aren't tested when they are charged with public intox. The cop's statement will read like the public intox statute and that is enough. Why is that? Because there is no BAC standard for public intox. You are intoxicated if the arresting officer says you exhibited certain traits, not if you test out at a certain BAC.
I know what our statute states, and I know how I had to get the evidenciary proof to proceed with a case
Then perhaps you should show me where your public intox statute makes mention of a specific BAC level.
Sixteen (16) spent .223 casings and four (4) spent .45 shell casings were recovered at the scene.These casings indicate twenty (20) shots were fired by the officers.Finally,a .20 caliber bullet was found on the scene.While this bullet could have come from Jacks .204,The FBI expert who tested the bullet will not testify to that fact conclusively.There isno solid explanation how that bullet,if fired from Jacks gun,came to rest in the middle of the scene.
And to say these cops were calm and placing there shots, is an understatement.Idiots anyway you look at it....
Sixteen (16) spent .223 casings and four (4) spent .45 shell casings were recovered at the scene.These casings indicate twenty (20) shots were fired by the officers.Finally,a .20 caliber bullet was found on the scene.While this bullet could have come from Jacks .204,The FBI expert who tested the bullet will not testify to that fact conclusively.There isno solid explanation how that bullet,if fired from Jacks gun,came to rest in the middle of the scene.
And to say these cops were calm and placing there shots, is an understatement.Idiots anyway you look at it....
You know those casings include the ones shot at the bull right?
Or do you think the deputies picked up those casings prior to the altercation with yantis?
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
Then maybe you have a drinking problem
Buy .104 is schitfaced
Not very many years ago, .104 BAC would not even qualify for a DUI around here.
.104 is a looooong way from schitfaced for a lot of folk.
Roland believes he fired three (3) to four (4) shots and claims to have seen and felt the muzzle blast from Jack's rifle.Extensive lab testing of Rolands clothing and gear could not confirm a bullet strike or muzzle blast
Roland described it as tunnel vision...They did not take into account any of the other witness's saying only there were only four witnesses.Two (2) Cops versus two (2) victims..Some of the others are talking out now..
Roland believes he fired three (3) to four (4) shots and claims to have seen and felt the muzzle blast from Jack's rifle.Extensive lab testing of Rolands clothing and gear could not confirm a bullet strike or muzzle blast
Roland described it as tunnel vision...They did not take into account any of the other witness's saying only there were only four witnesses.Two (2) Cops versus two (2) victims..Some of the others are talking out now..
That there was no gunshot residue on his clothing does not mea that he gave a false statement
I'm sure they took statements from everyone that was there, but very likely decided that there wasn't much substance in a lot of them
I guess this is another example of why I not only have no faith in the justice system and why I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
As far as I'm concerned blue lives don't matter until innocent lives matter.
Those pigs, prosecutors and the sheriff can rot in hell.
I bet you splattered all over a Claude Dallas photo after that post.
No but if your erectile dysfunction needs a boost I can send a photo of myself if you'd like. It'd be your pleasure.
Roland believes he fired three (3) to four (4) shots and claims to have seen and felt the muzzle blast from Jack's rifle.Extensive lab testing of Rolands clothing and gear could not confirm a bullet strike or muzzle blast
Roland described it as tunnel vision...They did not take into account any of the other witness's saying only there were only four witnesses.Two (2) Cops versus two (2) victims..Some of the others are talking out now..
So you're in the camp that the State AG is in on the conspircay?
Give it to the GJ. If they no bill it I'll be satisfied and many others will too. Bypassing that is not only irresponsible but extremely difficult to believe anything they say.
What about the DV, illegal possession of explosives and threats of violence? Is he the officer that was interviewed last month regarding this event nine months earlier.
Give it to the GJ. If they no bill it I'll be satisfied and many others will too. Bypassing that is not only irresponsible but extremely difficult to believe anything they say.
What about the DV, illegal possession of explosives and threats of violence? Is he the officer that was interviewed last month regarding this event nine months earlier.
Just what would the state AG benefit from with a "cover up"?
How is witholdie judgment and waiting for a full report. Promoting the"us against them" mentality?
Because it is... duh. (You're playing with a lot of children on here, g12- you know that. Just admit you'da capped old whitey too and move on with your Friday night, or crack a cold one open and keep replying until his head explodes)
How is witholdie judgment and waiting for a full report. Promoting the"us against them" mentality?
Because it is... duh. (You're playing with a lot of children on here, g12- you know that. Just admit you'da capped old whitey too and move on with your Friday night, or crack a cold one open and keep replying until his head explodes)
No I wouldn't have, because he wouldn't have been called
He could benefit in a lot of ways. How can Saudi Arabia benefit by donating to a charity?
What does anyone have to lose by giving it to the GJ? Other than the dirty cops, sheriff and the perception of law enforcement in general they have nothing to lose by empaneling a GJ. Well I guess they'd lose the cloud of suspicion and cronyism that now defines them. It's a complete and total miscarriage of justice to not empanel a GJ.
I'm gonna ride my mower home and see if I can make it with out getting shot.
If you come across an accident scene, don't stop, take out your rifle, point it at the first responders while they are trying to extricate the victims for the flight for life, crank off a round.....and you probably wont.
He could benefit in a lot of ways. How can Saudi Arabia benefit by donating to a charity?
What does anyone have to lose by giving it to the GJ? Other than the dirty cops, sheriff and the perception of law enforcement in general they have nothing to lose by empaneling a GJ. Well I guess they'd lose the cloud of suspicion and cronyism that now defines them. It's a complete and total miscarriage of justice to not empanel a GJ.
As Sean said, there isn't an AG out there who wouldnt drop the hammer on a couple of.small town cops if he even had an inking of a thought there would be a good conviction
He could benefit in a lot of ways. How can Saudi Arabia benefit by donating to a charity?
What does anyone have to lose by giving it to the GJ? Other than the dirty cops, sheriff and the perception of law enforcement in general they have nothing to lose by empaneling a GJ. Well I guess they'd lose the cloud of suspicion and cronyism that now defines them. It's a complete and total miscarriage of justice to not empanel a GJ.
Are you really trying to equate this to Hitlery? Wow...
Have you ANY idea how easy it is for a prosecutor to get an indictment via a GJ? The old saying that a DA can get a GJ to indict a ham sandwich didn't start for nothing. It can just as easily work the other way (a prosecutor presenting a case and throwing it before a GJ if they want a no bill). If a state AG - about as far removed from a Podunk SO as you can get - backed up by the state police chooses NOT to go to a GJ because of lack of evidence, that says volumes.
What the AG did NOT do (and had a GJ been empaneled and no billed) was preclude a civil case. That is more of an indictment than a GJ and subsequent no bill or acquittal. Essentially, the AG is saying "we don't have enough to prosecute these dumbasses, and can't get it, but they and the SO can have their asses sued off and we won't stop it".
The AG can't prosecute or prove a crime. But, they didn't shut the door on anything else. Had they gone to a GJ and/or trial, those doors would have shut completely.
He could benefit in a lot of ways. How can Saudi Arabia benefit by donating to a charity?
What does anyone have to lose by giving it to the GJ? Other than the dirty cops, sheriff and the perception of law enforcement in general they have nothing to lose by empaneling a GJ. Well I guess they'd lose the cloud of suspicion and cronyism that now defines them. It's a complete and total miscarriage of justice to not empanel a GJ.
Are you really trying to equate this to Hitlery? Wow...
Have you ANY idea how easy it is for a prosecutor to get an indictment via a GJ? The old saying that a DA can get a GJ to indict a ham sandwich didn't start for nothing. It can just as easily work the other way (a prosecutor presenting a case and throwing it before a GJ if they want a no bill). If a state AG - about as far removed from a Podunk SO as you can get - backed up by the state police chooses NOT to go to a GJ because of lack of evidence, that says volumes.
What the AG did NOT do (and had a GJ been empaneled and no billed) was preclude a civil case. That is more of an indictment than a GJ and subsequent no bill or acquittal. Essentially, the AG is saying "we don't have enough to prosecute these dumbasses, and can't get it, but they and the SO can have their asses sued off and we won't stop it".
The AG can't prosecute or prove a crime. But, they didn't shut the door on anything else. Had they gone to a GJ and/or trial, those doors would have shut completely.
Short of a lynching, what more do you want?
Wow!! That's a lot of reality to expect Ates and Hates to absorb it.
What the AG did NOT do (and had a GJ been empaneled and no billed) was preclude a civil case.... The AG can't prosecute or prove a crime. But, they didn't shut the door on anything else. Had they gone to a GJ and/or trial, those doors would have shut completely.
Every time it appears you've posted the dumbest fcking thing that could be posted........you outdo yourself.
How in the wide, wide world of law can an AG tell a private person they can't sue?
They got no right to do that. And nothing an AG could do could possibly stop this man's family from suing.
You'd be dangerously stupid, except no one on the fire takes your posts seriously.
BTW, moron, AG's CAN prosecute a case. That's what they're supposed to do.
When they *prosecute* a crime, they try and *prove* a crime, believe it or not.
This AG is either too crooked or too lazy to even try.
And, it may even be beneficial to the community for that to happen, because then the people can see the evidence, rather than speculate endlessly about how the reportage an be misconscrewed.
And again, moron, even if the cops were acquitted, the family can still sue, a la OJ Simpson.
What the AG did NOT do (and had a GJ been empaneled and no billed) was preclude a civil case.... The AG can't prosecute or prove a crime. But, they didn't shut the door on anything else. Had they gone to a GJ and/or trial, those doors would have shut completely.
Every time it appears you've posted the dumbest fcking thing that could be posted........you outdo yourself.
How in the wide, wide world of law can an AG tell a private person they can't sue?
They got no right to do that. And nothing an AG could do could possibly stop this man's family from suing.
You'd be dangerously stupid, except no one on the fire takes your posts seriously.
BTW, moron, AG's CAN prosecute a case. That's what they're supposed to do.
When they *prosecute* a crime, they try and *prove* a crime, believe it or not.
This AG is either too crooked or too lazy to even try.
And, it may even be beneficial to the community for that to happen, because then the people can see the evidence, rather than speculate endlessly about how the reportage an be misconscrewed.
And again, moron, even if the cops were acquitted, the family can still sue, a la OJ Simpson.
What an idiot.
It depends entirely on state law, asshat. In MANY states, acquittal of criminal charges precludes civil suits for damages due to the higher bar of evidentiary proceedings and state law.
That you haven't a f'kin' clue is no surprise.
The AGs decisions in this case leave the doors WIDE open to civil suits, neither precluding nor clouding those cases from going forward.
At least I have bayourover following me around with his man crush on me. The wife abuser has several hundred posts of nothing positive. Hundreds of posts of being a complete dick.
Yes Sean, I am comparing the 2. I know you rarely approach any subject with objectivity. But you failing to see the similarities isn't surprising, nor do I care to draw waste any time helping you.
Yes it's possible a crime was committed but I don't think anyone will believe me so there will be no charges. Kinda hard to have a justice system that works when 1 individual makes the choice for 12.
Also, it's good to see that you're still stalking my posts because I'm continuing to live rent-free in that addled brain of yours. Pet Internet stalkers just aren't as easy to come by these days. Now, stay....good boy....
It depends entirely on state law, asshat. In MANY states, acquittal of criminal charges precludes civil suits for damages due to the higher bar of evidentiary proceedings and state law.
That you haven't a f'kin' clue is no surprise.
The AGs decisions in this case leave the doors WIDE open to civil suits, neither precluding nor clouding those cases from going forward.
Was the guy shot in "many states"? That musta hurt.
You're FOS as usual.
Got caught tryin to be intelligent, as usual.
Pull some obscure BS outta your ass to try and hide it, as usual.
Time for another handle, I'm thinkin. This one's been fcked into the ground.
At least I have bayourover following me around with his man crush on me. The wife abuser has several hundred posts of nothing positive. Hundreds of posts of being a complete dick.
Yes Sean, I am comparing the 2. I know you rarely approach any subject with objectivity. But you failing to see the similarities isn't surprising, nor do I care to draw waste any time helping you.
Yes it's possible a crime was committed but I don't think anyone will believe me so there will be no charges. Kinda hard to have a justice system that works when 1 individual makes the choice for 12.
I will admit to approaching this with at least as much objectivity as you have; fair enough?
What more do you want? We can all think that a crime might have been committed, but without enough evidence to prosecute, there isn't a legal avenue to pursue. The AG is about as distant from this as possible and would be the most likely to prosecute if there was anything at all. He left every door open that he could; civil and criminal (because it didn't go to a GJ, the case remains viable for later prosecution if new evidence arises). If an AG with the SP backing him doesn't see enough to warrant any level of prosecution at this point, then there just isn't anything there to prosecute. That doesn't say innocent, it says there's not enough evidence, and there's a huge difference.
As I said: short of a lynching, what more do you want at this point?
It depends entirely on state law, asshat. In MANY states, acquittal of criminal charges precludes civil suits for damages due to the higher bar of evidentiary proceedings and state law.
That you haven't a f'kin' clue is no surprise.
The AGs decisions in this case leave the doors WIDE open to civil suits, neither precluding nor clouding those cases from going forward.
Was the guy shot in "many states"? That musta hurt.
You're FOS as usual.
Got caught tryin to be intelligent, as usual.
Pull some obscure BS outta your ass to try and hide it, as usual.
Time for another handle, I'm thinkin. This one's been fcked into the ground.
I can't believe you said that.How many beers does it take to be .104? Ya...4-5 for his weight and they called him by request of deputy Rowland...Wow..What a drunk..
I sure can't get schitfaced on 4-5 beers...
.104 is more than 25% over the legal limit, and that level of inebriation can be a factor in elevating any crime committed while that drunk, for reference. It sure as Hell ain't close to sober and clear thinking.
People have different tolerance and alcohol deteriorates quickly. You can bet he was a lot more than a .1 when he got himself shot...not that it means anything. What time of the day did this all occur?
At least I have bayourover following me around with his man crush on me. The wife abuser has several hundred posts of nothing positive. Hundreds of posts of being a complete dick.
Yes Sean, I am comparing the 2. I know you rarely approach any subject with objectivity. But you failing to see the similarities isn't surprising, nor do I care to draw waste any time helping you.
Yes it's possible a crime was committed but I don't think anyone will believe me so there will be no charges. Kinda hard to have a justice system that works when 1 individual makes the choice for 12.
Let me clarify a couple of points:
1. As far as your man crush theory goes, I think you are one of the biggest ill-informed DH's to ever post on the internet who thinks he has answers to everything. You could piss off the Pope on most days
2. As for the wife beater part.......it's not worth commenting on other than to say that you know nothing about me other than what you've fabricated. I'm curious why you bring something like that into you narrative/discussion of someone you know nothing about? Projection maybe?
Who GAF what his BAC was? He was at home eating dinner and socializing. That's now reason to kill citizens? Fu.cking distractions and red herrings are the way the guilty deflect attention.
What happened with the DV, illegal explosives possession and threats of violence the POS deputy proffered? Instead of indicting the dead man because he had a few beers with dinner why don't we ask pertinent questions?
People have different tolerance and alcohol deteriorates quickly. You can bet he was a lot more than a .1 when he got himself shot...not that it means anything. What time of the day did this all occur?
Yantis's were sitting at the table eating dinner, supper, or whatever ya wanna call the evening meal.
Postmortem synthesis of ethanol is a tricky business. While defense attorney's professional witnesses love to confirm what you say, there are also confirmed instances where people have died drunk and then shown ZERO alcohol in later tests. There are some where it has been proven that the alcohol level has risen in corpses too. As I said, I doubt that it matters though, he doesn't sound like the kind of guy who just drank his first beer.
Who GAF what his BAC was? He was at home eating dinner and socializing. That's now reason to kill citizens? Fu.cking distractions and red herrings are the way the guilty deflect attention.
What happened with the DV, illegal explosives possession and threats of violence the POS deputy proffered? Instead of indicting the dead man because he had a few beers with dinner why don't we ask pertinent questions?
As far as I know, the DV, illegal explosives possession, and threats of violence issues are 1) unrelated, and 2) still viable.
The pertinent questions to the incident at hand seem to have been covered in 5300 pages of evidentiary reporting.
That's simply one law review article touching on issues that impact estoppel and similar provisions in several states.
Now, speak, boy...speak....
Blow me, loser.
This case ain't in "several states".
You're *still* FOS.
Maybe if you got some authority from somewhere in europe, that would help, in case Mr. Yantis had been shot there, too.
Yantis family: "AG, can we sue?"
AG: "No."
Yantis family: "Well, I guess that's it, then. Damn the luck!"
That's the 4agerk24 position?
No, you asked for evidence to support my assertion that in several states a criminal acquittal bars civil action for the same incident. I provided that. You can't admit that I was right, so you throw a fit. Nothing unusual there.
I do not know whether ID is an estoppel state. If it is, then the AG left the civil suit door open. If it is not, then he at the very least did not cloud any civil case with a GJ or trial acquittal. The criminal case can also still be revived if any new evidence (such as, say, an officer offering conflicting or damning testimony in a civil trial) were to arise.
The AG left every possible door open, even if he did not find enough evidence to pursue a prosecution at this time. A GJ no bill or trial acquittal would have shut many, if not all, of those still open doors.
Who GAF what his BAC was? He was at home eating dinner and socializing. That's now reason to kill citizens? Fu.cking distractions and red herrings are the way the guilty deflect attention.
What happened with the DV, illegal explosives possession and threats of violence the POS deputy proffered? Instead of indicting the dead man because he had a few beers with dinner why don't we ask pertinent questions?
AcesNeights (ironically the "dead man's hand); I've laid out the results as best as I can from a legal perspective. Look, the cops are almost assuredly schitbirds. They sure as Hell didn't handle the situation as best as it could have been. There's no denying that. However, the likelihood of an AG "cover-up" given the parameters and everything else is vanishingly small; it just doesn't make any sense. Combine that with the AG having left every possible door open for future action, I have to ask again: short of a lynching, what more do you want?
Selective quotation is the only play you had left. No surprise, as you'd been handed your ass again.
Those that can read and comprehend full adult thoughts (those beyond a 3rd grade level) will digest the entire post. That you cannot and won't again is no surprise.
What the AG did NOT do (and had a GJ been empaneled and no billed) was preclude a civil case.... The AG can't prosecute or prove a crime. But, they didn't shut the door on anything else. Had they gone to a GJ and/or trial, those doors would have shut completely.
Shat for brains, you didn't mention "several states" in the original stupidity, did you?
But you'd like to use it as a crutch now.
You gotta lotta liberal in you, whether you know it or not.
Don't argue bout what actually happened, just throw a buncha other BS on top of it and hope nobody notices.
You're hilariously obsessed. This level of stalker is very hard to come by these days.
I almost feel guilty for tossing you a bone....almost.
In regard to ID and collateral estoppel, a bit of very quick research shows that it is, in fact, an estoppel state to some degree. To what level, and whether a GJ no bill would estop a civil action, or whether it requires a full trial acquittal, would require additional research and inquiry that frankly I have no interest in doing.
That for some reason you have asserted that a criminal acquittal would NOT estop a civil action (think wrongful death suits against homeowners who kill an intruder in self-defense) is amazingly wrong, though.
At this point, you're back to "ignore" status. Try not to stress much over that this time; it's clearly a toll on you to have to follow me around and find new ways to embarrass yourself.
Back to this incident - all doors are still open and left that way by the AG; including later prosecution of the officers of new evidence arises.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Nothing to say it was not fired days before and ended up on the road. Nothing to say it was fired from Yantis rifle. I am not taking sides, just saying there is no proof to being to court. .
You're hilariously obsessed. This level of stalker is very hard to come by these days.
I almost feel guilty for tossing you a bone....almost.
In regard to ID and collateral estoppel, a bit of very quick research shows that it is, in fact, an estoppel state to some degree. To what level, and whether a GJ no bill would estop a civil action, or whether it requires a full trial acquittal, would require additional research and inquiry that frankly I have no interest in doing.
That for some reason you have asserted that a criminal acquittal would NOT estop a civil action (think wrongful death suits against homeowners who kill an intruder in self-defense) is amazingly wrong, though.
Back to this incident - all doors are still open and left that way by the AG; including later prosecution of the officers of new evidence arises.
Well, I don't have the GAS to keep up with your mania, so let's agree that *one* of us is a complete moron, that posts bullshat when he has no business doing same.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Nothing to say it was not fired days before and ended up on the road. Nothing to say it was fired from Yantis rifle. I am not taking sides, just saying there is no proof to being to court. .
Days before? surely you jest. Appears there was only one 204 there, any half wit could had been able to tell if was fired that evening, or days ago.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Nothing to say it was not fired days before and ended up on the road. Nothing to say it was fired from Yantis rifle. I am not taking sides, just saying there is no proof to being to court. .
Spent shell casing in the rifle and it appears that all the witnesses agree that he fired the rifle might have something to do with it. If a .204 round hits the road, there probably isn't going to be much left to definitively match the ballistics to a specific rifle.
One thing I am sure of, we citizens now know all we will ever know about this incident. I sincerely doubt any opinions will be changed on this matter in the future.
We should take note though as to what was not said in the AG's report.
As Mule Deer has mentioned on more than one occasion referencing firearms writeups. Often what is not written is more telling than what is written.
Nowhere have I seen it printed that the deputies are exhonerated, nor have I seen it written that they acted within departmental policy.
I have only seen that the AG said he felt the state lacked evidence to assure a conviction against the deputies.
One thing I am sure of, we citizens now know all we will ever know about this incident. I sincerely doubt any opinions will be changed on this matter in the future.
We should take note though as to what was not said in the AG's report.
As Mule Deer has mentioned on more than one occasion referencing firearms writeups. Often what is not written is more telling than what is written.
Nowhere have I seen it printed that the deputies are exhonerated, nor have I seen it written that they acted within departmental policy.
I have only seen that the AG said he felt the state lacked evidence to assure a conviction against the deputies.
One thing I am sure of, we citizens now know all we will ever know about this incident. I sincerely doubt any opinions will be changed on this matter in the future.
We should take note though as to what was not said in the AG's report.
As Mule Deer has mentioned on more than one occasion referencing firearms writeups. Often what is not written is more telling than what is written.
Nowhere have I seen it printed that the deputies are exhonerated, nor have I seen it written that they acted within departmental policy.
I have only seen that the AG said he felt the state lacked evidence to assure a conviction against the deputies.
That is not a glowing endorsement!
Apparently you missed the part where the ag stated he would release the full report to the public...Ithe would seem if you want to know.more you are free to read it.
I'm sure that all the states' evidence, what little they have, stands up to scrutiny and cross examination. There's obviously no other interpretations irregardless of the witness statements taken that night, unlike the stone cold facts from the cops days or months after the fact. Signed, sealed and delivered.
If Yantis gun was the only 204 at the scene, and there was a 204 bullet found in the pavement. That evidence would at least seem to impeach the deputies testimony.
If that is so, Won't a lie cast doubt to their entire statements be enough to be brought before a jury?
Nothing to say it was not fired days before and ended up on the road. Nothing to say it was fired from Yantis rifle. I am not taking sides, just saying there is no proof to being to court. .
Spent shell casing in the rifle and it appears that all the witnesses agree that he fired the rifle might have something to do with it. If a .204 round hits the road, there probably isn't going to be much left to definitively match the ballistics to a specific rifle.
That is my point. You know more about this but wouldn't it be hard to prove that bullet was fired by Mr. Yantis? He could have shot it at a coyote days before. Proving in court is little harder than saying here at the Fire even though we all believe it was that bullet.
All this comes down to what the DA could bring to court with a reasonable chance of winning. He said - she said won't cut it and there appears to be no cut and dried evidence either way.
I believe there was no cause for anyone but the bull to get shot but proving that would be near imposable.
Guessin, but the guess is Mr. Yantis fired it pretty much straight down.
Into the asphalt.
The caliber can be determined from the core, but rifling marks would be destroyed.
It would have a shape that would show it was not fired at any great angle to the asphalt, so it could not have been fired at an earlier time.
The impact would have made an indentation, which would have collected the blood found "on" the bullet, i.e., on the end of the core closest to the "chamber" end of the bullet.
Yantis prepares to put the animal out of its misery.
For a reason that will probably never be known, one of the officers objects, and grabs Yantis.
Yantis rifle discharges into the asphalt, proving that it was:
(a) never pointed at an officer; or
(b) pointed at an officer who struck the barrel down towards the asphalt.
Other officer shoots Yantis.
First officer shoots Yantis.
Both officers STFU until they can get their stories to match the physical evidence and not hang their asses.
The case could be prosecuted, and would hinge on whether the jury believed (a) over(b), but apparently won't be.
He's not part and parcel of the PD. The PD is local; the AG is state. Huge difference. A local DA that has to work with the SO on cases daily might factor in stuff he/she shouldn't on an investigation like this. An AG who is far removed and couldn't care less about a small SO will have NO qualms about throwing two deputies into the ringer. None.
You keep blathering about corruption at all levels and not even thinking about the levels involved or how they interact. The State Police ran the investigation. Never seen an SP that would cover for an SO at all; almost always the opposite. Never seen a State AG that wouldn't fry a local cop at the drop of a hat to be able to say they were "fair, impartial, and no one is above the law".
If this had been an SO investigation and local DA call, then I could see your point. SP and State AG? No. Not at all. You're not going to get a more impartial, or in fact likely skewed toward finding reasons to prosecute the deputies, situation that this. And yet, still no indictment.
You do know, that the Idaho State Police has a documented record of covering up local departments cock-ups? Right?
So you SOUND really profound, but in reality, you're full of scheisse.
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
They were "full".
One of the deputies got busted by his dash cam at his previous job in McCall. He pretty clearly learned that keeping cameras off is a much better deal.
Which in my mind is impossible to distinguish from pre-meditation.
Guessin, but the guess is Mr. Yantis fired it pretty much straight down.
Into the asphalt.
The caliber can be determined from the core, but rifling marks would be destroyed.
It would have a shape that would show it was not fired at any great angle to the asphalt, so it could not have been fired at an earlier time.
The impact would have made an indentation, which would have collected the blood found "on" the bullet, i.e., on the end of the core closest to the "chamber" end of the bullet.
Yantis prepares to put the animal out of its misery.
For a reason that will probably never be known, one of the officers objects, and grabs Yantis.
Yantis rifle discharges into the asphalt, proving that it was:
(a) never pointed at an officer; or
(b) pointed at an officer who struck the barrel down towards the asphalt.
Other officer shoots Yantis.
First officer shoots Yantis.
Both officers STFU until they can get their stories to match the physical evidence and not hang their asses.
The case could be prosecuted, and would hinge on whether the jury believed (a) over(b), but apparently won't be.
Are you comfortable with me shooting toward your feet?
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
I don't shed any tears when the cops are ambushed or killed. Us against them.
At least your clear about your role in forwarding that rift....so long as your okay with being as responsible for the mentality at the "bad" cops in your AO, so be it.
The good cops getting killed for whatever reason (or lack of one) and their families will, likely, get along just fine without your support.
He's not part and parcel of the PD. The PD is local; the AG is state. Huge difference. A local DA that has to work with the SO on cases daily might factor in stuff he/she shouldn't on an investigation like this. An AG who is far removed and couldn't care less about a small SO will have NO qualms about throwing two deputies into the ringer. None.
You keep blathering about corruption at all levels and not even thinking about the levels involved or how they interact. The State Police ran the investigation. Never seen an SP that would cover for an SO at all; almost always the opposite. Never seen a State AG that wouldn't fry a local cop at the drop of a hat to be able to say they were "fair, impartial, and no one is above the law".
If this had been an SO investigation and local DA call, then I could see your point. SP and State AG? No. Not at all. You're not going to get a more impartial, or in fact likely skewed toward finding reasons to prosecute the deputies, situation that this. And yet, still no indictment.
You do know, that the Idaho State Police has a documented record of covering up local departments cock-ups? Right?
So you SOUND really profound, but in reality, you're full of scheisse.
Then y'all have a Hell of a lot bigger problems than a dead rancher. The SO sure as Hell should not have investigated the incident. The SP is the next agency up with jurisdiction. After that, you get Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and the FBI. Since the SO is out, and the FBI has no dog in this fight, you're left with the SP. If they are that FUBAR, y'all are up the creek. Still haven't heard a viable alternative as to what people want at this point, or going back if the SP can't be trusted how exactly they want a legitimate, impartial investigation to be done.
He's not part and parcel of the PD. The PD is local; the AG is state. Huge difference. A local DA that has to work with the SO on cases daily might factor in stuff he/she shouldn't on an investigation like this. An AG who is far removed and couldn't care less about a small SO will have NO qualms about throwing two deputies into the ringer. None.
You keep blathering about corruption at all levels and not even thinking about the levels involved or how they interact. The State Police ran the investigation. Never seen an SP that would cover for an SO at all; almost always the opposite. Never seen a State AG that wouldn't fry a local cop at the drop of a hat to be able to say they were "fair, impartial, and no one is above the law".
If this had been an SO investigation and local DA call, then I could see your point. SP and State AG? No. Not at all. You're not going to get a more impartial, or in fact likely skewed toward finding reasons to prosecute the deputies, situation that this. And yet, still no indictment.
You do know, that the Idaho State Police has a documented record of covering up local departments cock-ups? Right?
So you SOUND really profound, but in reality, you're full of scheisse.
Then y'all have a Hell of a lot bigger problems than a dead rancher. The SO sure as Hell should not have investigated the incident. The SP is the next agency up with jurisdiction. After that, you get Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and the FBI. Since the SO is out, and the FBI has no dog in this fight, you're left with the SP. If they are that FUBAR, y'all are up the creek. Still haven't heard a viable alternative as to what people want at this point, or going back if the SP can't be trusted how exactly they want a legitimate, impartial investigation to be done.
Sean, I think the DOJ investigated this too and said the was not enough evidence to.meet a criminal act
I have no idea how much the ISP is or is not trusted out there, but there are damned few places that the DO(i)J is trusted at all these days. The friggin' Stasi would arguably have a better reputation than the Dept of (in)Justice.
I have no idea how much the ISP is or is not trusted out there, but there are damned few places that the DO(i)J is trusted at all these days. The friggin' Stasi would arguably have a better reputation than the Dept of (in)Justice.
I understand whathat you're saying, but I can't see an Obama appointed US atty. Not putting the crunch on two white cops if she thought she had a case
For an average 185 to 200 pound man, as a matter of more or less accepted scientific fact, .10 BAC is four to five beers in an hour or so. It isn't schit faced and most who drink a little would hardly even consider themselves buzzed at that level of BAC.
I've arrested .28s that didn't consider themselves "buzzed"
if the casing hit the asphalt and was not run over, stepped on very good chance could run NBIN successfully on it
Originally Posted by Fubarski
We all have to guess as to facts at this point.
That bein said:
The .204 bullet was recovered from the asphalt.
Guessin, but the guess is Mr. Yantis fired it pretty much straight down.
Into the asphalt.
The caliber can be determined from the core, but rifling marks would be destroyed.
It would have a shape that would show it was not fired at any great angle to the asphalt, so it could not have been fired at an earlier time.
The impact would have made an indentation, which would have collected the blood found "on" the bullet, i.e., on the end of the core closest to the "chamber" end of the bullet.
Yantis prepares to put the animal out of its misery.
For a reason that will probably never be known, one of the officers objects, and grabs Yantis.
Yantis rifle discharges into the asphalt, proving that it was:
(a) never pointed at an officer; or
(b) pointed at an officer who struck the barrel down towards the asphalt.
Other officer shoots Yantis.
First officer shoots Yantis.
Both officers STFU until they can get their stories to match the physical evidence and not hang their asses.
The case could be prosecuted, and would hinge on whether the jury believed (a) over(b), but apparently won't be.
if the casing hit the asphalt and was not run over, stepped on very good chance could run NBIN successfully on it
Originally Posted by Fubarski
We all have to guess as to facts at this point.
That bein said:
The .204 bullet was recovered from the asphalt.
Guessin, but the guess is Mr. Yantis fired it pretty much straight down.
Into the asphalt.
The caliber can be determined from the core, but rifling marks would be destroyed.
It would have a shape that would show it was not fired at any great angle to the asphalt, so it could not have been fired at an earlier time.
The impact would have made an indentation, which would have collected the blood found "on" the bullet, i.e., on the end of the core closest to the "chamber" end of the bullet.
Yantis prepares to put the animal out of its misery.
For a reason that will probably never be known, one of the officers objects, and grabs Yantis.
Yantis rifle discharges into the asphalt, proving that it was:
(a) never pointed at an officer; or
(b) pointed at an officer who struck the barrel down towards the asphalt.
Other officer shoots Yantis.
First officer shoots Yantis.
Both officers STFU until they can get their stories to match the physical evidence and not hang their asses.
The case could be prosecuted, and would hinge on whether the jury believed (a) over(b), but apparently won't be.
The casing was still in the gun.
The mention of blood, was that it was found on the "round" with no specificity as to whether it was found on the casing or projectile
It sounds to me, that if you were going to take all idiots that were at the scene of the shooting in one room, you would need a large room!
The bull has a broken leg, kill it as soon as possible, as it does pose a hazard to everyone in the area. Killing it should be a simple act, especially when done by a "trained expert", the .223 though not my first choice, is more than necessary for the job at hand. There certainly is no reason to call for help, adding people, guns and confusion to an already tenacious situation.
Remember the two victims in the Subaru were seriously injured and were waiting for rescue personal.
Add more flashing lights, sirens, motorist and gun fire to the situation and things get ugly real fast.
Tempers on edge, pompous cop, drunk rancher, people screaming and yelling a bull bawling and you have all the makings of disaster.
I don't believe that Jack had any intention to harm anyone, I do believe the cop with the .223 was [is] an over zealous control freak who lost his temper when mister Yantis told him to GFY and get out of his way so he could put his bull down properly, and when he walked by the cop grabbed him and his rifle discharged into the ground giving the hot headed deputy all of the excuse he needed to gun him down. And since the 204 bullet was recovered at the scene I would suggest that it was fired almost directly straight down, as even a slight angle would have caused a high velocity round as the 204 would certainly ricochet and be lost.
This whole case is the results of poor training, poor hiring practices and poor choices in wanna be cops. They killed a man because of egos, it is that simple. They will get away with it because they were cops, poor ones but cops just the same.
A lot of lives have been altered and one ended over a simple accident, many will never be the same and the payout will be huge, as it should be.
This is far from over, sadly it will be a very long time before some people get over it, if they ever do.
Are you comfortable with me shooting toward your feet?
Travis
I sure would not give you permission ahead of time to do so. But on the other hand, I would not kill you for it eiher, as long as you made no attempt to reload your weapon and so you could do it again.
If you killed 10% of the general population, you would have killed most that needed killing.
I expect that the same holds true for the cop population.
Well tough guy, get to work! Bonus points if you're drunk when you do it. Triple bonus points if you're DUI and run em all over with a motor vehicle. Quadruple points if it is a Mini Cooper.
I sure would not give you permission ahead of time to do so. But on the other hand, I would not kill you for it eiher, as long as you made no attempt to reload your weapon and so you could do it again.
But then, I am not a hot headed fool.
It may come as a shock to some that in a court of law they will look at the totality of all circumstances.
I sure would not give you permission ahead of time to do so. But on the other hand, I would not kill you for it eiher, as long as you made no attempt to reload your weapon and so you could do it again.
But then, I am not a hot headed fool.
It may come as a shock to some that in a court of law they will look at the totality of all circumstances.
If this rancher guy was black like me, it woulda gone to a GJ and got a no bill. Don't know about state laws and civil suits after a GJ no bill.. based on what I have read here and otherwheres, anyways. The feebs won't even get involved. C'mon!
Seems to me the media these days would love to suck up a story like 'black rancher killed by white sheriff's deputies!' Any prosecutor is gnashing at the bits to f*ck with a few small deputies like this and win. It's a case where the evidence, as gathered, does not really merit further review. Apparently 5k+ pages were released. I'd like to not comment further until I read those but like EVERY SINGLE OTHER PERSON HERE I've not read all the pages. And will keep typing.
I don't believe that Jack had any intention to harm anyone,...
Jack Yantis was CALLED to come put down his bull. He was NOT called to come out and pat it on it's head and talk it to sleep. Everybody on the scene knew he would be coming with a weapon of some sort.
I hope the people of Adams County rise up and demand that the sheriff's office be shut down, Adams County doesn't need a sheriff's office that MURDERS The People it purports to serve.
I'm thinking that the deputies, or at least one of them, were completely over whelmed in the entirety of the whole situation.
Or could be some drunk [bleep] of a rancher armed with a rifle decided to up the ante. Some of you guys seem to forget several of Yantis' neighbors said he was a hothead with a known temper, but sure are quick to back those saying what a good guy he was.
I'm thinking that the deputies, or at least one of them, were completely over whelmed in the entirety of the whole situation.
Or could be some drunk [bleep] of a rancher armed with a rifle decided to up the ante. Some of you guys seem to forget several of Yantis' neighbors said he was a hothead with a known temper, but sure are quick to back those saying what a good guy he was.
Kinda reminds of the Dindonuffins.
Absolutely.
Only thing is why were the cops there? First responders, sure. Fireman, absolutely. Rancher, yep.
Cop? Write your traffic report and get the fugg out of here. Better yet, have the others write and stay home until you're called.
Because it was an injury accident in small town Idaho. Could even be traffic needed directing/redirecting. And I agree with the over involvement. Please have people quit calling the cops to play referee, parent, dog catcher, fee collector, litter patrol, drunk sitter, parking lot attendant, locksmith, loss prevention, etc.
Because it was an injury accident in small town Idaho. Could even be traffic needed directing/redirecting. And I agree with the over involvement. Please have people quit calling the cops to play referee, parent, dog catcher, fee collector, litter patrol, drunk sitter, parking lot attendant, locksmith, etc.
Or could be some drunk [bleep] of a rancher armed with a rifle decided to up the ante. Some of you guys seem to forget several of Yantis' neighbors said he was a hothead with a known temper, but sure are quick to back those saying what a good guy he was.
Kinda reminds of the Dindonuffins.
And in your oxygen deprived mind, a mean drunk needs murdered on sight, the deputy was recorded roughing up another old man, I guess he should have shot that guy too!
jimy a Drunken rifle welding Cop hating man reduces his chances of survival when things go to [bleep]. Lucky he wasnt Black or a Muzzy, the whole god damn family woulda been slaughtered
Or could be some drunk [bleep] of a rancher armed with a rifle decided to up the ante. Some of you guys seem to forget several of Yantis' neighbors said he was a hothead with a known temper, but sure are quick to back those saying what a good guy he was.
Kinda reminds of the Dindonuffins.
And in your oxygen deprived mind, a mean drunk needs murdered on sight, the deputy was recorded roughing up another old man, I guess he should have shot that guy too!
GFY!
No, just the ones who point guns and/or shoot at deputies. Did you watch the actual video you reference or just talking outta your ass, as usual? Don't worry, Stevil is on your side...lol
If they continue in that community, or any community that knows their history, they'll get what they have coming.
The sheriff in a county south of us went through a similar incident years back. The over-trained, under-educated deputies killed a woman when they did a botched raid on the wrong address. Several years later the deputy that pulled the trigger took a .45fmj between his eyes. The drunken shooter scored a bullseye hit from his front porch. It happened in the district I worked for, no tears were shed, nor did we waste our time or take a ladder truck out of service for his funeral. Cops are pretty forgiving of the mistakes of their co-workers, others not so much.
Because it was an injury accident in small town Idaho. Could even be traffic needed directing/redirecting. And I agree with the over involvement. Please have people quit calling the cops to play referee, parent, dog catcher, fee collector, litter patrol, drunk sitter, parking lot attendant, locksmith, etc.
Do they do anything else?
Go to a memorial for a dog.
Yep! Big, strong, mescaline? grown men, going to a memorial for a dog, a working animal.
Because it was an injury accident in small town Idaho. Could even be traffic needed directing/redirecting. And I agree with the over involvement. Please have people quit calling the cops to play referee, parent, dog catcher, fee collector, litter patrol, drunk sitter, parking lot attendant, locksmith, loss prevention, etc.
I'm all for it. Cops, as they are today, should respond to zero of those calls.
If they continue in that community, or any community that knows their history, they'll get what they have coming.
The sheriff in a county south of us went through a similar incident years back. The over-trained, under-educated deputies killed a woman when they did a botched raid on the wrong address. Several years later the deputy that pulled the trigger took a .45fmj between his eyes. The drunken shooter scored a bullseye hit from his front porch. It happened in the district I worked for, no tears were shed, nor did we waste our time or take a ladder truck out of service for his funeral. Cops are pretty forgiving of the mistakes of their co-workers, others not so much.
I sincerely hope your kid doesn't choose a permanent career in law enforcement because you are putting some horrendous karma on yourself.
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
Cameras don't fix schit.
They're just feel good non-sense.
Travis
Ah, there's where you are wrong, my friend. I have direct and repeated experience that audio and video evidence can kill a frivolous lawsuit quicker than a bought-off judge. And also that knowledge that the camera is always rolling is effective motivation to make it a habit to act professionally.
No - it's not a cure-all, but the camera makes a huge difference.
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
Cameras don't fix schit.
They're just feel good non-sense.
Travis
Ah, there's where you are wrong, my friend. I have direct and repeated experience that audio and video evidence can kill a frivolous lawsuit quicker than a bought-off judge. And also that knowledge that the camera is always rolling is effective motivation to make it a habit to act professionally.
No - it's not a cure-all, but the camera makes a huge difference.
Not really. People still see what they want to see.
Look at the alton sterling shooting
Then if for some reason your camera doesn't catch something due to positiining (think vehicles, the action very often doesn't happen right in front of the lens) then people are accused of purposefully praking to preclude video capture
Not really. People still see what they want to see.
Look at the alton sterling shooting
That's more the exception than the rule. I'd think that 99% of the time that dash cams / body cams reinforce the cop's story and shut down the lies from drunks/felons and unnecessary force accusations.
One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
Cameras don't fix schit.
They're just feel good non-sense.
Travis
Ah, there's where you are wrong, my friend. I have direct and repeated experience that audio and video evidence can kill a frivolous lawsuit quicker than a bought-off judge. And also that knowledge that the camera is always rolling is effective motivation to make it a habit to act professionally.
No - it's not a cure-all, but the camera makes a huge difference.
Not really. People still see what they want to see.
Look at the alton sterling shooting
There are always exceptions. And it depends on the quality of information recorded. But overall, cameras make a difference. The more, the better. IME, video more often keeps things from even getting to court. When faced with the evidence, the guilty or false accuser usually folds.
Then there's the effect on overall professionalism. Those of us with cameras pointed at us 100% of the time tend to act more professionally. That has an added effects of the group being looked upon more favorably.
Virtually every time one of my brothers is in direct conflict with a member of the public, a lawsuit is threatened and/or filed against us. Those used to be hard to defend. Now we win almost all of them. Many are dropped early on. We know that the camera is always rolling, so we make damned sure that the evidence will be in our favor. In other words, we are focused on doing it right.
Then if for some reason your camera doesn't catch something due to positiining (think vehicles, the action very often doesn't happen right in front of the lens) then people are accused of purposefully praking to preclude video capture
Easy to remedy. Yes - more expensive, but worth it.
Not really. People still see what they want to see.
Look at the alton sterling shooting
That's more the exception than the rule. I'd think that 99% of the time that dash cams / body cams reinforce the cop's story and shut down the lies from drunks/felons and unnecessary force accusations.
And this is a point that I think some of you are missing. The more times the accused is vindicated by audio/video evidence, the more widely the whole group are viewed as ethical professionals by the general public (there will always be rabble rousers). The way things are right now, there isn't much trust by a large portion of the public.
And this is a point that I think some of you are missing. The more times the accused is vindicated by audio/video evidence, the more widely the whole group are viewed as ethical professionals by the general public (there will always be rabble rousers). The way things are right now, there isn't much trust by a large portion of the public.
That only happens if the media releases the video when the police are exonerated.
And this is a point that I think some of you are missing. The more times the accused is vindicated by audio/video evidence, the more widely the whole group are viewed as ethical professionals by the general public (there will always be rabble rousers). The way things are right now, there isn't much trust by a large portion of the public.
That only happens if the media releases the video when the police are exonerated.
They don't.
Maybe you missed it, but no one needs "the media" to release anything these days. Besides - I think we are not far enough into the use of such devices yet to establish any such pattern. If we were, those cameras would have been rolling.
We heard all the arguments against them here too. Same with random drug testing. I wish neither were needed, but I'm glad we have both. Much better work environment, now that they're here.
But 88% of the public want them, apparently. It's a free country, though, so cops that hate them are just as free to find other work as I am free to reject work that requires me getting random drug tests or finger printed and background checked. Not that I have anything to hide, I just object to the intrusion so I find other gigs.
And this guy is coming back to work...The deputies had two (2) days to get there stories strait before ISP interviewed them..Oh ya..Nothing wrong with that for a couple psycho's...
Quote
Phillips had made Wood a firearms instructor for the ADSO, and his wife had become close friends with Wood’s now-estranged spouse. Following the shooting, Wood had become separated from his wife, and appeared to descend into something resembling a psychosis.
On several occasions, Phillips told the ISP, Wood suggested “he was gonna hurt himself … he goes back and forth on either goin’ to another country or killin’ himself.” In at least one of those instances, Phillips recounted, he indicated that he was no longer interested in fleeing to Latin America, but was “talkin’ about blowin’ himself up.”
This December 29th conversation took place in Phillips’ pickup truck. Worried that Wood was an incipient murder-suicide, Phillips told him that “I’m gonna handle this the law enforcement way…. [W]e’re gonna go ahead and get an endangerment hold on ya.” At this point, Wood “literally turned in his seat and squared off with me and stuck his hand down by his gun. He says, `There will be gunfire if … we go this route.’”
That was not the last time Wood threatened to murder fellow law enforcement officers. He also reportedly threatened to kill the family’s dogs. Yet Phillips and other officers allowed him free rein -- which left Phillips’ wife horrified that the preservation of Wood’s Blue Privilege could have lethal consequences for his wife – who was also her close friend.
“You need to stop lookin’ at this as a … friend helpin’ a friend, and start lookin’ at this as a cop,” his wife chastised him, according to Phillips’ account. Of course, the problem was precisely that Phillips was acting like a cop – someone loyal to the Blue Tribe – rather than a peace officer acting to protect the public. This might explain why his wife revised her admonition: “Stop lookin’ at this as … a buddy helpin’ a buddy or a fellow cop helpin’ a fellow cop.’”
As Phillips discussed the matter with McCall Police Officer Josh Johnson and McCall Police Chief Justin Williams, both agreed that Wood was displaying sociopathic tendencies. Contingency plans were made to carry out a major operation involving several agencies – the ADSO, the Valley County Sheriff’s Office, the Ada County Sheriff’s Office, the McCall Police Department – in the event that Wood “loses his job or loses his guns.”
But 88% of the public want them, apparently. It's a free country, though, so cops that hate them are just as free to find other work as I am free to reject work that requires me getting random drug tests or finger printed and background checked. Not that I have anything to hide, I just object to the intrusion so I find other gigs.
That 88% wouldn't know the 4th Amendment from the hole in their dick.
And this guy is coming back to work...The deputies had two (2) days to get there stories strait before ISP interviewed them..Oh ya..Nothing wrong with that for a couple psycho's...
Quote
Phillips had made Wood a firearms instructor for the ADSO, and his wife had become close friends with Wood’s now-estranged spouse. Following the shooting, Wood had become separated from his wife, and appeared to descend into something resembling a psychosis.
On several occasions, Phillips told the ISP, Wood suggested “he was gonna hurt himself … he goes back and forth on either goin’ to another country or killin’ himself.” In at least one of those instances, Phillips recounted, he indicated that he was no longer interested in fleeing to Latin America, but was “talkin’ about blowin’ himself up.”
This December 29th conversation took place in Phillips’ pickup truck. Worried that Wood was an incipient murder-suicide, Phillips told him that “I’m gonna handle this the law enforcement way…. [W]e’re gonna go ahead and get an endangerment hold on ya.” At this point, Wood “literally turned in his seat and squared off with me and stuck his hand down by his gun. He says, `There will be gunfire if … we go this route.’”
That was not the last time Wood threatened to murder fellow law enforcement officers. He also reportedly threatened to kill the family’s dogs. Yet Phillips and other officers allowed him free rein -- which left Phillips’ wife horrified that the preservation of Wood’s Blue Privilege could have lethal consequences for his wife – who was also her close friend.
“You need to stop lookin’ at this as a … friend helpin’ a friend, and start lookin’ at this as a cop,” his wife chastised him, according to Phillips’ account. Of course, the problem was precisely that Phillips was acting like a cop – someone loyal to the Blue Tribe – rather than a peace officer acting to protect the public. This might explain why his wife revised her admonition: “Stop lookin’ at this as … a buddy helpin’ a buddy or a fellow cop helpin’ a fellow cop.’”
As Phillips discussed the matter with McCall Police Officer Josh Johnson and McCall Police Chief Justin Williams, both agreed that Wood was displaying sociopathic tendencies. Contingency plans were made to carry out a major operation involving several agencies – the ADSO, the Valley County Sheriff’s Office, the Ada County Sheriff’s Office, the McCall Police Department – in the event that Wood “loses his job or loses his guns.”
But 88% of the public want them, apparently. It's a free country, though, so cops that hate them are just as free to find other work as I am free to reject work that requires me getting random drug tests or finger printed and background checked. Not that I have anything to hide, I just object to the intrusion so I find other gigs.
That 88% wouldn't know the 4th Amendment from the hole in their dick.
They're retards.
Dave
Body cameras can't see or hear anything that the cop can't see or hear, so not sure about the 4th Amendment issue.. As long as the cop isn't going somewhere he doesn't have the right to be. Anybody who thinks they are telling something to a cop in confidence is a blooming idiot. Thought that was settled decades ago in the Supreme Court?
Unless you think it's a violation of the cop's 4th amendment rights?? Again, it's a voluntarily held job. Sucks, but so does being a long haul trucker having to submit to random drug testing and having GPS/black box tracking in their rigs.
Don't know if our local sheriffs have cams or not. Guessing they probably do around Lincoln and Omaha, not elsewhere in the state.
But 88% of the public want them, apparently. It's a free country, though, so cops that hate them are just as free to find other work as I am free to reject work that requires me getting random drug tests or finger printed and background checked. Not that I have anything to hide, I just object to the intrusion so I find other gigs.
That 88% wouldn't know the 4th Amendment from the hole in their dick.
They're retards.
Dave
Body cameras can't see or hear anything that the cop can't see or hear, so not sure about the 4th Amendment issue.. As long as the cop isn't going somewhere he doesn't have the right to be. Anybody who thinks they are telling something to a cop in confidence is a blooming idiot. Thought that was settled decades ago in the Supreme Court?
Unless you think it's a violation of the cop's 4th amendment rights?? Again, it's a voluntarily held job. Sucks, but so does being a long haul trucker having to submit to random drug testing and having GPS/black box tracking in their rigs.
Don't know if our local sheriffs have cams or not. Guessing they probably do around Lincoln and Omaha, not elsewhere in the state.
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
And I totally agree there. Cameras should be able to be turned off... though then you have problems like this one, where multiple LEO's all have them turned off while on a call even though shots had been fired at an animal that had been charging people. In what possible scenario should cameras have been off when any of that was happening?
Technological solutions to people problems always suck. But nobody has found how to fix people.
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
And I totally agree there. Cameras should be able to be turned off... though then you have problems like this one, where multiple LEO's all have them turned off while on a call even though shots had been fired at an animal that had been charging people. In what possible scenario should cameras have been off when any of that was happening?
Technological solutions to people problems always suck. But nobody has found how to fix people.
The problem is, the same people who, even when it is stated that all 5000 pages of a report is available to the public, still continue to think there is some sort of cover up....that when a state AG ,after sifting through all of those aforementioned pages doesn't believe he has enough to even approach a GJ with,...won't believe a camera anyway.
Those types of people think a camera is an end all be all item. Those types will sit and say dumb schit like, well, those cameras should be mandated to be recording 24/7...
And both of the cameras were not turned off. One was off and one was full and couldn't record
well Deflave poor old Jack invited the ultimate use of force when he drunkenly made a decision to handle a firearm in the presence of 2 Cops, accidental discharge sure would get fingers on triggers quick smart.
a witness named Tamara Sue Evanow stated that Jack Yantis' rifle was still pointing in the direction of the bull when she heard the first shots fired. I'm assuming that the person who was hollering 'Shoot that thing' was Brian Wood, who I believe was already ticked off that Jack had insulted his 'prized' short barreled AR15.
I find it interesting that Ms. Evanow's account wasn't of interest to the ISP investigators. But then again I think I know why it wasn't.
OK I am really disappointed in this thread... I have not opened it since about right page 8 or 9.... By this point I figured it had to have shifted to the new ABCs of bra size type of thread
a witness named Tamara Sue Evanow stated that Jack Yantis' rifle was still pointing in the direction of the bull when she heard the first shots fired. I'm assuming that the person who was hollering 'Shoot that thing' was Brian Wood, who I believe was already ticked off that Jack had insulted his 'prized' short barreled AR15.
I find it interesting that Ms. Evanow's account wasn't of interest to the ISP investigators. But then again I think I know why it wasn't.
The Sniper
If, and it's probably a big IF you have the comprehensive ability. Why don't you read the whole 5000 page report, instead of picking bulls chit off of Facebook posts.
Either that or admit you're a fuggin potato head and be done with it
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
And I totally agree there. Cameras should be able to be turned off... though then you have problems like this one, where multiple LEO's all have them turned off while on a call even though shots had been fired at an animal that had been charging people. In what possible scenario should cameras have been off when any of that was happening?
Technological solutions to people problems always suck. But nobody has found how to fix people.
The problem is, the same people who, even when it is stated that all 5000 pages of a report is available to the public, still continue to think there is some sort of cover up....that when a state AG ,after sifting through all of those aforementioned pages doesn't believe he has enough to even approach a GJ with,...won't believe a camera anyway.
Those types of people think a camera is an end all be all item. Those types will sit and say dumb schit like, well, those cameras should be mandated to be recording 24/7...
And both of the cameras were not turned off. One was off and one was full and couldn't record
The real problem is the A G's decision to not present the evidence to a Grand Jury.
In Texas it would have been citizens, not the State, deciding whether or not to prosecute.
Hopefully the Civil Trial will correct this and the Yantis family will get their day in court.
If, and it's probably a big IF you have the comprehensive ability. Why don't you read the whole 5000 page report
Why don't you give it a try so you know what your talking about for a change.There's only one thing worse than a dirty Cop-Another Cop covering it up and/or backing him..In your case without any idea what's going on.
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
And I totally agree there. Cameras should be able to be turned off... though then you have problems like this one, where multiple LEO's all have them turned off while on a call even though shots had been fired at an animal that had been charging people. In what possible scenario should cameras have been off when any of that was happening?
Technological solutions to people problems always suck. But nobody has found how to fix people.
The problem is, the same people who, even when it is stated that all 5000 pages of a report is available to the public, still continue to think there is some sort of cover up....that when a state AG ,after sifting through all of those aforementioned pages doesn't believe he has enough to even approach a GJ with,...won't believe a camera anyway.
Those types of people think a camera is an end all be all item. Those types will sit and say dumb schit like, well, those cameras should be mandated to be recording 24/7...
And both of the cameras were not turned off. One was off and one was full and couldn't record
The real problem is the A G's decision to not present the evidence to a Grand Jury.
In Texas it would have been citizens, not the State, deciding whether or not to prosecute.
Hopefully the Civil Trial will correct this and the Yantis family will get their day in court.
Do you really think, with 5,000 plus pages of statements, and evidentiary reports that if he though he he had a chance of getting an indictment that he wouldn't have recommended it to a GJ...
If, and it's probably a big IF you have the comprehensive ability. Why don't you read the whole 5000 page report
Why don't you give it a try so you know what your talking about for a change.There's only one thing worse than a dirty Cop-Another Cop covering it up and/or backing him..In your case without any idea what's going on.
Want the link?
Sniper
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
I think train is referring to the officers rights to privacy, say using the restroom and things like that
And I totally agree there. Cameras should be able to be turned off... though then you have problems like this one, where multiple LEO's all have them turned off while on a call even though shots had been fired at an animal that had been charging people. In what possible scenario should cameras have been off when any of that was happening?
Technological solutions to people problems always suck. But nobody has found how to fix people.
The problem is, the same people who, even when it is stated that all 5000 pages of a report is available to the public, still continue to think there is some sort of cover up....that when a state AG ,after sifting through all of those aforementioned pages doesn't believe he has enough to even approach a GJ with,...won't believe a camera anyway.
Those types of people think a camera is an end all be all item. Those types will sit and say dumb schit like, well, those cameras should be mandated to be recording 24/7...
And both of the cameras were not turned off. One was off and one was full and couldn't record
The real problem is the A G's decision to not present the evidence to a Grand Jury.
In Texas it would have been citizens, not the State, deciding whether or not to prosecute.
Hopefully the Civil Trial will correct this and the Yantis family will get their day in court.
What's going to be your spin if they get exonerated in a civil trial?
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
No,the problem is an active duty police officer getting on the internet and acting like a seven (7) year old child with name calling and expecting the public to have respect for all officers...
Ron, Good Day to you. What has changed in your life? Did you become a Lutheran? The old Cutter would have been wrasslin' by now. Anyway, good to see you posting. Take Care, Slave
Ron, Good Day to you. What has changed in your life? Did you become a Lutheran? The old Cutter would have been wrasslin' by now. Anyway, good to see you posting. Take Care, Slave
I just promoted myself to the rank of Sniper..If FBI/Swat and Navy Seal training does not give you the ability to kill a wounded bull with multiple shots,my training will.Classes are upcoming to a theater near you...
This so called trained sniper with his trained buddy put 12 rounds into Jack Yantis...Fine shooting and they never did kill the bull,it just bled out on the hiway...
Here is the training posted by Woods.....
I've been involved in firearms and tactics training for over a decade both as a student and as an instructor. Much of my experience comes from private sector, and I picked up some good stuff from my time on a law enforcement tactical team. I have trained, and been trained by, private sector,law enforcement agencies, S.W.A.T., Navy SEALS, and more.
I am searching for there Karate training as we speak because they both(in there 30's) did a good one on the 62 year old woman,but she survived.
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
No,the problem is an active duty police officer getting on the internet and acting like a seven (7) year old child with name calling and expecting the public to have respect for all officers...
Your a prime example why we don't...
Hey genius I've been retired for almost 2 years now
I said nothing about respect...I've been speaking to using some semblance of common sense...clearly something a full blown potato head that does nothing but continue to cherry pick articles and only post the parts he thinks has relevance doesn't comprehend.
As far as a civil suit, I really doubt it ever sees court and I would imagine that a settlement is forthcoming
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
No,the problem is an active duty police officer getting on the internet and acting like a seven (7) year old child with name calling and expecting the public to have respect for all officers...
Your a prime example why we don't...
Hey genius I've been retired for almost two years now.
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
No,the problem is an active duty police officer getting on the internet and acting like a seven (7) year old child with name calling and expecting the public to have respect for all officers...
Your a prime example why we don't...
Hey genius I've been retired for almost two years now.
The problem is retard, you don't have a clue either...but you can't pull your head out of your azz long enough to let enough oxygen reach your brain to realize thathat
No,the problem is an active duty police officer getting on the internet and acting like a seven (7) year old child with name calling and expecting the public to have respect for all officers...
Your a prime example why we don't...
Hey genius I've been retired for almost two years now.
The problem is, the same people who, even when it is stated that all 5000 pages of a report is available to the public, still continue to think there is some sort of cover up....that when a state AG ,after sifting through all of those aforementioned pages doesn't believe he has enough to even approach a GJ with,...won't believe a camera anyway.
Pretty hard to back that up when the camera isn't even an option. In this case, the first hint of real suspicion of cover-up was announced by many when the status of those cameras was kept unannounced. For nine months, no one verified publicly whether the cameras were on or not. I was one who wished to see video that exonerated the officers. That's all it would have taken for me. An announcement that video evidence was secured would have kept me happy until then.
Do you really think, with 5,000 plus pages of statements, and evidentiary reports that if he though he he had a chance of getting an indictment that he wouldn't have recommended it to a GJ...
fu.ck me freeme what is clear is no stone has be left unturned and a clear recommendation has been made, get over it, mistakes were made no doubt but the biggest was by the deceased. [bleep] happens move on
U.S. Attorney Wendy Olson said no audio or video evidence exists. Wood and Roland wore body cameras, but Wood’s camera memory was full and Roland had not turned his on, Olson’s office said in a news release.
Yantis had a blood alcohol level of .104 percent, the state’s investigative report said. A level of .08 percent is considered intoxicated for motorists in Idaho.
fu.ck me freeme what is clear is no stone has be left unturned and a clear recommendation has been made, get over it, mistakes were made no doubt but the biggest was by the deceased. [bleep] happens move on
Ms. Wendy loves people like you, sport. "It" isn't the issue here - but you wouldn't get that, of course.
Things are starting to come out about the officers involved..There is also audio of Woods talking to his wife and mentioning the last person to pizz me off like that was Jack,and he's dead,mentioning Jacks death several times...
Woods
Newly released records from the state investigation of a rancher’s shooting by two Adams County sheriff’s deputies show that both deputies had been disciplined for behavior in previous jobs, and one had been fired.
McCall’s investigation found that Wood violated several hunting-related laws, two police department policies — conduct unbecoming and failure to maintain level of moral conduct — and a city policy prohibiting employees from engaging in criminal conduct. He was fired Nov. 30, 2011.
Wood’s firing led Idaho Peace Officer and Standards Training, a division of the Idaho State Police, to begin an investigation to determine whether Wood should be decertified. All local and state law enforcement officers in Idaho must be certified through POST.
Jerry Summers was McCall’s police chief when Wood worked there.
“I received a call from the POST decertification investigator questioning comments that were made and truthfulness by Mr. Wood,” Summers told the Statesman this week, declining to be more specific. “I provided additional documentation to that investigator and said that if, in his estimation, the officer was being untruthful, that my recommendation would be to decertify the officer.”
After McCall fired him, Wood took construction jobs and other nonpolice work. On Oct. 4, 2012, he filed a a tort claim against the Idaho State Police and Jim Tibbs, a POST investigator and veteran police officer who then sat on the Boise City Council and is now an Ada County commissioner.
The claim — which Idaho law requires before anyone sues a state or local agency — alleged that Tibbs and “other unknown agents … were involved in the unlawful dissemination of information gleaned from a confidential interview between Investigator Tibbs and Mr. Wood.”
Ten weeks after that, POST dismissed the decertification investigation.
Rolands
Roland’s incidents
Roland, 38, has worked for six Idaho law enforcement agencies since 2000, including the sheriff’s offices of Adams, Canyon and Valley counties and the Gooding, Parma and Wilder police departments. Roland told the Statesman that he also worked in Basra, Iraq, for military defense contractor DynCorp International from 2008 to 2010. Zollman hired him as a patrol deputy in August 2014.
An ISP report said four incidents in Roland’s tenure in Valley County from 2005 to 2012 resulted in investigations or discipline:
1. On Jan. 12, 2007, after a complaint from a motorist, Roland was counseled for his attitude during a traffic stop. The ISP report provided no details. Roland told the Statesman he does not recall the specific incident, but the statement is correct.
2. On May 14, 2008, Roland received a letter of reprimand and was placed on probation for one year for conduct unbecoming, which stemmed from an off-duty incident. The ISP report provided no details. Roland declined to provide details but said he was not demoted.
3. In March 2010, an internal investigation was started against Roland after a confidential informant provided information to members of the Valley County-area narcotics task force. The ISP report provided no details about this, either, and neither did Roland.
Roland told the Statesman he was questioned and then later told that the matter had been dropped.
“I never did figure out what that was about,” he said. “I never knew there was an (internal) investigation.”
4. In December 2011, the Idaho POST Academy told Valley County Sheriff Patti Bolen that there were inconsistencies on Roland’s POST and employment applications about his military service.
In a 2001 job application, Roland said he served in the military and received a general discharge under honorable conditions. In a 2011 application, he said he did not serve in the military. POST told Bolen that Roland actually had received an “uncharacterized/entry-level separation.”
It certainly looks like the citizens were well aware of his sealed and secretive record. The citizens, according to the boot lickers here, are the ones with total control over their police department. It's the fault of the citizens in these guys "AO" for not demanding better LEO.tic
It speaks to precisely what I and others said months ago, early in this thread. Dirty cops are rehired and rehired until they kill someone innocent at which time they're covered for, lied for and eventually rehired again.
This is part of his recorded conversation with his wife that she recorded for obvious reasons when they were split up and he was threatening to fire on deputies and kill animals...
His wifes account and recording in January....
The day he was threatening the animals is the first day he started doing the veiled threats about how "the last person that pushed him to his limits was Jack and I know what happened to him ."He has mentioned something along those lines several times,and he has mentioned he killed a man several times
More will come out as it goes along before the attorneys chew them retards up....
It certainly looks like the citizens were well aware of his sealed and secretive record. The citizens, according to the boot lickers here, are the ones with total control over their police department. It's the fault of the citizens in these guys "AO" for not demanding better LEO.tic...
To add to Aces' sarcastic point.....I have family members who are friends of one of the wives and live in the area. As close as they were, they had no idea of these things in the past and in the background.
Someone on Facebook is saying that it is the same officer that got fired from the McCall PD.That would not surprise me as I know more than one that went to Adams county as deputies from the McCall PD.
Another said I new it about it being the same officer...
If this turns out to be true I hope it shines a light on the practice of firing a cop from one force only to be hired by another.
If a cop is fired for actions such as this, they should be banned from ever wearing a badge.
My brother in law's uncle's third cousin knows a guy who is friends with someone's wife who says they're both great guys.
Yeah? So did my niece - who is (or was) a close friend of one of those two officer's wives.
I guess you're too primed to retort to catch that the point was only about how the locals didn't know enough to have anything to say about the hiring of these two. You're a sharp one, sport.
Are these guys back on the street protecting and serving yet?
If they are I hope it's not too long before they're found swinging from a ponderosa; side by side, in death as in life. I'll stand in line to piss on their grave.
I read a post a couple days ago that said "Have no fear Peterson and Spence are here"...Thought it was funny at the time but them two Mayberry deputies will wish they weren't by the time this is over.
With the November Sheriff election in Adams county coming up,I wonder if the Sheriff will put the deputies back to work prior to the elections....I would guess not but he ain't the brightest bulb in the department and he is scared chitless of Brian Wood..
Are these guys back on the street protecting and serving yet?
If they are I hope it's not too long before they're found swinging from a ponderosa; side by side, in death as in life. I'll stand in line to piss on their grave.
You are on thin ice with that comment. I made a similar one on this thread not long after it was started. and Great Patootie was concerned enough to consider contacting my local LEO's and reporting me.
I've found it is best to just laugh at self important sons of bitches like him on the internet. They are so far into themselves that they can't even comprehend the outrage normal guys feel about the two thug cops in Idaho.
These guys have history and any reputable sheriff/police department would not hire them....Ruby ridge is another example of bad decisions and cops getting rehired only to get fired again..
Lon Horiuchi(FBI sniper-"laughing") who killed Randy Weavers wife.
He first he killed Weavers wife... said it was a a mistake. Then the FBI sent him packing. Found himself in Seattle working Patrol. More problems there and dismissed. Guys like this have been an example as to why you shouldn't hire them.
These guys have history and any reputable sheriff/police department would not hire them....Ruby ridge is another example of bad decisions and cops getting rehired only to get fired again..
Lon Horiuchi(FBI sniper-"laughing") who killed Randy Weavers wife.
He first he killed Weavers wife... said it was a a mistake. Then the FBI sent him packing. Found himself in Seattle working Patrol. More problems there and dismissed. Guys like this have been an example as to why you shouldn't hire them.
The best news is....Those two deputies "Will Not" be coming back to work for the Adams county sheriffs department....
Paid vacation over.....
Sniper
Well,maybe not....
The attorney representing the Adams County Sheriff's office tells 6 On Your Side, Deputy Cody Roland, one of two deputies involved in the shooting death of Council rancher Jack Yantis is no longer on the payroll.
Jim Davis said Roland resigned shortly after the incident last November. Davis said as of Wednesday afternoon Deputy Brian Wood remains on the Adams County payroll. Wood told 6 On Your Side he is still on paid administrative leave.
I guess one could say this is not over by a long shot.
The executive director of Idaho Counties Risk Management, Adams County's insurance company, said the company will continue to pay Wood's salary for a "limited time," but Adams County needs to make a decision on the next steps.
Disgusting...It's going on 10 months of vacation pay for killing a rancher.
What's the hold up? I thought their innocence was so cut and dry that there is no reason to even empanel a grand jury? Let get back to the citizens they protect without delay.
The small hamlet of Council can't even afford to hire good cops, they're resignated to suffer losers and rejects like Rowland, Wood and all the others that may or may not suffer from periodic insomnia, so I doubt they'd splurge on premium ammo. They overcome their many deficiencies by beating up or shooting non-threatening senior citizens and pumping a lot of CCI Value box into the victim.
Nothing wrong with thrifty. Besides, Buffalo bore would've been a waste of money. Shooting someone that isn't threatening, in the back only requires the cheap stuff anyway.
Brian Woods last day at the Adams County sheriffs office was August 31,2016..No word if he was fired or quit.Roland now works at Evergreen Forest Products, a sawmill between New Meadows and Council along with the ex-deputy Yokum who traded sex for a ticket.(laughing)
Brian Woods last day at the Adams County sheriffs office was August 31,2016..No word if he was fired or quit.Roland now works at Evergreen Forest Products, a sawmill between New Meadows and Council along with the ex-deputy Yokum who traded sex for a ticket.(laughing)
Let the law suits begin!
I'm not one prone to obscene gestures, but I think I'll be doing a one-finger salute each time I pass through Tamarack for the foreseeable future.
Brian Woods last day at the Adams County sheriffs office was August 31,2016..No word if he was fired or quit.Roland now works at Evergreen Forest Products, a sawmill between New Meadows and Council along with the ex-deputy Yokum who traded sex for a ticket.(laughing)
Let the law suits begin!
I'm not one prone to obscene gestures, but I think I'll be doing a one-finger salute each time I pass through Tamarack for the foreseeable future.
Ditto.....I might even drive down there one afternoon just to give em the finger....
ETA.....the finger is for Roland...trading sex for a traffic ticket seems like good sound police work and a step towards creating positive community relations between citizens and law enforcement IMO...... Providing it was with a smoking hot chick and not a young boy of course....
Think I'll not be reducing my speed to 45 either.....unless it's to deliver a prolonged tribute at even lesser speed. I wonder if they'll let him drive a forklift.
I some how missed the re-election thread but my opinion is that was sickening and it seems cultist.
So,you foreigners, thousands of miles away must be right that everything was by the book and above board..Wait a cotton picking minute..Idaho post seems to think not...
Can't be..Can it..He did nothing wrong,right?..This must just be a misunderstanding.
Sheriff, deputies deny allegations in Idaho rancher lawsuit
Law enforcement officials named in a wrongful death lawsuit deny allegations they violated federal civil rights during and after the shooting of an Idaho rancher.
Jack Yantis, 62, was killed two years ago after one of his 2,500-pound bulls was hit by a car and charged emergency crews on a highway just north of the tiny town of Council in west-central Idaho. Yantis arrived with a rifle just as deputies decided to put down the animal. Authorities have said there was an altercation, and Yantis and two deputies all fired their weapons.
Yantis' family has since filed a complaint against Adams County, Sheriff Ryan Zollman and former sheriff's deputies Brian Wood and Cody Roland. The lawsuit alleges nine counts of Fourth Amendment rights violations, including not only wrongful death but also assault and battery and false imprisonment.
According to federal court documents filed Jan. 13 and 16, Zollman — acting on behalf of Adams County — Wood and Roland responded to the lawsuit by denying the allegations.
For example, Zollman's attorney maintains that the sheriff was aware Roland and Wood had discussed the fatal shooting but denied allegations that Zollman made no effort to separate the deputies before they gave their statements.
"Any and all conduct on the part of defendants Roland and Wood with respect to the matters alleged in the complaint was lawful, justifiable, and performed within their duties and responsibilities as deputies, in good faith and with the belief that such acts were proper and appropriate," wrote attorneys representing Roland and Wood.
Roland's and Wood's attorneys also requested that the complaint be dismissed. Zollman's response does not contain that request.
The lawsuit comes just more than a year after Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden decided there was not enough evidence to charge Wood and Roland following a four-month investigation. Roland and Wood have since left the sheriff's office, while Zollman was re-elected to his post several months after the attorney general's decision was announced.
Yantis' rifle went off and the deputies shot at least 14 times and 12 of their bullets hit the rancher.
They're evasive about what Jack Yantis was shooting at. WTH??? I'm sure they'd like the public to believe Jack fired at the deputies, but if he had, why not say it to bolster their credibility? Did he shoot at them or not?
What they do say is, "Authorities have said there was an altercation, and Yantis and two deputies all fired their weapons." and "Yantis' rifle went off and the deputies shot at least 14 times".
Well, did he shoot at them or not?
He undoubtedly brought the rifle to put down the bull.
![[Linked Image]](http://s37.photobucket.com/user/montanasam/media/A%202015/Summer%202015%20026_2.jpg.html)
Lets conduct ourselvs in a way that genuinely shows our intent if not ability to carry out a intelegent conversation. My goodness I know we are better than what has recently been out for display for all of us popcorn and entertainment fans.![[Linked Image]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ycl6Ik4EEEQ/VQDPbhZcX0I/AAAAAAAAS1s/9NZzb6_eJ1I/s1600/Burt%2BReynolds%2BDeliverance.PNG)
![[Linked Image]](http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/aresize/835x529/img/photos/2015/05/12/17/c1/472812290_master_1.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.destgulch.com/movies/deliver/deliv09.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6yLQKJBuGxo/Sre6AscJZ3I/AAAAAAAAAOM/TrbLRRHlfiU/s400/06deliverancekid1.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://38.media.tumblr.com/c20c61411af5af0a2e13abf7cbdabba4/tumblr_n6bcc1Zm9X1td73xio1_400.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://cdn.tegna-tv.com/-mm-/9e3bff266982469a700bebacaefc86fdaa29e89c/c=242-0-1678-1080&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/11/02/KTVB/KTVB/635820807026369769-rancher5.JPG)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Council1_zpsxbgzy8fj.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Council_zpsuwncsjow.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Donna%20Yantis_zpshm80c11f.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Jack%20Yantis%20_zpskb5fkpq2.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://blog.ctnews.com/meyers/files/2012/05/deliverance1.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1186.photobucket.com/user/Weather223/media/2015%20buck_zpsn8ohgezm.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1186.photobucket.com/user/Weather223/media/Johns%202015%20deer_zpslnqvukhu.jpg.html)
Let's see. 50 pages of guys beating each other up in sheer vitriol over an incident that they did not witness...and you say females operate on feelings?![[Linked Image]](http://www.lavackfitness.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/baby-win.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/55277892.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://memeguy.com/photos/images/to-the-redditor-whos-jealous-of-ugly-people-being-in-relationships-88696.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/b4/ea/ef/b4eaefe5c31e13d873ec9c8590e255fd.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Council%20shooting_zpssetb8hsr.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/csi_zpsjtvbfhz1.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/witness_zps8hobuy3a.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/witness1_zpssklsqr08.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s192.photobucket.com/user/MallardAddict/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2015-11-12-13-20-21_zps9ocskocf.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s192.photobucket.com/user/MallardAddict/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_2015-11-12-13-17-52_zpsjtbut4j2.png.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://memecrunch.com/meme/54GUN/i-think-we-all-saw-that-coming/image.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/national%20forest%20council_zpsuafkjphi.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/highway95_zps8evm0eaj.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i1288.photobucket.com/albums/b489/jrobb400/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-11/FB_IMG_1447952730903_zpsa9jyd3ik.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc204/RIGHTSOFMAN/BRIANWOODSNIPER1.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc204/RIGHTSOFMAN/BRIANWOOD-APRIL232013.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/deputy%20mug%20combo_zpsfysf3oap.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Rowland_zpshltib9wx.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://mediaassets.kivitv.com/photo/2015/12/07/brian%20wood%202_1449536010563_28036214_ver1.0_640_480.JPG)
![[Linked Image]](http://i1288.photobucket.com/albums/b489/jrobb400/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-12/FB_IMG_1450757892071_zpsegr6aw0k.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s1085.photobucket.com/user/MOGC1/media/xbers4.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://i1288.photobucket.com/albums/b489/jrobb400/Mobile%20Uploads/2015-12/MEME2015-12-21-09-33-57_zpsxwawlh7t.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20151225-162630_zpsfmtkoax3.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20151226-063933_zps3sf3unjw.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.idolol.com/pictures/bb84a8628d7c605534b9a9a0bd50e9f4.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.justice.gov/usao/id/images/wolsonofficial.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/12985546_1559028001057251_581380254013803723_n_zpsjos6ua37.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/13173644_998230453546076_810933061114150867_n_zpsgxjkl8zq.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://images.mic.com/tvt42ercfehvyturc8hfc6rrnw73ma8eyu4zthdjd9bpdgyppkfppdngonbpqw5x.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s189.photobucket.com/user/Greatwaputi/media/Mobile%20Uploads/3BAC9C8A-C05B-4A67-80F1-D77778573D74_zpszbekcw37.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s189.photobucket.com/user/Greatwaputi/media/Mobile%20Uploads/6C27D870-4C64-47B2-B400-2A1634A0A713_zpsga4k0i5p.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/59/2a/7b/592a7b048ef50750c58bf1744765405c.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/123_1_4_zpsla97ul3g.jpeg)
![[Linked Image]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v652/jaycocreek/CodyRowland_zps0eztflug.png)