Irving is crazy!

[UNT90]

Fine.  Forget he is 14.  He was naked, with a hole in his head, cover it bruises and cuts.  Not only did the three women report that he had resisted going with Dahmer and cowered behind them, he also resisted the police when they tried to hand him over Dahmer.  I guess he was lucky not to get shot by them.   I don't care if he was 85.  Forcing him back to Dahmer was a huge mistake.   Taking them both back to the house, the other person resisting the whole way, then noticing a terrible odor? Another miss.  Not to mention all of the above is enough to see do a background check and see that he is a registered sex offender.  

You asked why he didn't talk?  He probably no longer could.  He was unable to speak and was drooling.  Why?  He had a hole drilled in his head.  Head-wounds bleed.  His hair was matted in dried blood, he was covered in dried blood.  He was also freshly bleeding.  All three women demanded to know why he was covered in blood and the cops told them to go away.  

I just can't see where handing over a naked bleeding person over to someone who they do not want to go with, who multiple witnesses reported was trying to escape from them, into a house that smelled like a decomposing body is not a monumental screw up.  

Also if "BECAUSE WE WERE NOT THERE" is a valid defense, you had better stop complaining about RV, because you where not there when he was negotiating those five year contracts or those OOC games with Tulsa and NAU.

 

It's funny that he constantly harps on KRAM for refusing to admit he is wrong in the face of mountains of evidence then does the same thing.  Has anyone ever seen UNT90 and KRAM in the same room at the same time?

except hardly anything in your post actually happened. But don't believe me, read the officer's explanation yourselves:

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/08/26/us/officer-defends-giving-boy-back-to-dahmer.html

 

Now, Cerebus, this is a very simple question for you. Given the facts that the officer stated he knew at the time, what piece of evidence would you have probable cause to believe existed in Dahmer's house given the facts that presented themselves to the officer AT THE TIME HE DEALT WITH THIS SITUATION?

The officer saw what he thought was a drunk Laotian male that he thought was of age (not cut up, not with a hole in his head) that he probably thought he was giving a break by releasing him to his lover instead of taking him to jail for PI.

Stop believing everything you read on the Internet.

As for the RV reference, I make those determinations by evidence and past history, which is a really good determinate of future behavior. Don't forget who first brought the scheduling problem to everyone's attention and who told you there was no physical way in hell that we could have 6 home games in 2015. A statement I believe I made in either 2012 or 2013 (cause 4th grade math ain't hard). 

Edited September 18, 2015 by UNT90

[Cerebus]

 

Now, Cerebus, this is a very simple question for you. Given the facts that the officer stated he knew at the time, what piece of evidence would you have probable cause to believe existed in Dahmer's house given the facts that presented themselves to the officer AT THE TIME HE DEALT WITH THIS SITUATION?

 

ST:  Could Police Have Saved Young Victim? -- 911 Tapes Show Officers Were In Dahmer's Place, Left Teen To Fate

Police were in the apartment of Jeffrey Dahmer on May 27 but left after returning a dazed and naked 14-year-old boy to the fate he apparently had sought to escape.

----

Police Chief Philip Arreola lodged administrative charges yesterday against the three officers involved. The three, who have not been publicly named, have been suspended with pay since last Friday, when Arreola ordered an internal investigation.

"There is no way we can change what has occurred," said Arreola, clearly pained by the apparent breach of procedure by the officers.

The officers involved, Arreola said, "failed to conduct a basic, proper police investigation into the matter. Basic law-enforcement practices were not followed."

---

The officers did not run a records check on Dahmer, 31, who was on probation for sexually assaulting Sinthasomphone's brother, now 16, in 1988.

---

Lawyers for the police officers confirmed yesterday that two of the officers were inside the apartment. 

---

Dahmer told police that there were also photos of previous victims strewn on the floor and a body in his bedroom "smelling like hell" at the time the two officers were present.

---

Milwaukee resident Nicole Childress, 17, called 911 at 2 a.m. to report in alarmed tones that a man was chasing a youth who was naked, dazed and bleeding.

"I'm on 25th and State," she said. "And there's this young man, he is buck-naked and he has been beaten up. He is very bruised up. He can't stand. He has no clothes on. He is really hurt. . . ."

---

The 911 operator dispatched a squad car to the intersection to look for a "man down . . . badly beaten, wearing no clothes." Meanwhile, Childress was connected with the fire department dispatcher, who immediately sent an ambulance.

A Milwaukee County sheriff's deputy reported another call, describing "subject male dragging a naked male who looked like he was beat up severely."

---

The next communication is 15 minutes later from the police car dispatched to the scene.

"The intoxicated Asian naked male (laughter in background) was returned to his sober boyfriend (more laughter)." When the officers are dispatched to another scene, one comments that, first, "my partner is going to get deloused at the station."

---

About 10 minutes later, Glenda Cleveland, Childress' aunt, called police to ask about the incident and offer her niece and daughter, Sandra Smith, 18, as witnesses.

"No information was taken down. I was wondering how this situation was being handled. It indicated a male child was being raped and molested by an adult," Cleveland told one officer with whom she spoke.

Finally, she reached one of the officers who handled the incident. She was told the accounts of her niece and daughter weren't needed.

---

The officer later said, as Cleveland continued to question whether the injured person was a child: "I can't do anything about somebody's sexual preference in life."

---

But when asked about the pronounced stench Dahmer's neighbors had complained of for months, Eggert had no comment.

---

Cleveland: “But what if he’s a child? Are you positive he is an adult?”

Officer: “Ma’am, like I explained to you, it’s all taken care of. It’s as positive as I can be. I can’t do anything about somebody’s sexual preference in life.”

Cleveland: “Well, no, I am not saying anything about that, but it appeared to have been a child. This is my concern.”

 

Chicago Tribune: After Dahmer: Police Try To Learn

In a final chapter of the tragedy, officers John Balcerzak, 35, and Joseph Gabrish, 29, fought hard for their jobs, and last month they lost. After a four-week hearing, 27 witnesses, 90 hours of testimony and 1,000 pages of evidence, Milwaukee`s fire and police commission upheld the firings by Police Chief Philip Arreola.

In the end, the commission did not buy arguments that the officers thought they were being sensitive to ``a caring homosexual relationship``; that they were convinced Hmong was an adult, or that the fault lay with gaps in training, a heavy workload, or Dahmer`s abilities to con many people.

Instead, the commission agreed with the city prosecutor that the officers had undertaken a bungled investigation of many missed opportunities, driven by a wink at what they thought was a gay lovers` spat and the desire to get a drunk off the street as quickly as possible.

---

In a 52-page report the commission found that Balcerzak and Gabrish violated police rules 15 times in an investigation that lasted 16 minutes. Among the key points:

- The two officers failed to perform a records/warrant check on Dahmer. And they failed to verify the name, age and address of ``John Hmong``; to get a medical assessment of his physical condition (an emergency medical team was waved off); to determine if he could communicate, in English or otherwise; to investigate his alleged underage drinking and to get verification of Dahmer`s statements that Hmong was his roommate, or to do anything to verify that Dahmer was a responsible party with whom to leave the incapacitated youth.

- They also failed to interview, or even get the names and addresses of three willing, neutral witnesses-Sandra Smith, Tina Spivey and Nicole Childress-who made the 911 emergency call. The women said they were rebuffed by the officers when they attempted to tell them that they heard Dahmer, who at first claimed he did not know ``John,`` address him by another name and that they saw the youth resist as Dahmer attempted to drag him away in a headlock.

- And finally, the officers failed to evaluate the information of Glenda Cleveland, the mother of one of the women, who spoke by telephone with Balcerzak later that night. Cleveland identified Sinthasomphone as a child that her children once had played with. She offered the names of the three young women as witnesses. Balcerzak declined to take the names.

So again, just to make it clear:  All of ^that^  is not probable cause for this guy:

 

But asking why she has to put out her cigarette IS probable cause for this lady:

 

And bringing a pencil case with wires and and LCD attached IS probably cause for this guy:

 

 

 

As for the RV reference,....

I believe a man once said:  " I don't know. You don't either. BECAUSE WE WERE NOT THERE."  

I really don't know what you are going to do with your free time now that you can't hassle RV, since you where not there. 

[UNT90]

 

 

ST:  Could Police Have Saved Young Victim? -- 911 Tapes Show Officers Were In Dahmer's Place, Left Teen To Fate

 

Chicago Tribune: After Dahmer: Police Try To Learn

So again, just to make it clear:  All of ^that^  is not probable cause for this guy:

 

But asking why she has to put out her cigarette IS probable cause for this lady:

 

And bringing a pencil case with wires and and LCD attached IS probably cause for this guy:

 

 

 

I believe a man once said:  " I don't know. You don't either. BECAUSE WE WERE NOT THERE."  

I really don't know what you are going to do with your free time now that you can't hassle RV, since you where not there. 

So the commission concluded that the officers were driven by what that thought was a gay lovers spat and the desire to get a drunk off the street as quickly as possible.

That was the conclusion of the investigation. 

And relating a police matter involving a murder to college football is quite the stretch. 

Do you honestly believe there were pictures of other victims lying on the floor and a dead guy in another room? And you believe this because the serial murderer told you so? Really? 

As to the investigation, those officers never had a prayer of keeping their jobs. Even if everything they did was perfect for the situation. I'm quite sure you remember the political climate around this at that time.

I see there is nothing in your post that details what the officers' say happened when they contacted the victim and Dahlmer. Why is that? 

You don't find what you don't look for and don't know about. That applies to both this situation and our AD. 

And please answer the question. What piece of criminal evidence would be the subject of your search? Just one will do. With what the officers knew AT THE TIME. All these hindsight statements by a murderer ain't gonna cut it. Neither is all the hindsight info in your post. 

Also, as your reference to the black female above demonstrates, you seem to not understand having probable cause to arrest vs probable cause to search. They are very different things, my friend.

 

<pats self on back for derailing a truly moronic thread> 

Edited September 18, 2015 by UNT90

[Censored by Laurie]

It's funny that he constantly harps on KRAM for refusing to admit he is wrong in the face of mountains of evidence then does the same thing.  Has anyone ever seen UNT90 and KRAM in the same room at the same time?

that's about the best you'll ever get out of him...a "I was just hijacking a thread...see how that works?" or a "I canz do satire too...see how that works?"

[Cerebus]

So the commission concluded that the officers were driven by what that thought was a gay lovers spat and the desire to get a drunk off the street as quickly as possible.

That was the conclusion of the investigation. 

 

 

Nope.  The conclusion of the inverstigation was:  

In a 52-page report the commission found that Balcerzak and Gabrish violated police rules 15 times in an investigation that lasted 16 minutes. Among the key points:

- The two officers failed to perform a records/warrant check on Dahmer. And they failed to verify the name, age and address of ``John Hmong``; to get a medical assessment of his physical condition (an emergency medical team was waved off); to determine if he could communicate, in English or otherwise; to investigate his alleged underage drinking and to get verification of Dahmer`s statements that Hmong was his roommate, or to do anything to verify that Dahmer was a responsible party with whom to leave the incapacitated youth.

- They also failed to interview, or even get the names and addresses of three willing, neutral witnesses-Sandra Smith, Tina Spivey and Nicole Childress-who made the 911 emergency call. The women said they were rebuffed by the officers when they attempted to tell them that they heard Dahmer, who at first claimed he did not know ``John,`` address him by another name and that they saw the youth resist as Dahmer attempted to drag him away in a headlock.

- And finally, the officers failed to evaluate the information of Glenda Cleveland, the mother of one of the women, who spoke by telephone with Balcerzak later that night. Cleveland identified Sinthasomphone as a child that her children once had played with. She offered the names of the three young women as witnesses. Balcerzak declined to take the names.

^ All that is evidence that AT THE TIME could have been used. ^  

That is a lot more than having a pencil case with wires, that you say is probable cause, or refusing to put out a cigarette in your own car.  

 

[Coffee and TV]

pictures of other victims lying on the floor and a dead guy in another room

Am I doing this right CBL? 

[Cerebus]

Am I doing this right CBL? 

I like how he finds it impossible believe that there could have been a dead guy laying out on the floor when the officers THAT DID THEIR JOB CORRECTLY A a few month later found the Polaroids in plain site on his night stand, and found the following in the apartment:

four severed heads in the fridge,
seven painted and bleached skulls (including those of the 14 year old victim and of Tony Hughes),
Two preserved human hearts,
a torso and bags full of various body parts in his freezer,
two entire skeletons,
one pair of severed hands,
two preserved penises,
and in the 55 gallon drum in his bedroom, an additional three torsos.

 

 

[UNT90]

 

I like how he finds it impossible believe that there could have been a dead guy laying out on the floor when the officers THAT DID THEIR JOB CORRECTLY A a few month later found the Polaroids in plain site on his night stand, and found the following in the apartment:

 

 

(still waiting for you to tell me what evidentiary item that you could write a search warrant for base on WHAT THE OFFICERS KNEW AT THE TIME)

 

Right, because nothing changes in an apartment in a few months. Good God, he had a kid there he was trying to sexually assault. Don't you think the kid would have mentioned this to the police if he had seen it? I think we all agree that kid spent much more time inside that apartment than those officers.

Also, wouldn't it be a really good plan to have a dead body on the floor and pictures of people lying around when you bring a kid home to sexually assault? A kid you obviously have a previous relationship with since you are a registered sex offender FOR ASSAULTING THAT KID'S BROTHER!

But you apparently believe the word of a serial killer whose only power left at the time is to distort facts to show the police how stupid they are and how smart he is, right?

Let me explain what was a very real possibility for what could have happened if the officers had ignored the victim, who lied to the officers about his name and age and most likely any injury the officers may or may not have observed (notice you didn't post what the officers say occurred from the moment they contacted the victim), and listened to every witness. They MAY have arrested Dahmer for assault family violence. They would have also probably arrested the victim for PI, or simply left him at Dahmer's apartment. 

If they arrested the juvenile pretending to be an adult, he would have been taken to an adult jail. Since he is a juvenile, his fingerprints wouldn't be in the automated system (if he had ever been fingerprinted at all), if an automated system even existed back then. He would have been held until sober and released with a citation under his fake name.

Remember, he didn't want the police to know who he was. 

So, you have arrested a guy for assaulting another guy OUTSIDE his apartment (where the witnesses saw it occur), you have an uncooperative victim lying about his name and unwilling to give any other information, and you have a PI arrest of that uncooperative victim.

Tell me again, what piece of criminal evidence exists inside that apartment that you can justify to a judge to get a search warrant?

I'll wait while you look for something that isn't there.

that's about the best you'll ever get out of him...a "I was just hijacking a thread...see how that works?" or a "I canz do satire too...see how that works?"

drives you crazy, don't it?

Edited September 18, 2015 by UNT90

[Cerebus]

(still waiting for you to tell me what evidentiary item that you could write a search warrant for base on WHAT THE OFFICERS KNEW AT THE TIME)

Listen KRAM JR, the following is what the officers did wrong at the time that could easily have lead them to get probable cause, as found by the commission:

 

In a 52-page report the commission found that Balcerzak and Gabrish violated police rules 15 times in an investigation that lasted 16 minutes. Among the key points:

- The two officers failed to perform a records/warrant check on Dahmer. And they failed to verify the name, age and address of ``John Hmong``; to get a medical assessment of his physical condition (an emergency medical team was waved off); to determine if he could communicate, in English or otherwise; to investigate his alleged underage drinking and to get verification of Dahmer`s statements that Hmong was his roommate, or to do anything to verify that Dahmer was a responsible party with whom to leave the incapacitated youth.

- They also failed to interview, or even get the names and addresses of three willing, neutral witnesses-Sandra Smith, Tina Spivey and Nicole Childress-who made the 911 emergency call. The women said they were rebuffed by the officers when they attempted to tell them that they heard Dahmer, who at first claimed he did not know ``John,`` address him by another name and that they saw the youth resist as Dahmer attempted to drag him away in a headlock.

- And finally, the officers failed to evaluate the information of Glenda Cleveland, the mother of one of the women, who spoke by telephone with Balcerzak later that night. Cleveland identified Sinthasomphone as a child that her children once had played with. She offered the names of the three young women as witnesses. Balcerzak declined to take the names.

1) If they had done a background check on Dahmer, they would see he was a convicted child molester.  Three witnesses claimed the boy looked underage, which isn't surprising, since he was 14.   That's probable cause for a search.

2) If they hadn't waived off the medical team the team could have probably told that the minor was drugged, and had several wounds.  Again, probable cause.

3) They didn't do a records check for the name, which they should have all three girls reported he was calling him another name.  If they found they couldn't find the fake name, they could have easily asked for a missing persons report, which would have matched the minor.  Probable cause.

4) The next day a witness told police that she knew the boy was a minor and had played with her children for years.  Probable cause.  The victim was probably dead at this point, but the future 4 victims could have been saved.

[KRAM1]

I went to that school, where were you? 

Denton...long before you were problems even born.  Ha!  Well, maybe not that long before....Youhave any kids at that school, r kids in any schoo?

[KRAM1]

 

Listen KRAM JR, the following is what the officers did wrong at the time that could easily have lead them to get probable cause, as found by the commission:

 

1) If they had done a background check on Dahmer, they would see he was a convicted child molester.  Three witnesses claimed the boy looked underage, which isn't surprising, since he was 14.   That's probable cause for a search.

2) If they hadn't waived off the medical team the team could have probably told that the minor was drugged, and had several wounds.  Again, probable cause.

3) They didn't do a records check for the name, which they should have all three girls reported he was calling him another name.  If they found they couldn't find the fake name, they could have easily asked for a missing persons report, which would have matched the minor.  Probable cause.

4) The next day a witness told police that she knew the boy was a minor and had played with her children for years.  Probable cause.  The victim was probably dead at this point, but the future 4 victims could have been saved.

Thanks...on this issue I will take that jerky first line as a compliment. You definitely have that vast ego of yours in high gear on this one.  It has zero to do with the officers to me....what they did or did not do wrong will be handled.  It's about the fact that this happened in the first place given the world today and the violence that has taken place in our schools that has resulted in way too many killed and injured including lots of kids.  I would much rather have someone embarrassed a bit and remain uninjured than to be seeing the carnage and watching on the news as more parents bury their kids.  You can argue the points of search all you wish, but I don't think you are either a lawyer nor have you ever been a sworn law enforcement officer.   I'll breath easier that someone acted in the best interests of the safety and security of those inside that school...kids, staff, visitors, etc. And, will be happy that all the "second guessers" and arm chair QB's and holier than thou know it alls can now debate the political correctness of how this was handled...all the while erasing any shred of personal responsibility from a 14 year old kid described as a young genius.

Since ideas other than yours are not welcome, and usually are not, I will bow out of this discussion wearing my badge of honor that I was pegged in the same light with UNT90 on this one...perhaps only this one, but A-OK with me on this one.

 

[oldguystudent]

I'd like to suggest a new GMG.com game...it's called "Let's Pick One Totally Out-of-Context Portion of a UNT90 Rant as Our Favorite" (working title...a bit cumbersome, I know)

here's mine: 

 

I think I have a leg up on this game with my sig.

[KRAM1]

 

It's funny that he constantly harps on KRAM for refusing to admit he is wrong in the face of mountains of evidence then does the same thing.  Has anyone ever seen UNT90 and KRAM in the same room at the same time?

It is?  What's actually funny is your comment.  I have never felt that he is "harping" on me. He "harps" on his pet issues, not me. Why?  Because I know and he knows that we are on different sides of certain issues, and we enjoy the back and forth here and in person.  And, if any one was looking we were together for an extended chat at the SMU game and we make a point of saying hello at each game.  It isn't personal with us...as it seems to be with some. And, he ALWAYS is one of the first to donate to any of my projects in support of UNT...without having to be asked...and is often the first to volunteer his time as well as his funds.

 

Edited September 18, 2015 by KRAM1

[UNT90]

 

Listen KRAM JR, the following is what the officers did wrong at the time that could easily have lead them to get probable cause, as found by the commission:

 

1) If they had done a background check on Dahmer, they would see he was a convicted child molester.  Three witnesses claimed the boy looked underage, which isn't surprising, since he was 14.   That's probable cause for a search.

2) If they hadn't waived off the medical team the team could have probably told that the minor was drugged, and had several wounds.  Again, probable cause.

3) They didn't do a records check for the name, which they should have all three girls reported he was calling him another name.  If they found they couldn't find the fake name, they could have easily asked for a missing persons report, which would have matched the minor.  Probable cause.

4) The next day a witness told police that she knew the boy was a minor and had played with her children for years.  Probable cause.  The victim was probably dead at this point, but the future 4 victims could have been saved.

actually, none of what you quote is probable cause for a search of the apartment.

Ill ask again, even with all of the hindsight evidence, what piece of criminal evidence are you looking for in the apartment? Saying "I just want to search because he's a pedophile" ain't gonna cut it. 

Now, if the victim had claimed sexual assault (he didn't), THEN you could articulate probable cause to get the bedding for potential DNA evidence. But the kid didn't do that. He also didn't yell that dead bodies were all over the floor. 

What you had was 2 cops answering calls for service who were just trying to solve a problem and get to the next call. 

And Damn you, KRAM! I worked real hard to get this thing off of a stupid topic. 

[Censored by Laurie]

geez...stfu, alonzo

[Cerebus]

UNT90 let me use an analogy you might understand.

 

You walk up to President Smatresk and complain about the scheduling.  He says he talked to the AD, and the AD assured him he did everything he could.  In fact, he called up every school he could.  Now he only called two weeks before the season started, and he had only scribbled down two numbers on a Jimmy John's napkin, and one of those numbers wasn't for NAU but for a Shakey's Pizza in Mobile, but AT THE TIME he called he couldn't do anymore.

You of course are incredulous, you say he should have put more work into this, not done the bare minimum.  For example he could have googled the correct number for NAU, or possibly a ton of other schools, maybe even done the work earlier.  In the face of all your protests, Smatresk just keeps repeating that AT THE TIME he made those calls, there was nothing more the AD could do.  Also, you were not there, so how can you judge?

That is what arguing with you about this is like.  Yes, the cops probably did enough to convince themselves that their lazy, half ass, largely incompetent scheduling investigating was enough.  The fact remains that a commission found huge problems with they did and if they had just been competent and followed the procedures laid out by their own department (records check on either, letting the medical team examine the victim, listened to the multiple witnesses that stated the boy did not want to go with Dahmer, and was underage) they would have had more than enough for a search of the home.  The report clearly stated that.  

The only way someone could still defend the cops is if they had stubbornly made up their mind and refused to listen to evidence.   Especially when you compare their reaction to that of the cops that did bust Dahmer later.  They found a guy walking around with a handcuff on, questioned him, and when he said some guy had tried to handcuff at his apartment. That was enough in a competent officers mind to go over to Dahmer's place, question him, and look around.   Dahmer's lawyers tried to get that thrown out as not probable grounds for a search, but the court disagreed.  

[FirefightnRick]

So....guns are not allowed in school, even fake guns.  But fake bombs are allowed....and are actually encouraged?

 

Do I have this right?

 

 

Rick

[Green P1]

So....guns are not allowed in school, even fake guns.  But fake bombs are allowed....and are actually encouraged?

 

Do I have this right?

 

 

Rick

It sure doesn't seem like it. 

[Censored by Laurie]

It sure doesn't seem like it. 

less so than usual, too

[FirefightnRick]

It sure doesn't seem like it. 

 

I'm not sure?    The front page of the paper...for the fourth or fifth day in a row... seems to suggest just that?

Build a fake bomb..bring it to school...presto!!! Instant fame, recognition and rewards.  

Rick

Edited September 20, 2015 by FirefightnRick

[VideoEagle]

But it wasn't intended to be a fake bomb, ever! Even the Irving Police are admitting they overreacted. But because they took him away in handcuffs and word spread about that, yes he is getting a bonanza of stuff! Even Governor Abbott said he thought they overreacted! 

Microsoft gave him a huge haul of gifts and want to see what he can make with them. 

I don't understand what Jeffery Dalmer has to do with this since the 14-year-old Texan never intended to threaten anyone and at least one of his teachers, in the building at the time, knew it. 

Anyone else think the picture of Ahmed standing in his Nasa t-shirt, handcuffed with an officer in the background, looks like a scene from the Big Bang Theory? 

[FirefightnRick]

But it wasn't intended to be a fake bomb, ever! Even the Irving Police are admitting they overreacted. But because they took him away in handcuffs and word spread about that, yes he is getting a bonanza of stuff! Even Governor Abbott said he thought they overreacted! 

Microsoft gave him a huge haul of gifts and want to see what he can make with them. 

I don't understand what Jeffery Dalmer has to do with this since the 14-year-old Texan never intended to threaten anyone and at least one of his teachers, in the building at the time, knew it. 

Anyone else think the picture of Ahmed standing in his Nasa t-shirt, handcuffed with an officer in the background, looks like a scene from the Big Bang Theory? 

First off,... we don't know the full story since the family won't give Irving ISD and Irving P.D. permission to release all the information.

 Per the mayor's interview this morning, last week city and ISD leadership had a scheduled meeting with the family to explain and get an understanding on all sides.  That meeting got delayed one day...then the family didn't show up for it the next day and chose to hold a press conference instead...making sure everyone got their side first,..then refusing to release all information pertaining to this case because the student is a minor.

Secondly..and most importantly...I'm willing to bet if asked the majority of parents with kids in Irving ISD are thankful an overreaction occurred...if that is indeed what happened at all?

Ill wait and hold judgement on poking a finger in the eye of a another police department until both sides of the entire story comes out.

 

Rick

[Quoner]

Man, wait until someone's dial up gets the latest from Bill Maher and the people saying he may not have built the clock...a lot of questions for sure?

[Censored by Laurie]

Man, wait until someone's dial up gets the latest from Bill Maher and the people saying he may not have built the clock...a lot of questions for sure?

I'm far more interested in what Pete Carroll has to say about all this.

maybe get him, Curt Schilling, Darren Wilson, FFRick and Christiaan Huygens (credited inventor of the clock) all up on a round-table...see what sort of ideas get bantered about

[Quoner]

I'm far more interested in what Pete Carroll has to say about all this.

maybe get him, Curt Schilling, Darren Wilson, FFRick and Christiaan Huygens (credited inventor of the clock) all up on a round-table...see what sort of ideas get bantered about

Only if 90 furiously googles the merits of quartz crystal vs. tuning fork in clock design so he can add some real expertise to the discussion.