Woman, 6 hours with no clothes in jail

[Father of four]

6 hours with out any clothes is excessive. And for what? Maybe for just being sarcastic? Her answer about committing suicide may have deserved that she had her clothes removed, OK. But 6 hours was just a slap in the face to her as I see it. That was punishment from the Officers because they could. How dare she not do as she was told in Their jail !!!! I could be wrong but I doubt it.

Mountainbear, I respect you but come on..they could have evaluated her with in a couple hours. And the fact is they paid her something means they are willing to pay her because... 1 they were guilty of something or, 2 they believed they would be better off giving her money now instead of paying her more later. Something like that I bet ya. Either way if they were totally clear and legal they would have not paid her a dime!

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm sure you've heard the old canard that "any prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."

With very few exceptions, the inverse is also true. The bias is the state's, not the jury's.

Perhaps, we certainly have become a weak minded people

 

[Blitzkrieg]

6 hours with out any clothes is excessive. And for what? Maybe for just being sarcastic? Her answer about committing suicide may have deserved that she had her clothes removed, OK. But 6 hours was just a slap in the face to her as I see it. That was punishment from the Officers because they could. How dare she not do as she was told in Their jail !!!! I could be wrong but I doubt it.

Mountainbear, I respect you but come on..they could have evaluated her with in a couple hours. And the fact is they paid her something means they are willing to pay her because... 1 they were guilty of something or, 2 they believed they would be better off giving her money now instead of paying her more later. Something like that I bet ya. Either way if they were totally clear and legal they would have not paid her a dime!

Again, how dangerous is a paper hospital gown?

I hope she also sued the individual officers and cleaned out their retirement funds

 

[MountainBear]

So in this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty (or at least that's the idea). So we are assuming that the lady was innocent and just being mistreated. But without a conviction (in fact with a no bill returned) we assume the officers are guilty. What a world...

 

[Father of four]

So in this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty (or at least that's the idea). So we are assuming that the lady was innocent and just being mistreated. But without a conviction (in fact with a no bill returned) we assume the officers are guilty. What a world...

That is not my point!!!!! 6 hours is excessive! I am not saying she was not guilty.

 

[ZachS]

Perhaps, we certainly have become a weak minded people

When there's only one source of information about the alleged crime committed, even the strong-minded will have little choice but to vote based on what they've heard. Especially if the prosecutor's not clearly stringing them along.

In many states, they've dispensed with grand juries entirely.

 

[Father of four]

So in this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty (or at least that's the idea).

She was treated like she was guilty of possibly committing suicide!

 

[MountainBear]

She was treated like she was guilty of possibly committing suicide!

Because if she commits suicide while in custody, then the sheriff's office gets sued for that. You guys are treating the officer's like they are guilty. We don't have all the facts. We don't know the realities beyond the timeframe involved (which doesn't appear to be in question). You guys are simply making a bunch of assumptions based on one biased news report. That's not fair to anyone involved. I assume that if a jury of civilians, whom are presented the facts of a case (or at least both sides) refuse to indict the officer's involved, then it seems unreasonable for you guys, who don't have all the facts, to be condemning them.

Six hours seems like a lot. It seems unreasonable. But apparently, there were some extenuating circumstances, otherwise the officer's involved would have been indicted. Remember, it was not a peer review board that cleared them. It was a criminal grand jury made up of civilians. Civilians who have the same thoughts as we do. Something convinced them these officer's didn't do anything criminal.

 

[Father of four]

Alright..Uncle. I was wrong.

 

[MountainBear]

Damn, I should have been a lawyer...

I still respect your opinion FOF, as always, but as you may have noticed, I tend to come to the defense of LEO's with a vengeance...

 

[Redcap]

And the police wonder why people don't trust them.

Yup.