tvc184

So the new Speaker has been in office for less than 12 hours and you have been able to deduce that he is much worse?

There is no charge of fleeing from a crime scene that I have seen. I have said in other threads….. maybe he is a felon, maybe he has a warrant his arrest (even misdemeanor), is out on bail and not supposed to possess a handgun as a condition of bail, etc.

Apparently (I didn't see it) the shooter could be in trouble, not for the shooting but the aftermath. Supposedly the shooter got people’s money back and started handing it out before he fled. If true, that could potentially open him up to criminal charges for tampering with evidence. He could be cleared by a grand jury by self defense yet be indicted for what happened afterwards.

Now that the show is over, we can get on with the gridlock between the GOP House and the Democrat Senate.

This has been discussed quite a bit in other forums and on Facebook. A guy goes into a Houston restaurant, waving a fake pistol around in an apparent robbery…. [Hidden Content]

Intoxicated?

I don’t think religion is relevant. I do think the national media is relevant on what they want to make into a major news story. For example, George Zimmerman kills Trayvon Martin. No matter a person’s opinion on right or wrong, it was just a local homicide. The media didn’t make it just news, it was international news for over a year. That was purely a media driven story. Michael Brown was killed by a police officer after attacking the officer and after he committed a robbery. A couple of people a day are killed by the police somewhere in this country. Why was that case international news for over a year? The media inflamed the public on that case and the DOJ spent millions of dollars on what was a local incident. After a year of investigating, the federal prosecutors came to the same conclusion that the local prosecutors were able to do in two weeks. Religion? It isn’t relevant in my opinion but the media seems very selective on what they make into a national or international news story. I would think most people would be more interested in a woman being hacked to death than one guy shooting another and claiming self defense.

He got what he wanted out of her. He got his Black female nominee to help boost him over the top. She is no longer needed and now Yesterday’s news.

If you think a majority of the public even knows what the Speaker of the House is and then toss in authority, I believe you are terribly mistaken. No matter who wins in 2024, you’re giving way more credit to the average public than exists. I would bet you could not get 25% of adults to explain the electoral college. The voting population almost certainly has no clue what the Republicans are arguing about but only know that they are arguing. Obviously on an Internet forum a person can Google the answer and appear to be intelligent in response. Stop any person on the street and ask those questions and see what response you get. I would even go as far as just say that a majority of college students currently enrolled have no clue who was most recently the Speaker. Go to Facebook and look at some of the local issues with crime and arrests and look at the comments. The comments are comical. In fact, a few people in this forum, who I happen to know their names, post on Facebook in those threads.

The normal every day American probably doesn’t even know what is happening or what it means. They likely think that some kind of law is being debated and have no clue what the Speaker is or what importance the position has without googling for an answer. *** Average American: Haha…. it is funny what is happening! Question: So what is happening? Average American: I don’t know but it’s funny. Question: They are debating on who should be the Speaker. What does the Speaker do? Average American: I don’t have a clue. I think it may be a person who repeats the day’s activities in the Senate.

It’s a debate. That’s what has the Democrats confused.

I think here we have an admission that at least 200 House Republicans are “respectable conservatives”.

We used to dispatch many/most police calls in 10 codes. We were supposed to transition away from 10 codes a couple of decades ago but a few still linger. With my badge number… “184 10-17, in reference to 10-15 with possible 10-32” Now it would be… “184 speak to John Smith in reference to a disturbance with a person, possibly armed with a knife” What mostly changed is that the types of calls or most no longer in code. Like 10-10/Fight, 10-15/Distbance, etc. although a 10-50/Vehicle accident is still common. If you told one of our officers today to check on a 10-15 with possible 10-10, you would probably just as well be speaking Japanese. Codes that my agency (and all police agencies are different in codes, policy and culture) still uses to make it short, sweet and with no ambiguity are like 10-32 (supposed to mean armed person but most often a firearm) or 10–18 (quickly as possible). If an officer says I need EMS 10-18, it means a person needs medical assistance 5 minutes ago. When the football player Hamlin went down last night on Monday Night Football, that would be EMS 10-18. If it is in reference to the officer himself it typically means I am in deep trouble like Help 10-18 or I need backup 10-18…. usually accompanied by his/her voice going up an octave or two. 9-11 demonstrated the problem with codes as multiple agencies were talking in code probably without realizing that there are several different codes including 10 codes. Some agencies use the words like Code or Signal such as Signal Zero or Code 4 to differentiate from 10 codes. My department has a 5 code for a call disposition with 5 always being the first number like 518 or 521. It means nothing to anyone else. A 518 is short for, see report or, I am writing a report in reference to my call such as robbery, burglary, etc. A 521 means, settled or…. I dealt with these two idiots and I got them to calm down with no more intervention needed. Back when codes first came out (1930s) and most police agencies could only talk to themselves, it really didn’t matter what a code meant. When I retired 18 months ago I had something like 64 radio channels to speak to any fire department, police department, chemical plant emergency operations, etc. in this area.

Wouldn’t Nancy Grace be a joy to life with? She is full of it about half the time and vindictive. She hit a couple of good points though. I think the comment the suspect is reported to have said about anyone else being arrested was just part of the game. She is correct (or possibly) about location of any DNA. It is like fingerprints at a crime scene. Anyone who has ever walked between cars in a parking lot has probably left their DNA and fingerprints at some locations. It is like a school getting broken into and a student’s fingerprints are on the teacher’s desk. With 80-100 students a day, if the print belonged to any of them, so what? I lifted some fingerprints from a classroom but they were inside of a locked cabinet. The teacher left the keys in her desk so a student might have found it. Fingerprints on the teacher’s desk might mean nothing. Those same fingerprints inside of a locked location that no one is supposed to have access to might mean everything.

Another Ted Bundy….. Which also begs the question, was the stunning criminal act his first or will they start finding bodies. I think it may be hard to pattern these killers but I thought many/most of them built up into these types of crimes. They didn’t go from zero to 100 in a single incident but anything is possible. Smaller acts of violence, like starting on animals and slowly building up.

Motive is almost always the most interesting part of such a case. It just isn’t a requirement for a conviction. It would be very hard to make great movies if we never got into motives. I see a lot of Facebook lawyers make statements like, if he committed the crime then what was his motive? I don’t know, he didn’t get his Frosted Flakes today? And you could be correct about a knife. Any gun might have the potential to be traced, even if purchased on the street.

Being a criminologist might have been his downfall. 🙃 I have a book by Dr. George Kirkham… somewhere, Signal Zero. It would be in my language, “officer needs assistance”. Every part of the country or even individual agencies have their own code. It is the ultimate call for help to assist an officer in trouble, potentially in danger of serious injury or death. I have responded to many such calls and made a few myself. But who is George Kirkham? He was basically a police hating PhD in criminology at Florida State University. His doctorate was from the generally thought to be anti-government, anti-authority UC-Berkeley. Like a lot of criminologists (but certainly not all), he had no experience in much of his field of expertise and his knowledge of the subject was taught by professors…. who also had no direct knowledge of what they were teaching. It was academics who had learned from other academics who had learned from….. Police officers also go to college and some of Dr. Kirkham’s students were police officers. Some of them told him that much of his conclusions and lessons were full of crap. One of them eventually challenged him to go to the police academy and ride patrol. He approached the dean of his college department who endorsed the idea. He convinced a sheriff, I believe in Jacksonville, Florida, to let him go to the police Academy on the weekends. He finally got his commission and went on patrol in one of the worst part of town. Signal Zero was part of his experiences. Cases like, in his first couple of days he had to deal with a drunk in a bar. He was going to show the veteran hard core cop how words could diffuse the situation and there was no need for a show of force, much less put your hands on someone. While he was within a few moments on the ground screaming for help, his partner stepped in or something to that effect. I think he said something like, I kept hearing someone screaming and then realized it was him. It was supposed to be a one summer experiment for a couple of nights a week. It ended up being years spent on patrol at a couple of different agencies. He was still a professor and he still taught class but now he saw the issues from the other side. I remember reading a comment by him that much of what he had written in his academic career, and much of what he was teaching in many cases was not true. But wait, he had a PhD in criminology as taught by PhDs in criminology. So Dr. Kirkham wrote more books and produced police training films. Much of the backlash that he received from (now we would call woke) students who didn’t want to hear his police experiences and other professors who saw him as I guess a sellout or a brainwashed person who should no longer be teaching. I assume that no one is going to track down any of Dr. Kirkham’s books or articles so here is a 60 Minutes piece on him done almost 50 years ago. Like Dr. Kirkham found out, reading books by people who were taught by people who wrote books who never actually applied it, may not always have the correct answers.

It obviously could have nothing to do with it but that would be one heck of a coincidence. I would like to see how the put together the case but that might never be known except at trial. A motive is usually meaningless at trial but it might help close things up for a jury. You never know what a juror will rationalize. Jilted boyfriend where he wanted to kill his ex plus the guy that stole her and the others were unfortunate to be at the wrong place and time? Psycho serial killer? Similar to a school mass murderer but he didn’t want to get caught so he could do it again? A fantasy of outsmarting law enforcement (which I think might be common in serial killers).

Testing his perceived knowledge??

Batteries have an extremely diminished capacity in the extreme cold!? Who would have known…… 🤪

In reference to database searches by/for law enforcement, we have: AFIS for fingerprints. [Hidden Content] CODIS for DNA. [Hidden Content] NIBIN for firearm ballistics. [Hidden Content] We have had several cold cases made locally by hits like in CODIS.

I think they try to follow up on each, usually by a task force or group of investigators assigned to the incident. It is not always that many tips however even when there are that many tips. It isn’t like thousands of entirely different clues but mostly a repeating of clues. For example 800 people might report seeing a vehicle in that area and give similar descriptions. Like, we got an X number of tips that a small SUV was seen leaving the parking lot. Those tips collectively show: Year model: 2012-2019 or unknown Color: Green, blue, aqua, turquoise or unknown but medium to dark. Brand: Toyota, Hyundai, Honda or unknown. And so on. That matters because if someone turns in a bright yellow, 1998 Ford Explorer, it probably isn’t going to be a suspect vehicle. BUT…. you still keep the tip just in case. Maybe that was the one person that saw a different vehicle and I could break the case open. Another quick example is if 175 people gave the same name and/or description of a possible suspect. Like, a guy named Such And Such started hanging out with that group a couple of months ago and he seemed strange. But let’s say that a couple of those “same” tips gave additional information like, he had made claims of having fantasies about being a serial killer. Like with the vehicle, a very similar set of tips keep popping up. So with just the vehicle and suspect tips (none of which may be true) we have almost 1,000 tips of a maybe strange guy (likely with a physical description) possibly named Such And Such and a vehicle that may not be linked to him that is a midsize to small SUV, in a year model in the mid to late 2000s and having a green, blue or similar color. So do 1000 different investigators need to be assigned to that? No. I have been involved in a couple of those types of investigations on a smaller scale. I actually called a tip line from another state to give a tip (reported to me) about a national story (kind of like this) that was all over the news prior to today’s social media. The Internet was big but not like it is today. I spoke to a female sergeant (if I remember correctly) and she asked if I thought the tip was valid. I told her that the tip was from a person that I trusted and I absolutely thought that the person thought it was legitimate. We kind got a laugh out of that, cop to cop. She made a comment like, yeah I know what you mean. So, does each and every one get addressed? Yes and no. They probably get addressed by compiling them like I showed. Now that they have arrested a suspect, we could have a good chance of finding out that if the tips were valid as in, a few may have turned out to be correct. A person leaving a tip probably doesn’t know anything about the crime. They are just passing on potential leads. Just like the tip I called in, the person saw a vehicle and a description of two people but the tip was of an out of state license plate with either partial or complete numbers (getting too many years ago to remember). Was it actually the suspects? Did it help? Did it match similar information? I haven’t gotten a clue but that is sometimes what breaks a case. You can bet it was logged with the rest of the tips. So let’s play what if. What if the news story that I was involved in (from several states away) by passing on a tip was the only one from this area of Texas and with the license plate description? Does that make it invalid? Certainly not. A couple of hundred tips might’ve come in about another vehicle and they could’ve all been wrong although similar and the one I called in might have been completely accurate. So again, I think that the thousands of tips would be cataloged and an attempt made to follow up, depending on time. Of course, they could have locked on this guy very early and it just took this long to compile the case. That was kind of the point I wanted to make when this thread first started. Just because you don’t hear it on the news does not mean that it does not exist. To say the police have no clues is entirely understandable but likely not correct. I thought that I read in reference to this arrest that they had DNA material from the crime scene. That alone would be a significant clue, especially with computer searches.

From a CNN article: “The arrest comes a day after police said they have received about 20,000 tips through more than 9,025 emails, 4,575 phone calls, iand 6,050 digital media submissions, while having conducted over 300 interviews”. [Hidden Content] Apparently they got DNA and other evidence from the scene that matched the suspect.

Because the politically correct laws on Family (domestic in other states) Violence (FV). A family member is a person you are married to or were formerly married, a person you have had a baby with, a roommate, a former roommate, a person you have dated and had a continuing romantic or intimate relationship with or a former dating partner. Each of those under Texas law is under FV. Specifically under the roommate and former roommates, it is legally called a member of a household. This is the legal definition of roommates or however we wish to describe them. Notice that they do not have to be related AND it includes people “previously” (former) having lived together. Sec. 71.005. HOUSEHOLD. "Household" means a unit composed of persons living together in the same dwelling, without regard to whether they are related to each other. Sec. 71.006. MEMBER OF A HOUSEHOLD. "Member of a household" includes a person who previously lived in a household. Under federal gun laws, a person convicted of a felony can not possess a firearm. They added in domestic or (in Texas) family violence. So slapping a former roommate (with a misdemeanor conviction) carries the same lifetime ban of firearm possession as if it was a felony. Oh yeah, if you slap a former roommate or girlfriend and are convicted of assault, to do it again years later is a felony. So a guy played college sports. Twenty years later he get mad while drinking and punches his dorm roommate. His buddy is mad and files charges. About 5 years later the same guy has a relationship with a girlfriend. She has an argument with him and is screaming in his ear and he shoves her away. It isn’t intentional but she slips and scratches her knee. That accidental very minor injury is a felony.

Yes the teacher knows. Does that justify the penalty? How do groom an adult? Maybe I need to take notes Another stupid law as an example (which happened to a local police officer maybe 15 years ago. I think he was about 22 and had a 17 year old girlfriend. The ended up in an intimate relationship which is/was completely legal. At some point they took photos together in less than a fully clothed condition. He was then convicted of a felony. Why? Because at 17 she was an adult and could agree to any sexual act with consent but photographs are a felony until her 18th birthday. Make sense? And get this, both are adults and both could possess the exact same photo that they both agreed to take but only he is a felon. He is 18 or older so her possessing photos of him is no crime. There are some stupid laws on the books to make people feel good but don’t make sense.