Baltimore Update

[thetragichippy]

6 hours ago, nappyroots said:

Does it matter that the guy was a veteran? Did the cop keep his job?

He did get his job back.......and it did not matter if he was a veteran.....just like it does not matter if a man is "unarmed" and a cop shoots him in self defense.  

 

But both of those terms are used to make the suspects look better

[baddog]

Well, in the past few weeks, the Dallas area, Baltimore, and now Baton Rouge have experienced some severe flooding.....Baltimore like they haven't seen before. Who's next....Ferguson?

[nappyroots]

On 8/12/2016 at 9:11 PM, thetragichippy said:

He did get his job back.......and it did not matter if he was a veteran.....just like it does not matter if a man is "unarmed" and a cop shoots him in self defense.  

 

But both of those terms are used to make the suspects look better

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Arnold did't get his job back

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, nappyroots said:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Arnold did't get his job back

This is not really hard to follow but I will type slowly.......

This was my post that hippy was agreeing with on Arnold getting his job back.......

>>>>>I am not sure which of his fellow officers that you spoke with but I spoke to several and they all supported him. Maybe we know a different group of officers............. 

An arbitrator gave Arnold his job back saying that his rights were denied. The city paid him off to leave. 

A copy of Bartman's ruling states,.......  "The grievant is exonerated on all charges. The city of Orange, Texas violated state and federal law when it deprived Capt. Arnold of his 'due process rights.' The indefinite suspension is reversed and the disciplinary reinstatement of Captain Arnold is so ordered. As to remedy, he will be restored to his position and made whole for all benefits and credits in accordance with Texas Local Government Code 143.053(f)."<<<<<

 

As I stated, Arnold won his arbitration and when the city appealed, they paid him $600,000 not to come back. If the city was sure of a victory on appeal, why pay him more than half a million dollars in settlement? They gave him 10 year's salary to agree to not get his job back. Of course the city could have rolled the dice and gone to a trial but I think they saw the writing on the wall that they very well might have to give him back pay and reinstate him so they paid him off... which is exactly what I stated in my first post.  

You stated in a post that I quoted that his fellow officers did not support him. I disagreed as I know most of his fellow officers and several told me differently. You then posted the above article to back up your premise This is a quote from your article that you have cited to back up your statement. "Several officers dropped in to support Arnold.".  

So let's see, you say that he didn't get his job back but I say that he did and the city settled with him to not come back. His firing was never upheld. You also stated that his fellow officers did not support him and then you cite an article that refutes you own statement and backs up mine that his fellow officers did support him.

Thanks for the confirmation. 

[LumRaiderFan]

15 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

This is not really hard to follow but I will type slowly.......

This was my post that hippy was agreeing with on Arnold getting his job back.......

>>>>>I am not sure which of his fellow officers that you spoke with but I spoke to several and they all supported him. Maybe we know a different group of officers............. 

An arbitrator gave Arnold his job back saying that his rights were denied. The city paid him off to leave. 

A copy of Bartman's ruling states,.......  "The grievant is exonerated on all charges. The city of Orange, Texas violated state and federal law when it deprived Capt. Arnold of his 'due process rights.' The indefinite suspension is reversed and the disciplinary reinstatement of Captain Arnold is so ordered. As to remedy, he will be restored to his position and made whole for all benefits and credits in accordance with Texas Local Government Code 143.053(f)."<<<<<

 

As I stated, Arnold won his arbitration and when the city appealed, they paid him $600,000 not to come back. If the city was sure of a victory on appeal, why pay him more than half a million dollars in settlement? They gave him 10 year's salary to agree to not get his job back. Of course the city could have rolled the dice and gone to a trial but I think they saw the writing on the wall that they very well might have to give him back pay and reinstate him so they paid him off... which is exactly what I stated in my first post.  

You stated in a post that I quoted that his fellow officers did not support him. I disagreed as I know most of his fellow officers and several told me differently. You then posted the above article to back up your premise This is a quote from your article that you have cited to back up your statement. "Several officers dropped in to support Arnold.".  

So let's see, you say that he didn't get his job back but I say that he did and the city settled with him to not come back. His firing was never upheld. You also stated that his fellow officers did not support him and then you cite an article that refutes you own statement and backs up mine that his fellow officers did support him.

Thanks for the confirmation. 

Lol...dang facts...again.

[new tobie]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Lol...dang facts...again.

I know Arnold I talked to him in person

[LumRaiderFan]

6 minutes ago, new tobie said:

I know Arnold I talked to him in person

OK...great.

[thetragichippy]

19 hours ago, new tobie said:

I know Arnold I talked to him in person

How is he enjoying that half a million dollars?