Watching The Cops
See other Watching The Cops Articles
Title: Police Bodycam Footage Sheds Light on Girl’s Viral Beach Head-Pummeling
Source:
RedState
URL Source: https://www.redstate.com/alexparker ... ce-beating-girl-emily-weinman/
Published: May 31, 2018
Author: Alex Parker
Post Date: 2018-05-31 22:10:39 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 21719
Comments: 135
On Wednesday, New Jersey police released bodycam video which sheds light on the viral beating of a young girl by a beach officer. Wednesday’s footage of a cop punching a young girl in the head as he holds her face-down at the beach — and the confrontation which preceded the sandy grappling — serves as a compliment to the video which made headlines over the last few days. — Lexy (@HewittLexy) May 26, 2018 In the nine minutes of additional context, Wildwood police are seen engaging 20-year-old Emily Weinman as she soaks up sun with her 18-month-old daughter, a friend, and her daughter’s father. After discovering alcohol near her beach blankets, an officer orders her to take a Breathalizer test. “I know that didn’t come up positive. I didn’t take a drink of anything,” she says. One of the cops states she’s going to have to pour out her alcohol. Off-camera, either she or her friend explains, “We didn’t even drink alcohol. You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age. You are. You’re not allowed to drink it. And we’re not drinking it.” The officers tell the girls they’re guilty of “possession/consumption. Open display — you can see [the alcohol].” “Okay, you can see it,” one of the girls admits. “And we’re not drinking it.” The video goes silent for several seconds, seemingly muting more than just names. Emily states what she clearly believes are her rights: Then more exchange between Weinman and the cop: “She’s on her way. You can wait here.” … “What’s your last name?” “You don’t need my last name.” The boys in blue aren’t particularly impressed: “Don’t touch me!” “You’re about to get dropped.” She backs away. She appears to push at the officer’s chest as he closes in on her. The video then cuts to the maybe-100-pound-girl girl screaming as the cop mounts her and is holding her by the hair. She yells, “They’re choking me!” After more struggle, the cop warns, “That’s it,” and begins fist-smashing her in the head. Both the puncher and the punched are cursing. Weinman now faces multiple charges, including two counts of assault on a police officer. I can only imagine people are going to have very different opinions of the video. So much so, that I don’t want to even give mine. I’d prefer to simply read your thoughts in the Comments section below. I’ll share my view, nonetheless, as a catalyst: Firstly, in my opinion, the girl comes across as a self-entitled brat who could probably use being taken down a few notches. Secondly, the cop appears happy to abuse his power and beat a young girl in the head. This is not the job of law enforcement. It is not their charge, place, right, or job to teach people a lesson. Their job is only to enforce the law. With as little force as possible. In this case, at issue was a citation. Nothing more. Emily Weinman may be obnoxious. But that is not the business of a public servant who is paid to bring only his best to his position. Am I wrong? Am I right? Please tell me how. Check out my initial coverage of the viral video — and the ensuing commentary of RedState readers — here. And for another choking story, check out what MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace wants to do to Sarah Huckabee Sanders. And by all means, follow Alex Parker on Twitter. Poster Comment: The longer this went on, the more I was hoping someone would accidentally kick her in the head two or three times or just light her up with a Taser for a half-hour or so. I would never have the patience to be a cop and deal with these assholes constantly.
I was sleeping on the beach and I woke up to this.. i can’t believe it.. pic.twitter.com/UJE5Sy7E4G “I didn’t do anything to disrespect you. …You can’t lock me up. I didn’t disrespect you. … I didn’t do anything to you. You’re mad because you thought we were drinking.” “Where’s your aunt?” “Okay, that’s it. I’m done with you. (to the other officer) Do you have cuffs on you?” “Don’t f***ing touch me!…What are you doing?”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative (#0)
Sweetheart, you lost your "woman" exemption in the 60's. You wanted equality. Well, you got it.
The video had "this is not going to end well" written all over it. It includes such favorites a "girl tells cop what the law is", quibbling about "we can carry alcohol if we're not drinking it", refusing to empty the bottle, not giving her name, cursing, and walking away. Then BLAM! It all goes to shit. So predictable in all these videos.
Right at the moment to put her hands up to push the cop's face or hit him weakly on the face to fend off his lawful arrest. As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest. On top of refusal to identify a lawful request for ID or a name and a minor in possession of alcohol. They could probably go after her for child endangerment as well since she was asleep/passed out with her infant nearby. After pushing at his face to avoid the cuffs, it really went downhill. Recall that mouthy bitch on the subway in L.A.? She was on her way to meet the DMV so she couldn't give ID. And this one has an aunt who is "on the way", supposedly the owner of the booze. This "aunt", if she exists, caused this situation directly by not taking her booze with her when she left the beach (assuming any of that stuff is true). I don't blame the cops for investigating. You have a woman laying unconscious (sleeping or passed out) on the beach, alcohol containers near her, and an infant not being watched by anyone apparently as the baby daddy was way off down the beach somewhere, as we saw when she kept screaming for him to come help her and she clearly had no idea where he was. A reminder of the Subway Cunt and her Cuntish Co-protector getting arrested, being filmed by the Gay Male Cunt Cameraman. (Yes, we do get to use the word 'cunt' any time we want now. Samantha Bee made it all part of the social conversation.)
Yep. 100%. But you know they're going to drop all the charges to make it go away. Then people like Deckard will conclude that the cops had nothing, were in the wrong, and are bullies. I say we start charging people and make them go to court. Being nice to them by dropping the charges obviously isn't working. By the way, did you read that study that showed that accusations of police brutality dropped 93% since body cams were installed? The money saved in out-of-court settlements more than paid for the cameras.
I was taught the difference between assault and battery many moons ago. I dislike how the media and press misuse the terms all the time, usually using the word assault in many cases when there is physical contact. Just a little thing that irks me and I wanted to share it here. Edit: I remember back in college studying for a law class test in a group. My smart friend said, Fred, this is assault and he raised his fist aimed at my arm. Then he said, this is battery and his fist landed (lightly) on my bicep. Very clear and concise explanation that I recall to this day.
Well, these laws do vary state to state. They are not federal laws, uniform throughout the states. If in doubt about a particular state, ask nolu where you can find the relevant statutes.
TooCon, see my edit above. Nolu Spam will have me reading all day with what I consider a simple concept with a simple explanation.
Depends on whether his superiors and the D.A. have any balls. Even just having the videos out there on YouBoob may help deter some bad behavior at those beaches. Most police chiefs are focused on reducing crime to a low level, not in trying to utterly eradicate every breach of the statutes. So the D.A. or police chief might say, yeah that video shook people up a little and now we're down to only a handful of complaints about alcohol on the beach per week. And if they'd had a dozen complaints a day previously, they could legitimately consider it a success. The purpose of law enforcement is not to eradicate crime but to reduce it as much as possible without forcing the citizens to live in a police state. I thought it was amusing that on a forum where we can find someone to disagree with anything, body cams seemed to enjoy uniform support here among LF posters. Everyone seemed to think it was a good idea, for lots of different reasons. A lot less of the he-says-he-says in court, protecting good cops from malicious accusations of brutality, protecting the public from bad cops abusing their authority, etc. We see how the bodycams are paying off in countless cases. And now the crooks know about those bodycams and they are a lot less likely to try dumb stuff, tell easily disproved lies at their trials, etc. So when they go off to Crook College (prison), they learn to anticipate that their interactions with cops will be filmed and it will rarely help them instead of the cops. Which means the smart move for crooks is to think through anything you do that the cop's camera will record. I wouldn't be surprised in coming years if cops come to think of bodycams as the best thing to come along in some years. But it is a process overall. We give them the cameras but it takes a while to see the real result as the implications of those cams sinks in with criminals of various types.
You'd better know the statutes of the state you're in before you believe that that is or ever was true. Your buddy sounds like a dumbass. And statutes may have changed since as a result of the courts or state legislature. No two states have identical laws on murder, assault, battery, rape, etc. Those things are considered crimes in all the states but the trigger for prosecution varies, the elements of the crime can vary considerably, etc. We have 50 states and 50 criminal codes. Then the feds, due to their meddling federal criminalization, added another 5,000 or more federal violent crime statutes to the tally (no one can determine an exact count of just how many federal violent crimes there are). And nolu is not spamming us when he gives us quotes or links to the actual governing statutes and to relevant court decisions.
liberal mojo ... jusT shorT lived flowering youTh afTer ThaT noThing love If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Yeah, ninth in his class of 800 and a medical doctor with many years of service. He would have been higher if he wasn't helping his fellow friends/students so much with his compassion and brain power. Screw you.
Maybe you should go ask him whether the statutes of state criminal laws are reliably uniform across all 50 states. So maybe he told the state of the law in your state some 40-50 years ago. Let's grant that it was accurate for the sake of argument. All of these statutes have changed considerably over the years in all the states, either by court decisions or the state legislatures changing the law themselves. In all 50 states. You are a dumbass if you think what some guy told you about assault and battery 50 years ago in one state is somehow still the relevant standard for assault and battery in all 50 states today. Yeah, it really isn't my fault that you're a dumbass.
UCMJ - first word is Uniform. Dumbass.
The woman on the beach and the cops are all civilians. So UCMJ is completely irrelevant.
Your smart friend gave you the correct, classic example.
Thanks, Holmes.
Someone should beat the stupid out of her...
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Has the FBI knocked on your door to discuss why you have over 50,000 primers in your Mom's basement? No? It just shows how slow the federal government is. Yes? You are hiding the questioning from us.
It’s prey like you, that feed the need for bullies. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
No offense, but your delusional rantings here have convinced me that you need to be put down like a rabid dog. You and others of your blue ilk are a threat to society.
Over 50,000 primers? Really in personal possession?? Are you watching, "The Night of the Living Dead" variant scope of discovery for your own personal protection?
Just between me and you ... GrandIsland is an absolute idiot. If you create a root cause analysis of his posts .... he lives in his mother's basement, never to get out.
You’re just like every snowflake that flaps his shit smackers... just like that Hogg asshole. Real tough... but don’t have the ass or the balls to act. All you gotta do is remove that geriatric diaper, put on your big boy pants... and complete the task you suggest. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
What would you do if you didn’t have 80 year old Dicktard, fight your battles? Lmfao
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I will ensure my criticisms of your stupid, silly FUCKING GAWD AWFUL posts are cast off with rational debating skills during your awkward rebuttals; as .... unlike yourself I am not perfect.
You should go immediately to Hell, without passing go or collecting $200.00... for even typing those two words together. lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
You should go immediately to Hell, without passing go or collecting $200.00... for even typing those two words together. There is no objective evidence of "HELL," officer. Why did you pull me over? Is your opinion admissible in a court of law within the boundaries of the USA?
And that will be not less than $500 for disorderly stupid. NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013) 1. a. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority or who knowingly consumes any alcoholic beverage in any school, public conveyance, public place, or place of public assembly, or motor vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense, and shall be fined not less than $500.00. [snip]
If you lived a few years ago you wouldn't believe in germs and you would be telling deckard that it is a conspiracy theory that the world is not flat. 🍿
NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013) We can always count on you to bring some relevant facts. I hope they throw the book at her. I'm sick of seeing all these videos of people who don't know the laws and don't care what they are and then start mouthing off to cops who are just doing their jobs. When it's all done, I think this mouthy beach bitch will have a lot more respect for the police. And she will learn some valuable facts about the laws and why we should obey them.
So predictable in all these videos. Yes,and it NEVER means the cops are right to beat on and abuse citizens who aren't being violent or threatening.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
...said the sheep to the butcher.
HorseHillary! We are NOT subjects,we are free citizens with rights,and the cops had no right to start the physical confrontation over such a nickel and dime "offense". Most cops today are assholes because the job is a asshole magnet.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Can't you get some extradition order and fly down to Spiclandia and just arrest buckeroo? I'm pretty sure he's breaking some laws down there.
He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.
And YOU are a dumbass if you think that FACTS can change. PERCEPTION can change,but not facts,and the FACTS are those pompous asses in blue were the ones that committed assault and battery.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Someone should beat the stupid out of her... Because she was right and knew her rights? Is that you,Cartman?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
What makes you so sure she didn't have legal authority to possess it? Maybe she was carrying it for her adult friends,or just watching it for them?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The asshole CREATED a situation that borderline gave him the authority to make an arrest. If she were a lawyer or made it known her father was a lawyer,he would have tucked his little tail up into the crack in his ass and fled,whimpering for mercy. IF she goes to court and tries to represent herself she WILL be found guilty of resisting arrest,but that represents nothing more than the thugs in the legal system protecting themselves and the system by scratching each other's backs. 99 percent of the time what will happen is the cops will threaten to charge her with felony resisting arrest unless she drops her charges they beat her and used excessive force,and that she was not guilty of the original charge. That is NOT justice,it is abuse of official power and it goes on every day in every state in this nation,while idiots like you stand by and applaud. IF she has a close friend or relative that is a lawyer and is bored and interested in taking the case,all the charges will be dropped against her in exchange for a written agreement that she will not sue the cops or the PD they work for for excessive use of force. It ain't right,it ain't justice,but it is what happens everyday in every courtroom in the country.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Someone should beat the stupid out of her... Why,because she is right and you are mad because she was questioning the authora-TAY of goobermint dawgs? Supposes she was with her family and carrying the beer because her father was carrying the umbrella and towels,and her mother was carrying something else? Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Bullshit! He CREATED the confrontation because citizens not breaking any laws stood up to him and pointed that out,and it pissed him off.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Really? Let's take another example of a class of gun laws. How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago? How many allow CCW now? The underlying facts of a crime don't change but the laws change all the time, state by state. And that is a fact.
So carrying narcotics is just fine as long as the cops don't observe you selling them or using them? Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug.
I saw no egregious use of force. The arresting officers acted lawfully based on what we have seen. There's a rising lawlessness on beaches around the country. Local PDs are strained in dealing with it.
You're an a-hole, like your homo friend FireIsland. She did nothing wrong to deserve what happened. I hope you post a follow-up article once the dust settles. Apparently NJ cops are a-holes too. What a crock.
How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago? How many allow CCW now? The underlying facts of a crime don't change but the laws change all the time, state by state. And that is a fact. There ARE no facts in your brain fart. It only proves that what people like YOU call "Facts" are temporary things that change with the wind. AND.......WTF is up with your rabid approval of a state ALLOWING someone to enjoy a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT? Here is a little factoid for you,it is the nature of authorities,including cops and states to try to expand their power,and there is nothing they would forbid themselves from doing if it weren't for the US Constitution preventing them from overreaching.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
So carrying narcotics is just fine as long as the cops don't observe you selling them or using them? Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug. If they are legal prescribed narcotics,the obvious answer is "YES!" If they are illegal narcotics,as you so obviously want to imply,the answer is "No,and it would not be legal for them to be carried if the girls had been over 21,either. Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug. So what? Are you their daddy? Who died and gave you the authority to regulate who can and can not BE AROUND BUT NOT CONSUMING legal,tax-paid alcoholic beverages?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You are ok with a 200+ lb cop punching a minor female in the head that is on the ground? Good to know.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
It's somewhat of an honor to be considered an a-hole by you. I must be doing something right.
Well, only if it is too inconvenient to just kick her in the head.
If she wants no interference from the state, then stay off patrolled state-owned property. Like the beach.
. . . So what? Are you their daddy? Who died and gave you the authority to regulate who can and can not BE AROUND BUT NOT CONSUMING legal,tax-paid alcoholic beverages? You sure switched fast from "Of course, it's against the law" for narcotics and went to "you ain't their daddy" when it comes to alcohol.
This is why the cops say nothing when they're detaining someone and they ask, "What I do?" Because if they tell them they start spouting bullshit like this.
It does demonstrate the radical changes of the character of our society. 50 years ago if you were carrying concealed it was assumed you were the bad guy carrying it for nefarious purposes. Why else would you have a concealed weapon? Today, there are numerous examples of why people carry concealed for defensive, not offensive, purposes.
Obviously I don't want to turn this into a CCW chat thread but it seemed like an example of radical changes in criminal law that have happened in a class of what were once uniformly serious crimes. In the case of CCW, the radical change in state laws has happened in just 25 years.
Especially after you bragged on the other thread how you stayed on-topic despite numerous posts. "In the case of CCW, the radical change in state laws has happened in just 25 years." The NRA deserves a lot of credit for that, I think. Plus the criminals, of course. But the point is that there's no reason not to -- assuming you're a trained, responsible adult (even though most armed criminals aren't). It's hard to argue against self-defense, especially when that self-defense has the side effect of protecting others. Plus, no one knows you're armed, so they can't be offended. Civilian open- carry is disconcerting. My nephew in Ohio open carries and when I'm there I feel unprepared for some upcoming shootout. Like, "What do you know that I don't know?" The funny part is that he liked his girlriend's 9mm better as a carry weapon, so they swapped. But hers is powder blue and looks like a squirt gun. A 9mm squirt gun.
It's a right to carry but I really don't like open carry, don't like to see it. I don't even like to see cops wearing a holster. If you want to carry, get a CCW and stop making gun-shy people nervous. Of course, I'm sure I'm very much in the minority on this, at least on this forum. And I do live in a state with a fairly low barrier to get a CCW. I also think that open-carry mostly hurts the gun rights cause more than it helps. I'm thinking of the rather aggressive open-carry nuts down in Texas especially. There's another bunch in California.
God is not ABSOLUTE. God is relative to your capability & capacity to survive.
I get nervous at a gun store when I see gang-bangers (well, they look like gang-bangers) handling firearms. I have this strange feeling we'll be meeting again.
Only when it's done to intimidate. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
Statistically, you're more likely to face off in a gunfight against someone of your own race. This is true for both blacks and whites. You are several percent more likely to be killed by a black man than a non-black. So while your thought of fellow gunshop customers as possible assailants is ironic, outside of some improbable circumstances you are still much more likely to be in a gun fight with another white. I think you probably do know all of this already. John Lott and others have posted some well-known studies on gun violence for some years and the results regarding interracial vs. intraracial shootings is pretty consistent.
Nope. And I am whistling DIXIE!
Ahhh,"The State" is your massa,and you are happy with that. Good to know.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Well,Bubba,you specified ILLEGAL narcotics,and legal beer.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
HorseHillary! I knew several local businessmen that carried concealed weapons on a daily basis 50 years ago,and nobody thought anything of it. Why else would you have a concealed weapon? Uhhhh,to protect yourself from robbery and assault?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I was at this country tavern out in the boonies about twenty years ago in the afternoon. The thing I noticed was this large .45 caliber revolver sitting next to the cash register against the wall, not the counter. The place had a reputation for rough types showing up. I doubt they were ever robbed though. I think the name of it was The Black Cat. I had a beer or two with friends and a nice visit. Not sure if I'd want to be there after 11 p.m. though.
Suppose you came back into reality, fag patriarch.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Suppose you eat shit and die,Fire Island?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Speaking of death... how old are you again?
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law which violates the Constitution to be valid. This is succinctly stated as follows: 'All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.' Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803) 'When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.'
Man, you gotta love how many ‘men’ are in this thread cheering a girl getting beat up by a guy. I bet they’re all tough guys too. Lol. Maybe they beat their wives as well, wouldn’t surprise me, unless the only reason they don’t is because their wives could beat the hell outa them. What a country we live in now, eh?
'What kind of man gives cigarettes to trees?'
At what point was she actually beaten up? She struggled to resist arrest and got cuffed. You sure do love to hurl those allegations though, a real petty liberal streak of accusation. Makes you feel morally superior apparently.
Blah-blah-blah. You think a Class II Jersey beach cop is going to deliberate like Oliver Wendell Holmes while trying to decide to make an arrest? Before you declare this woman more holy than the Virgin Mary, let's look at some other reporting on her little hobbies. Wildwood Police are referring Weinman to the Cape May prosecutor’s office on two counts of aggravated assault on a police officer, and charges of aggravated assault by spitting bodily fluids at/on a police officer, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, obstruction and being a minor in possession of alcohol. This is not Weinman’s first run in with the law and not the first time she’s been combative, according to court documents. In September of 2016, she was arrested and charged with burglary, simple assault, criminal mischief, criminal trespass and recklessly endangering another person. In November of 2017, Weinman pleaded guilty to misdemeanor simple assault and misdemeanor “recklessly endangering another person.” She was sentenced to serve four years of probation and pay just under $10,000 in court costs and restitution.
I don’t watch videos. Opening sentence in OP mentions a beating. Maybe you don’t read what you post? By the way? I am morally superior. It just is what it is.
'What kind of man gives cigarettes to trees?'
So, offered a chance to see the evidence yourself, you prefer to remain ignorant and form opinions based on slanted second-hand reporting. Maybe being gullible or lazy is the source of your moral superiority.
So that means she has her probation revoked and she has to serve time for the 2017 crime in addition to these new charges? I hope.
At that point I turn arond and find another bar.
Which New Jersey law violated the U.S. Constitution here?
So you don't believe in gender equality?
Judges in most states have flexibility and the probation laws vary. I have no idea what NJ does. I would think there would be some jail time. Some additional info from Heavy.com: You can read Weinman’s full, now-deleted Facebook post below: I did not do anything wrong and anything could’ve been written down on that paper so I wouldn’t give it to him. At that point I was told if I don’t give it to him he’s going to arrest me. I told him I have my 18 month old daughter with me and there’s no need for all of it and that again, I’m not gonna give him my information knowing I didn’t do anything wrong. He told me he’s arresting me and started coming towards me to put handcuffs on me. I cautiously was backing up from him (facing him) and yelled for my daughters father. (he was playing in the ocean with our daughter at the time).. I tripped and fell and the cop tackled me to the ground and smashed my head into the sand. At that point I blacked out and fought any way possible trying to get up and push him off me. Thats when he head locked me me by his arm around my neck, punched on me in my head and then he head locked me again but this time choking me, I was gasping for ear. Yes, i know I should’ve gave him my name.. I was partly wrong in a way but I was scared; Like I said I didn’t do anything wrong and anything could’ve been written on that paper, the whole situation was iffy and I didn’t trust it.. especially being aware of the fact of how grimy law enforcement can be now a days. & honestly, I can say if I took even a sip, then I would’ve gave them my information and called it a day; I’m underage, so I know better. But this whole situation was handled wrongly and blew out of proportion all because these pigs didn’t do their jobs the way they were TRAINED to do so. maybe that’s just how they train them nowadays, who knows with the world we live in today🤷🏻♀️ Now, I’m over here with a sore body, banging headache and the thought of ever trusting a police officer again if anything were to happen in the future. That’s what we call them for right?🤦🏻♀️ We are supposed to feel safe and trust our police officers for anything. Oh, did I mention that they didn’t even take the beer (like they’re supposed to since we were underage) and finish getting my friends info?? They obviously were there to stir the pot. I know I’m not the first this happened too and definitely am sure that I will not be the last!! So she admits that it was her alcohol and defends it by alleging that 90% of the young people on the beach were also minors in possession. The mayor was interviewed too, "Troiano told local media underage drinking is a problem. 'I don’t understand why it seems to be that this is a God-given right that they can come here and drink underage,' he said." Obviously, this is another major beach with problems of rising lawlessness as we have seen around the country in recent years. Cannon, Nillman and Jordan are seasonal cops. Earning just $10 an hour, NJ.com says, they’re called Class II officers who get the same training as police recruits. To qualify for the job they must be 18, have a high school diploma and pass a background check. In its initial statement Sunday, the department said it has “received reports of a video on various social media sources, regarding an incident that occurred on the Wildwood beach yesterday afternoon with our officers.” So these are just summer beach cops, with minimal police training. Security guards with a badge. Maybe they're hoping to hired by a PD. You kinda notice the police chief is trying to be supportive but maybe he's not fighting for these seasonal cops like he would for his full-timers. Like any police incident, the who/what/where/when starts to give you a better picture of the incident. I'm not sure whether it's ordinary or not for seasonal beach cops to be as aggressive as this. Maybe some of the public resentment is due to the fact that they are seasonal cops, not full-time cops or deputies who have a lot more training.
I just watched a few seconds. Did they get a search warrant for that breathalyzer. You constitutionally need one. You know that right?
I don't think you can cite a Supreme Court opinion to support that. I've never heard that before. It is moot anyway. She gave the breath sample as requested. Apparently, so did her friend though you don't really see that.
She was a minor in possession of alcohol. That gave them probable cause to test her. But it's a moot point. They asked and she voluntarily complied. Twice, I think.
Supreme court decisions lol. I'm talking about the true law the constitution. Not a bunch of freaks opinions. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
I wasn't talking to you. I don't care about your opinion. You are a stupid when it comes to the constitution and human rights. You are more like a nazi than an American constitutionalist. Anyhow. If there was probable cause where is the oath or affirmation. but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
She says that twice. Can't she read?
Her person was secure, the alcohol was not concealed on her body or clothing. She wasn't in a house/home/residence, no personal papers were involved, and I don't think alcohol in plain sight qualifies as an "effect" but as visible contraband (when possessed by a minor). And they didn't search her at all. She even alleges that they didn't seize the alcohol after they arrested her but just left it on the beach. So where is your search and where is your seizure? Neither occurred. I don't think the Fourth Amendment applies here.
She doesn't write badly so she can read pretty well. I'll bet her lawyer just loved her posting that little Facebook confession. : )
They searched her person. They searched her breath. I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something. The plain words of the constitution were violated.
They did not search her person that I saw. They requested a breath sample and she complied voluntarily with the request. If you surrender a right, that's your problem. And the state and federal courts do not believe a breathalyzer violates fundamental rights. It's not like that defense has not been tried (and failed) many times in court. I still don't see a search or a seizure.
I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something. I'm with you Pebbles. I consider a breathalyzer the same as a cavity search.
It doesn't say you can search if someone is stupid and agrees to your illegal search. It says no searches.
That is the first positive comment I have received from you in many moons.
She wasn't searched. The alcohol was in plain sight by her blanket. What, you expect the cops to go around blindfolded so they don't see evidence of crimes providing probably cause for further investigation? If she hadn't had the alcohol out in plain sight next to her, it seems very unlikely that they would have ever stopped to question her and then arrest her. An officer seeing something in plain sight is not conducting a search. He's just seeing evidence.
See? I told you that you were wrong. Now even Fred is agreeing with you. : )
Go pound sand, you misterwhite jr. son of a gun.
I'm talking specifically about the breathalyzer. If they want to arrest her for the alcohol then so be it. Like I said I'm only talking about the breathalyzer. I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age. At least the beachs I've been on.
I'm not sure if all public beaches ban it though that is a safe bet. But a minor is always banned, on the beach or elsewhere. This girl isn't too bright or she wouldn't have been displaying it openly. It's bound to catch any cop's eye. And the girl looks like she could be in high school.
At least the beaches I've been on. Not sure if that's true. Canned beer is fine at some, bottled (glass) beer is a no-no for obvious reasons.
I started think about the 18mo infant. It would have been born in December 2016 or very early January 2017 to be 18 months old now. So she was 5-6 months pregnant in September 2016 when she committed some pretty serious crimes. Then when her daugher wasn't even a year old, she committed more crimes and paid $10,000 restitution and court costs and got 4 years probation. I think this is not a law-abiding person.
Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while. NORMALLY I'm very cynical about these types of possible over-officiousness. I will say that the initial reports were clearly way slanted toward the Witch in question. Story was spun AGAINST LE as usual. UNTIL the Wildwood PD released th body-cam. Drunken Witch is Guilty of several offenses. INCLUDING being an obnoxious attention-ho, disturbing the peace, incitement, lying her azz off, and assaulting a LE. I. FULLY. CHEERED. ON. HER. BEAT-DOWN. *My perspective*: Having worked at the Seaside NJ beaches for several years (back when), this kind of animal was simply carted away without all this phony fanfare. By screeching and screaming, she's tried to cover her own lawlessness to exploit the fake, "MEN ARE MEAN WOMEN-HATERS!" meme. (This is the type of selfish weaselly witch who would cry, "RAPE!!!" in public in you brushed against her.) As TC has documented above, this disrespectful witch was already ON PROBATION and NOT a good person. What we DON'T need: A bunch of these types of Dem-Leftist trouble-making anarchists pulling this BS in public as we're all trying to enjoy ourselves in peace.
So was busting minors for alcohol openly displayed a usual thing back when? Was this use of force something that surprised you or seemed typical for summer beach cops like these? [I assume you had seasonal cops back then too.]
I'll say. Fred even told me to go pound sand. My feelings were really hurt.
... and 18 years old. Any record of crimes committed prior to that -- and I'm guessing quite a few -- would be sealed. So, she's off to a running start and I'm sure we haven't heard the last of her, given her attitude towards the law and law enforcement. At least the kid has a father. No idea how that happened.
Yeah. I'm crying.
Cop: "Alcohol is not allowed on the beach. You're going to have to pour it out." No assault. No beating. No arrest. No YouTube video. No Facebook posting. I live a dull life. (But with no criminal record.)
Or she could have put it in a cooler or kept it out of sight. Then the cops would have had no probable cause to stop and get off the 4-wheeler to question her. Apparently, some people think you have a constitutional right to display that you have alcohol on a patrolled public beach even if you're a minor.
I guess she actually believed what she was saying -- as long as she's not drinking it, it's legal. Misdemeanor stupidity.
Yeah,that little thing assaulted those two fat cops and had them in fear of dey widdle lifes. Da poor bayabys! And all they did was attack her and thrown her to the ground and hit her in the head! She's a bully! A bully,ah tells ya! As for the rest of it,sounds like a typical example of the pigs overcharging to get a plea bargain conviction. IOW,police and judicial abuse of power and authority for profit and to cover their own incompetent asses.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
She says that twice. Can't she read? Maybe she thought it would be a good idea to write it twice so slow-witted people would understand it?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something. I'm with you Pebbles. I consider a breathalyzer the same as a cavity search. The sound you are hearing is that of AKA nailing a framed copy of that post to his wall.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Well, if she is correct and they never did actually confiscate the alcohol, then it would seem they have no physical evidence of M.I.P. All her lawyer has to do is say, "What alcohol? I see no alcohol in evidence". So she might get off on that charge. It could cause the D.A. to drop all the charges since that was the offense that set events in motion.
They didn't look fat. They'd only been on the job for a month or so. So they hadn't had time yet to bulk up on donuts and steroids.
New Jersey has been under Sharia Law since governor Crisco. It's mandatory in NJ now to beat women if they have alcohol, and aren't wearing a burqa.
Just her voluntary testimony, on camera, that she illegally possessed it. Of course she could say she was just kidding. But the cop would say he didn't know that and based his subsequent actions on what he thought was a truthful statement by her at the time.
She was UNDERAGE. It was ILLEGAL and IMPOSSIBLE for her to lawfully POSSESS an alcoholic beverage. It was a not less than $500 offense. I posted the New Jersey statute.
Define "possess". Sounds to me like you think it is illegal for her to be on a beach,or maybe even in a state,where alcoholic beverages exist. Was she not a part of a family group,at least one of whom was an adult,who at that particular moment was in the water with her child?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I posted the New Jersey statute. Try reading it. NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013) 1. a. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority or who knowingly consumes any alcoholic beverage in any school, public conveyance, public place, or place of public assembly, or motor vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense, and shall be fined not less than $500.00. Was she underage? Was she in a public place? Did the police find the alcoholic beverage? Did she argue that it was legal for her to possess the alcoholic beverage? If either you or she need someone to define the word possess, a judge will do that for not less than $500.
Nope the "aunt" she claimed was on the way never showed. The baby daddy was playing in the water some distance away. You may have noticed she screamed for him a half-dozen times and it took him a minute or so to show up (seen in the tape by the cops yelling at him to back off).
But she says they didn't confiscate the alcohol as evidence. Maybe this will all blow up on an evidentiary challenge from her attorney. "What alcohol was my client alleged to possess, your honor?" Then the other charges probably evaporate.
Well,he was probably foolish enough to think there was no danger of his wife being attacked on a public beach in broad daylight.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
He was just a baby daddy, not a husband and has another 16.5 years of being on the hook financially for her baby. Assuming that it really is his baby and not some other guy's. IOW, he's a dumbass however you slice it.
So what?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
So: you were factually inaccurate. Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.
That's just pathetic. Desperation in order to try to win a losing argument is never pretty,but you are taking it to new lows.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
The article describes him as "her daughter's father". Not a husband, not a fiancee. The child is an infant only 18mo old. And that makes him the baby daddy.
So what? In WHAT important way does that make any difference at all? How does it change anything?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You were suggesting they were a pair with legal status or declared intentions. I was merely correcting this impression. They aren't married, they aren't engaged, she and her baby live with her mom, I think.
I was suggesting there was an adult of legal age to possess beer as a part of the group.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
There wasn't. She told the cops her "aunt" was on the way. The "aunt" never showed. She made a CreepBook post after that said she was M.I.P. and excusing it by saying the 90% of the minors on the beach were also M.I.P. Then she deleted the post but someone snapshotted it before she got it deleted.
Hey! You can't say "cunt". Oh, wait. Yes you can. I forgot that word is now an accepted part of American lexicon. Sorry. (But why do I have this nagging feeling that the word would still be taboo if a conservative comedian referred to Michelle's children that way?)
Well, you see yer Honor, I thought it was legal for me to have a gun as long as I didn't shoot it. And, uh, my aunt was on the way and she has a license. And, uh, just about everyone else had a gun.
Exactly. These ne'er-do-well Feckless Cunts will lie at the drop of a hat.
"You're not allowed to beat me … I'm a woman."
#2. To: Tooconservative (#0)
#3. To: misterwhite (#2)
(Edited)
Then BLAM! It all goes to shit.
#4. To: Tooconservative (#3)
As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest. On top of refusal to identify a lawful request for ID or a name and a minor in possession of alcohol.
#5. To: Tooconservative (#3)
(Edited)
In such jurisdictions, assault (also called attempted battery) is a threat or physical act that creates a reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact, whereas battery is a physical act that results in that harmful or offensive contact.
TooCon: As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery.
#6. To: Fred Mertz, nolu chan (#5)
I was taught the difference between assault and battery many moons ago. I dislike how the media and press misuse the terms all the time, usually using the word assault in many cases when there is physical contact.
#7. To: Tooconservative (#6)
#8. To: misterwhite (#4)
But you know they're going to drop all the charges to make it go away. Then people like Deckard will conclude that the cops had nothing, were in the wrong, and are bullies.
By the way, did you read that study that showed that accusations of police brutality dropped 93% since body cams were installed?
#9. To: Fred Mertz (#7)
TooCon, see my edit above. Nolu Spam will have me reading all day with what I consider a simple concept with a simple explanation.
#10. To: misterwhite (#2)
boris
#11. To: Tooconservative (#9)
Your buddy sounds like a dumbass.
#12. To: Fred Mertz (#11)
Yeah, ninth in his class of 800 and a medical doctor with many years of service.
Screw you.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#12)
#14. To: Fred Mertz (#13)
UCMJ - first word is Uniform.
#15. To: Fred Mertz, Tooconservative (#7)
Nolu Spam will have me reading all day with what I consider a simple concept with a simple explanation.
#16. To: nolu chan (#15)
#17. To: Tooconservative (#0)
You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.
#18. To: GrandIsland (#17)
Someone should beat the stupid out of her...
#19. To: buckeroo (#18)
#20. To: GrandIsland, buckeroo (#19)
It’s prey like you, that feed the need for bullies.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#21. To: GrandIsland (#19)
#22. To: Deckard (#20)
You and others of your blue ilk are a threat to society.
#23. To: Deckard (#20)
No offense, but your delusional rantings here have convinced me that you need to be put down like a rabid dog.
#24. To: buckeroo (#22)
#25. To: GrandIsland, Deckard (#24)
#26. To: buckeroo (#25)
rational debating
#27. To: GrandIsland (#26)
#28. To: Tooconservative (#0)
Off-camera, either she or her friend explains, “We didn’t even drink alcohol. You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age. You are. You’re not allowed to drink it. And we’re not drinking it.”
2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.
#29. To: buckeroo (#27)
#30. To: nolu chan (#28)
And that will be not less than $500 for disorderly stupid.
#31. To: misterwhite (#2)
It includes such favorites a "girl tells cop what the law is", quibbling about "we can carry alcohol if we're not drinking it", refusing to empty the bottle, not giving her name, cursing, and walking away. Then BLAM! It all goes to shit.
#32. To: Tooconservative (#30)
And she will learn some valuable facts about the laws and why we should obey them.
#33. To: Tooconservative (#3)
Right at the moment to put her hands up to push the cop's face or hit him weakly on the face to fend off his lawful arrest. As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest.
#34. To: GrandIsland, buckeroo (#26)
#35. To: sneakypete (#33)
HorseHillary! We are NOT subjects,we are free citizens with rights,and the cops had no right to start the physical confrontation over such a nickel and dime "offense".
#36. To: Tooconservative (#12)
You are a dumbass if you think what some guy told you about assault and battery 50 years ago in one state is somehow still the relevant standard for assault and battery in all 50 states today.
#37. To: GrandIsland (#17)
You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.
#38. To: nolu chan (#28)
Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority
#39. To: Tooconservative (#35)
He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.
#40. To: GrandIsland (#17)
You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.
#41. To: Tooconservative (#35)
He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.
#42. To: sneakypete (#36)
And YOU are a dumbass if you think that FACTS can change.
#43. To: sneakypete, GrandIsland (#40)
Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.
#44. To: sneakypete (#39)
IF she has a close friend or relative that is a lawyer and is bored and interested in taking the case,all the charges will be dropped against her in exchange for a written agreement that she will not sue the cops or the PD they work for for excessive use of force.
#45. To: Tooconservative (#0)
The longer this went on, the more I was hoping someone would accidentally kick her in the head two or three times or just light her up with a Taser for a half-hour or so.
#46. To: Tooconservative (#42)
Really? Let's take another example of a class of gun laws.
#47. To: Tooconservative (#43)
Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.
#48. To: Tooconservative (#44)
I saw no egregious use of force. The arresting officers acted lawfully based on what we have seen.
#49. To: Fred Mertz, GrandIsland (#45)
You're an a-hole, like your homo friend FireIsland.
#50. To: sneakypete (#48)
You are ok with a 200+ lb cop punching a minor female in the head that is on the ground?
#51. To: sneakypete (#46)
AND.......WTF is up with your rabid approval of a state ALLOWING someone to enjoy a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?
#52. To: sneakypete (#47)
If they are illegal narcotics,as you so obviously want to imply,the answer is "No,and it would not be legal for them to be carried if the girls had been over 21,either.
#53. To: nolu chan (#28)
We didn’t even drink alcohol. You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age. You are. You’re not allowed to drink it. And we’re not drinking it.”
#54. To: Tooconservative (#42)
How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago?
#55. To: misterwhite, sneakypete (#54)
#56. To: Tooconservative (#55)
(Edited)
Obviously I don't want to turn this into a CCW chat thread
#57. To: misterwhite (#56)
(Edited)
My nephew in Ohio open carries and when I'm there I feel unprepared for some upcoming shootout.
#58. To: A K A Stone (#29)
If you lived a few years ago you wouldn't believe in germs and you would be telling deckard that it is a conspiracy theory that the world is not flat. 🍿
#59. To: Tooconservative (#57)
It's a right to carry but I really don't like open carry, don't like to see it.
#60. To: Tooconservative (#57)
I also think that open-carry mostly hurts the gun rights cause more than it helps.
#61. To: misterwhite (#59)
I get nervous at a gun store when I see gang-bangers (well, they look like gang-bangers) handling firearms. I have this strange feeling we'll be meeting again.
#62. To: Tooconservative, GrandIsland (#34)
I'm pretty sure he's breaking some laws down there.
#63. To: Tooconservative (#51)
If she wants no interference from the state, then stay off patrolled state-owned property. Like the beach.
#64. To: Tooconservative (#52)
You sure switched fast from "Of course, it's against the law" for narcotics and went to "you ain't their daddy" when it comes to alcohol.
#65. To: misterwhite (#54)
50 years ago if you were carrying concealed it was assumed you were the bad guy carrying it for nefarious purposes.
#66. To: sneakypete (#65)
HorseHillary! I knew several local businessmen that carried concealed weapons on a daily basis 50 years ago,and nobody thought anything of it.
#67. To: sneakypete (#40)
Supposes she was with her family and carrying the beer because her father was carrying the umbrella and towels,and her mother was carrying something else?
#68. To: GrandIsland (#67)
Suppose you came back into reality, fag patriarch.
#69. To: sneakypete (#68)
Suppose you eat shit and die,Fire Island?
#70. To: Tooconservative (#35)
He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.
#71. To: hondo68, Tooconservative (#70)
He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#72. To: sneakypete (#65)
#73. To: Dead Culture Watch (#72)
Man, you gotta love how many ‘men’ are in this thread cheering a girl getting beat up by a guy. I bet they’re all tough guys too. Lol.
#74. To: Deckard, misterwhite, GrandIsland, sneakypete (#71)
I saw her spit at the cop but I didn't think she spit effectively enough to hit him, more likely got a little spit on her own boobs or the sand.
Weinman, a Philadelphia native, whose Facebook page is filled with photos of her young daughter, is facing several felony charges that could result in several years in prison if found guilty.
#75. To: Tooconservative (#73)
(Edited)
#76. To: Dead Culture Watch (#75)
I don’t watch videos. Opening sentence in OP mentions a beating.
Maybe you don’t read what you post? By the way? I am morally superior. It just is what it is.
#77. To: Tooconservative (#74)
In November of 2017, Weinman pleaded guilty ... she was sentenced to serve four years of probation ...
#78. To: Fred Mertz (#66)
I was at this country tavern out in the boonies about twenty years ago in the afternoon. The thing I noticed was this large .45 caliber revolver sitting next to the cash register ...
#79. To: Deckard (#71)
#80. To: Dead Culture Watch (#72)
Man, you gotta love how many ‘men’ are in this thread cheering a girl getting beat up by a guy.
#81. To: misterwhite, GrandIsland (#77)
(Edited)
So that means she has her probation revoked and she has to serve time for the 2017 crime in addition to these new charges?
So, I decide to go on the beach with my daughter, her father and friend. I had alcohol, it’s Memorial Day weekend and 90 percent of people are underage drinking on the beach, without a doubt. Two cops approach me on a their four wheelers and ask me and my friend how old we are, we gave them our ages. Then, we got breathalized, and it came back negative. I told them I wasn’t drinking and the alcohol was clearly closed/sealed, which the cops seen. They still stayed, the one cop following me when I walked away to go make a phone call after they did what they had to do.. like okay, they did their job and I cooperated🤔🤦🏻♀️ Therefore I asked them don’t they have something better to do as cops than to stop people for underage drinking on the beach, saying to that there’s so much more serious stuff going on the cop said, “I was gonna let you go but now I’ll write you up” and he asked my name. Wildwood Chief of Police Robert N. Regalbuto told local media, “From what I see on the video and only on the video, from not even talking to the officers, I think they did a decent job.”
#82. To: Tooconservative (#0)
#83. To: A K A Stone (#82)
You constitutionally need one. You know that right?
#84. To: A K A Stone (#82)
Did they get a search warrant for that breathalyzer. You constitutionally need one.
#85. To: Tooconservative (#83)
#86. To: misterwhite (#84)
#87. To: Tooconservative (#81)
anything could’ve been written down on that paper so I wouldn’t give it to him.
#88. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#85)
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated
#89. To: misterwhite (#87)
She says that twice. Can't she read?
#90. To: Tooconservative (#88)
And they didn't search her at all.
#91. To: A K A Stone (#90)
(Edited)
They searched her person. They searched her breath.
The plain words of the constitution were violated.
#92. To: A K A Stone (#90)
They searched her person. They searched her breath.
#93. To: Tooconservative (#91)
(Edited)
#94. To: Fred Mertz (#92)
#95. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite, Fred Mertz (#93)
It doesn't say you can search if someone is stupid and agrees to your illegal search. It says no searches.
#96. To: A K A Stone (#94)
That is the first positive comment I have received from you in many moons.
#97. To: Tooconservative (#96)
#98. To: Tooconservative (#95)
#99. To: A K A Stone (#98)
I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age.
#100. To: A K A Stone (#98)
I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age.
#101. To: misterwhite (#84)
In September of 2016, she was arrested and charged with burglary, simple assault, criminal mischief, criminal trespass and recklessly endangering another person.
#102. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone, Fred Mertz, GrandIsland, Dead Culture Watch, misterwhite (#96)
See? I told you that you were wrong. Now even Fred is agreeing with you. : )
#103. To: Liberator (#102)
Having worked at the Seaside NJ beaches for several years (back when), this kind of animal was simply carted away without all this phony fanfare.
#104. To: Liberator (#102)
Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while.
#105. To: Tooconservative (#101)
So she was 5-6 months pregnant in September 2016 ...
#106. To: Liberator (#102)
Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while.
#107. To: Tooconservative (#0)
One of the cops states she’s going to have to pour out her alcohol.
Me: "Oh, I didn't realize that. OK. I'm pouring it out."
Cop: "Thank you. Have a nice day."
#108. To: misterwhite (#107)
(Edited)
#109. To: Tooconservative (#108)
Apparently, some people think you have a constitutional right to display that you have alcohol on a patrolled public beach even if you're a minor.
#110. To: Tooconservative (#74)
Before you declare this woman more holy than the Virgin Mary, let's look at some other reporting on her little hobbies.
#111. To: misterwhite (#87)
anything could’ve been written down on that paper so I wouldn’t give it to him.
#112. To: Fred Mertz, A K A Stone (#92)
They searched her person. They searched her breath.
#113. To: sneakypete, misterwhite, Liberator (#110)
As for the rest of it,sounds like a typical example of the pigs overcharging to get a plea bargain conviction.
#114. To: sneakypete (#110)
Yeah,that little thing assaulted those two fat cops and had them in fear of dey widdle lifes.
#115. To: Fred Mertz, Sharia Beach Party (#97)
#116. To: Tooconservative (#113)
then it would seem they have no physical evidence of M.I.P.
#117. To: sneakypete (#38)
What makes you so sure she didn't have legal authority to possess it? Maybe she was carrying it for her adult friends,or just watching it for them?
#118. To: nolu chan (#117)
She was UNDERAGE. It was ILLEGAL and IMPOSSIBLE for her to lawfully POSSESS an alcoholic beverage. It was a not less than $500 offense. I posted the New Jersey statute.
#119. To: sneakypete (#118)
Define "possess". Sounds to me like you think it is illegal for her to be on a beach,or maybe even in a state,where alcoholic beverages exist.
2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.
#120. To: sneakypete, nolu chan (#118)
Was she not a part of a family group,at least one of whom was an adult,who at that particular moment was in the water with her child?
#121. To: nolu chan (#119)
If either you or she need someone to define the word possess, a judge will do that for not less than $500.
#122. To: Tooconservative (#120)
The baby daddy was playing in the water some distance away. You may have noticed she screamed for him a half-dozen times and it took him a minute or so to show up (seen in the tape by the cops yelling at him to back off).
#123. To: sneakypete (#122)
Well,he was probably foolish enough to think there was no danger of his wife being attacked on a public beach in broad daylight.
#124. To: Tooconservative (#123)
He was just a baby daddy, not a husband
#125. To: sneakypete (#124)
So what?
#126. To: Tooconservative (#125)
(Edited)
So: you were factually inaccurate. Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.
#127. To: sneakypete (#126)
Desperation in order to try to win a losing argument is never pretty,but you are taking it to new lows.
#128. To: Tooconservative (#127)
The article describes him as "her daughter's father". Not a husband, not a fiancee. The child is an infant only 18mo old. And that makes him the baby daddy.
#129. To: sneakypete (#128)
(Edited)
#130. To: Tooconservative (#129)
You were suggesting they were a pair with legal status or declared intentions.
#131. To: sneakypete (#130)
I was suggesting there was an adult of legal age to possess beer as a part of the group.
#132. To: Tooconservative (#125)
Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.
#133. To: Tooconservative (#131)
She told the cops her "aunt" was on the way.
#134. To: misterwhite, sneakypete (#133)
Well, you see yer Honor, I thought it was legal for me to have a gun as long as I didn't shoot it. And, uh, my aunt was on the way and she has a license. And, uh, just about everyone else had a gun.
#135. To: Tooconservative (#134)
These ne'er-do-well Feckless Cunts
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]