|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » We're supposed to believe in the law. To serve and protect us. |
| 1-14 of 14 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 03-16-18 01:50pm - 2379 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
We're supposed to believe in the law. To serve and protect us. We're supposed to believe in the law. To serve and protect us. Right. Here's a case of a 20-year-old guy, Nehemiah Griego. At 15, he shot and killed his mother, father, brother, and 2 younger sisters. 2 years ago, a judge ruled that the man (a teen at the time of the ruling) was amenable to treatment and should be released when he turns 21. He is now 21, and a different judge ruled that the man should stay in jail until the state decides what to do (keep him in jail, or release him). Personally, I would not feel safe if this guy was released and moved next to me. He shot his parents, his brother and 2 sisters, in cold blood (while insane or in a rage over life or suicidal or whatever) over a several-hour time frame (killing the mother first, then the brother, then the 2 baby sisters, then having to wait several hours before the father came home, and shooting the father multiple times). And this guy, now 21, 5 years after the killings, is ready to be set free? Enquiring minds want to know: If they release this guy, will they also be issuing life insurance policies to anyone he murders in the next few years? ---------- ---------- Nehemiah Griego to be detained at MDC, judge rules J.R. Oppenheim and Kasia Gregorczyk March 16, 2018 05:44 AM ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- A 20-year-old man who killed five members of his family as a teenager will be remanded to the Bernalillo County jail, a Children's Court judge ruled on Thursday. Nehemiah Griego will be housed at the Metropolitan Detention Center as he awaits a potentially new amenability hearing. In January 2013, Griego killed his parents and three siblings. He was 15 at the time. Griego has been in Children Youth and Families Department custody ever since. Two years ago, a judge determined Griego was amenable to treatment and should be released on his 21st birthday. He was due to be released on March 20 when he turns 21 years old, but the New Mexico Court of Appeals overturned that ruling and sent the case back to Children's Court. Griego's defense argued he should stay in the juvenile detention center pending the next step in his case while the state said Griego should be treated as an adult. "A person 18 years of age or older shall not be detained in a juvenile detention facility," prosecutor James Grayson told the court. "And so based on that provision, your honor, the detention facility would not accept him because he is over the age of 18." "Those protections would be administrative seg [sic], so that's what they would do to keep him safe from the other inmates," defense attorney Steven Taylor said. "Interestingly, I mean it says to protect his civil rights. But in effect, it would jeopardize his civil rights if he were kept in administrative seg [sic] for his safety. Quite a conundrum." In his ruling, Judge Michael Martinez determined the appellate court's decision essentially hit the reset button on Griego's amenability and, hypothetically, he was never charged as a juvenile. As it stands today, that makes Griego an adult in the eyes of the court. Therefore, Griego does not have to wait until he turns 21 to be detained. He will be transported to MDC under instructions that his safety is a top priority. New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas praised Thursday's ruling. "I am pleased that the Children’s Court judge recognized the effect of the Court of Appeals Opinion and remanded Nehemiah Griego to jail consistent with the appellate positions of the Office of the Attorney General," he said. Griego's defense has 30 days to ask the state Supreme Court to reconsider. That clock started March 9 when the appellate court sent the case back to Children's Court. While Griego is in jail, his attorney always has the ability to file a motion to review his conditions of release. AddThis Sharing Buttons Share to Google BookmarkShare to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to PrintShare to More Credits J.R. Oppenheim and Kasia Gregorczyk Updated: March 16, 2018 05:44 AM Created: March 15, 2018 04:42 PM Copyright 2018 KOB-TV LLC, a Hubbard Broadcasting Company. All rights reserved | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 02:27pm - 2379 days | #2 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Separate from the 21-year-old killer: It seems there is a new sport: throwing rocks and boulders from overpasses onto the freeway. I've read a few news reports where people (mainly teens) have dropped rocks onto freeways or highways, killing people in cars below. This is the latest example of this sport: A 30-35 pound boulder was thrown or dropped over the top of a protective fence on an overpass onto the freeway, crashing through the windshield of passing car. A passenger in the car died from injuries. His wife, child and mother-in-law were unhurt. But any of them could have been hurt or killed from the boulder hitting the car. ----- ----- http://ktla.com/2018/03/15/person-of-int...assenger-in-vehicle/ Passenger Dies After Boulder Intentionally Thrown Onto 134 Freeway Strikes Car His Wife Was Driving: CHP Posted 10:31 AM, March 15, 2018, by Tracy Bloom and Mary Beth McDade, Updated at 11:03PM, March 15, 2018 A 23-year-old man who had just learned his wife was pregnant died after a boulder "intentionally" thrown from a 134 Freeway overpass slammed into his family's car as they were driving through Pasadena, authorities said Thursday as they sought help finding the perpetrator. The boulder went through the passenger-side windshield, killing the father-to-be who was sitting in the front seat. (Credit: KTLA) The incident occurred shortly before 9 p.m. Tuesday, as the family was in their 2017 Toyota Corolla headed westbound on the 134 under the Orange Grove Boulevard overpass, according to the California Highway Patrol. The victim's 21-year-old wife was behind the wheel when a 30- to 35-pound boulder suddenly crashed into the car's windshield and shattered the glass. It hit the driver's husband, who was sitting beside her in the front passenger seat, CHP said. The young woman's mother and a 4-year-old daughter were also in the vehicle at the time, but apparently escaped unharmed. The woman immediately drove to the nearest hospital, Glendale Adventist Medical Center, to get medical help for the wounded man. Emergency room personnel did what they could to save him, but the victim succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. The victim's father, Francisco Lopez, identified his son as 23-year-old Christopher Lopez. Investigators believe the massive rock that killed Lopez was purposely hurled onto the roadway, CHP officials said at a Thursday afternoon news conference held in front of the CHP's Altadena Station. “This was an intentional act," CHP Lt. Chuck Geletko said. “Any prudent person would know that a boulder that size would seriously harm someone driving on the freeway below.” At the news conference, authorities and the victim's family members made impassioned pleas to the public for help tracking down whoever was responsible. Guadalupe Gutierrez, the victim's wife, recounted through sobs how she and her husband had recently found out that she was pregnant. “Now he’s gone,” Gutierrez said, her voice shaking. “We’re asking for your help. If anybody saw anything, please help us find whoever did this to him. He didn’t deserve this. My daughter didn’t deserve this.” CHP investigators said they have gathered evidence, including checking the boulder for any possible DNA evidence, but are looking for witnesses to come forward. “This was an innocent family, driving home," Geletko said. "We need help from the public to find the person who committed this atrocious act and prevent this from happening to another family." An earlier CHP write-up of the incident indicated an unknown person was wanted for 187 PC, a reference to the California Penal Code section for murder. Anyone who witnessed suspicious behavior in the vicinity of Orange Grove and the 134 around the time the boulder was tossed off the overpass is urged to call CHP's Altadena Station at 626-296-8100 or 323-259-3200 afterhours. Correction: An earlier version of this article spelled the CHP lieutenant's last name incorrectly. The story has been updated. | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 03:07pm - 2379 days | #3 | |
|
Onyx (0)
In-Activated by Staff Posts: 149 Registered: Nov 28, '17 |
Edited on Mar 20, 2018, 10:27pm | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 04:14pm - 2379 days | #4 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
https://www.dailywire.com/news/28317/bom...500000-ryan-saavedra Regarding the gun system check: This is a case of brown-nosing. Acting FBI deputy director (under Trump, who hates Obama) criticizes Obama for the Department of Justice ruling that forced the deletion of 500,000 fugitives from a national database. I don't understand the reasoning behind the forced deletion, because Federal agents seem to cover criminals inside any state, or suspected criminals in any state. With or without warrants. (ICE grabs and detains people it suspects of being illegal immigrants.) But why blame Obama? Because it happened in his administration? Using the same reasoning, Trump is guilty of murder for the 17 killed in mass shooting at high school in Parkland, Florida recently. It happened while Trump was president. Put Trump in jail now, before more innocent people are killed in high schools. Also, put Trump in jail, for any people in cars who are killed by people throwing rocks, because Trump is responsible for all the people in the US. Did Obama personally review and authorize the deletion of the criminal records from the database? Did Trump personally authorize the shooter to commit mass murder at the Florida high school? Just because Trump hates Obama, doesn't mean Obama should be blamed for stupid decisions made by the Justice Department. Except Trump has a super-brain: He loves all humanity, even the humans from shit-hole countries, and from rapist Mexico, which he wants to spend countless billions of dollars to build a wall to protect us from Mexico. With a super-brain, you can profess love for Obama, while hating him. Maybe it's just words that Trump loves all of humanity. Trump loves himself. Is that the reason he is the greatest President we've ever had? | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 04:34pm - 2379 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
A student was suspended for staying in class during National Walkout Day. Maybe he should get a lawyer and sue the school for millions of dollars for the emotional damage done to him. Did the school have the legal right to suspend a student for staying in class? Were the student's civil liberties violated by the school, or whatever legal nonsense you might cite, as a reason to sue the school for damages? The school, as well as the Shoemakers, have received death threats and hate messages. So, the student seems to have a case, for suing the school, because the school was at least partially responsible for creating a situation where the student has received death threats, as well as the stigma of being suspended from school. My take: you have all kinds of people in the US. You want to stomp on a kid, who chooses to stay in a classroom, while other students walk out? ------- ------- http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/16/ohi...nal-walkout-day.html EDUCATION 6 hours ago Ohio student suspended for staying in class during National Walkout Day Caleb Parke By Caleb Parke | Fox News Jacob Shoemaker, an Ohio high school senior, was suspended for staying in the classroom during the National Walkout Day. Jacob Shoemaker, an Ohio high school senior, was suspended for staying in the classroom during the National Walkout Day. (Carrie Carlyle) An Ohio high school student said he tried to stay apolitical during the National Walkout Day over gun violence but was suspended for his choice to remain in a classroom instead of joining protests or the alternative, going to study hall. Jacob Shoemaker, a senior at Hilliard Davidson High School, said he didn’t want to take sides in the gun-control debate consuming the country. If he went outside for the walkout, he said, he would be supporting gun control. If he stayed in the common area of the school, he said, he would be seen as supporting gun violence and disrespecting the 17 lives lost in the Parkland, Fla. High school shooting the month before. Jacob had met with the school’s principal on Tuesday, a day before the rally, for about an hour to find out what exactly the walkout was supporting. But he said the principal reportedly told him it was for the “students to express themselves.” This left Jacob wondering if it was a memorial for the lives lost or a show of support for gun control. He decided, instead, to stay in class for about 20 minutes doing homework after his teacher and fellow classmates left and locked the door. When they returned, he was slapped with a suspension. Jacob’s father, Scott Shoemaker, said his son was just trying to stay neutral – and did nothing wrong. “Politics [doesn’t] belong in the school,” he said. “Students shouldn’t be pressured into taking a side.” The story went viral after Jacob sent a photo of his out-of-school suspension citation to one of his friends, who posted it on social media. The school, as well as the Shoemakers, have received death threats and hate messages. Thousands of students walk out for gun control and to honor Parkland victims. Julie Gunlock makes her case. Video Scott Shoemaker said his son was just trying to be introspective – and he wasn’t acting out. “He didn’t do anything to deserve this,” he said. “He didn’t ask for this.” The district says it's responsible for students' safety and they can't be unsupervised. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Caleb Parke is an associate editor for FoxNews.com. You can follow him on Twitter @calebparke Edited on Mar 16, 2018, 04:48pm | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 04:48pm - 2379 days | #6 | |
|
Onyx (0)
In-Activated by Staff Posts: 149 Registered: Nov 28, '17 |
Edited on Mar 20, 2018, 10:26pm | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 07:47pm - 2379 days | #7 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User  Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
The kid in the story didn't just remain in the classroom, he remained in the classroom when there was no teacher and the door was locked. Had I done that in my high school (stayed in a classroom without adult supervision) I would have been suspended too. There are legal liability issues. I respect Jacob Shoemaker's desire to remain politically neutral, but he was told his options for the day: attend the walkout, or go to a common area for the duration. Both were school-sanctioned, and he was not given the option to stay in an empty classroom. Part of schooling is obeying the rules laid out by the administration. I doubt that the Shoemakers have a legal case against the school. It is unfortunate that his principled stand against being political at school resulted in his suspension, but it probably was legal. It is a sad day that a student NOT skipping class will be given a suspension. And that he and his family have received death threats. Kind of makes you wonder what kind of society we live in where disagreeing with someone's actions or beliefs can be seen as a justification for threatening that person's life. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 08:32pm - 2379 days | #8 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I do not agree. You get a note or permission to leave a class to go to the bathroom. Are you being supervised? Is a guard or police officer sent with you while you are away from the classroom? I am not aware of any school that will send a guard to supervise you if you leave the classroom to go to the bathroom, or to see a nurse. This idea of supervision at all times is baloney. I think the kid had the right to stay in the classroom, without a teacher being there. Do they lock all classrooms so students can not enter the room, until the teacher gets inside the room? Not unless you're in a prison or jail or psych ward. Years ago, we when I was in junior high and high school, students entered the room where the classes would be held, and if the teacher was not there, we waited for the teacher to show up. This idea that a teacher has to be present at all times for supervision is a standard that is not real. It is not followed 100%. I'm not a lawyer. But my guess is that as long as you are on school grounds, you are, in theory, under the supervision of the administration (principal, teachers, whatever). So, unless the principal wrote a legal note telling the student he was not being supervised, I believe the student was under the supervision of the school staff, as long as the student was in the classroom. Does the principal have the right to suspend students? Yes, it's part of his job. But you can be sued, if you are doing the job wrong. So, I think the student has a case to be made, that the principal was wrong to suspend the student. If the principal or the teacher ordered the student to leave the classroom, then the student was disobeying a direct order. That was not mentioned in the newspaper article. But if the teacher left the student in the classroom, without giving the student a direct order to leave, then the staff (principal, teacher) were being overly harsh, since they did not give a direct order that was disobeyed. To go one step further: the teacher locked the student in the classroom. The classroom was empty except for the student. That could be the basis for a suit against the teacher and the school, for locking a student in an empty room What if there was a fire? Who would have the responsibility if the student died in a fire at the school, because the door was locked? (I'm assuming the door was locked, and the student was locked inside.) | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 08:43pm - 2379 days | #9 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
lk2fireone, I had a lot of time making up tests in high school at lunch times due to health-related absences. There was always a teacher present. I told one that she could go get lunch while I took the test. She told me flat-out that that was not allowed. Students were not allowed in classrooms without supervision. If the teacher for some reason had to leave the classroom, all the students went with them, or they brought in an administrator to stay with the students. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." | |
|
||
| 03-16-18 09:43pm - 2379 days | #10 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Loki, I went to public schools when I was young. In Los Angeles county. My experiences were completely different from yours. In junior high school, and high school, we normally moved between different classrooms, for each subject. The teachers for each subject were different (chemistry, physics, English, whatever subject they taught). So as students, we moved from one classroom to a different classroom, depending on what subject we were going to be taught. Not all students took the same classes all the time. The teachers also moved between classrooms. So you could move to a classroom, and sometimes the teacher would already be present. Or if the teacher was not present, you waited for the teacher to appear. If you were excused to go to the bathroom, or to see a nurse for some health problem, the teacher gave verbal permission. No written note was required. Maybe the laws are different in different times, or different geographical areas. Your experience in high school was completely different from mine. I do not recall ever having an administrator show up to supervise a class if a teacher was late to enter the classroom. Never. Not in junior high, not in high school. If a teacher failed to show up, a different teacher (substitute, or regular) would take his place. I don't think I was ever sent to the principal's office. I think there was a principal, and a vice principal. Maybe you would see one of them at a school meeting (I forgot the term you use for a special meeting of all the students to attend some kind of school meeting). And I suppose the principal and vice-principal had each had a secretary. But other than that, I can't recall any other administrators at the school, on the junior or high school level. Did you go to a private school for high school, where the rules were very strict? Or maybe the rules changed a lot. I'm over 20+ years older than you, so that might explain why our experience in high school is so different. | |
|
||
| 03-17-18 05:14am - 2379 days | #11 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
I went to public schools in Silicon Valley in the late 1980s. We had five administrators at my high school. A principal, and four vice principles: One handled student activities, one did guidance/discipline, one did academic guidance, and I forget what the other did. We too went from room to room between periods. If a teacher had to leave their classroom during those times, say to use the bathroom, the door was locked. Students were never allowed unsupervised in a classroom. If a teacher for any reason had to leave a classroom, they called the office and an administrator came to relieve them. There may have been some special rules at my high school. A lot of the honor students (I took honors/AP classes) were implicated in a cheating ring, so leaving the classroom with an unsupervised student and test materials inside was strictly verboten. BTW, the cheating students (we all knew who they were) never got any punishment. They all went on to university, many of them prestigious ones. One ended up at the US Military Academy at West Point. A few attended Stanford. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." Edited on Mar 17, 2018, 05:17am | |
|
||
| 03-17-18 05:26am - 2379 days | #12 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
The news article from Fox is poorly written. It doesn't fully explain all the relevant details, so we're kind of left to wonder why the student was suspended. It doesn't mention the offense the student committed, just that he didn't walk out or go to the designated non-walk out area. In my school days, the VP of Guidance sure as hell TOLD you and your parents what the offense was that led to the suspension. The article is sensationalist. It makes you think an injustice was done to the student, but doesn't give all the pertinent details for the school's actions. It truly looks to me like the student defied a school administrator's order to leave the classroom (he'd met with administration the day before), the teacher didn't follow the policy (locked the student in the otherwise empty classroom), and the student got suspended for it. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." | |
|
||
| 03-17-18 05:27am - 2379 days | #13 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
The news article from Fox is poorly written. It doesn't fully explain all the relevant details, so we're kind of left to wonder why the student was suspended. It doesn't mention the offense the student committed, just that he didn't walk out or go to the designated non-walk out area. In my school days, the VP of Guidance sure as hell TOLD you and your parents what the offense was that led to the suspension. The article is sensationalist. It makes you think an injustice was done to the student, but doesn't give all the pertinent details for the school's actions. It truly looks to me like the student defied a school administrator's order to leave the classroom (he'd met with administration the day before), the teacher didn't follow the policy (locked the student in the otherwise empty classroom), and the student got suspended for it. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." | |
|
||
| 03-17-18 01:20pm - 2378 days | #14 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I went to school at an earlier age than Loki. And the rules and titles were different. I just assumed that there was a vice principal. I know there was a principal. But the other vice principals, we never had any of those. We did have guidance counselors, to explain our choices in what classes we wanted to take, and talk about careers and college choices after graduation. In my day, it was (trying to remember the term, but don't recall exactly) college prep courses, or else vocational prep courses (that was not the exact terminology, but the basic idea--you were either taking high school to go to college, or not). Similar to honors courses, or non-honors courses. Today, kids in high school can actually take college courses while in high school, and it's not unusual for them to get college credits while in high school. We had nothing like that while I was in high school. But that was almost 60 years ago. I agree the newspaper article is not specific enough to know what the details of the suspended student's actions were. If the student was ordered to leave the classroom, and disobeyed, then he should have been suspended. But if he was locked inside the classroom, and could not leave the classroom until it was unlocked, that would make a dangerous situation if a fire or emergency happened and he was trapped inside a room. In my day (ancient history), at my school, there was not a lot of unruly behavior. Kids mainly did what they were told. My class (student grade) had about 300 students in high school. One girl had dyed hair. One out of maybe 150 girls. None of the boys dyed their hair. Today, both boys and girls dye their hair. And they seem to wear just about anything they want. We did not have any school uniforms, and the dress code was fairly open. I don't remember even thinking there was a dress code. Because that kind of stuff came in years later. Unless you went to a local catholic school, where the students wore catholic school uniforms. When I say we didn't have school uniforms, I'm leaving out that if you were in the school band, you wore the band uniform that the school supplied (except you had to buy your own white buck shoes-it was a marching band that played at football games.) But you only wore the uniform at football games or if there was a parade you played in. And the instrument you played was supplied by the school. Today, if you're in a school band, many schools require you to buy your own instrument. Times change. Rules change. School uniforms at my school: I also left out the athletic uniforms: football, basketball, gymnastics, etc. Edited on Mar 17, 2018, 01:36pm | |
|
||
| 1-14 of 14 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
