UnionMom

The camera in that situation is used to record the test (or refusal) for court. That means that once the test is completed or the refusal is declared, the evidence is complete and so the tape is stopped and saved. Had this been footage from a surveillance camera, I could understand the suspicion. Personally, I tend to think that it would have been wise to leave it running just because he was in a room with a belligerent female and the door closed. At least until he opened the door, it would have been good CYA to leave it running. I know she was trying to get out but you just never kn

It is clear that you, like so many, put too much faith in what you see on TV.

If the cop had beaten her, she and her lawyer would be saying that ... not commenting on following policy.

If you're in a position to get it paid off and in your name, it will absolutely make thing easier for you.

Get a letter from the finance company ... have the seller make payment directly to them ... if you're completely up front and provide all information (Name, address, contact numbers, etc.) for the lien holder, you'll likely met less resistance.

No way. I have a friend who bought a vehicle from a small local used car lot and they didn't have the title. She ended up having to go through the court to get her title after the used car lot closed up shop and disappeared.

The officer believed her to be intoxicated, she was acting as many intoxicated individuals do. The story does say that she was not but that doesn't change the fact that the officer believed her to be, based on her actions. She wasn't denied her rights. Just because you're allowed to make a phone call doesn't mean you're allowed to make it whenever you want ... no matter what you see on TV. Anyone who believes the black eyes aren't a normal occurrence with a broken nose has clearly never seen anyone with a well broken nose, or anyone who has had a nose job, for that matter. It

It was the schools that were in the wrong. (we did this one yesterday)

The "luxury tax" didn't stop them from spending their money, Pat. And if you honestly believe any significant percentage of that population would suddenly start eating at McDonalds, you're only kidding yourself. I get your point but it isn't a very realistic one.

same

I do find it interesting that her lawyer says only that there were policy violations ... if anyone actually believed that the officer beat her, they'd be yelling it at the top of their lungs.

link to another article

Now, I do wonder why the officer was fired. Does he have a history? Is the department willing to sacrifice him to avoid potential issues? I'm still a believer that she caused her own injuries but something is not right if he got fired.

The one estate that I have dispersed so far (am the Executor for a number of others) was in a jurisdiction that required a value be determined and fees paid with each filing (initial and each subsequent) based on the initial value of the estate. Nice little scam job there. Example ... the starting value of the estate is $750,000 ... every filing thereafter until it is closed has a fee based on that initial value. Didn't matter if the estate value at the time of the filing was down to $200 ... the fee was still based on the $750,000 value. Sorry ... got a little sidetracked.

They said in the story that it is department policy to stop the recording and save it once a refusal has been clearly established. Common sense would tell a male officer alone with a female, especially one acting as she was, that it is best to let it roll.

I've got a much bigger issue with them having visual surveillance on minors than anything else in this. Most kids aren't leaving their laptops on the kitchen table ... they are in their bedrooms.

Actually, they do need to do at least a general inventory to determine estate value. Not an item by item, detailed one. "Furnishings" ... "clothing/personal items" ... etc.

Wouldn't matter ... it still wouldn't fly. Monitoring the computer use if fine ... no way, no how is monitoring the student in their home ok. Heck, not even just the student ... anyone with range of the open laptop would be subject to the spying without ever having had a chance to sign anything.

Interesting.

I think area LE has probably determined it best to allow the court to decide what to do here.

Do your attorneys specialize in estate law? Every attorney I've ever talked to about it has said the same thing ... do not be specific unless you really have to.

She was being argumentative, resisting lawful commands, and was clearly becoming a danger to herself as well as the officer. She was not trying to get away from him because of any fear ... that is very clear in her behavior. She, like many others, has a misconception of how things work and was trying to take the position of control of the situation instead of following the rules.

Crack pipes.

- a female officer does not have to be present - based on her earlier actions in the video, I can easily see how she could have caused her own injuries - if he caused her injuries, her attorney would have said that much instead of the whole line about following policy - the officer was an idiot to turn off the camera when he was alone with a hostile female