SFPD Breathalyzer Error Puts Hundreds Of DUI Convictions In Doubt [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : SFPD Breathalyzer Error Puts Hundreds Of DUI Convictions In Doubt


pipedreams
03-10-2012, 12:35
This is rather disturbing.

"According to CBS, 'Hundreds, or even thousands, of drunk driving convictions could be overturned because the San Francisco Police Department has not tested its breathalyzers."
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/sfpd-breathalyzer-error-puts-hundreds-of-dui-convictions-in-doubt/

Mister_Beefy
03-10-2012, 13:57
This is rather disturbing.

"According to CBS, 'Hundreds, or even thousands, of drunk driving convictions could be overturned because the San Francisco Police Department has not tested its breathalyzers."
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/sfpd-breathalyzer-error-puts-hundreds-of-dui-convictions-in-doubt/


I predict a PTSD epidemic in san francisco.

elsolo
03-10-2012, 18:40
Did the PD miss evidence collection 101

SixDemonBag
03-10-2012, 18:46
They missed Police Work 101.

That city wants social workers, not cops.

Ohio Copper
03-10-2012, 19:31
Are these simply PBTs or the actual breathalyzers that haven't been calibrated? Couldn't figure that out from the article.

TBO
03-10-2012, 19:45
Are these simply PBTs or the actual breathalyzers that haven't been calibrated? Couldn't figure that out from the article.
Agree. Looks most like PBT (roadside field sobriety screening test), not what most places consider/call a true "breathalyzer/intoxylizer" test.

CAcop
03-10-2012, 21:02
Agree. Looks most like PBT (roadside field sobriety screening test), not what most places consider/call a true "breathalyzer/intoxylizer" test.

In my county that device in the video can only be used in court to say that "it showed the prescence of alcohol." It will give you a number but they merely consider it to be one of the field sobriety exercises. People can refuse to take them. They are PAS (preliminary alcohol screening) devices. We calibrate them once a week.

Now there are EPAS devices (evidentiary preliminary screening). They are the ones where we can go into court and state the number they blew. It also prints out a paper copy and part of the calibration also downloads the data onto Cal DOJ's servers. Tey are calibrated once a month IIRC.

I actually have no idea why the cases would be thrown out in court due to the fact the PAS device is merely one of many tests officers conduct in the field to determine if an arrest was warranted. I can see if the EPAS was not calibrated but those are from the DOJ.

It is SF however and they do things very differently.

*ASH*
03-10-2012, 21:08
I predict a PTSD epidemic in san francisco.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl


that and a rash of videos proclaiming " im the only one professional enough to use... "

holesinpaper
03-10-2012, 21:38
In my county that device in the video can only be used in court to say that "it showed the prescence of alcohol." It will give you a number but they merely consider it to be one of the field sobriety exercises. People can refuse to take them. They are PAS (preliminary alcohol screening) devices. We calibrate them once a week.

Now there are EPAS devices (evidentiary preliminary screening). They are the ones where we can go into court and state the number they blew. It also prints out a paper copy and part of the calibration also downloads the data onto Cal DOJ's servers. Tey are calibrated once a month IIRC.

I actually have no idea why the cases would be thrown out in court due to the fact the PAS device is merely one of many tests officers conduct in the field to determine if an arrest was warranted. I can see if the EPAS was not calibrated but those are from the DOJ.

It is SF however and they do things very differently.

Really? You can see no reasons?



Fraud.
Dereliction of duty in a matter directly related to a case.
Results were used to strong arm plea deals -- but are really based on a lie.
False evidence used in court.
Etc.

NG VI
03-10-2012, 21:46
Really? You can see no reasons?

Fraud.
Dereliction of duty in a matter directly related to a case.
Results were used to strong arm plea deals -- but are really based on a lie.
False evidence used in court.
Etc.


Add false probable cause or however it would be described as well. Without the initial breath machine, they would have never been arrested in the first place, so if it wasn't calibrated, they should have never been used and therefore never been arrested.

I wonder how the city plans on compensating these people for their wrongful arrests, imprisonments, and the massive (wrongful) consequences and side penalties that follow people for years after a DUI?

CAcop
03-10-2012, 22:19
Really? You can see no reasons?



Fraud.Yes with the PAS what about the FSEs?
Dereliction of duty in a matter directly related to a case.Relacance your honor? That should be the first words out of and ADA's mouth if a defense attorney tries that.
Results were used to strong arm plea deals -- but are really based on a lie.PAS part of what goes into PC. The issue at hand. EPAS has nothing to do with the PC and is the evidence of the crime. EPAS not affected. PAS affected.
False evidence used in court.What was the false evidence. Remember the PAS can only be used to say alcohol was present. That is still truthful. If the officer testified as to the number on the screen it would be false but not prejury due to him not knowing the devices weren't calibrated. Even then the device still showed alcohol was present, just not at the level indicated. Again testimony fits.
Etc.Well that is a strong argument. "There must be something else I just don't know what I am talking about so I am going to pretend I have more to say than I really do." Try that in court.


Reread my post. Actully watch the video. Read. Listen. Learn.

Now what part of the PAS is not used except to say in court, "there was alcohol present" and to be one of many FSEs do you not understand. It is the same as gaze nystagmus, line walk, finger count, one leg stand, etc. The PAS can be refused. This was the device shown in the video. This was the device the defense attorney refer to as reading much higher than the later test.

The later test was either blood or EPAS. EPAS can be testified to in a court of law as the the number it displayed and recorded. PArt of the reason why the PAS cannot be used in the same way is that it does not record the number. The EPAS cannot be refused unlike the PAS device. The EPAS is given after the arrest.

The only hope the defense has is that the probable cause for the arrest is possibly shot. I say possibly because if the arrestee refused the PAS he can still go to jail if he did poorly on the FSEs. As a vetran officer asked me a dozen years ago about the PAS, "What do you think we did all thise years ago when we didn't have a PAS?" That got me to thinking. Why run through the FSEs with little care and use the PAS as a crutch. Why not spend more time on the FSEs and if they refuse you can still arrest them?

CAcop
03-10-2012, 22:21
Add false probable cause or however it would be described as well. Without the initial breath machine, they would have never been arrested in the first place, so if it wasn't calibrated, they should have never been used and therefore never been arrested.

I wonder how the city plans on compensating these people for their wrongful arrests, imprisonments, and the massive (wrongful) consequences and side penalties that follow people for years after a DUI?

Like I said before the device in the video is a PAS. It can be refused. Even if refused you can make an arrest. Look up field sobriety exercises. Some places still call them tests.

Riddle me this. How did they make arrests for DUI before PAS devices?

Your "no PC" doesn't fly.

CAcop
03-10-2012, 22:24
I think the SF DA just doesn't want to go to trial on all thse cases because every clown will think they will be able to throw the cases out. So they will have to do a whole bunch of work when they can toss the cases. Besdies the DMV probably hit them with the minimum 3 month suspension of their DL. The only thing missing are the fines the DA collects. No one actually gets jail time, at least for first time offenses. Hell, you actually have to comitt felony DUI for jail time. Five convictions or an injury to another in a crash.

Mister_Beefy
03-10-2012, 22:24
more apology for LEO screwups.

after the break, our junior weatherman dave will jump off the building to check to see if gravity is still working. :rofl:

CAcop
03-10-2012, 22:28
more apology for LEO screwups.

after the break, our junior weatherman dave will jump off the building to check to see if gravity is still working. :rofl:

How many DUI arrests hve you made in the state of California?

HiddenEyes
03-10-2012, 22:33
Might be nothing more than defense attorneys doing a little marketing. They love people trying to fight DUI, it is a huge cash crop for them. If they can get an article like this printed then a whole bunch of people will part with the cash for a trial. Few days in court, canned show for the jury, client loses anyway, attorney walks away tens of thousands richer.

I might be biased against defense attorneys. :supergrin:



Mr. HE:cool:

Mister_Beefy
03-10-2012, 22:40
How many DUI arrests hve you made in the state of California?


zero.

of course, that has nothing to do with anything, except for the "I'm the expert, you don't know what you're talking about", "You've never put your life on the line so shut up" and "You wish you could do what I do but could never cut it, so you criticize instead" arguments to follow.

did I miss any? california cop will be along shortly to rectify that, by applying the appropriate insults and accusations of logical fallacies and straw arguments that will never, ever, be substantiated.

so I guess the news item is completely bogus, then? is that what you're saying?

all those convictions really aren't in trouble, because all those police did their job, and did them well, and the machine used is just a tertiary aid to the real police work and not a major part of the evidence for conviction?

how about you shoot an email over to SFPD and let them know... maybe they'll give ya a medal. :rofl:

Ohio Copper
03-11-2012, 14:05
The only issue I can see is the dereliction of duty on the officer's part whose task it was to calibrate and ensure the proper certification of the PBT devices. Then again, toss out the PBT evidence, we don't use them here but I wouldn't have an issue having it tossed if this were the circumstance. I have whatever 'vehicle in motion' or traffic violation indicators for the stop. The subject's demeanor 'glassy, bloodshot eyes, an inability to comprehend questioning, inability to stand without using the vehicle as support, failure of SFST's, an open container(s) in the vehicle, admission of consumption of alcohol etc. While the PBT's and intoxylizer results PROVE there was consumption of alcohol that took place prior, the above listed are indicators of intoxication.

Furthermore, was this an ongoing issue? Did the officer completely ignore his task and forge the documents or is this just a way, as previously noted, for a defense attorney to open up a can of worms?

No insults necessary.

ray9898
03-11-2012, 14:17
So is this the roadside box or the official state test at the station?

rockapede
03-11-2012, 14:28
Add false probable cause or however it would be described as well. Without the initial breath machine, they would have never been arrested in the first place, so if it wasn't calibrated, they should have never been used and therefore never been arrested.

I wonder how the city plans on compensating these people for their wrongful arrests, imprisonments, and the massive (wrongful) consequences and side penalties that follow people for years after a DUI?

I have never used a PBT to arrest a drunk....did I have probably cause?

All in all, this is a problem and somebody needs to get their butt chewed/disciplined. It may or may not have any real effect on cases though.

Novocaine
03-11-2012, 15:37
Furthermore, was this an ongoing issue? Did the officer completely ignore his task and forge the documents or is this just a way, as previously noted, for a defense attorney to open up a can of worms?

Article says they were forging documents every ten days for the last six years.

Nice. What I see is every overturned conviction = lawsuit the City will have to settle. Back legal fees, insurance premiums, lost jobs, lost reputations yadda yadda... Just because some lazyasses rather play solitaire than push a freaking button. It's ok, the City has bigger budget than some States. And, after all, since when it was the job of a public servant to do his/her job here?

As a tax-paying San Francisco resident I have to say: it really warms my heart. I have to pay the DA 3 times: to work the original case, to fight the appeal and to work on lawsuit settlement. And I have to pay defendant's legal fees AND restitution. And the salary of the cops who cause the whole mess. And probably those copís union lawyers. How is that not win-win for me? I mean win-win-win-win-win?
:rofl:

holesinpaper
03-11-2012, 20:03
I have never used a PBT to arrest a drunk.

If it's so damn irrelevant and meaningless then...

why waste your time, and our money, on it.

ray9898
03-11-2012, 20:13
If it's so damn irrelevant and meaningless then...

why waste your time, and our money, on it.

because there is no single magic device out there to prove DUI. That is why we do so many tests which creates a longer report than if I shot someone. It is simply a piece in the puzzle.

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 20:20
because there is no single magic device out there to prove DUI. That is why we do so many tests which creates a longer report than if I shot someone. It is simply a piece in the puzzle.

I thought DUI was a criminal offense that had to be proven?

You're saying that you use a bunch of unreliable methods to prove a crime?

rockapede
03-11-2012, 20:30
If it's so damn irrelevant and meaningless then...

why waste your time, and our money, on it.

Umm? I think I just said that I DON'T. Granted, I don't think it's irrelevant or meaningless, I just don't use it.

MIPs are another story.

rockapede
03-11-2012, 20:32
I thought DUI was a criminal offense that had to be proven?

You're saying that you use a bunch of unreliable methods to prove a crime?

Where did he say anything was unreliable? Just like any other crime, every little piece is a part in the evidentiary puzzle.

gommer
03-11-2012, 21:54
In my county that device in the video can only be used in court to say that "it showed the prescence of alcohol." It will give you a number but they merely consider it to be one of the field sobriety exercises. People can refuse to take them. They are PAS (preliminary alcohol screening) devices. We calibrate them once a week.

Now there are EPAS devices (evidentiary preliminary screening). They are the ones where we can go into court and state the number they blew. It also prints out a paper copy and part of the calibration also downloads the data onto Cal DOJ's servers. Tey are calibrated once a month IIRC.

I actually have no idea why the cases would be thrown out in court due to the fact the PAS device is merely one of many tests officers conduct in the field to determine if an arrest was warranted. I can see if the EPAS was not calibrated but those are from the DOJ.

It is SF however and they do things very differently.


Because if they didn't say it put a gazillion DUI cases in jeopardy then it wouldn't be the news.

Gotta love the news these days. Kid shoots a window with a BB gun and it turns into an article about terrorism. I say that jokingly but it's probably happened.

Reminds me of the guy in FL who requested the source code for something, manufacturer refused, case was thrown out (I think).

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:10
Where did he say anything was unreliable? Just like any other crime, every little piece is a part in the evidentiary puzzle.

because there is no single magic device out there to prove DUI. That is why we do so many tests which creates a longer report than if I shot someone. It is simply a piece in the puzzle.

What I gather is that no single test is reliable enough to prove DUI but several unreliable tests together can?

If a driver refuses a field test, shows no signs of intoxication on camera, refuses a breathalyzer and then has his blood drawn showing a BAC above the legal limit, is that sufficient to convict or not?

So then, if blood is not drawn, how can one or more unreliable tests prove that someone was driving with a BAC above the legal limit? 2 unreliable tests are independently unreliable, combining the results does not make any of them more reliable.

holesinpaper
03-11-2012, 22:27
because there is no single magic device out there to prove DUI. That is why we do so many tests which creates a longer report than if I shot someone. It is simply a piece in the puzzle.

Ahhh I get it.

So NOW the puzzle is missing a piece.

You're essentially saying "it just doesn't matter. Hey, no big deal. Yes these officers were lying about your case -- but only about part of it so it doesn't matter. Trust us, we're 'the government.' And really, it was just a 'little' lie about a 'trivial' matter. Honest! (this time. Really. No fingers crossed)"

Gotcha. Makes perfect sense.

holesinpaper
03-11-2012, 22:30
What I gather is that no single test is reliable enough to prove DUI but several unreliable tests together can?

If a driver refuses a field test, shows no signs of intoxication on camera, refuses a breathalyzer and then has his blood drawn showing a BAC above the legal limit, is that sufficient to convict or not?

So then, if blood is not drawn, how can one or more unreliable tests prove that someone was driving with a BAC above the legal limit? 2 unreliable tests are independently unreliable, combining the results does not make any of them more reliable.

You should not try to trick this good officer with logic.

banjobob
03-11-2012, 22:34
I wonder if they were ever used at a "screw the 4th amendment" DUI checkpoint?

If I'm not mistaken the nazis had some very sophisticated technology to detect the presence of Jews at their checkpoints.

ray9898
03-11-2012, 22:34
Ahhh I get it.

So NOW the puzzle is missing a piece.

You're essentially saying "it just doesn't matter. Hey, no big deal. Yes these officers were lying about your case -- but only about part of it so it doesn't matter. Trust us, we're 'the government.' And really, it was just a 'little' lie about a 'trivial' matter. Honest! (this time. Really. No fingers crossed)"

Gotcha. Makes perfect sense.


I never said that....you wanted to know why the test was done if it was not the "end all" and I addressed it.

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:35
You should not try to trick this good officer with logic.

I'm not trying to trick anyone, honest. I don't understand his statement.

If someone has to blow into a machine that measures there BAC and that machine isn't accurate, and the machine they blow into after that isn't accurate to prove anything, 2 inaccurate results don't add up to one accurate one.

ray9898
03-11-2012, 22:38
What I gather is that no single test is reliable enough to prove DUI but several unreliable tests together can?

If a driver refuses a field test, shows no signs of intoxication on camera, refuses a breathalyzer and then has his blood drawn showing a BAC above the legal limit, is that sufficient to convict or not?

So then, if blood is not drawn, how can one or more unreliable tests prove that someone was driving with a BAC above the legal limit? 2 unreliable tests are independently unreliable, combining the results does not make any of them more reliable.


Like the majority of other crimes that require interpretation, it takes a solid case to prove something beyond any reasonable doubt.

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:39
Like the majority of other crimes that require interpretation, it takes a solid case to prove something beyond any reasonable doubt.

Can a person be convicted of DUI based on (inaccurate) breathalyzer and officer testimony alone?

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:43
(not directed at you Ray)

What happens when a citizen is pulled over and given a breathalyzer that is inaccurate because it hasn't been calibrated and he measures above the legal limit, but isn't?

Then the guy is arrested and begins to suffer the consequences in his work and personal life, incurs significant personal costs financial and otherwise.

And he wasn't actually over the limit.

ray9898
03-11-2012, 22:44
Can a person be convicted of DUI based on (inaccurate) breathalyzer and officer testimony alone?


In my state....no. I have to provide evidence of impairment coupled with a test results unless testing is impossible due to injury which gives me a blood test from a medical facility.

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:45
In my state....no. I have to provide evidence of impairment coupled with a test results unless testing is impossible due to injury which gives me a blood test from a medical facility.

Gotcha. Thanks.

Sam Spade
03-11-2012, 22:49
Can a person be convicted of DUI based on (inaccurate) breathalyzer and officer testimony alone?

Yes. No. But.... The inaccuracy is in the exact numerical reading, not in the detection of presence/absence of alcohol. DUI is actually two separate charges everywhere I've looked--an impairment caused by alcohol charge, and a BAC over 0.08 charge.

Testimony plus the confirmed presence of alcohol can get you the impairment charge, but not the BAC allegation. So you can be convicted of DUI on testimony alone, nevermind the mechanical device.

ETA: everywhere except GA, apparently. :cool:

ray9898
03-11-2012, 22:50
(not directed at you Ray)

What happens when a citizen is pulled over and given a breathalyzer that is inaccurate because it hasn't been calibrated and he measures above the legal limit, but isn't?

Then the guy is arrested and begins to suffer the consequences in his work and personal life, incurs significant personal costs financial and otherwise.

And he wasn't actually over the limit.

If it is the only evidence the conviction should be vacated without question.

certifiedfunds
03-11-2012, 22:53
:dunno:

If it is the only evidence the conviction should be vacated without question.

consequences begin well before conviction

ray9898
03-11-2012, 23:03
Yes. No. But.... The inaccuracy is in the exact numerical reading, not in the detection of presence/absence of alcohol. DUI is actually two separate charges everywhere I've looked--an impairment caused by alcohol charge, and a BAC over 0.08 charge.

Testimony plus the confirmed presence of alcohol can get you the impairment charge, but not the BAC allegation. So you can be convicted of DUI on testimony alone, nevermind the mechanical device.

ETA: everywhere except GA, apparently. :cool:


In GA the result just deals with the weight of the evidence. Under .05 can be presumed not impaired, up to .79 must be proven as a less safe driver, over .08 is evidence of impairment.

CAcop
03-11-2012, 23:30
Here is how DUI works in CA:

Vehicle stopped for PC on vehicle code violation

Officer contacts driver

Suspects drinking (usually due to symptoms such as red/watery/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, loss of motor skills, etc)

Officer has driver get out of car

Field sobriety exercises conducted (lift one foot and stand, finger count, and nystagmus are the three tested by the Feds and approved by the courts as being reliable. walking the line, alphabet, etc are just extras. I like adding a few to the "gold standards" to give people extra credit so to speak. Especially since the lift one foot thing is hard for me to do with my knees these days)

Then there is the PAS device previously mentioned. (Run by the PD) They can refuse this one. Some do, most don't. Some of those who do it play with the machine to try to get a different result. The machine is smarter than them, it fails them when they try. It is looking for a deep lung sample and you cant fake it. Even your granny can blow hard enough to get it done. And no a penny will not save you.

If there is enough to arrest you have the choice of breath or blood. We also tell you that only blood will allow you to have a sample for later independent testing. If you fail or cannot provide a sample the other will be taken. Blood can be forced in CA. Breath tests are done with the EPAS. (Run by DOJ)

From there jail where they cut you loose in 5 hours.

Then court.

In my 14 years I have never gone to trial for a DUI. I haven't even gone for a motion to supress. I have personally arrested over 50 suspects and witnessed over 100 arrests for DUI. I can win without the PAS. I might win without the EPAS or even blood.

rockapede
03-14-2012, 18:45
What I gather is that no single test is reliable enough to prove DUI but several unreliable tests together can?

If a driver refuses a field test, shows no signs of intoxication on camera, refuses a breathalyzer and then has his blood drawn showing a BAC above the legal limit, is that sufficient to convict or not?

So then, if blood is not drawn, how can one or more unreliable tests prove that someone was driving with a BAC above the legal limit? 2 unreliable tests are independently unreliable, combining the results does not make any of them more reliable.

Very rarely in any criminal case is any single piece of evidence "reliable" enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That doesn't make that piece of evidence "unreliable" though; all cases are built on as much evidence as can be gathered. No field sobriety or breath test is proof of anything in and of itself, that's why they are taken as a whole.

I'd submit that unless the officer was a complete moron, the subject in your scenario would never be arrested and asked to submit to a blood test.

SVTNate
03-15-2012, 00:20
Here is how DUI works in CA:

Vehicle stopped for PC on vehicle code violation

Officer contacts driver

Suspects drinking (usually due to symptoms such as red/watery/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, loss of motor skills, etc)

Officer has driver get out of car

Field sobriety exercises conducted (lift one foot and stand, finger count, and nystagmus are the three tested by the Feds and approved by the courts as being reliable. walking the line, alphabet, etc are just extras. I like adding a few to the "gold standards" to give people extra credit so to speak. Especially since the lift one foot thing is hard for me to do with my knees these days)

Then there is the PAS device previously mentioned. (Run by the PD) They can refuse this one. Some do, most don't. Some of those who do it play with the machine to try to get a different result. The machine is smarter than them, it fails them when they try. It is looking for a deep lung sample and you cant fake it. Even your granny can blow hard enough to get it done. And no a penny will not save you.

If there is enough to arrest you have the choice of breath or blood. We also tell you that only blood will allow you to have a sample for later independent testing. If you fail or cannot provide a sample the other will be taken. Blood can be forced in CA. Breath tests are done with the EPAS. (Run by DOJ)

From there jail where they cut you loose in 5 hours.

Then court.

In my 14 years I have never gone to trial for a DUI. I haven't even gone for a motion to supress. I have personally arrested over 50 suspects and witnessed over 100 arrests for DUI. I can win without the PAS. I might win without the EPAS or even blood.

Accurate information. I am a criminal defense attorney in California.

PAS results are very rarely at issue. PAS+FST+objective symptoms of intoxication as written in the police report and CA DMV DS-367 report gets you an arrest and a blood sample or breath sample from a table top device.

A properly calibrated PAS, or field use device, is accurate to within... I can't recall the exact amount, as it's so rarely litigated, but I think it's .01 or so. They can, however, register false amounts due to mouth alcohol, diet, medical conditions, and many other factors. I wouldn't expect a police officer to know the many, many nuances of this. I learn about these things from subject matter experts I retain on DUI cases occasionally... and these are people with decades of LEO experience, in crime labs, with these devices, people who are known and respected by every crim judge and DMV hearing officer in the region. But again, it's rarely at issue. More typically police mistakes are made in PC for the stop or administration of tests (both FST's and blood/breath tests as required by CA Title 17), not the accuracy of a testing device.

DanaT
03-15-2012, 07:43
Yes. No. But.... The inaccuracy is in the exact numerical reading, not in the detection of presence/absence of alcohol. DUI is actually two separate charges everywhere I've looked--an impairment caused by alcohol charge, and a BAC over 0.08 charge.

Testimony plus the confirmed presence of alcohol can get you the impairment charge, but not the BAC allegation. So you can be convicted of DUI on testimony alone, nevermind the mechanical device.

ETA: everywhere except GA, apparently. :cool:

So lets exapnd upon this and ASSUME that the reporting is correct.

How can I believe testimony of the police if the police at best (according to the report) falsified documentation showing calibration and at worst commmitted felony forgery (it would be akin to forging legal documents)?

I am trying to understand why I would have any reason to believe an officer from a department that is forging/falsifying documents.

Just a side note, in my field (class 3 medical devices) how would you take it if I forged (or approved forged) documents that allowed bad pacemakers to be sold to the public. For example if there was a test for voltage output that needed to be calibrated and we didn't want to spend the time doing so the paper was forged showing the test was in calibration, but in reality it was not and people had to have replacement pacemakers put in (a very "simple and quick" surgery...in the long run probably much less of an ordeal for someone to go through than a DUI charge)? What do you think the consequences should be?

-Dana

DanaT
03-15-2012, 07:47
More typically police mistakes are made in PC for the stop or administration of tests (both FST's and blood/breath tests as required by CA Title 17), not the accuracy of a testing device.

This isn't about "police mistakes." It is about falsifying documentation.

There is a big difference between making an error, and making a pattern of of every so many days not doing one's job and falsifying documentation to hide the fast that one is not doing his/her job.

-Dana

wprebeck
03-15-2012, 08:22
PBT's aren't even allowed in court here in Kentucky. I know a few officers who have them, and our BA certified officers at work can calibrate them, but since they're along the lines of a polygraph for evidentiary value....not many folks use them.

Both my wife and I have made numerous DUI arrests, and gotten convictions, without a PBT. The Intoxilyzer results are what matters - and the results of SFST's, along with other articulation that the subject was impaired. PBT results mean jack squat.

Sam Spade
03-15-2012, 09:13
I am trying to understand why I would have any reason to believe an officer from a department that is forging/falsifying documents.-Dana

Witnesses are judged on their own credibility, not that of others, and we don't indulge in "group guilt" in our system.

DanaT
03-15-2012, 09:27
Witnesses are judged on their own credibility, not that of others, and we don't indulge in "group guilt" in our system.

For a theoretical point of view, I agree. From a practical, real world, point of view I disagree.

For example, in court, a police officer in uniform and out of uniform should have testimony judged with the same level of credibility but in the real world, in uniform is more credible. Also, a defendant sitting there in a jail jump suit looks much more guilty than one sitting in a suit and tie.

Also, the company one keeps is often used to judge a person.

I would say that a department that has document falsification happening is either 1) not have adequate oversight, 2) has a wide spread indifference to sloppy work, 3) it is known within the dept and is intentionally overlooked (which would be "conspiracy" and group guilt would definitely apply) or 4) a combination of the above.

Either way, there seems to be some level of questionability of the group as a whole.

Equate this this to OWS. Lot of the people never committed a criminal offense, but the credibility of any given person is weighted by the actions of the group as a whole and often by the lowest common denominator in a group.

We have group guilt, we just don't like to admit it. We are taught this from a very young age too. In school, if the some kids in the class are disruptive, generally the teacher punishes the class with the hope that peer pressure will keep the bad kids from poor behavior.

-Dana

series1811
03-15-2012, 09:38
For a theoretical point of view, I agree. From a practical, real world, point of view I disagree.

For example, in court, a police officer in uniform and out of uniform should have testimony judged with the same level of credibility but in the real world, in uniform is more credible. Also, a defendant sitting there in a jail jump suit looks much more guilty than one sitting in a suit and tie.

Also, the company one keeps is often used to judge a person.

I would say that a department that has document falsification happening is either 1) not have adequate oversight, 2) has a wide spread indifference to sloppy work, 3) it is known within the dept and is intentionally overlooked (which would be "conspiracy" and group guilt would definitely apply) or 4) a combination of the above.

Either way, there seems to be some level of questionability of the group as a whole.

Equate this this to OWS. Lot of the people never committed a criminal offense, but the credibility of any given person is weighted by the actions of the group as a whole and often by the lowest common denominator in a group.

We have group guilt, we just don't like to admit it. We are taught this from a very young age too. In school, if the some kids in the class are disruptive, generally the teacher punishes the class with the hope that peer pressure will keep the bad kids from poor behavior.

-Dana

I think the word you are looking for is "stereotyping".

The criminal justice system is designed around trying to eliminate that from considerations of guilt or innocence. In general society, not so much.

DanaT
03-15-2012, 09:49
I think the word you are looking for is "stereotyping".

The criminal justice system is designed around trying to eliminate that from considerations of guilt or innocence. In general society, not so much.

But since the system is judged by general society, you cannot eliminate it and it is in fact a large part of the legal system.

For example, does a prosecutor in a DUI case come in and tell the jury that about how the guy he arrested was out drinking after the end of a season coaching little league and didnít realize he had 3 beers in two hours and that put him over the limit and had he waited another hour he would have been OK? DO they portray him as a good upstanding citizen or do they try and portray him as a monster who with reckless abandonment almost killed someone had the police not caught him?

To get a conviction, I suspect they play up the stereotype. Of course on the opposite end, the defense will also play the stereotype game.

Probably, in reality, the truth of character and such is somewhere in the middle.

-Dana

series1811
03-15-2012, 09:59
But since the system is judged by general society, you cannot eliminate it and it is in fact a large part of the legal system.

For example, does a prosecutor in a DUI case come in and tell the jury that about how the guy he arrested was out drinking after the end of a season coaching little league and didnít realize he had 3 beers in two hours and that put him over the limit and had he waited another hour he would have been OK? DO they portray him as a good upstanding citizen or do they try and portray him as a monster who with reckless abandonment almost killed someone had the police not caught him?

To get a conviction, I suspect they play up the stereotype. Of course on the opposite end, the defense will also play the stereotype game.

Probably, in reality, the truth of character and such is somewhere in the middle.

-Dana

You're getting trial by jury, which is set up as an adversarial system, mixed up with the police trying to determine the facts.

The people who designed our legal system decided it worked best with people only arguing one side of an issue before the trier of fact. Other countries have the system you describe, where one attorney is both prosecutor and defense attorney. Is that what you are advocating?

TBO
03-15-2012, 10:25
Why are you profiling the police?

DanaT
03-15-2012, 21:47
Why are you profiling the police?

Because.

DanaT
03-15-2012, 21:49
You're getting trial by jury, which is set up as an adversarial system, mixed up with the police trying to determine the facts.

The people who designed our legal system decided it worked best with people only arguing one side of an issue before the trier of fact. Other countries have the system you describe, where one attorney is both prosecutor and defense attorney. Is that what you are advocating?

I guess it depends what you are interested in.

There is no perfect system. Unfortunately, guilty people rarely admit that they are guilty and prosecutors who don;t convict are seen as soft on crime and don't get re-elected. They both have a reason to distort the truth.

There is an absolute truth of what happened. Both side tend to ignore it.

-Dana

DanaT
03-15-2012, 22:00
So, let me ask the LEO a blunt question.

The first part is for arguments sake, we must ASSUME that the story of the officer that was supposed to calibrate the instruments and didn't yet filled out the paperwork saying he did is true. If true, he falsified documents. So that is working assumption. I agree, do't rush to judgement, etc. But in reality he did it or did not do it so looking at event that he did what he is accused of.

Using this assumption (that he did it) if you were the officers would you fire him? To answer this you also must assume you have the ability to take the action (i.e. no union, employment at will, no hearings...you are judge jury executioner like many bosses in the private sector)

I have fired two people for falsifying documents that were probably less important than these so I would say I would fire him. Under FDA laws and guidiance documents, medical devices must have full traceability. One person I fired was that he didn't like signing his name multiple times that he performed and operation and decide to sign one paper, and make photocopies. No warning. I fired him right away. He was trained not to do this. Other guy made a mistake and forgot to sign paperwork he did. When an error like this is found the person must write "performed on 1/1/2000 by XXX. Signed on 2/1/2000 by XXX" He decided that was too much effort and back dated. He was given a warning. He did it a few weeks later when he didn't think anyone had noticed. He was on the second one.

Falsifying documents says a lot about a person.

-Dana

TBO
03-15-2012, 22:28
Because.
That stopped being a reason after age four.

DanaT
03-15-2012, 23:00
That stopped being a reason after age four.

I did not get that memo.

-Dana

series1811
03-16-2012, 04:56
I guess it depends what you are interested in.

There is no perfect system. Unfortunately, guilty people rarely admit that they are guilty and prosecutors who don;t convict are seen as soft on crime and don't get re-elected. They both have a reason to distort the truth.

There is an absolute truth of what happened. Both side tend to ignore it.

-Dana

Do you know anything at all about the criminal justice system, or are you just surmising?

DanaT
03-16-2012, 07:51
Do you know anything at all about the criminal justice system, or are you just surmising?

I have stayed out of it.

Doesn't change the fact that I know honesty from dishonesty and not a single LEO will answer if they would fire the guy.

That says a lot to me.

-Dana

DanaT
03-16-2012, 08:03
Do you know anything at all about the criminal justice system, or are you just surmising?

The ONE traffic ticket I had proves that I KNOW cops lie to try and get a conviction.

She wrote on the back of ticket notes, which were complete LIES

She was in a chevy blazer..the little one... and I didn't see her. I WAS doing something wrong. I was drag racing and jump the light a fraction of a second before the light turned green. SO what I WAS doing was attempting to race, but since I left first the motorcycles didn't go. I DID run a red light. I NEVER exceeded the speed limit and turned into the next parking lot (signaled, waited for traffic to make the left turn, etc) where the people gathered to race.

The b^&% then came into the parking lot and turned on her lights. She gave me a bunch of crap about having a illegal vehicle and it was going to be impounded for having nitrous oxide on it (yes, it did have it). So she called her sup. He told her there was nothing illegal about that. She wrote me a ticket for the red light but on the back, she put that I attempted to elude her. Trust me had I WANTED to get a away from a blazer that I had at least a quarter mile head start on I would have. I wouldn't have gone where I did.

She admitted she admitted in court that my version of pulling into a parking lot without her behind me with lights on was correct but that I still ran the red light. Ticket was dismissed because her comments on the back were untruthful. When dealing with the DA before, I was going to jail for eluding if I didnít agree to pay this huge fine because the ticket was with aggravating circumstance.

So do I trust the system from my limited dealing with it? No. No one (including me) was interested in the truth. The truth is I ran a red light and should have paid the ticket.

-Dana

TBO
03-16-2012, 08:31
So not only do you have "because", but now add "they did it first" to you list of tools.

My God, living life, grade school style.

series1811
03-16-2012, 10:39
Dana T, I think we read loud and clear where you are coming from. :supergrin:

DanaT
03-16-2012, 10:53
So not only do you have "because", but now add "they did it first" to you list of tools.

My God, living life, grade school style.


Yes. Just like the ones who say don't question the principal because he is always right being the authority figure.

Or, do what the bully says so you don't get beat up. If you get beat up it is your fault for not doing what the bully told you to do.

That grade school style living life?

-Dana

DanaT
03-16-2012, 10:54
You guys like to bash me.

Why don't either of you have the guts to say publically if YOU would fire the guy for falsifying documents?

-Dana

series1811
03-16-2012, 11:11
You guys like to bash me.

Why don't either of you have the guts to say publically if YOU would fire the guy for falsifying documents?

-Dana

Not being taken seriously, and being bashed, are not the same thing.

TBO
03-16-2012, 11:25
Being called on your behavior is not bashing.

Trying to claim victim status is just one more example of your disingenuous behavior.

Sent using Tapatalk

DanaT
03-16-2012, 16:06
Being called on your behavior is not bashing.

Trying to claim victim status is just one more example of your disingenuous behavior.

Sent using Tapatalk

So, would you fire an LEO that worked for you (if you had the ability to) that falsified documents.

Seems you really shy away from answering this. It is a blue wall of silence thing? Seems awefully silent.

Maybe I could make it easier. If you were a manager at McDonalds and you sent the guy into clean the bathroom every hour and he signed that he did it, but didn't clean the bathroom, would you fire him?



-Dana

Peace Warrior
03-16-2012, 16:09
In my county that device in the video can only be used in court to say that "it showed the prescence of alcohol." ...
This ^^^

TBO
11-06-2012, 11:12
PBT's are also used by Probation, Parole, Courts, Juv centers, etc.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:20
Being called on your behavior is not bashing.

Trying to claim victim status is just one more example of your disingenuous behavior.

Sent using Tapatalk

Now that's humorous.

TBO calling someone else disingenuous. :upeyes:

Government employees use fake and faulty 'evidence' on a regular basis. It's only 'shocking' when officials can't hide it any longer and the truth gets out.

http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-chemist-charged-crime-lab-scandal-194745835.html

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Oversight-of-crime-lab-staff-has-often-been-lax-1149961.php

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:20
Relacance your honor? That should be the first words out of and ADA's mouth if a defense attorney tries that.

I really wonder what a judge would say if an ADA had the first word out of his mouth being "relacance"? I would start questioning the ADAs grasp of the english language let alone his grasp of the law.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:30
Now that's humorous.

TBO calling someone else disingenuous. :upeyes:

Government employees use fake and faulty 'evidence' on a regular basis. It's only 'shocking' when officials can't hide it any longer and the truth gets out.

http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-chemist-charged-crime-lab-scandal-194745835.html

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Oversight-of-crime-lab-staff-has-often-been-lax-1149961.php

So again, the media gets it 100% correct in regards to law enforcement and 100% incorrect in regards to 2nd amendment rights and firearms.

Those folks are scientists, not police officers. But alas I see you went with "government employees" to fit your agenda.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:30
http://www.azduiatty.com/judge-refuses-all-tests.html
"A judge [Judge Patrick Young] driving with his boss was charged with drunken driving after a wreck that sent another motorist to the hospital, and the other judge was seen by an officer pouring out a can of beer, police said....
Young's attorney, Clyde Kuehn, said Thursday his client was "absolutely within his rights" to refuse a field sobriety test and a Breathalyzer test, saying the tests have proven unreliable..."

If they are so unreliable (and they are), why does this judge always allow them into evidence in cases he's presiding over?

Hmmmmmm.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:32
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20121031/BLOG48/710319860
King County deputy prosecutor decided not to file a drunken-driving charge against Snohomish County District Court Judge Timothy Ryan.

As we reported, the prosecutor determined there was insufficient evidence to prove Ryan was driving impaired Aug. 29 when he was stopped by Washington State Patrol troopers near Mill Creek. Ryan refused to cooperate with sobriety tests.

What do these judges know? Why do they refuse sobriety tests when they drive drunk? :whistling:

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:35
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20121031/BLOG48/710319860


What do these judges know? Why do they refuse sobriety tests when they drive drunk? :whistling:

You can refuse SFSTs as well. As well as refuse a breathalyzer.


That's fine for me, less paperwork. Especially after you put your car through a mcdonalds.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:36
http://www.camicjohnson.com/blog/2012/05/dui-charges-against-illinois-off-duty-officer-are-questionable.shtml
A Collinsville police sergeant was a passenger in the 47-year-old defendant's vehicle when the accident took place. Contrary to what the arresting officer claims, the police sergeant claims that the defendant never refused a sobriety test. According to one of the arresting officers, the refusal was inadvertently left out of the police report.

What?! "inadvertently left out" of report? Thin blue line of shame.

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:40
That's fine for me, less paperwork. Especially after you put your car through a mcdonalds.

I am sure if I put my car through a dunkin donuts, there would be a lot of extra paperwork. I would probably not only get charged with DUI, but obstruction of justice, interfering with a police officer, etc, etc.

FWIW, I would love a donut right about now.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:40
You can refuse SFSTs as well. As well as refuse a breathalyzer.


That's fine for me, less paperwork. Especially after you put your car through a mcdonalds.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

O RLY?

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2012/oct/20/memphis-police-accused-of-dui-just-said-no-to/

Not following the law may have paid off for officers Joma Harris, 43, on April Fools' Day and Roger Williams, 32, in January. Prosecutors later dismissed misdemeanor charges of DUI, (failure to follow) duty upon striking a highway fixture, leaving the scene of an accident and violation of vehicle registration law against Harris. A DUI charge against Williams also was dropped.Both men pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor of reckless driving and received diversion, which will allow that charge to be erased after a year without further trouble.

When LEO refuse DUI tests in order to ensure they get the least sentence possible, that sends a strong message that everyone should resist such tests imho.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:41
I am sure if I put my car through a dunkin donuts, there would be a lot of extra paperwork. I would probably not only get charged with DUI, but obstruction of justice, interfering with a police officer, etc, etc.

FWIW, I would love a donut right about now.

There you go! There's your true colors! I knew you wouldn't let any of us down.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:43
O RLY?

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2012/oct/20/memphis-police-accused-of-dui-just-said-no-to/



When LEO refuse DUI tests in order to ensure they get the least sentence possible, that sends a strong message that everyone should resist such tests imho.

I'm not sure you have the brain power to comprehend the legal system and how it works. Keep copying and pasting!


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:46
There you go! There's your true colors! I knew you wouldn't let any of us down.

What. You don't like donuts? Are you communist or French? Either way, you are un-american.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:48
What. You don't like donuts? Are you communist or French? Either way, you are un-american.

Never was much of a fan. Although a nearby farm market makes some damn good plain donuts.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:48
I'm not sure you have the brain power to comprehend the legal system and how it works. Keep copying and pasting!


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

I understand how power corrupts.

http://www.msjllp.com/blog/2012/07/dui-charges-against-fairview-heights-illinois-sergeant-are-dropped.shtml

This week, prosecutors dropped DUI charges against an Illinois police sergeant. The 47-year-old Fairview Heights sergeant had been arrested after a two-car accident on St. Patrick's Day. He was with another officer at the time of the crash, and both were off-duty...

Oddly, the arresting officer refused to turn over video to prove that the sergeant refused the field sobriety test. And, he also wrote in his arrest report that he believed the sergeant was fit to drive.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:49
I understand how power corrupts.

http://www.msjllp.com/blog/2012/07/dui-charges-against-fairview-heights-illinois-sergeant-are-dropped.shtml

I think I know who you are now...


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:50
Never was much of a fan. Although a nearby farm market makes some damn good plain donuts.

You must be french.

Do you like crÍpes or baklava more?

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:51
Pattern and practices:

http://www.totaldui.com/news/articles/breathalyzer/washington-toxicology-lab-troubles.aspx

Troubles at the Washington State Patrol toxicology lab have prompted DUI attorneys to mount protests in district court concerning more than 50 DUI cases, and the ultimate decision could have a wide-ranging impact on hundreds to even thousands of other cases...

Back in July, the state lab's former manager, Ann Marie Gordon, abruptly resigned after being accused more than once of signing statements that she had tested the solution when she really hadn't.

State crime labs, trust them like the devil.

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:53
I think I know who you are now...

I am sure you dont. He is Number 5. Often time he refers to himself as Leoben Conoy. He is one of my alternate personalities.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:53
You must be french.

Do you like crÍpes or baklava more?

Good ol American right here. Wanna take this outside?

I'll go easy on you I promise.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:53
http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-chemist-charged-crime-lab-scandal-194745835.html

A former chemist accused of falsifying evidence at a Massachusetts state crime lab where she handled more than 60,000 drug samples was arrested on Friday and charged with obstructing justice and lying about her training.

Pattern and practices.

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:54
I am sure you dont. He is Number 5. Often time he refers to himself as Leoben Conoy. He is one of my alternate personalities.

One of multiple, correct?


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:54
Holesinpaper, what do you do for a living?


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:54
Good ol American right here. Wanna take this outside?

I'll go easy on you I promise.

I am not really into that kinky stuff with guys....

TBO
11-06-2012, 11:55
Good olť exercise of bias, poking, thinly veiled by attempting to label it humor after the fact.

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 11:55
I am not really into that kinky stuff with guys....

I thought you were? That is why you're in Germany right?


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 11:56
I think I know who you are now...


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

Police your own before attempting to police anyone else.

It's an inherently corrupt system that is about power, control and money -- not justice. And that's pathetic.

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:57
I'll go easy on you I promise.


If you look like this police officer, I am much more interested..


http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oktober09_09_21/o11_20425553.jpg

DanaT
11-06-2012, 11:58
I thought you were? That is why you're in Germany right?

Oh no.

They have these in Germany

http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oktober09_09_21/o27_20278475.jpg

They bring you big beers.

DanaT
11-06-2012, 12:00
One of multiple, correct?

There are 13 of me. You can find my pictures if you are good.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 12:00
Holesinpaper, what do you do for a living?


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

WTF does that have to do with this topic?

TBO
11-06-2012, 12:00
Are

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 12:00
Police your own before attempting to police anyone else.

It's an inherently corrupt system that is about power, control and money -- not justice. And that's pathetic.

Blah blah blah.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

DanaT
11-06-2012, 12:01
Good olť exercise of bias, poking, thinly veiled by attempting to label it humor after the fact.

Life must be tough for you with everyone biased against against you. Shall I buy you a donut?

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 12:01
WTF does that have to do with this topic?

All I did was ask, curiosity that's all.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

TBO
11-06-2012, 12:02
You, and holes, are not everyone (despite whatever self image you subscribe to).

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

DanaT
11-06-2012, 12:03
You, and holes, are not everyone (despite whatever self image you subscribe to).

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

Does that mean you want the donut or not?

TBO
11-06-2012, 12:05
Signs, once again, of a defeated argument.

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

DanaT
11-06-2012, 12:07
Signs, once again, of a defeated argument.

What argument. We were talking about donuts.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 12:07
You, and holes, are not everyone (despite whatever self image you subscribe to).

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

Not yet, but the tide seems to be turning.

http://boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/NewImage21-300x358.png

Abusive Border Patrol Agents NM Checkpoint - YouTube

More grow fed up every day, and peacefully resist illegal behavior of government officials.

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 12:09
Signs, once again, of a defeated argument.

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

From the side that is indefensible, I'll take that for what it's worth (nothing).

Exactly how much corruption, nepotism and malfeasance on the part of LEO, crime labs, and prosecutors does it take before you admit there is a systemic problem?

Ohio Copper
11-06-2012, 12:09
Not yet, but the tide seems to be turning.

http://boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/NewImage21-300x358.png

Abusive Border Patrol Agents NM Checkpoint - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2SkaRvKv8U)

More grow fed up every day, and peacefully resist illegal behavior of government officials.

Yeah, probably not.


" I was wondering what would break first; your spirit or your body."

TBO
11-06-2012, 12:09
Very poor on your part, I honestly expect better of you (believe you are capable of more).

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

DanaT
11-06-2012, 12:12
Very poor on your part, I honestly expect better of you (believe you are capable of more).

Which one of my personalities are you talking to?

holesinpaper
11-06-2012, 12:17
Very poor on your part, I honestly expect better of you (believe you are capable of more).

Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2

What? Was it the image of stamps edited as required by Federal law?

http://tywkiwdbi.blogspot.com/2012/11/freedom-liberty-equality-justice-forever.html

Mrs. VR
11-06-2012, 12:54
Is it a full moon again already? :impatient: