Response to Jim_bo's claim about citing cops

[CdwJava]

I have been sick so did NOT get a chance to respond to Jim's diarrhea of the mouth ... so, I will do so here!

I won't address the issues in that particular thread, but I WILL correct the "record" as he portrayed it - or, rather ME.

Cops believe they are above the law.* Especially traffic laws.* Carl has even said openly that he would NOT write a traffic ticket to another cop.* He has stated that cops don’t ticket cops.*

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!! I have NEVER stated any such thing! In fact, if you actually read what I have actually posted, you will find that I HAVE cited other officers - Hell, I have even ARRESTED other officers! Yes, there are SOME cops who will not ticket other cops, but that is hardly the same as "cops believe they are above the law" and that *I* stated I would never cite another cop.

That, Jim, is a lie.

I don't expect you to apologize because that's the kind of guy you are. But, I could NOT let that egregious claim remain unanswered.

 

[Ohiogal]

I have been sick so did NOT get a chance to respond to Jim's diarrhea of the mouth ... so, I will do so here!

I won't address the issues in that particular thread, but I WILL correct the "record" as he portrayed it - or, rather ME.


Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!! I have NEVER stated any such thing! In fact, if you actually read what I have actually posted, you will find that I HAVE cited other officers - Hell, I have even ARRESTED other officers! Yes, there are SOME cops who will not ticket other cops, but that is hardly the same as "cops believe they are above the law" and that *I* stated I would never cite another cop.

That, Jim, is a lie.

I don't expect you to apologize because that's the kind of guy you are. But, I could NOT let that egregious claim remain unanswered.

Carl, as a defense attorney, I am often on the opposite side of police officers HOWEVER I have found you always act ethically and above board. Don't let Jim get you down. He is wrong and that should not be tolerated. Don't be mad. Be proud of the person YOU are and that many of us know you to be.

 

[JIMinCA]

I have been sick so did NOT get a chance to respond to Jim's diarrhea of the mouth ... so, I will do so here!

I won't address the issues in that particular thread, but I WILL correct the "record" as he portrayed it - or, rather ME.


Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!! I have NEVER stated any such thing! In fact, if you actually read what I have actually posted, you will find that I HAVE cited other officers - Hell, I have even ARRESTED other officers! Yes, there are SOME cops who will not ticket other cops, but that is hardly the same as "cops believe they are above the law" and that *I* stated I would never cite another cop.

That, Jim, is a lie.

I don't expect you to apologize because that's the kind of guy you are. But, I could NOT let that egregious claim remain unanswered.

Carl,

I tried to search for the conversation where you made the comments concerning not ticketing other cops. However, it seems that the search engine on this site limits how far back you can look. I do remember being shocked and surprised that you would make such outlandish comments... that's why they stuck in my head. However, I also admit that the comment I made in the referenced post was provocative and controversial. As such, I should have verified that I had specific evidence of my claim before making it. I only assumed that I could resurrect the old statements if necessary. Since I cannot provide evidence of the statements you made, I rescind my statement in the referenced post. Furthermore I apologize for making a statement that I cannot support. While I know in my heart of hearts that such statements were made by you, I should not have referenced them without a supporting link.

Now, that said, I am more than a bit disappointed in your reaction. I have been very critical of you from time to time on this site. I have many times pointed out that your comments tend to lean "pro-state" (you are, after all, a CA cop) instead of providing posters with every possible defense they may be able to use (as that is what they are usually asking for). But I have also been very supportive and respectful of you as well. I have many times deferred to your background and knowledge... but I never hesitated to point out when I felt that you were wrong. However, I don't believe I can ever remember a time that I was downright disrespectful towards you. I've always known you to be of very even temper, unlike many of the hotheads here who go off half-****ed with nothing to support their opinions but anger and vitriol. So your bitter post above has me taken aback quite a bit.

I know you didn't want an apology from me... but suck it up, you got one any way. However, my apology is more motivated by the fact that my comments elicited an uglier side of you than I am used to seeing rather than the fact that I don't have a link to support my comments. You may not like the things that I say (as they are generally not pro-state), but I usually support my comments with facts and law. But apparently, you have already determined the "kind of guy I am".

 

[Proserpina]

Carl,

I tried to search for the conversation where you made the comments concerning not ticketing other cops. However, it seems that the search engine on this site limits how far back you can look. I do remember being shocked and surprised that you would make such outlandish comments... that's why they stuck in my head. However, I also admit that the comment I made in the referenced post was provocative and controversial. As such, I should have verified that I had specific evidence of my claim before making it. I only assumed that I could resurrect the old statements if necessary. Since I cannot provide evidence of the statements you made, I rescind my statement in the referenced post. Furthermore I apologize for making a statement that I cannot support. While I know in my heart of hearts that such statements were made by you, I should not have referenced them without a supporting link.

Now, that said, I am more than a bit disappointed in your reaction. I have been very critical of you from time to time on this site. I have many times pointed out that your comments tend to lean "pro-state" (you are, after all, a CA cop) instead of providing posters with every possible defense they may be able to use (as that is what they are usually asking for). But I have also been very supportive and respectful of you as well. I have many times deferred to your background and knowledge... but I never hesitated to point out when I felt that you were wrong. However, I don't believe I can ever remember a time that I was downright disrespectful towards you. I've always known you to be of very even temper, unlike many of the hotheads here who go off half-****ed with nothing to support their opinions but anger and vitriol. So your bitter post above has me taken aback quite a bit.

I know you didn't want an apology from me... but suck it up, you got one any way. However, my apology is more motivated by the fact that my comments elicited an uglier side of you than I am used to seeing rather than the fact that I don't have a link to support my comments. You may not like the things that I say (as they are generally not pro-state), but I usually support my comments with facts and law. But apparently, you have already determined the "kind of guy I am".

Oh, you can go back further than you'd imagine.

And here's the thing. Carl has one helluva lot of credibility. You do not.

Your post here only proves the point.

 

[JIMinCA]

Oh, you can go back further than you'd imagine.

And here's the thing. Carl has one helluva lot of credibility. You do not.

Your post here only proves the point.

Well... it seems like you just did exactly what I apologized for doing. You made a statement without providing anything to support it. Your statement of "you can go back further than you'd imagine" implies that I was not being truthful about my search. You have nothing to support that statement and as such you have spoken volumes about your credibility.

 

[Proserpina]

Well... it seems like you just did exactly what I apologized for doing. You made a statement without providing anything to support it.

I don't need to prove it - your own words do that very well all by themselves.

Your statement of "you can go back further than you'd imagine" implies that I was not being truthful about my search.

On which planet? Seriously? Dude, don't project so obviously.

You have nothing to support that statement and as such you have spoken volumes about your credibility.

Again, you don't need my proof.

Pudding, and all that good stuff.

 

[JIMinCA]

Carl, as a defense attorney, I am often on the opposite side of police officers HOWEVER I have found you always act ethically and above board. Don't let Jim get you down. He is wrong and that should not be tolerated. Don't be mad. Be proud of the person YOU are and that many of us know you to be.

Talk about unprofessional. I'm glad that the moderator deleted some of the more vicious things you posted about me.

However, Ohiogal, the search engines do go back far enough to pull up this little gem from your past:

https://forum.freeadvice.com/speeding-other-moving-violations-13/ca-red-light-ticket-591083.html

In this thread, as in many, you just ASSUME the guilt of the poster. Furthermore, you offered erroneous advice that was nothing short of irresponsible. As a defense attorney, your job is to defend ALL your clients... not just the ones you think are worthy of a defense. I can understand Carl's pro-state bias as he is a cop. But as a defense attorney, your pro-state bias baffles me.

 

[cbg]

I was not aware that Carl, or anyone else on this board for that matter, was obligated to "provide posters with every possible defense they may be able to use". Would you mind showing me where in the TOS it states that to be a guarantee?

Thanks.

 

[You Are Guilty]

I don't recall who it is that turned me on to this trick, but to whoever it was, thank you. Greatest Xmas gift yet:

This message is hidden because JIMinCA is on your ignore list.

 

[TigerD]

Jim,

If you are not happy with your free advice, I'm more than happy to give you a refund.

DC

 

[Ohiogal]

Talk about unprofessional. I'm glad that the moderator deleted some of the more vicious things you posted about me.

However, Ohiogal, the search engines do go back far enough to pull up this little gem from your past:

https://forum.freeadvice.com/speeding-other-moving-violations-13/ca-red-light-ticket-591083.html

In this thread, as in many, you just ASSUME the guilt of the poster. Furthermore, you offered erroneous advice that was nothing short of irresponsible. As a defense attorney, your job is to defend ALL your clients... not just the ones you think are worthy of a defense. I can understand Carl's pro-state bias as he is a cop. But as a defense attorney, your pro-state bias baffles me.

Dude I stand behind everything I post. Deal with it. You are still an idiot. Vicious? Really? Grow a spine, backbone, and thick skin. Oh and btw, I also know in that thread I admitted to being wrong and I thanked those that corrected me. Try actually comprehending.

 

[CdwJava]

Carl,

I tried to search for the conversation where you made the comments concerning not ticketing other cops.

Since I never would have made such a statement concerning me, I am not surprised you wouldn't find it. I MIGHT have stated I would be inclined not to, not that I never would. I am also disinclined to cite friends and family members - that's a far cry from NOT doing something.

When a warning might suffice, great. When it won't, then it is time for a citation. Sometimes, a citation or an arrest is warranted. And, if I wasn't going to cite a cop then you'd think I wouldn't arrest one, but I did that just a few weeks ago - a local one, and a friend ... so please don't accuse me of things that simply are not true.

Now, that said, I am more than a bit disappointed in your reaction. I have been very critical of you from time to time on this site. I have many times pointed out that your comments tend to lean "pro-state" (you are, after all, a CA cop) instead of providing posters with every possible defense they may be able to use (as that is what they are usually asking for).

I take my credibility quite seriously. I can stand being accused of many things, but being accused of making statement that I would not have made, that I cannot stand for.

I know we have gone around, and have vehemently disagreed. Disagreement with a position, fine - I can deal with that. But, characterizations that essentially defame me, I cannot let stand.

But I have also been very supportive and respectful of you as well. I have many times deferred to your background and knowledge... but I never hesitated to point out when I felt that you were wrong. However, I don't believe I can ever remember a time that I was downright disrespectful towards you. I've always known you to be of very even temper, unlike many of the hotheads here who go off half-****ed with nothing to support their opinions but anger and vitriol. So your bitter post above has me taken aback quite a bit.

I know you didn't want an apology from me... but suck it up, you got one any way. However, my apology is more motivated by the fact that my comments elicited an uglier side of you than I am used to seeing rather than the fact that I don't have a link to support my comments. You may not like the things that I say (as they are generally not pro-state), but I usually support my comments with facts and law. But apparently, you have already determined the "kind of guy I am".

Well, for that last statement, I do apologize. I made it in the heat of the moment. In my neck of the woods, there has been a lot of falderall about officers and credibility by a local paper that has printed half truths (fortunately, I am one of those that he has found no fault with). But, it has me rather defensive and reactionary.

I apologize for that last characterization. It was uncalled for. Sorry.

 

[Zigner]

Jim,

If you are not happy with your free advice, I'm more than happy to give you a refund.

DC

You will have to track down all of his accounts and refund each and every one.

 

[obmij]

Since I never would have made such a statement concerning me, I am not surprised you wouldn't find it. I MIGHT have stated I would be inclined not to, not that I never would. I am also disinclined to cite friends and family members - that's a far cry from NOT doing something.

Let's just say that we may have had a miscommunication in the past and not belabor the issue beyond that.

Well, for that last statement, I do apologize. I made it in the heat of the moment. In my neck of the woods, there has been a lot of falderall about officers and credibility by a local paper that has printed half truths (fortunately, I am one of those that he has found no fault with). But, it has me rather defensive and reactionary.

I apologize for that last characterization. It was uncalled for. Sorry.

Apologies accepted but unnecessary. Despite our differences, I still hold you in very high esteem.

 

[quincy]

I'm confused. Is JIMinCA the same person as Jim_bo? And is jimbo backwards (obmij) the same poster, as well?

Or are all Jim's on this site a bit wacky?