NJ: Man sues after officers allegedly shot, paralyzed him while he retrieved ice tea from car

So you just ignored this huh

Next

 

“If the vehicle is running”

 

or even being pushed
You're just playing dumb now

 

Which one applies here?

 

Operation of a car is not defined like you want it to be. Any law firm website you can find will tell you Operation is the act of getting behind the wheel.
Rather its running or not which is why every DL handbook specifies it.
And why you WILL be arrested for sitting in a parked car with the engine off while drunk.
You are the operator. Rather you choose to start the engine or not.

 

So you think they explained what operating is because it doesn’t matter. Ok
My buddy was arrested for sitting in a parked car drunk and beat the charges claiming he got drunk after he parked. No DUI on his record and now he’s got a CDL

 

says who?

 

So why do you think he got arrested in the first place for being in a parked car?
Because he was the operator and drunk. Hence a DUI.
Being the operator has nothing to do with the engine being on or off.
You answer your own questions but keep asking the same things over and over.

 

The article mentions he smashed into 1 vehicle.

I asked you
Cool story bro. Can you link us all their badge numbers / names?
Can you post this is normal police procedure when asking for an ID?
Can you source they asked for an ID?

And you did not provide me with anything but cool stories.

And so, were they on duty? You can not provide me with anything.

Uh no.
It is safe to say the victim got it all right with thugs showing up with masks coming out of unmarked cars.
You got zero to dispute this. Absolute zero. All you got going is this misplaced "protect the blue" when they wronged a black dude.
You can not even say what probable cause they have, and here you are saying that I got no clue and must be lying.
Total joke.

 

So why we’re charges dropped if he was operating drunk?
A: he wasn’t operating

 

Media manipulation. They let out a barebones story and fit it to their "bad cops" narrative, where it is eaten up by folks that are desperate to keep the divisions between races alive. So they put out a story that's vague but fits the narrative, their followers pick it up and spread it around for free. The media makes money from it and it advances their divisive agenda.

 

Good point. It's obvious who here has actually read the story or understands the law. I'd wager that group here is fairly representative of of followers in the US.

 

A. I don't believe your story
B. If you want just ignore whats in your DL handbook and what every attorney on the planet will tell you, I can't help you

 

You require badge numbers, and written protocols on asking for a DL?
Thats pretty funny. You require a battery of qualified questions but at the same time, any hands up don't shoot article in a local paper and you believe every word.
Nobody is going to provide you with ANYTHING as its a waste of time.
All you will do (as your reputation proceeds you) is claim everyone but the media is lying.

So you feel free to believe someone who went to get a tea out of his car was shot in the neck 4 times by rouge off duty cops looking to kill black people all you want.
But the actual video will provide the event and then you will have yet another back peddle for that as well.
We all know you too well.

 

That’s why we have judges.

Probable cause = Suspicion + Articulable facts.

 

I guess you don't have any idea what reasonable suspicion is and what it allows huh?

 

Shouldn’t need to get to a judge, cops need to learn the law

 

Sure I do. What crime did they suspect him of simply by him sitting in a car?

 

Was Ice T hurt?

 

All we got is not some iffy article in some local paper. We got the lawyer of the defendant giving a press conference.
And it's not my fault or my problem that the cops are refusing to explain themselves to even release the body camera footage....
besides that they dropped ALL the charges they initially made against him.
So there is no reason at all to think the defendant is lying while it remains you got nothing to defend what the cops did.


Even worse, you got no rebuke to say what on earth the probable cause was for them "cops" to go after their victim. You got no reply to what the police procedure is for a traffic stop, as if it's done by unmarked care with plain clothed officers with ski masks. I am starting to suspect that you know they cops are in the wrong, but you can not stand to admit to that.

 

Operation in NJ is defined by intent. If one is sitting in a vehicle with the engine running (or not) and intents to put the car in motion, he’s operating.

 

Of course. But I see no evidence the law wasn’t applied properly. Even if it wasn’t, that doesn’t give you the right to run over a cop. If your rights were violated, take the cop to court. A judge will decide. Running over someone is not justice.

 

Not always true. You fall asleep in your car with no keys , or the keys shut in the trunk, and the car is on private property... you will be fine. Might have to win in court, but it's not open/shut case. You found on the highway passed out in your car , you going to jail whether keys in it or not.

 

I wasn't referring to private property.

 

Henderson was charged with aggravated assault, resisting arrest and obstruction of justice. They only dropped the assault charges.

I don't have to explain to you what their probable cause was or their procedure for a traffic stop. Unlike you, I don't comment on things I couldn't possibly know because I wasn't there. What I do know is a detective not involved, selected by the DA, who viewed the body cam and car videos had to give his affidavit to the DA's office on his account of the shooting.

Knowing the video is going to be made public, the Detective stated the facts of the stop. And guess what, theres a bit more than your explanation of 4 guys who were not cops, shot a guy in the neck for getting a tea where ALL charges were dropped..
Who'd a thunk