US: Police use tear gas to quell vigil for teen who police say shot himself in the head while handcu - Polidicks

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;43324088]Unless every single person within the Durham police forensic unit is corrupt, along with every other at the department, I seriously doubt a lie of such magnitude could be made.[/QUOTE] They just raided a goddamn candlelight vigil, and you're doubting that they're corrupt?

Wasn´t there a similar case in the USA? Oh wait, this one is in Durham, North Carolina. Hmmm, but the victim is white, the other guy was black if I remember correctly. [url]http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/21/autopsy-arkansas-man-shot-himself-while-cuffed-in-back-of-police-car/[/url] Oh fuck yeah, my brain is awesome!

I swear we had a thread about this before too where we found you can shoot yourself in the head from behind the back if you're guns hidden in your waistband.

Fuck Durham. I used to live there. :/

[QUOTE=SinjinOmega;43324030]One RIDICULOUSLY simple fact points against it though. The fact he was in handcuffs. Behind the back at that. And tear gassing and arresting people attending a VIGIL of all things is just plain dumb.[/QUOTE] A news team investigated, and it [I]is[/I] possible to get the gunshot wound the teen had, while the hands are cuffed behind the back.

Here it is. [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1206684[/url]

[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;43323930]Wait, what?[/QUOTE] Is it about the second sentence? Cause if so, I think they meant this: [quote]But the family said [B]on[/B] Wednesday [B]that [Jesus][/B] Huerta [B]had[/B] never tried to kill himself.[/quote] If you mean about the differing stories... Then yeah, I'm stumped as to why they're saying two different things too.

He was trying to use his Persona

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43324207]words[/QUOTE] I'm getting annoyed at how you occasionally ban people for really trivial fucking reasons when you're in an argument with them.

[QUOTE=V12US;43325103]I'm getting annoyed at how you occasionally ban people for really trivial fucking reasons when you're in an argument with them.[/QUOTE] So I'm not the only one that thought that ban was a little biased.

[QUOTE=V12US;43325103]I'm getting annoyed at how you occasionally ban people for really trivial fucking reasons when you're in an argument with them.[/QUOTE] Not reading the article and getting into an argument about it is bannable though.

[QUOTE=jiggu;43325446]Not reading the article and getting into an argument about it is bannable though.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it happens all the time in other threads, and even though I'm reporting them nothing happens. It's happened two days in a row now in a Starpluck thread. I feel like another admin should handle it if he's personally involved in the debate.

Wow, this is pretty outrageous. Just, why the fuck do you start tear gassing a vigil, huh. Feeling guilty of something, perhaps?

I know it's far fetched and very unlikely, but let's say this kid actually did somehow shoot himself while handcuffed. Even then that means -They didn't pat him down -They weren't keeping an eye on him -They didn't care. So no matter what, the police fucked up badly here, and this is just fuel on the flames. I'm ashamed that this happened in my state. Normally we're pretty peaceful.

[QUOTE=Tmaxx;43325871]I know it's far fetched and very unlikely, but let's say this kid actually did somehow shoot himself while handcuffed. Even then that means -They didn't pat him down -They weren't keeping an eye on him -They didn't care. So no matter what, the police fucked up badly here, and this is just fuel on the flames. I'm ashamed that this happened in my state. Normally we're pretty peaceful.[/QUOTE] To be fair they found him after his relatives called the police after he ran away, and he was being booked with second degree trespassing so having a gun hidden on him was probably not anyone's first thought.

[QUOTE=plunger435;43325949]To be fair they found him after his relatives called the police after he ran away, and he was being booked with second degree trespassing so having a gun hidden on him was probably not anyone's first thought.[/QUOTE] police are ALWAYS supposed to pat you down when getting arrested, though.

[QUOTE=Tmaxx;43325964]police are ALWAYS supposed to pat you down when getting arrested, though.[/QUOTE] And as this thread has shown, clearly police make mistakes a lot, this PD it seems more than others, but I doubt it was a homicide like others are saying.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;43323977]It might be fucking obvious the police did it if you didnt read more about the story than the few sentences in the OP. All evidence points to a suicide. The guy had gunshot residue on his hands, the cop didn't have a trace and all other forensic evidence points to a suicide.[/QUOTE] Well how the fuck can he do that handcuffed? The residue could be planted evidence.

In related news; A quadriplegic hangs himself in his prison cell. Guards call it a shame.

Here's something showing how it's possible. [url]http://www.policeone.com/suspect-transport/articles/5910979-Video-Ark-police-reconstruct-handcuffed-shooting/[/url]

[QUOTE=V12US;43325103]I'm getting annoyed at how you occasionally ban people for really trivial fucking reasons when you're in an argument with them.[/QUOTE] This isn't anything new. You make a claim that makes it obvious you didn't read the article (or in this case the first line) and I will ban you. I don't really care if you happened to be debating me with me while you did that, as that doesn't give you a free pass to break the rules. The reasoning is that you don't fucking waste people's time by debating when you haven't actually even bothered to read the first line. It's not even occasional and my ban history extends back to a month so take a look. [QUOTE=plunger435;43325490]Yeah, but it happens all the time in other threads, and even though I'm reporting them nothing happens. It's happened two days in a row now in a Starpluck thread. I feel like another admin should handle it if he's personally involved in the debate.[/QUOTE] Two people need to report a post for it to be flagged. You guys are probably just having a confirmation biases if that's what you notice. With all the illiteracy-bans in my event log (below), only the first one was done in my thread and that is probably because I tend to read every post in my thread. He wasn't even debating me so I don't the issue from your side, not that there would be an issue if he was also debating me: [QUOTE=StickyWicket;43309481]Why would anyone limiting freedom-of-speech be celebrated? Propaganda or not, I'm guessing that these posters were put up on private property without complaint of the property owners, so this is clearly censorship. Even if these were put up on public property, they weren't funded by the state and limiting them in the subway means they can limit any offensive poster anywhere else. Not a good call, not a good call indeed [highlight](User was banned for this post ("You guessed wrong; didn't read the article" - Starpluck))[/highlight][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=lazyguy;43271895]What if they do refuse me? Am I supposed to just not buy the pork? Can I ask for another cashier to serve me? What if it's a smaller shop and there's only one till? [editline]22nd December 2013[/editline] Marksies is a bit outside my price range anyway. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Didn't read the article" - Starpluck))[/highlight] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Extended - used an alt to evade ban" - Megafan))[/highlight][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=RayvenQ;43148746]Except taking selfies at someones funeral isn't exactly normal. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Didn't read the article" - Starpluck))[/highlight][/QUOTE] With the 2nd and 3rd being in other threads, it's called being consistent.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43330307]This isn't anything new. You make a claim that makes it obvious you didn't read the article (or in this case the first line) and I will ban you. I don't really care if you happened to be debating me with me while you did that, as that doesn't give you a free pass to break the rules. The reasoning is that you don't fucking waste people's time by debating when you haven't actually even bothered to read the first line. It's not even occasional and my ban history extends back to a month so take a look. Two people need to report a post for it to be flagged. You guys are probably just having a confirmation biases if that's what you notice. With all the illiteracy-bans in my event log (below), only the first one was done in my thread and that is probably because I tend to read every post in my thread. He wasn't even debating me so I don't the issue from your side, not that there would be an issue if he was also debating me: With the 2nd and 3rd being in other threads, it's called being consistent.[/QUOTE] I was going off the last two threads of yours where I saw the bans, and what he'd said, so I apologise,my mistake. I couldn't look through the ban history properly on my phone it bugs out with any pop ups like that. Though I do still feel admins should not ban someone who their debating with, since it does appear this way.

Gaseous freedom.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43330307]This isn't anything new. You make a claim that makes it obvious you didn't read the article (or in this case the first line) and I will ban you. I don't really care if you happened to be debating me with me while you did that, as that doesn't give you a free pass to break the rules. The reasoning is that you don't fucking waste people's time by debating when you haven't actually even bothered to read the first line. [/QUOTE] Kind of late to the party, but as I posted from my lonely hovel in the refugee camp, I think it was pretty obvious I wasn't talking out my ass considering I was having a pretty detailed discussion about the matter. I was mainly referring to the other article posted in the thread considering the op one was pretty shitty. I did actually go back to the main article to make sure before I posted the post that got me banned, but I skimmed over it for whatever reason. I think it was kind of shitty considering I even said I wasn't sure if it was in the original article but anywho [editline]29th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Slarav;43327802]Well how the fuck can he do that handcuffed? The residue could be planted evidence.[/QUOTE] Your not totally restricted in handcuffs and residue would have been kind of a pain to plant successfully.