what will andersons verdict be?

Not the same thing Pavolo. Not even close.

O right that is a sting same as getting in a fight with the boys in the bar . Or maybe the being present when the deal go's down . There are alot of times they have to bend the rules in there job and that is what I meant when I made the statement . Anderson broke the biggest he ratted and for that he will pay . He is a little boy who is in over his head .

"There are alot of times they have to bend the rules in there job and that is what I meant when I made the statement"

The police should never, ever, ever bend the rules.

Sorry to burst your bubble but it is a fact of life .

that may well be.. but it definately should not be.

It's outrageous that you appear to defend those actions Pav.

When the cops cheat...we all lose.

Thumbs Up to JTF for spelling "LOSE" correctly.

Everyone should be so skilled

LOL...

Heh...there's no excuse for anyone to misspell nowadays....it's just a click away eh...

JTF wrote:Heh...there's no excuse for anyone to misspell nowadays....it's just a click away eh...

Actually the problem isn't a "misspelling", it's a misuse or mis-selection of the word.

Quite typically, using "loose" instead of "lose", or "doe's" instead of "does"

What I defend is the means to get the conviction , like it or not the criminal doe's not play completly by your rules . Be as self serving as you wish as long as your rights are not harmed and in most cases they are not then nail the scum. If you have been truly vioalated then prove it and I will feel sorry for you .

BUT... That is not what you said. I guess if you want to be misinterpreted Pav just keep posting as you do.

That said, an undercover cop bending the rules while working to discover evidence to prosecute is one thing. To maneuver our rights in the same effort is another. And is not acceptable under any circumstances.

Keep the two clear in the mind of the police and there will be no problemos...

Wrong again grumpy where did I say it was okay to step on your rights I just said that I agree with them bending the rules of the law to get there job done .
You all jumped on me with out reading carefully what I have said . Telling me there is no why rules should be broken , while what you mean is your rights should not be stepped on which I tend to agree with. But in some cases they have to push the envelope , hence why so many cases get thrown out cause we are so tied up with the rights of the accused .
If we can prove that he sold drugs imo good enough get him off the street, he broke the law. Which may be wrong or what ever but it is the law follow it .

Wrong still Pavolo. You simply did not substantiate your comment. When one says it is okay to bend the rules in the context of rights then it is only natural to assume that bending the rules includes all the rules.

Come now Pav. If you wanted to convey that it was okay to bend the rules, but not peeps rights, then say that. You do get what I'm sayin' eh?

I never said in the context of rights just in the context of their job, meaning the way they get their conviction . As long as you don't interfere with their rights you will probably get the conviction.
Their rights are theres for good or bad and the rights you have when it comes to the law and arrest are ingrained , in the charter .
This topic is going off into rights which is not where I was discussing any thing . If the police pose or be something they are not to get there man I have no problem , if they set up a scheme to ensnare you I have no problem .
If they walk in to your house with out a warrant then you will be protected . If the execute a search of your house with out announcing there presence then you are protected . If they tap your phone with out a warrant then you are protected and the tapes are no use .
I have no where said your rights should be or can be overrun by the police , only that the police sometimes have to bend the law to do the the job they do. And that by me is fine , I think you are getting me mixed up with Holly .

(Pavolo... When we allow the police to trample basic rights, that is far worse then letting a drug dealer off. Or would you like a police officer to beat the crap out of you, just because he lost control?)

This is the first mention of rights and I did not make it someone else did .

Here is what you said Pav. This is you saying it is okay to bend the rules. It does not say "it is okay to bend the rules to get a conviction but not to deny people their rights".

Nuff said on this...

Pavolo wrote:No cops are not perfect nor are they stupid , and you are innocent till proven guilty cept in the case of child abuse .
Sometimes you have to bend the rules to seal a case and if it gets a guilty verdict then Iam for it . The police very rarely have gone after innocent people cept when they are given bad info which is not always there fault.
Dean what you seem to advocate is that you want the police right to operate, ham strung so you can feel that your rights are protected . Well they have to obey the law , they have to bend it to get into the world of no rules which is crime .

You still do not have me saying it is okay to step on your rights , only that the police sometimes have to bend the rules. Where do I condone the breaking of your precious rights . I really tired of people who think they know or tell me what I say .