Wednesday, November 22, 2006

3 Atlanta police officers shot while serving a narcotics a 92 year old woman!

One was hit in the arm, another in a thigh and the third in a shoulder. The officers were taken to a hospital for treatment, and all three were conscious and alert, police said.

The reporting doesn't go into specifics about whether or not the warrant was justified, or if anything illegal was found. They raided the house in plain clothes and were apparently shot before even making it in to the house. It sounds like a pretty sad story, but the fact that a 92 year old woman has that good of aim and is alert enough to know someone is trying to break in to her house is pretty damn impressive.

Sadly, the police promptly shot and killed her.

For the New Orleans folks:

Of the police brutality cases we've had, this is the most egregious because of the woman's age," Hutchins said.

Hutchins said he would try to meet with Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington and would also meet with lawyers.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

So many things in the paper today got me upset, I don't even know where to start. Let's start with the local news shall we?

First head shaker of the day comes from the Times Pic this morning. It is about Bayard, the NOPD Captain who spoke out pretty harshly about the cities hurricane preparations and everything police were involved in during the aftermath. This includes a brief to a Senate committee. He is a 30+ year veteran of the NOPD, and is very well liked in the rank and file of the department.

Until about a month ago, Bayard led the department's narcotics and vice squads; now he works in a vaguely defined office job as a liaison to the Orleans Parish district attorney.

This is typical Riley here, rather than fix something he will get rid of anyone who disagrees with him. I realize you could make a case about this being "payback" for the whole Bangkok Spa thing, but Riley doesn't even use that as his reason. His reasoning for reassigning Bayard is pretty pathetic for a law enforcement agent.

Riley, who took over the department soon after Hurricane Katrina, said he simply had a philosophical difference with Bayard over drug-enforcement tactics: The chief wanted more busts of small-time street corner dealers because of the violence associated with that trade; Bayard preferred chasing kingpins in extended undercover probes.
The major narcotics unit "wasn't doing what I wanted them to do," Riley said. "That is why the move was done."

The Chief of Police thinks the way to solving the cities drug problem is to arrest the dime bag dealers on the corners rather than the big boys. This does absolutely nothing to fix anything. It does however add to his arrest totals. He thinks this make him look good to the feds, and is able to tout his numbers whenever he brags about what a difference he is making. What a tool.

Just to put this out there...Riley needs to go. He is dragging the department down to new lows when the situation is most dire. Kind of reminds me of Bush/Rumsfeld. When will Nagin figure this out?

Now, for my favorite part of the article....

Bayard received a call and gained the confidence of a man representing a series of massage parlors in eastern New Orleans, the French Quarter and other parts of the city that were fronts for prostitution. The man offered Bayard thousands of dollars in bribes for police protection.

Bayard contacted Loicano, who oversaw the public integrity bureau, and went undercover, posing as a dirty cop for 14 months and receiving more than $100,000 in bribe money that was used as evidence in cases that closed all 10 massage parlors. The operation also resulted in the arrests of 46 people, one of whom was a 14-year police veteran.

That sounds like a TV show there. Go go Timmy.

edit: fixed a bad link

Monday, November 13, 2006

Scary though

From Bush's Veterans Day radio address comes this tidbit.

"Whatever your opinion of the outcome, all Americans can take pride in the example our democracy sets for the world by holding elections even in a time of war."

Even in a time of war? Call me paranoid, but I want to know if not holding the elections something he considered? Even worse, is it something he is considering for when his term is up?

He's already started dismanteling the constitution, what's to stop him from going a bit further? Another disaster like 9/11 for the country to rally around him and give him more power for "our own good"?

He ended his address with:

"The message of this week's elections is clear: the American people want their leaders in Washington to set aside partisan differences, conduct ourselves in an ethical manner, and work together to address the challenges facing our Nation. This is important work that will demand the hard effort and good faith of leaders from both sides of the aisle, and I pledge to do my part."

Amazing how now that he can't ram through any thing his little black heart desires it's time for bipartisan conduct. Thank God for those elections....even if it was in a time of war

Thursday, November 09, 2006

This is some funny stuff. While I was reading quotes from Rush about how he has been lying to his listeners for the last couple of years I stumbled across this. Be careful, you'll be singing this all day.