I agree with Doc Tabor that it is time to dial down the rhetoric, and on the tendency to unnecessarily demonize those who oppose us, but I have to part with him when it comes to dropping the rhetorical hammer on certain individuals.
- First and foremost is Detective Roberts. That warrant is nothing but lies, and he is the author of each and every one of those lies. To call it anything else, or to minimize my language in describing them would be an understatement.
- Second is the badgelickers. I understand that calling people names is a little hyperbolic, and will draw a certain amount of criticism automatically, but if I’m going to identify these folks, some shorthand is needed. I’m not talking about the people who aren’t paying close attention, and assume that cops are generally honest. I mean those who actively make the most cognitively dissonant excuses for even the most obvious wrongs committed by police.
- Third is the gun grabbers hiding behind support for the police in this case. The ones who leave comments everywhere that Ryan fired carelessly through a closed door and/or at an unidentified target. This issue has undergone such a thorough fisking at this point, that these two arguments can only be the result of chosen ignorance, driven by either an anti-gun agenda, or grasping desparately for another excuse to scapegoat Ryan rather than dare to look at what the police did wrong before they ever went to his house.
- Fourth is the cops who have testilied(not a typo) so far. I saw the testimony Friday, right alongside Tabor and Wilburn. The robotic, cookie cutter testimony is so different than the fumblin’ bumblin’ stumblin’ that they do when cross-examined by the defense. Their testimony is clearly coming from the reenactment, not the actual event. I trust that Broccoletti will tear this apart when he calls his witnesses. He has already pointed out the pry bar that’s missing from the reenactment photo, but was photographed in the forensic evidence and documented in the warrant return inventory.
- Fifth is anybody who would become a narcotics officer in the first place. I’ll give some leeway on the “I’m just following orders” line to any cop who is enforcing laws against real crimes and stumbles across a stash, then has to add the drug charges. But anyone who joins the narcotics unit is making a living off the criminal enterprise that is the war on drugs, and is beneath contempt.
- Sixth is this prosecutor, Paul Ebert. He has already withheld evidence that he later introduced. He has excused a cop from testifying who was under subpoena, and whose testimony will contradict a prominent portion of the prosecution’s case. If you doubt the underhandedness of Ebert, google Rack ‘n’ Roll billiards.
In my estimation it’s not possible to overstate the sleaziness of those I’ve just listed. I might be convinced to hold some of my fire against some of these folks until their lies become more obvious. But the abuses of some of the others aren’t documented properly in most of the media, and if I don’t point it out in whatever forums I have at my disposal, who will?