Originally Posted by Ataturk
So the fact that Rivers has apparently spent most of his adult life in prison has no bearing on his claim to have saved $16,000 in cash? The fact that he used his mother as an alibi in the last case, just like he claims to have done in this one?
That's correct, simply because you have committed a crime in the past does not mean you are now committing a crime. Also, there has been no evidence the police who stole his cash knew about his prior record or about him using his mother as an alibi in the past.
But, again, my complaint isn't that Rivers is a liar -- he almost certainly is, but that's not the point. The point is that his story was parroted far and wide across the internet and no one bothered to investigate it in the slightest. It's a pattern we see repeated over and over -- right here in this thread, even.
How was it not investigated? The police refused to make a statement. They refused to make a statement because they know they're full of shit. The Defendant in a criminal action has the right to remain silent without any adverse inference regarding his/her guilt, not the Plaintiff in a civil action. If the police wanted to give their side of the story they could That they refused to do so shows how full of shit they are.
EDIT - I also would note you have no such bullshit statements to make against the actual focus of that article, Mr. Aaron Heuser, a meth technician, er, mathematician, who was unconstitutionally harassed while on the train. Or the spurious list of contradictory bullshit list of "evidence of criminal activity." Again, you focused on three sentences in a page long article dealing with police abuse and expect to have some kind of great victory for the police because a scumbag who had his rights violated was probably guilty anyway.Edited by Harold falcon - 5/20/15 at 8:36am