-
Posts
169,225 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
471
theguru last won the day on May 22
theguru had the most liked content!
Reputation
30,283 ExcellentAbout theguru
- Currently Viewing Forums Index
Converted
-
Location
Florence
Converted
-
Interests
Kentucky High School Sports, Music, Fitness, Friends, Family.
Converted
-
Occupation
Founder BluegrassPreps.com
Converted
-
Wide Layout
Yes
Converted
-
Set Default Read Receipt for Private Messages
No
Recent Profile Visitors
The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.
-
I agree there should be plenty of witnesses or partial witnesses. We all also need to be precise, the post arrest complaint says: Subject refused to comply and accelerated forward, dragging Detective Gillis to the ground. ============== So in other words, Detective Gillis was dragged down to the ground vs. being dragged. Or put another way, Detective Gillis was probably hanging onto the vehicle and was knocked down/fell down as Scheffler accelerated forward.
-
To me that means he was loading up the charges with each stop but still, that is a lot.
-
It is only speculation on my part but I feel very safe in assuming he would have been fired a couple of times over where I worked.
-
-
I am sure all the workers that witnessed the event were essentially required to give a statement. I would love to read those statements.
-
Ouch on the donut thing. He is lucky he only got five days for that. Some places would fire you for that one.
-
-
We disagree here.
-
I think something else we probably "learned" was LMPD did not discipline Detective Gillis for his uniform meaning that whatever Detective Gillis was wearing was in accordance with LMPD policy for directing traffic. In other words, the "I didn't know it was a police officer defense" took a big hit there.
-
I think what we did learn by omission was the LMPD powers that be don't appear to be interfering in this case. Detective Gillis violated policy and he was disciplined. Beyond that, this matter is for the "court" to decide.
-
Correct.
-
Here is the rest of that reply: Louisville chief of police Jacquelyn Gwinn-Villaroel: "Detective Gillis should have turned on his body-worn camera, but did not. His failure to do so is a violation of the LMPD policy on uniforms and equipment . . . He was performing a law-enforcement action as defined in our policy. . . . We understand the seriousness of the failure to capture this interaction, which is why our officer has received corrective action for this policy violation."
-
-
-
Padres take game two 7-3.