Why it's ok to beat up black kids...

When I said that

also the question was never that they are right to do what they did

Click to expand...

I did mean that the question was already resolved:they were found guilty and not even them did deny it. They did something worse: to defend themselves they did point the finger against a collegue of theirs. what they basically did was to say: If you did punish us so you should also punish likewise good old Willie Crook, but you didn't because he is black too. And that was the thing that granted them their rewards, not the fact that they were found not guilty because, apparently, eveyone did agree that they were

xechnao said:

There had been a dictatorship in Greece some time ago, for some years.

Click to expand...

I knew it! 8)

Also, to be on topic, I wish I could hit some of the members here with a flashlight in order to subdue them.

Aazealh said:

Also, to be on topic, I wish I could hit some of the members here with a flashlight in order to subdue them.

Click to expand...

You will be kicked out if you are white and you will get a four-day suspension if you are black. Hey if you are white Walter will have to pay you $ 1.600.000 for  your moral damages  afterwards ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

roberto999 said:

When I said that  I did mean that the question was already resolved:they were found guilty and not even them did deny it.

Click to expand...

Oh no you didn't, you weren't just saying they were found guilty of some wrongdoing or excessive force, you said they were having "fun" and that they felt "righteous" doing it; you called them "Dirty Harry." You can backpeddle now, but that's what you said, so I'm trying to help you get over this unfortunate bias. ;)

roberto999 said:

They did something worse: to defend themselves they did point the finger against a collegue of theirs. what they basically did was to say: If you did punish us so you should also punish likewise good old Willie Crook, but you didn't because he is black too. And that was the thing that granted them their rewards, not the fact that they were found not guilty because, apparently, eveyone did agree that they were

Click to expand...

Again, you show your bias against the officers and their character, of which neither of us can know. It could be that Willie Crook got the appropriate punishment for the situation, and the other men were punished excessively. How can you condemn them so considering this possibility, especially since the court did rule in their favor; their punishment was deemed inappropriate, at the very least this calls the degree of their misconduct into question and possibly makes the original judgement by their Chief completly moot. They ruled against him, so his own ruling on the wrongdoing of the officers is meaningless. Where's your sympathy for this injustice? ;D