I just saw the video on the police stop on the TX driver who committed suicide

But when it's a white person like Reese Witherspoon asking the officer questions and asserting her rights,it's not ok. Right Oatie? Bland got arrested for resisting arrest,kicking the officer and failing to obey a lawful command. The only difference between Witherspoon and Bland is Witherspoon didn't kick the officer.

I have explained the differences in the two arrests.  One was valid.  One was not.  I concede you are unable to distinguish the critical differences.  No surprise.

There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

Vikingwoman wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Well, that article certainly did the trooper more good than harm. He certainly is not going to be fired over this as you said.

He is gone.  You cannot even turn on your TV without seeing another officer F'lng up like the May stop and ignoring citizen's rights.  It is an epidemic exactly as I have outlined in the Mays thread......the rush to make it about rude citizens....hell no.....its about bad training and a complete transformation in America where the tail is wagging the dog. 

No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
Madison

But when it's a white person like Reese Witherspoon asking the officer questions and asserting her rights,it's not ok. Right Oatie? Bland got arrested for resisting arrest,kicking the officer and failing to obey a lawful command. The only difference between Witherspoon and Bland is Witherspoon didn't kick the officer.

Where did you see her resist arrest or kick the cop?

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force. We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL? Give me a break. If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one. And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

You can hear it in the video where she's calling him a pussy and the other female cop is there and remarks about her kicking him and then he points to where she kicked him to another cop.

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Oh and now watch Oatie come on and give some bullshit reason why the arrests were different. LOL!

They were different.  The minor traffic stop was over with the citation being handed to Sandra Bland.  The exceptions to the fourth amendment end when the stop ends.  Sandra was arrested not because she kicked the officer, but because she did not want to put her cigarette out and questioned why she was being placed under arrest and being asked to leave her car.  The Supreme Court addressed this clearly.  The officer safety exception does not apply because the officer lied and said he was asking her out of the vehicle to have her sign the citation.

Witherspoon was a passenger in a car where the driver was being given a field sobriety test to the driver.  The stop was not over and the officer was determining if the driver was impaired.  Witherspoon left the vehicle and the officer asked her to return to the vehicle.  It had nothing to do with what Witherspoon was saying, which at the time you mistakenly thought was a first amendment right of witherspoon(never saw a legal concept you could not butcher), rather I explained to you it was an officer safety issue that officer was in the middle of his investigatory stop and asking a passenger to remain in a vehicle during a stop has fully been supported by the Supreme Court.

Poor Dreams thinks the arrest happened when the alleged kick took place.  It did not.  I gave Dreams two very important Supreme Court cases which explain why the Bland arrest was not lawful.  If she had lived, all the charges would have been dismissed after a successful motion to suppress.  Witherspoon was guilty.  You lack the training or reading to understand this distinction, and Tex is only talking about things she understands fully.

See, this is where the bullshit comes in. It had everything to do w/ what Witherspoon was saying. Witherspoon was arrested for not obeying a lawful command. The officer said nothing about officer safety. He told her she was being arrested for not obeying his command because she asked what her husband was being arrested for and said she was a US citizen. Bland was asked to step out of the car because she was smoking a cigarette and refused to put it out. Both refused a lawful command. Now you can try and twist it all you want Oatie but he had a right to ask her to step out of the car and there was no difference between the actions. Futhermore, the stop was not over until she signed the ticket and he left. You and Fl Tex can continue to make it what it wasn't but that doesn't make it true. You both try to twist it to fit your agenda's.

https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=reese+witherspoon+arrest&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-002

No, the threshold question is intelligence.  A child often cannot distinguish a butterfly from a bird.  They both fly, but they are different.  Witherspoon's arrest had NOTHING to do with speech or what she was saying, and you argue that a butterfly is a bird.

I don't know about your children but my children and grandchildren certainly can distinguish a butterfly from a bird. The question is not intelligence but utter bullshit on your part. When people don't agree w/ you they are lacking conception and are unintelligent. A spade is a spade,Oatie. As I said you can make up all the BS you want but it doesn't make it true. The videos speak for themselves and it certainly doesn't take a genius to see it. Witherspoon disobeyed a lawful command and so did Bland.Period.

Now that we have established that your grandchildren can distinguish a butterfly from a bird, can they teach you?

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Once he issued the traffic citation, the stop was over. He had no right, and did not cite any probable cause, to continue the stop or to physically force her to exit the vehicle, including threatening her with a taser. He was baiting her. Off camera, neither you nor I can state what actually happened. I do believe there was an element of racism here, but I can't prove it. But, from your comments over time, including defending George Zimmerman, I can say that I do believe you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

She is highly intelligent.  However, in this area she assumes she knows more than she actually does, and the result is concepts get jumbled.  She has a very difficult time with legal concepts.  Not the end of the world and certainly not a reflection on her overall aptitudes, but a clear indicator that legal concepts are difficult for her to grasp.

Did you just make that up? The safety zone of the officer? No such thing. There was no physical obstruction at all or any law or safety zone for arguing. Pure bullshit. Exaggerated charges that would have been thrown out if she had contested it.
Dreams showing she does not understand basic Supreme Court logic in the Weatherspoon case.

Oh really, Seaoat? I have no experience or understanding? Just goes to show what you know.Squat! I've talked many times about being a police officer and I can tell you much of the bullshit they do is made up. There are no safety zones and other shit like that taught in the police academy. You would be surprised how much of it is poor police techniques made up by high school graduates. Much of what you post is your opinion and we all know what opinions are worth. Unless you were the head of the FBI or equal it doesn't matter to me who you are. You apparently think you're an expert at everything but we all know better than that.

Dreams all wrong, and telling us only the head of the FBI can disagree with her police experience.

Again, Seaoat because you apparently don't get it. Unless she was physically obstructing the situation she had a right to be where ever she wanted to be. Just because an officer tell you to sit in the car and you don't doesn't qualify as a criminal offense.

Well.....not exactly.

I could cite supremes cases but I want you to keep putting your foot in your mouth,Seaoat.
And a pigeon could poop on a newspaper selecting the Super Bowl winner and the correlation would be about the same.

You found no relevance to this case? Really? It's a good thing you never went to law school then. It has everything to do w/it. She questioned the officer. The guy in that case questioned the officer.Both were arrested. See spot run,Seaoat? You are now making up explanations.LOL!
once again misunderstanding a central tenet of the law and presuming that a case she gave was relevant.....too funny, it had NO relevance because she did not understand the tenet of why Witherspoon was charged....still thinks it was about speech.

United States v. Williams, 419 F.3d 1029, 1034 (9th Cir.2005) (finding that "it is reasonable for an officer to order a passenger back into an automobile that he voluntarily exited because the concerns for officer safety originally announced in Wilson, and specifically the need for officers to exercise control over individuals encountered during a traffic stop, outweigh the marginal intrusion on the passenger's liberty interest"); United States v. Holt, 264 F.3d 1215, 1223 (10th Cir.2001) (using the situation where an officer orders a passenger to remain in the vehicle as guidance where "considerations of officer safety [ ] outweigh fairly intrusive conduct during a traffic stop"); United States v. Clark, 337 F.3d 1282, 1288 (11th Cir.2003)

dammit Seaoat......what did you  do posting the law.....the fun could of continued for days.....or at least until another incident where Dreams could get it wrong.

The most prized quote on that Witherspoon thread, and the one I still cherish....is NEKO....she loved to challenge me, and would research and work for hours to prove me wrong......all she could say that day was......

Seaoat is right on this.

Dreams, I know those words will be hard for you to regularly type....but practice.....you will get something right.

Seaoat is right on this.

Why did you add the qualifier "on this".......the proper response would be Seaoat is always right.......hey where has Boards hidden..... with his team for the ages........Miami Heat.......and the all time great Mr. James.......
Too funny! You know, I almost wrote--Seaoat is always right (or almost always right) on these kinds of issues.

But I cannot risk agreeing with you...too much. lol.

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Once he issued the traffic citation, the stop was over.  He had no right, and did not cite any probable cause, to continue the stop or to physically force her to exit the vehicle, including threatening her with a taser.  He was baiting her.  Off camera, neither you nor I can state what actually happened.  I do believe there was an element of racism here, but I can't prove it.  But, from your comments over time, including defending George Zimmerman, I can say that I do believe you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

You're absolutely wrong. The stop was over when she signed the citation. You know nothing about law enforcement and he can make her get out of the car. Of course, you think it was racism. You always do. The facts are the officer and the trooper referred to her kicking him in the video. I guess they made that up on the spot. As for Zimmerman, you also weren't there and couldn't figure out that cracking someone's head on the cement was justifiable for shooting him.At least the jury was smarter than you. I don't think you're too sharp yourself. You don't have the ability to be impartial therefore you can't assess anything properly. Maybe that goes to your intelligence or maybe you're biased because you have a mixed race grandchild but something is missing there.

2seaoat wrote:The most prized quote on that Witherspoon thread, and the one I still cherish....is NEKO....she loved to challenge me, and would research and work for hours to prove me wrong......all she could say that day was......

Seaoat is right on this.

Dreams, I know those words will be hard for you to regularly type....but practice.....you will get something right.

Seaoat is right on this.

Why did you add the qualifier "on this".......the proper response would be Seaoat is always right.......hey where has Boards hidden..... with his team for the ages........Miami Heat.......and the all time great Mr. James.......
Too funny! You know, I almost wrote--Seaoat is always right (or almost always right) on these kinds of issues.

But I cannot risk agreeing with you...too much. lol.

Totally different issue,Oatie. You know I didn't agree w/ the lawful command bit but since that is the law in Fl. which was not in Ala. I conceded but this is not about whether it was a lawful command. This is about both of them doing the same thing so bringing Neko in for support is really a moot point. Plus it makes me sad.

Plus it makes me sad.

Don't be sad.  She had fun challenging me and smiled all day long if she could catch me making a mistake.  We had fun for years, and rather than being sad about retired Leo and Neko not being here anymore we should celebrate the fun we have and understand that we will all be gone someday, and the records of our posts will vaporize into nothing, but while we were here, we had fun.....in the end that is far from being sad......it is a celebration of life.

What do you think Retired Leo would have said? Or Blueman? As if I didn't know. Remember Sharky?

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Once he issued the traffic citation, the stop was over.  He had no right, and did not cite any probable cause, to continue the stop or to physically force her to exit the vehicle, including threatening her with a taser.  He was baiting her.  Off camera, neither you nor I can state what actually happened.  I do believe there was an element of racism here, but I can't prove it.  But, from your comments over time, including defending George Zimmerman, I can say that I do believe you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

You're absolutely wrong. The stop was over when she signed the citation. You know nothing about law enforcement and he can make her get out of the car. Of course, you think it was racism. You always do. The facts are the officer and the trooper referred to her kicking him in the video. I guess they made that up on the spot. As for Zimmerman, you also weren't there and couldn't figure out that cracking someone's head on the cement was justifiable for shooting him.At least the jury was smarter than you. I don't think you're too sharp yourself. You don't have the ability to be impartial therefore you can't assess anything properly. Maybe that goes to your intelligence or maybe you're biased because you have a mixed race grandchild but something is missing there.

I have two mixed-race grandchildren. And I was always top of my class, so who are you to question my intelligence? Can you claim the same?

Both of you are highly intelligent.  Dreams just reaches back on her police experience and thinks that will help her with complex legal issues.  It usually hurts her understand the critical concept in play within a fact situation.  I am spending the evening trying to remove a fishhook from my dogs lip.  She ran with my wife and was running the river shore and apparently found some food, fish or scent on a fishhook and proceeded to hook her lip.  I have removed the long portion from the bend to the eyelet, but I now have to push the shortened piece to free the barb, then pull the shortened hook through her lip.  She realizes we are trying to help her, but every time she feels the hook moving, she tenses up.  My eyesight is not that good even with my bifocals because of those damn shots, and my wife does not feel comfortable.  I have taken fishhooks out of people and dogs for years, but this evening so far has been no fun.

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Once he issued the traffic citation, the stop was over.  He had no right, and did not cite any probable cause, to continue the stop or to physically force her to exit the vehicle, including threatening her with a taser.  He was baiting her.  Off camera, neither you nor I can state what actually happened.  I do believe there was an element of racism here, but I can't prove it.  But, from your comments over time, including defending George Zimmerman, I can say that I do believe you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

You're absolutely wrong. The stop was over when she signed the citation. You know nothing about law enforcement and he can make her get out of the car. Of course, you think it was racism. You always do. The facts are the officer and the trooper referred to her kicking him in the video. I guess they made that up on the spot. As for Zimmerman, you also weren't there and couldn't figure out that cracking someone's head on the cement was justifiable for shooting him.At least the jury was smarter than you. I don't think you're too sharp yourself. You don't have the ability to be impartial therefore you can't assess anything properly. Maybe that goes to your intelligence or maybe you're biased because you have a mixed race grandchild but something is missing there.

I have two mixed-race grandchildren.  And I was always top of my class, so who are you to question my intelligence?  Can you claim the same?

Who the hell are you to tell me I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed? What damn nerve you got! And yes, I was at the top of my class. In fact, I didn't even go to high school. I quit three weeks into the ninth grade and went to college when I was twenty and graduated in three years. Took the GED and Act test in the same week. I was no. 2 academically in the police academy and the guy that beat me had 1/10 of a point higher. So just because you're not smart enough to figure out the Zimmerman case or too biased to even try ain't my problem,Lady. You don't like I think Zimmerman was not guilty? Tuff too bad.

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:There wasn't any differences, Oatie. One was told to get out of the car and one was told to get in the car.

That "officer" (I hesitate even to give him that much respect) had no valid reason to stop Ms. Bland, and certainly had no reason to have her get out of her vehicle, which he accomplished, on camera, by force.  We can't see what happened next, except we can hear Ms. Bland complaining that he forced her head to the ground and she couldn't hear...for a damn SIGNAL?  Give me a break.  If you were a cop, you were a damn poor one.  And Reese Witherspoon was DRUNK...not even close to this situation.

Oh so since I don't agree w/ your assessment I was a poor cop? I have news for you and your constant biased views on anything that has to do w/ race. You're not competent to evaluate anything where race is involved. You ignore everything but the fact that the person was black. The cop legally pulled her over. It may have been petty but he also pulled over a white person previous to her. We've also established he had the right to ask her to get out of the car whether she refused to stop smoking or not. Maybe he didn't want to breath her smoke but he had a right to ask her to get out of the car and she refused. She then started calling him names and was fighting w/ him while he was trying to cuff her and kicked him. Yes he yelled at her but he asked her many times to get out of the car. Now you want to act like all that was ok. You're FOS! Witherspoon may have been drunk but she did no less than Bland when she didn't obey his order and got arrested for verbally obstructing justice. No difference!

Once he issued the traffic citation, the stop was over.  He had no right, and did not cite any probable cause, to continue the stop or to physically force her to exit the vehicle, including threatening her with a taser.  He was baiting her.  Off camera, neither you nor I can state what actually happened.  I do believe there was an element of racism here, but I can't prove it.  But, from your comments over time, including defending George Zimmerman, I can say that I do believe you're not the sharpest tool in the drawer.

You're absolutely wrong. The stop was over when she signed the citation. You know nothing about law enforcement and he can make her get out of the car. Of course, you think it was racism. You always do. The facts are the officer and the trooper referred to her kicking him in the video. I guess they made that up on the spot. As for Zimmerman, you also weren't there and couldn't figure out that cracking someone's head on the cement was justifiable for shooting him.At least the jury was smarter than you. I don't think you're too sharp yourself. You don't have the ability to be impartial therefore you can't assess anything properly. Maybe that goes to your intelligence or maybe you're biased because you have a mixed race grandchild but something is missing there.

I have two mixed-race grandchildren.  And I was always top of my class, so who are you to question my intelligence?  Can you claim the same?

Who the hell are you to tell me I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed? What damn nerve you got! And yes, I was at the top of my class. In fact, I didn't even go to high school. I quit three weeks into the ninth grade and went to college when I was twenty and graduated in three years. Took the GED and Act test in the same week. I was no. 2 academically in the police academy and the guy that beat me had 1/10 of a point higher. So just because you're not smart enough to figure out the Zimmerman case or too biased to even try ain't my problem,Lady. You don't like I think Zimmerman was not guilty? Tuff too bad.

You quit school in the 9th grade? And didn't go to HS? And the fact that you were No. 2 at the police academy doesn't speak well for that school. Plus, you missed all kinds of things that might have made you smarter...and I bet you've been resting on your police laurels ever since. As for Zimmerman, he's shown his true colors too many times for anyone to still believe he was acting in self-defense. I remember people like you when I went back to college...giving parking tickets for parking the wrong way in the parking space...harassing students. I remember one campus cop in particular...he didn't think I showed the proper respect to him because I didn't slow down when he passed, even though I was going the speed limit. Gee, you must have had a hard life...but I guarantee you it was no harder than mine...and I don't spend my time trying to curtail everyone else's rights to improve my own outcomes...or defend people who don't deserve defending.

Apparently, I didn't need to go to high school and apparently I didn't miss anything because I breezed through college and then went to the academy. The academy was very easy for me and I went on to be an investigator. I was only a road cop for a year and you have no clue how good the school was but that really doesn't even matter. What matters is you're not smart enough to figure out what really happened in the Zimmerman case. The jury was though and that's what matters.