 |
|
Insufficient facts, leaping assumptions aren't sufficient
Posted on: August 10, 2020 at 12:40:43 CT
ScottsdaleTiger MU
Posts:
12591
Member For:
25.30 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
You are presenting the minimal amount of facts and then making an assumption that the reason the officer has not been charged is because he's a cop.
There are countless facts that can reasonably account for the delay. They include the particular facts of the incident. They also include the procedures being used to process the case.
I.e. it strikes me that one possibility is the matter may have gone to a grand jury for any number of legitimate reasons.
Your post is an example of "liberal laziness", i.e. a failure to fully explore what the facts and/or a failure to present the full facts in your post.
Or perhaps you know the full facts and are choosing to disregard those that are not favorable to you position, an intentional misleading of the reader.
There are countless facts that can reasonably account for the delay. They include the particular facts of the incident. They also include the procedures being used to process the case.
I.e. it strikes me that one possibility is the matter may have gone to a grand jury for any number of legitimate reasons.
Your post is an example of "liberal laziness", i.e. a failure to fully explore what the facts and/or a failure to present the full facts in your post.
Or perhaps you know the full facts and are choosing to disregard those that are not favorable to you position, an intentional misleading of the reader.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Insufficient facts, leaping assumptions aren't sufficient - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 8/10 12:40:43
-