|
Post by coolboy on Sept 11, 2006 7:29:51 GMT -6
Bravo, zoe! Very well said.
|
|
|
Post by SeleR on Sept 11, 2006 19:18:02 GMT -6
I, having children, wonder at the priorities of elected officials. How can the Sheriff cut out DARE programs for kids, but find money to pay an out of state firm to accredit the Sheriff's Office. I fail to see the community benefit of accreditation when crime seems to be rampant and the sheriff has no funds to combat problems. I am sure where the Sheriff sits that he sees no problems with drugs and our youth.
I was at a red light today, and a car with two teenagers (?) pulled up next to me with a stereo blaring what passes for music today, and to say that I was offended would be a gross understatement. I am not certain that there were any words in the "song" that were not obscene. My windows were up, and I rolled as far up as I could, but I could not escape the abuse to my ears, and worse, my children were in the car.
I am not a prude, but also am not an idiot. I understand that each generation has its own values, but when I hear leaders bemoaning the fact that 65% of inmates are minorities, I suggest you listen to the trash I did. No wonder those kids wind up in jail.
So I ask, where are all these unmarked units that the taxpayers pay for? There are laws against obscene language in public, against loud music, against walking around with your derriere' exposed, and in general, disturbing the peace. I think it is high time we overhaul the Sheriff and police departments and hire someone who will let it be known that what is accepted in New Orleans or Houston or Dallas is not accepted here. Laws that exist can be enforced. Why on earth should we pay for cameras so the police can do less of what they are paid for.
|
|
|
Post by str8up50 on Sept 12, 2006 17:26:39 GMT -6
Did anyone catch KLFY's broadcast at 5pm today....Seems there is a love affair soap opera at the PD which is under review by civil service. Something about a female officer, who is appealing her dismisal because she had an affair with another officer. And when it broke off, the female officer apparently began to get credit cards in her lover's girlfriends name. What a mess?
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Sept 13, 2006 6:22:28 GMT -6
thats interesting, i missed it, any names?
|
|
Cajunguy
New Member
Duhhh, who's got the boudin?
Posts: 42
|
Post by Cajunguy on Sept 13, 2006 7:13:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Sept 13, 2006 8:28:59 GMT -6
thanks
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Sept 20, 2006 9:52:14 GMT -6
Well that does it !!! Our "sheriff" has taken out a two page ad in Advertiser asking all of those "bad guys" to turn themselves in. First of all, if they do, there is no place to put them, so I suppose his motive is to show the need for a new and bigger jail. Secondly, he is openly admitting that he is not doing his job, and he would like the public to do it for him. Maybe spend a little less time on esoteric matters such as getting office accredited and a little more on arresting bad guys. Armed robbers, and rapists and murder suspects C'mon Doc, get off your ass and go to work. Why weren't these suspects hunted down before ? And we are worried about crime in New Siberia per the Advertiser? Thirdly, he number of outstanding warrants have climbed to "over one thousand ". How have our judges and DA allowed this to occur ? Why don't they tell the Sheriff and LPD to do their job and not let things pile up. Quit holding prisoners from other jurisdictions so we have adequate room for our own criminals. After all, we pay taxes to house local criminals, not state criminals. Don't Stansbury and Francis inspire confidence in our police forces ?
|
|
|
Post by SeleR on Sept 20, 2006 17:01:57 GMT -6
Well, I guess the sheriff has finally lost his mind. How dare he let these people roam our streets without making any effort until "Operation please turn yourself in because we are too lazy to look for you". I will never vote for a professor again. Talk about making us feel safe. And I was thinking all this apparent increase in crime was due to hurricane refugees when in fact our city and sheriff are not going out and finding these repeat criminals, some of whom have committed serious crimes.
|
|
|
Post by coolboy on Sept 21, 2006 2:33:51 GMT -6
If I'm a wanted criminal, does anyone honestly think that I'll turn myself in simply because of a newspaper ad? Maybe Bush should post a message on Al-Jazeera for the terrorists to turn themselves in. What a capital idea!
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Sept 21, 2006 12:21:15 GMT -6
According to our news-hawks at the Advertiser, over 100 people came in and paid fines. The sheriff said this was a "great" success and he might try this again. Let's see, 100 out of 2000, that is about 5%. Where does a failure fit in ? How does Stansbury make these statements and keep a straight face ? He should go to work for Blanco (btw, loved the shot of her on front page with blinders on), but then, working for Neustrom is like working for Blanco.
Maybe New Orleans should emulate our sheriff; think of the money they could save !
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Sept 21, 2006 12:26:57 GMT -6
I have seen efforts like this that were slightly more creative; the wanted people received a letter saying they had won football tickets, lottery prizes, free furniture etc. and were busted when they showed up. Hey Doc, show a little imagination.
On that vein, perhaps Bush could post an add offering three virgins or a donkey, or Whitney Houston. Then we could bring our boys home. They are not welcome over there.
|
|
|
Post by str8up50 on Sept 21, 2006 18:12:56 GMT -6
I just thought it was surprising that the same week that Neustrom conducts a "RoundUp", Sid Hebert is also doing one.
Also, I was really surprised that the council approved the camera devices to be installed at intersections. Furthermore, it is reported that if you are captured running a red light, that the ticket will be a civil fine and will not be reported to your insurance company or on your driving record.
So the question is this: If a cop is at the intersection and sees you run a red light and then the camera takes a picture of you....who issues the ticket? That is a question that had not been addressed as the officers ticket will def. go against your driving record/insurance as the camera ticket will not.
|
|
|
Post by April on Sept 21, 2006 19:33:01 GMT -6
Has anyone determined if traffic cameras are legal devices in Louisiana? I suppose the civil aspect is a way around the law for the city to implement these cameras. I am amazed at how easily the city can circumvent the law when it suits their purpose. FTTH debacle for example.
On this outstanding warrant business; Am I to understand that the sheriff/police have allowed 2,000+ scofflaws loose on the streets, and now want them to come and turn themselves in ? I guess that explains how our chief of police was unaware of the wiretapping laws. The sheriff must spend too much time in the classroom; the reason we employ patrol officers and detectives is to find and apprehend criminals. If we wait for criminals to simply turn themselves in, why on earth are we paying for all of these officers ? The same is true for these silly cameras. You know, someone is making money here, and I suspect it is outside the city coffers.
And str8up50, were you aware that insurance companies pay for a large % of all police radar units. Now why do you suppose they would do that ?
|
|
|
Post by str8up50 on Sept 22, 2006 2:23:57 GMT -6
No I didnt realize that April.
Did you know that the City Marshall has 4 officers solely for pursuing persons on outstanding warrants. The Sheriff has approx. 6 for that sole purpose. The vast majority of persons being arrested on warrants comes from the patrol officer, who checks out peoples status when coming into daily contact with these persons.
|
|
|
Post by jailbird on Sept 22, 2006 15:54:35 GMT -6
Williams told Judge Castle the sentence was excessive.
what a moron she should have sentenced him to 10 days in jail instead of his 18 months suspended sentence see if he would have liked that.
|
|
|
Post by TBEAR on Sept 23, 2006 5:32:40 GMT -6
He's lucky she didn't sentence him to jail time, thats what he deserves. He needs to take his medecine and shut up. He's a perfect example of an adult acting like a child.
|
|
|
Post by Taureau on Sept 23, 2006 9:01:58 GMT -6
I understand that Chris Williams will be on one year probation. Too bad he wasn't kicked off of the Council and Trade School Administrator's job.
Public Service, talking to "at risk" kids. There is no way I would allow my kid to listen to anything he would have to say. Hopefully while doing his "public service," he is being monitored by video.
Anyone taking bets on how long it would take before Chris Williams violates his "probation?" I guess, the question is what happens if and when they are violated?
|
|
|
Post by zoe10850 on Sept 23, 2006 23:53:45 GMT -6
I read in some car magazine, car & driver I believe, that GEICO was the biggest purchasor of police radar, theory being that the people caught would have increased rates, and they would get their share of higher premiums.
If 10 officers would arrest 4 people a day(4 of the 10), that would be over 1,000 per year. Then there would not be that 1,000 on the streets. Evidently not looking to hard. Apparently this was some sort of statewide deal as several sheriff's conducted "roundups". Apparently our sheriff is not the only one not doing his job.
Judge Castle is one of those bored housewives, like Judge keaty, who had wealty husbands who paid lots of money to get their wives elected to Judgeships. They have no practical experience, and really are not qualified to sit in judgement of anyone. I believe Mr Williams is not wrapped too tight, and should probably have had some psychitrist evaluate him. He should not head an educational institution at any level. Judge Castle was not as strict as she should have been, and should have brought the DA before the bench to explain his logic in reducing those charges. A $60 restitution?
|
|
|
Post by str8up50 on Sept 25, 2006 14:29:04 GMT -6
Another murder in Lafayette.....this is becoming all to familiar!!!
|
|
quest
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by quest on Sept 26, 2006 5:54:53 GMT -6
“Huge success”, that is what Stansbury said in today’s paper about 300 outstanding warrants being “resolved’ from the 2 page spread in the paper last with over 2000 warrants listed.
That is about 15% by math and that is considered a huge success by the sheriff. Something is terribly wrong here. First, to permit those kinds on numbers on warrants to even exist, That is wrong. Second, to “resolve” a mere 15% of those over 2000 outstanding warrants and call that a “huge success’ is insulting to thinking people everywhere.
|
|