Pot Meet Kettle!!
Nah..I'm just persistent. I kept asking hoping he would eventually answer.
I understand how that eluded you; most things do.
atonhead:
The Lawn Mower Man.
- Thread starter VoteJP
- Start date
Nah..I'm just persistent. I kept asking hoping he would eventually answer.
I understand how that eluded you; most things do.
atonhead:
Oops. Too late.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
I see a new person has given a more realistic explanation in the Enterprise newspaper to the Lady who wrote the letter, see below:
Link here = SoMdNews.com: May 25, 2012 - Yogi speaking from the grave
My own explanation is very similar - in that the police and the State's Attorney do indeed know that Trooper Wesley Goldston did do wrong in the killing of Mr Baird, but the State and the police simply can not admit when their own do wrong.
Another recent (March 22, 2012) incident concerning a State Trooper from the Leonardtown barracks was that State police officer Cpl Paul Trossbach harassed a waitress in her restaurant, link HERE, and when the cops do wrong then none of them show any chivalry or honor.
It does not matter if one disrespects a Woman or another one runs down the lawnmower man as the State and the police do not admit their own wrongs, and the Courts and Prosecutors help to cover up such events.
I had always thought that the police would be held to a higher standard and not to a lower standard, as in the police would be expected to follow every law more closely - but it does not work that way at all.
The police have some strange form of loyalty to each other to protect and defend each other even when the other cop(s) do wrongs, or even when one does horrible wrongs.
We as citizens and as human beings would think that the police would have the higher loyalties to the law and loyalty to the community and a loyalty to the dead lawnmower man - but no.
I myself say that everyone of them do share in the horrible guilt of Trooper Goldston, being every State police officer is guilty, every one at the Sheriff office shares that guilt, and the office of the State Attorney are all guilty for covering up the killing of Mr Baird.
I honestly do not see how anyone can continue working with Officer Goldston while that work includes pretending that he did no such wrong when he ran down the lawnmower man.
I see a new person has given a more realistic explanation in the Enterprise newspaper to the Lady who wrote the letter, see below:
Link here = SoMdNews.com: May 25, 2012 - Yogi speaking from the grave
My own explanation is very similar - in that the police and the State's Attorney do indeed know that Trooper Wesley Goldston did do wrong in the killing of Mr Baird, but the State and the police simply can not admit when their own do wrong.
Another recent (March 22, 2012) incident concerning a State Trooper from the Leonardtown barracks was that State police officer Cpl Paul Trossbach harassed a waitress in her restaurant, link HERE, and when the cops do wrong then none of them show any chivalry or honor.
It does not matter if one disrespects a Woman or another one runs down the lawnmower man as the State and the police do not admit their own wrongs, and the Courts and Prosecutors help to cover up such events.
I had always thought that the police would be held to a higher standard and not to a lower standard, as in the police would be expected to follow every law more closely - but it does not work that way at all.
The police have some strange form of loyalty to each other to protect and defend each other even when the other cop(s) do wrongs, or even when one does horrible wrongs.
We as citizens and as human beings would think that the police would have the higher loyalties to the law and loyalty to the community and a loyalty to the dead lawnmower man - but no.
I myself say that everyone of them do share in the horrible guilt of Trooper Goldston, being every State police officer is guilty, every one at the Sheriff office shares that guilt, and the office of the State Attorney are all guilty for covering up the killing of Mr Baird.
I honestly do not see how anyone can continue working with Officer Goldston while that work includes pretending that he did no such wrong when he ran down the lawnmower man.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
I felt angry (resentful) when I wrote those words to you so it makes sense that my meaning was not well delivered, or that I said more then I now want to be said.
I did not mean to tell you to leave this thread or to stop posting here, and I apologize for giving that message to you.
If you or anyone want to discuss the subject or even those that post childish nonsense are all welcome and invited by me onto any discussion that I participate within, and I do not ask you or anyone to leave.
My resentment is that you made so polite a request for me to "give it up" as you wanting to shut up my feelings and you wanting to suppress what I am saying, and especially in this very deeply serious subject of a police officer killing a beloved member of our society.
If you do not care about this subject then you do not need to view it or to participate in the discussion, but if you just want to silence the discussion then that would make you on the side of those who only want to cover up and hush up the killing of the lawnmower man and to that I did get resentful.
I will try hard to post nicer in the future.
I would ratherbefore you make ME
At your request, I am outta here. At least, you get the resent part. How is that HUGE chip on your shoulder doing? You may want to see a doc, because I think it is festering, as in infected, in case you don't understand that word. One more thing...do you understand the definition of convoluted?..:shrug: Love and peace. mama
I felt angry (resentful) when I wrote those words to you so it makes sense that my meaning was not well delivered, or that I said more then I now want to be said.
I did not mean to tell you to leave this thread or to stop posting here, and I apologize for giving that message to you.
If you or anyone want to discuss the subject or even those that post childish nonsense are all welcome and invited by me onto any discussion that I participate within, and I do not ask you or anyone to leave.
My resentment is that you made so polite a request for me to "give it up" as you wanting to shut up my feelings and you wanting to suppress what I am saying, and especially in this very deeply serious subject of a police officer killing a beloved member of our society.
If you do not care about this subject then you do not need to view it or to participate in the discussion, but if you just want to silence the discussion then that would make you on the side of those who only want to cover up and hush up the killing of the lawnmower man and to that I did get resentful.
I will try hard to post nicer in the future.
Hank
my war
Nah..I'm just persistent. I kept asking hoping he would eventually answer.
I understand how that eluded you; most things do.
Your love affair with JPC is disturbing...
No wonder you won't take Arkie out... Afraid of the meow meow...
mamatutu
mama to two
I felt angry (resentful) when I wrote those words to you so it makes sense that my meaning was not well delivered, or that I said more then I now want to be said.
I did not mean to tell you to leave this thread or to stop posting here, and I apologize for giving that message to you.
If you or anyone want to discuss the subject or even those that post childish nonsense are all welcome and invited by me onto any discussion that I participate within, and I do not ask you or anyone to leave.
My resentment is that you made so polite a request for me to "give it up" as you wanting to shut up my feelings and you wanting to suppress what I am saying, and especially in this very deeply serious subject of a police officer killing a beloved member of our society.
If you do not care about this subject then you do not need to view it or to participate in the discussion, but if you just want to silence the discussion then that would make you on the side of those who only want to cover up and hush up the killing of the lawnmower man and to that I did get resentful.
I will try hard to post nicer in the future.
Discussion is good. Harsh words not so good. In honor of Memorial Day.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
I liked that one line which I said to you, so now I plan to send a letter-to-the-Editor regarding that one line.
Also I found in the Police' Accident Report that there was a surveillance camera at the PNC Bank which might have shown the killing of Yogi on video, and it will likely show what happened directly after the accident, as in it might show if the Trooper Goldston had an unknown passenger in the vehicle with him at the time of the accident, and the camera will show the visibility level at the time of death.
As it turns out both the Police Report and the State Attorney's failure to press any charge was all done without any reference to the PNC survelience video which was under subpena.
The different reports do state that they checked every thing else, as they checked Goldston's cell phone and the radio log and witness reports and checked Yogi's driving record and autopsy but there is no accounting of the surveillance camera - which is a huge omission.
So when the police disclosed the information they simply failed to disclose that video - which very likely might tell everything.
Even more important is that they do not blame the accident on the buggy or blame the dead girl, as they do blame Yogi for what the State Trooper did.
Discussion is good. Harsh words not so good. In honor of Memorial Day.
I liked that one line which I said to you, so now I plan to send a letter-to-the-Editor regarding that one line.
Also I found in the Police' Accident Report that there was a surveillance camera at the PNC Bank which might have shown the killing of Yogi on video, and it will likely show what happened directly after the accident, as in it might show if the Trooper Goldston had an unknown passenger in the vehicle with him at the time of the accident, and the camera will show the visibility level at the time of death.
As it turns out both the Police Report and the State Attorney's failure to press any charge was all done without any reference to the PNC survelience video which was under subpena.
The different reports do state that they checked every thing else, as they checked Goldston's cell phone and the radio log and witness reports and checked Yogi's driving record and autopsy but there is no accounting of the surveillance camera - which is a huge omission.
So when the police disclosed the information they simply failed to disclose that video - which very likely might tell everything.
The bank security footage was reviewed. It only showed occasional headlights passing in the background and didn't show anything related to the accident.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
You may have some private information but you do not disclose your source, and the Police Report plus the State's Attorney document and all other available info does NOT mention nor acknowledges the PNC Bank video except in that one line which declares that it was under subpena.
So even if in real life you are some cop yourself having confidential police information - then that does not nullify the fact that the case was closed before the video was scrutinized, and that the video details are not available to the public or to the County Times newspaper which sought the info under the Freedom of Information Act.
As such you need to disclose your own source or else your claim is very suspicious indeed.
And I would agree with Yogi (of old) that I have strong distrust in the integrity of the police as to revealing the truth.
You may have some private information but you do not disclose your source, and the Police Report plus the State's Attorney document and all other available info does NOT mention nor acknowledges the PNC Bank video except in that one line which declares that it was under subpena.
So even if in real life you are some cop yourself having confidential police information - then that does not nullify the fact that the case was closed before the video was scrutinized, and that the video details are not available to the public or to the County Times newspaper which sought the info under the Freedom of Information Act.
As such you need to disclose your own source or else your claim is very suspicious indeed.
And I would agree with Yogi (of old) that I have strong distrust in the integrity of the police as to revealing the truth.
It is in the long form accident report.
The first version they received was in a format they couldn't read. They later received a second copy of the DVD that contained the required reader software.
Your love affair with JPC is disturbing...
You really are broken, aren't you.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
I do not doubt that the video recordings are somewhere, but claiming "it is in the long form accident report" means absolutely nothing, because that is equivalent to saying it is locked away in the State Police vault.
I guess I could ask the County Times if they know about the surveillance videos.
Plus the video(s) need to be scrutinized to see about the offending cop as to just whatever he did before and after the accident, including the weather visibility and if there was another passenger and such things as that, since if it is scrutinized correctly then this is not just seeking to view the lawnmower man getting creamed.
And for the record - State Police Trooper Goldston never said as to why he ran over Yogi, as Goldston never said why it was that he could not see the lawnmower man, and all we really get is the police telling us why it is that the lawnmower man is to be blamed for what Trooper Goldston did, which makes it into an extremely deficient accident report.
I do not doubt that the video recordings are somewhere, but claiming "it is in the long form accident report" means absolutely nothing, because that is equivalent to saying it is locked away in the State Police vault.
I guess I could ask the County Times if they know about the surveillance videos.
Plus the video(s) need to be scrutinized to see about the offending cop as to just whatever he did before and after the accident, including the weather visibility and if there was another passenger and such things as that, since if it is scrutinized correctly then this is not just seeking to view the lawnmower man getting creamed.
And for the record - State Police Trooper Goldston never said as to why he ran over Yogi, as Goldston never said why it was that he could not see the lawnmower man, and all we really get is the police telling us why it is that the lawnmower man is to be blamed for what Trooper Goldston did, which makes it into an extremely deficient accident report.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
Actually it must have eluded your self because I did give you an answer way back on page 3 posting #24, and truly it is absurd to think that I was riding in the Police vehicle.
Also you keep doing the childish name-calling, as in whatever "atonhead:" is expected to mean. It looks like an incorrect smilie code.
Nah..I'm just persistent. I kept asking hoping he would eventually answer.
I understand how that eluded you; most things do.
Actually it must have eluded your self because I did give you an answer way back on page 3 posting #24, and truly it is absurd to think that I was riding in the Police vehicle.
Also you keep doing the childish name-calling, as in whatever "
atonhead:" is expected to mean. It looks like an incorrect smilie code.
ahh..so then it is equally absurd to think that your mentally deficient self has any more information than those involved in the investigation had.
But I figgered as much. ..just waiting for you to admit it.
The video was reviewed. All that is visible in the subject timeframe are occasional headlights passing on the road in the background. It didn't show anything relating to the accident. Those cameras are set up to record the face of whoever is standing in front of the ATM, you have unreasonable expectations as to what information about stuff 200+ft in the background that camera is going to record. It's not like in CSI where they just post-process one frame and pick out the face of the evildoer from an automated database.
He did what anyone involved in a fatal accident should do: Shut up and let the facts sort themselves out. If at a later date it is beneficial to talk to investigators or the states attorney, you do so after getting throughly briefed by your attorney and with your attorney present. The cops know that, and that is why they rarely get in trouble. You could do the same, but I can see how that could be difficult for you.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
I saw that written in the reports but the ATM at that Hollywood PNC Bank is on the opposite side of the building where the ATM camera is NOT on the side where Mr Baird got run down.
So I realize you are going according to the police report, but I know the PNC Bank and its ATM could not photo the accident scene by any means.
But I also know that the Bank has other surveillance cameras on its drive up windows area (the side of the accident) and another one on the front of the Bank (the side where police vehicle stopped) and yet these are simply ignored or suppressed and certainly unmentioned - so claiming the ATM saw nothing when the ATM camera was impossible to see anything is a fraud.
And AGAIN the idea would have been to see the Police vehicle AFTER the crash, and of seeing the visibility, instead of just trying to see the moment of impact, but all of that has been conveniently excluded.
I see what Officer Goldston did by his failure to give any reason as to why he did not see or why he ran over Mr Baird to be extremely cowardly and immoral and a sign of criminality.
Plus if he like any citizen wants to take his right to remain silent then it is still his job to say that he chooses to remain silent, instead of people like yourself claiming that the cop chose to remain silent when it appears that no one in the investigation chose to ask the cop the appropriate questions.
And there was plenty of time for the cop to have his own Attorney present during questioning, and yet there is no record of any questioning, and yet the Police call this as an accident investigation without questioning the culprit.
What we have is a crime scene where they blame the lawnmower man (blame the victim) for what the killer did.
I saw that written in the reports but the ATM at that Hollywood PNC Bank is on the opposite side of the building where the ATM camera is NOT on the side where Mr Baird got run down.
So I realize you are going according to the police report, but I know the PNC Bank and its ATM could not photo the accident scene by any means.
But I also know that the Bank has other surveillance cameras on its drive up windows area (the side of the accident) and another one on the front of the Bank (the side where police vehicle stopped) and yet these are simply ignored or suppressed and certainly unmentioned - so claiming the ATM saw nothing when the ATM camera was impossible to see anything is a fraud.
And AGAIN the idea would have been to see the Police vehicle AFTER the crash, and of seeing the visibility, instead of just trying to see the moment of impact, but all of that has been conveniently excluded.
I see what Officer Goldston did by his failure to give any reason as to why he did not see or why he ran over Mr Baird to be extremely cowardly and immoral and a sign of criminality.
Plus if he like any citizen wants to take his right to remain silent then it is still his job to say that he chooses to remain silent, instead of people like yourself claiming that the cop chose to remain silent when it appears that no one in the investigation chose to ask the cop the appropriate questions.
And there was plenty of time for the cop to have his own Attorney present during questioning, and yet there is no record of any questioning, and yet the Police call this as an accident investigation without questioning the culprit.
What we have is a crime scene where they blame the lawnmower man (blame the victim) for what the killer did.
So why do you keep harping on what it does or doesn't show ?
I doubt that those cameras are recorded. Typically those cameras would only be hooked up to a CCTV system to allow the tellers to see the drive-up customers faces during a transaction.
The right to remain silent is a very fundamental thing, right in the first couple of amendments of the constitution. No different from freedom of religion, press and the right to own guns. Doing so does not allow any inference regarding guilt or innocence.
It becomes rather clear that you never read the report.
When contacted by the investigating officer, Goldston related through his attorney that he does not wish to make a statement and will only speak to internal affairs to the extent that he has to. I dont know how MD handles this, but statements to internal affairs are typically a personnel matter and can't be subpoenaed for outside legal proceedings.
See above.
It is certainly nice to get a statement from every driver in an accident, but there is really very little Goldston could have added to the findings.
No crime was committed.
An accident happened and the party at fault for causing the accident was identified.
I was down in that area last night. Just to get an impression of it myself, I drove that portion of Mervel Dean both directions. Yeah, maybe Goldston could have seen a pedestrian in the roadway, but if for example he concentrated on an oncoming vehicle, it is certainly conceivable that he never saw the camouflage wearing black-booted Yogi until he hit him.
VoteJP
J.P. Cusick
Excellent.
There is a BIG difference between the ATM camera which would show nothing, and me harping on the other surveillance cameras which might show us plenty.
Only the ATM video is mentioned by you or by the police report, and the ATM is on the opposite side of Bank away from the crime scene - which makes the ATM video as worthless by every means.
There are OTHER surveillance cameras being on the side where the accident did happen, and another camera on the front of the Bank which might show the Police vehicle as it finally stopped, and those are either excluded or have gone unreported.
I can not fathom why you would make a claim as like that - but that kind of claim is what drives the suspicions.
You say "typically" and I say NEVER as in never does a Bank teller have any monitor to see the customers, and there is definitely no such charade going on in that Hollywood Bank, and of all the Banks that I have been into then never as in NEVER has there ever been a Bank teller with a camera monitor screen to view any customer as such a thing is just not done.
The cameras at every Bank is always recorded because the cameras are in case of a Bank robbery, and the local Banks have had a few robberies in SMC so the camera systems are all recorded.
It troubles me that you would make-up such an outlandish and unrealistic claim.
In this you are basically correct, and there is nothing that decent people can do about it.
The bigger problem is not that Officer Goldston is lying or just not telling, because the bigger problem is that the entire police dept and the Office of Attorney General are lying and covering up this killing of Mr Baird.
Here in St Mary's County we do not have citizens who will march on the streets or do protesting against the killing of our lawnmower man. So we are being forced to accept that the dead Yogi was to blame for what the State Police officer did, and that is a nasty lie which many of us find hard to tolerate.
No matter how much it is said that Yogi did this and Yogi did that and Yogi did so wrong - then NONE of THAT gives any reason or excuse or justification for the State Police to run over top of him and to kill our lawnmower man.
The police and the State Attorney are all hiding behind the law and hiding behind their badges and it is cowardly and dishonorable and it is a true disloyalty for our community.
I do not see how you or anyone can honestly say that, and yet officer Goldston himself is not saying any such thing.
Since officer Goldston gives no word otherwise - then manslaughter is indeed what he did do, and manslaughter is the obvious charge for prosecution.
Of course the charge could be worse since he might have been willfully negligent or impaired or some other defect.
The communities' only weapon is in our refusal to accept the obnoxious lie that Yogi is responsible for what the Police Officer did.
It is our own job as the driver to look ahead and to see in-front of our vehicle and to act or react according to the road condition and obstacles.
The Officer Goldston was to look ahead and he was not to run over Mr Baird.
See link here = Drivers to Exercise due care. = Md Code Transportation 21-504.
There is a BIG difference between the ATM camera which would show nothing, and me harping on the other surveillance cameras which might show us plenty.
Only the ATM video is mentioned by you or by the police report, and the ATM is on the opposite side of Bank away from the crime scene - which makes the ATM video as worthless by every means.
There are OTHER surveillance cameras being on the side where the accident did happen, and another camera on the front of the Bank which might show the Police vehicle as it finally stopped, and those are either excluded or have gone unreported.
I can not fathom why you would make a claim as like that - but that kind of claim is what drives the suspicions.
You say "typically" and I say NEVER as in never does a Bank teller have any monitor to see the customers, and there is definitely no such charade going on in that Hollywood Bank, and of all the Banks that I have been into then never as in NEVER has there ever been a Bank teller with a camera monitor screen to view any customer as such a thing is just not done.
The cameras at every Bank is always recorded because the cameras are in case of a Bank robbery, and the local Banks have had a few robberies in SMC so the camera systems are all recorded.
It troubles me that you would make-up such an outlandish and unrealistic claim.
In this you are basically correct, and there is nothing that decent people can do about it.
The bigger problem is not that Officer Goldston is lying or just not telling, because the bigger problem is that the entire police dept and the Office of Attorney General are lying and covering up this killing of Mr Baird.
Here in St Mary's County we do not have citizens who will march on the streets or do protesting against the killing of our lawnmower man. So we are being forced to accept that the dead Yogi was to blame for what the State Police officer did, and that is a nasty lie which many of us find hard to tolerate.
No matter how much it is said that Yogi did this and Yogi did that and Yogi did so wrong - then NONE of THAT gives any reason or excuse or justification for the State Police to run over top of him and to kill our lawnmower man.
The police and the State Attorney are all hiding behind the law and hiding behind their badges and it is cowardly and dishonorable and it is a true disloyalty for our community.
I do not see how you or anyone can honestly say that, and yet officer Goldston himself is not saying any such thing.
Since officer Goldston gives no word otherwise - then manslaughter is indeed what he did do, and manslaughter is the obvious charge for prosecution.
Of course the charge could be worse since he might have been willfully negligent or impaired or some other defect.
The communities' only weapon is in our refusal to accept the obnoxious lie that Yogi is responsible for what the Police Officer did.
It is our own job as the driver to look ahead and to see in-front of our vehicle and to act or react according to the road condition and obstacles.
The Officer Goldston was to look ahead and he was not to run over Mr Baird.
See link here = Drivers to Exercise due care. = Md Code Transportation 21-504.
The cameras you are talking about are in the remote drive-through lanes. People dont rob a bank through a mailing tube. Maybe they are recorded, probably not. Why dont you go to the PNC and ask the branch manager. She would probably tell you.
You keep framing it like this was an intentional act. Yogi walked in the street when he shouldn't have and got run over. It's really not complicated.
Lol, so if a defendant remains silent it means he must have done it intentionally. You are pretty far out in looney land there with your legal theories.