- Forum Clout
- 98,606
I'm anal but I think as to whether to grant the dismissal or not the judge has to take Pat's facts at face value
-
Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators.
DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:
[email protected]
Robinson et al v. City of Milwaukee et al
- Thread starter Cumtown Fags
- Start date
- Forum Clout
- 45,227
I’m spitting nails that Pat’s emailed claim that he was too tough to cuff got accepted and put in a legal document. It’s obviously gaytarded and not important but it still annoys me.
lmao they tried to cuff him but couldn't corral him. Picture a bunch of cops chasing a greased up pig at the county fair.
For the record, Richard: The cops demonstrated that they are well-trained professionals of good judgment when, rather than using force to restrain you seconds after you screamed a million-dollar lawsuit threat, they let your flabby, weak body continue to jiggle free. They saw clearly what you were trying to do and did not play into your bullshit. Get fucked. I hope it’s what loses you the lawsuit.
- Forum Clout
- 16,466
"Mmmm no, I wasn't handcuffed because I'm a real life tough guy who doesn't take shit from pigs... excuse my language, sir."
- Forum Clout
- 64,314
MPD's lawyers really need to prove Rick was belligerent and they simply haven't yet. Rick's always going to claim to be perfect and blameless and you're right, the judge will have to take that at face value and consider the case through that lens.
That's why qualified immunity wasn't automatically evoked, because the case as presented is a calm and rational Patrick going "c'mon guys, this again?" The judge even brings up multiple examples of police interfering when they go to a domestic violence call and can tell the wife is being threatened to say everything is fine and she can't remember why she called 911.
- Forum Clout
- 18,485
Next season is looking good.
- Forum Clout
- 48,726
lmao they tried to cuff him but couldn't corral him. Picture a bunch of cops chasing a greased up pig at the county fair.
- Forum Clout
- 17,843
Can anyone come up with a scenario where it makes sense to email the cops and tell them they failed to handcuff you?
I don't understand.
The logic behind that continues to elude me.
I don't understand.
The logic behind that continues to elude me.
- Forum Clout
- 76,426
Tomlinson's Law dictates that when presented with a set of options, Patrick will always choose a new and more absurd option.
- Forum Clout
- 17,843
I believe the law states: Imagine the most absurd option and then wait for Rick to do something more absurd.
- Forum Clout
- 76,426
This is definitely more accurate.
- Forum Clout
- 56,967
It kind of reminds me of this nutty guy Eddy we lived by back in 80's always drunk driving, cops chasing him in his 63 comet, it was like Mayberry type of town along with a Barney Fife of our own, Eddy used to brag about the time cops chased him through state game lands with his Comet and lost them, he made it home but cops knew who they were after, our Barney claimed to never lost him during the chase, Eddy got into a pissing contest with cop over if he lost him or not, instead of Eddy giving a plea he decided to fight it just to take it to court and get cop under oath saying the lost him during the chase. in the end cop admitted he lost him in the chase and Eddy went back to jail for some time, if the internet was around back then no doubt he would be emailing this cop about the incident.
- Forum Clout
- 31,564
The email came from youwillnevercuffme1488
- Forum Clout
- 23,339
What da
- Forum Clout
- 63,559
Reminder that even if he geTs one, he will sTill sTeP on a raKe
- Forum Clout
- 51,108
Not necessarily. The case just wasn't dismissed based on qualified immunity, doesn't mean qualified immunity won't be established during trial.
- Forum Clout
- 78,298
I have not been following this but I read a few pages and you funsters are likely confusing dismissal with a motion for summary judgment. Broadly a motion to dismiss is the judge agreeing that there nothing in the complaint that is "applicable" law. What was presented even if true does not rise to the level of prima facie or isn't applicable to the venue, torts etc. This is usually pre discovery. You might be familiar with a certain Mrs krinsky. Slapp is like a specific kind of dismissal.
A motion for summary judgment is probably what you're conflating here. That's the judge saying. Even if all the facts under dispute are true it can be decided as a matter of law. Juries basically say if a fact is true or not. And a judge determines applicability process etc. If there's no facts for a jury to decide, then there's no trial. It could also be the judge saying none of this evidence is material or relevant even if true as well.
Qualified immunity would be this case,not a motion to dismiss. Msj comes during or after discovery. Because there's no evidence to rule on yet.
Trust me my father is a retired judge. This is 100% true.
A motion for summary judgment is probably what you're conflating here. That's the judge saying. Even if all the facts under dispute are true it can be decided as a matter of law. Juries basically say if a fact is true or not. And a judge determines applicability process etc. If there's no facts for a jury to decide, then there's no trial. It could also be the judge saying none of this evidence is material or relevant even if true as well.
Qualified immunity would be this case,not a motion to dismiss. Msj comes during or after discovery. Because there's no evidence to rule on yet.
Trust me my father is a retired judge. This is 100% true.
- Forum Clout
- 5,893
They probably contain the fake "motive" that Mr. Filion gave, ie "I discovered a black man farting in my wife's pussy so I killed both of them".Pure speculation but I think the one and only sealed exhibit is the faucet video lmfao
Edit: I just reread he previous order and Exhibit A is actually copies of police reports for each day they went. Not sure whether bodycams would fall under this or not?
I don't know all the details but I'm going to guess that P@t would have a case on the "there's no exigency if the cops strongly believe it's a prank " were it not for the fact that Patso screams at them and unnecessarily escalates the situation for no conceivable reason.