United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: College QB arrested, suspended after claiming ‘cocaine’ on his car was bird poop. It was bird poop.
Source:
Saturday Down South
URL Source: https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/s ... on-car-was-actually-bird-poop/
Published: Aug 3, 2019
Author: SDS Staff
Post Date: 2019-08-11 09:33:59 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 39340
Comments: 348
Chalk another one up to faulty drug field tests: Georgia Southern QB Shai Werts has been suspended following an arrest earlier in the week. Werts was arrested following a traffic stop on Wednesday night in Saluda, South Carolina. According to reports, Werts was originally pulled over for speeding. When the officer attempted to pull him over, however, he kept going and reportedly called 911 to explain that he wasn’t pulling over in a dark area. After reaching town, Werts then pulled over and was arrested for speeding. The QB was then asked about the white powder on the hood of his car, and he claimed it was bird poop that he tried to clean off at the car wash. The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits and in two different places on the hood of the car. “Everything about him and inside his vehicle made him appear as a clean person but the hood of his car was out of place,” the police report states. Werts denied any knowledge of the origin of the cocaine. The officer wrote that the powder appeared to have been “thrown on the vehicle and had been attempted to be washed off by the windshield wipers, and wiper fluid as there was white powder substance around the areas of the wiper fluid dispensary.” In addition to speeding, he was charged with a misdemeanor possession of cocaine. This is all really bad news because Georgia Southern plays LSU Week 1. Al Eargle, the Deputy Solicitor for the 11th Judicial Circuit which includes Saluda County, told Werts’ attorney, Townes Jones IV, that these kinds of charges would not be pressed on “his watch,” Jones said. South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) tests were conducted on the substance samples collected from the hood of Werts’ 2016 Dodge Charger, but the results confirmed that no controlled substance was present in the samples. “I have not seen (the SLED results) yet,” Eargle said on a phone call Thursday night. “But I was informed that the test did come back and that there was no controlled substance found.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits … Damn … You libertarian drug promoters even birds doing cocaine now. What is this frickin world coming to …
Well, that would be great way to smuggle cocaine. Just pray it doesn't rain.
Smart thinking ...
Which is essentially your admission that drug tests conducted by police departments are either completely corrupt or completely incompetent. I can't quite imagine how big a dumbass any cop would have to be to be so unaware of the properties of crystal cocaine and how it looks if exposed to moisture. What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over, thrown his coke stash forward (into the wind) onto his windshield and then tried to wash it away with wiper fluid? There is no other way to read this. Corrupt lab and/or corrupt cops. Probably both. Oh, look. It's a black QB. Let's just frame his black ass with phony drug tests that make any pile of poop test positive for cocaine. Thanks for playing. If you were a decent human being, you'd be ashamed of what you've posted here. It does matter to have a black man falsely accused of narcotics and to have such an arrest on his record. Like you even care about this victim of false arrest. I hope he can sue their asses off for defamation of character. He should never have been charged with cocaine possession without a full lab test.
Yeah, it was a process, wasn't it? Nothing says "I'm suspicious" like not immediately pulling over. At least he wasn't shot. And no dogs were shot. And this wasn't a no-knock raid. So what's the big deal? Oh, I get it. The driver was black. AND a quarterback. Hell, he should be allowed to do whatever he wants, right?
It could have been wet/damp powdered cocaine. "What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over, thrown his coke stash forward (into the wind) onto his windshield and then tried to wash it away with wiper fluid?" I think that was the theory, actually.
“Actually” – Yes. The “field drug tests” conducted police have been a problem. The Next generation field drug testing is suppose to provide new technology that eliminates subjectivity and preserves evidence. The remains however, with proper use training. Werts was smart. He did the right thing under a bad circumstance. He said: “I stayed down and I knew that the truth was eventually going to come out. Just didn’t know how long it would take. It’s definitely been hard to deal with.”
You know as little as the cop did. He was trained. He has no excuse for being so ignorant.
But you didn't care at all about this falsely accused man who now has a narcotics arrest on his record. You can't cover it up now.
Don't you think that this Negro owes the police a thank-you note for not shooting him while falsely arresting him on bad evidence? And another thank-you note for not driving to his house to shoot his dog too? The QB is kind of an ingrate, isn't he, whitey? He's lucky he doesn't get shot on a weekly basis by the cops.
Because none of your remarks focused at all on the injustice that was done to this victim of false arrest who now has a narcotics record. At least, not until I called you out on it. You had no problem at all with it.
What's he supposed to do when the substance tests positive -- twice? Let the guy go because he's black?
How do you know this? Because none of your remarks focused at all on the injustice that was done to this victim of false arrest … Is that right? Let me see now – Also, none of my remarks focused at all on the actions to indicate that justice was done by the police. Is that right? So, what did I say when I said nothing at all? What am I saying when I said nothing at all? If I had nothing to say, I probably wouldn’t say anything at all – nothing would come out of my mouth. So, is it just up to you to arbitrarily decide what it is I meant by my silence? Think about it … My loud silence spoke possibilities to you and I don’t get to control what is is that you are assuming I was saying through my silence. By saying nothing at all, I left you in a most awkward quandary and you were left to “divine” what the heck it was that I was not saying. Tough situation for you. You had to decide what my silence meant. And you did. It is amazing that you are such a good “diviner” sometimes. You have to know that silence could mean pretty much anything while silence can mean pretty much nothing. Obviously, my silence raised a question for you. It made you wonder what was meant by my silence. Even through the silence one could probably have almost heard the neurons at work in that thought factory of yours “thinking and making up shit like: “Gatlin didn't care at all about this falsely accused man.” And that’s what you did, Tooconservative – you just made up some shit.
Your earlier posts speak plainly enough for themselves. I stand by my (accurate) observations.
That figures. It's so typical libertarian mind reading of you. How are you on picking lottery numbers?
Every police department using such faulty tests should make no further arrests until they have verifiable and accurate ways to do lab tests. These field tests are just an excuse to profile people and arrest them at will for crimes such as Driving While Black. It can also be a pretext for a highway-robbery-by-cop in an attempt to use civil forfeiture against an innocent accused person who was arrested without cause for "failing" two obviously flawed tests.
Never tried. But I do have your number.
Should the police department keep using these field tests since they have been proven to give inaccurate results? If they use them again should they be held accountable and sued? Does the real victim the quarterback have a case against the police department for not using a reliable drug test? Why didn't the police know the drug test was inaccurate, don't they test them? If the police knew it gives false readings and it did int he past should the be sued for even more money? Do you go down on cops?
The Texas police departments stop using the drug-testing kits a couple years ago because of the false positive results. As also did the Missouri Highway Patrol. This problem has been around since 2008 that I know of.
So they knew but they kept using them. Or they are just dumb. The quarterback should be compensated financially by those in law enforcement that approved faulty testing kits.
How was the cop supposed to know he'd get a false positive on bird poop? Bringing me back to my original question -- what was the cop supposed to do after two tests showed positive?
Test with bird poop? I'm guessing they didn't. But you're saying they should have?
"In July 2017, the Houston Police Department announced it would no longer use the test kits, but not because of the test’s lack of reliability. Instead, they cited the risk posed to officers from handling opiate-related substances like Fentanyl while performing the test."
If they're inaccurate, then statistically they should give an equal number of false positives AND false negatives. Meaning a whole bunch of guilty people went free. That should make you happy. Freeing guilty people.
It makes you happy putting innocent people in jail without due process. Why is that? 1. You are a sadist? 2. You are dumb? 3. You are dumb and don't know it? 4. You are a former government worker and you think the government is always right?
We do it all the time. If you can make bail, you're let go. If not, you sit there -- even if you're later found innocent.
For the record it is noted that you did not dispute that putting innocent people in jail makes you happy.
America's criminal justice system was founded on the principle that it was better to let sizable numbers of the guilty to go free rather than allow even one man to be wrongly convicted and punished. You might observe that this is because so many colonists in America had suffered at the hands of the monarchist courts back in Europe. Even so, this is what presumption of innocence means and where it comes from. Not that that will ever be supported by a budding fascist like you, drooling to lick the boots of police on any occasion. In that sense, you are an un-American. So is Gatlin. You just don't give a shit who gets wrongly arrested, wrongly convicted, wrongly executed. Your concerns are for the cops who wrongly arrest, the prosecutors who wrongfully convict, the system that can wrongfully execute the falsely accused.
I heard he does suck a few nightsticks. Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor. After all, if it's a false accusation, whitey shouldn't mind at all that he's being falsely accused. whitey loves to defend cops making false charges in unlawful arrests, even corrupt cops. I also heard he once went down on a state trooper for a gallon of gas but that could just be an ugly rumor someone here at LP made up.
I don't beat my wife, either.
What does it mean when a substance tests -- twice -- as an illegal drug? That "presumption of innocence" suddenly shifts to "probable cause" of a crime. Now, it later turned out to be a false positive. Because the system worked as it should. The "guilty go free" is after due process.
So you don't know that it's true, you did not ensure that it's true, yet you published it anyways. And, based on your previous posts about me, you published that with actual malice. This means it must have been made with disregard for the truth, and with the intention of doing harm to my reputation on this forum. I'd say I have an airtight defamation lawsuit. Or at least enough to get you kicked off this forum.
A K A Stone to misterwhite: After all, if it's a false accusation, whitey shouldn't mind at all that he's being falsely accused. whitey loves to defend cops making false charges in unlawful arrests, even corrupt cops. I also heard he once went down on a state trooper for a gallon of gas but that could just be an ugly rumor someone here at LP made up. So you don't know that it's true, you did not ensure that it's true, yet you published it anyways. And, based on your previous posts about me, you published that with actual malice. This means it must have been made with disregard for the truth, and with the intention of doing harm to my reputation on this forum. I'd say I have an airtight defamation lawsuit. Or at least enough to get you kicked off this forum. I say that you are wrong about ever getting Stone to kick TC off this forum. He will never do it, albeit the right thing to do with the malicious and vulgar defamation of character displayed by TC. I predict Stone will not do shit about it. We shall see …
misterwhite v AKA Stone, Tooconservative et al? Yeah good luck with that Parsons.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Not at all. I clearly said it was only a rumor.
That is just a line from the movie Natural Born Killers, a near-quote.
It almost sounds like getting me banned from LF is something that Gatlin and misterwhite have discussed previously.
I know, this seems petty, but hear me out. “Good luck” is not a religious or emotional statement in any way. It’s something we say to each other to communicate ‘I want the best for you (in this matter).’ But “good luck” is a terrible way to say this. Despite being a common phrase, it’s got a couple of significant problems. First, “good luck” is a pessimistic phrase. It encourages, as the psychologists say, an external locus of control. In non-psychology-speak, this means the phrase “good luck” encourages us to see events as outside of our control (as opposed to within our control). When we perceive outcomes as outside our control, we don’t work to affect them, leaving us in the passenger seat of our lives. Second, “good luck” implies, to the person you’re saying it to, that they need luck to succeed. Instead of encouraging or helping them, you’re wishing for the world to conspire in their favor. If you had a friend who was about to compete in a contest, you wouldn’t tell them “I hope the judge is feeling lenient today,” but to say “good luck” is to say the same thing. Last, “good luck” is a terrible phrase no matter what your religious orientation. If you are a theist, and believe in god, it’s bordering on blasphemous. Why are you appealing to a nonexistent ‘luck’ when it is God who directs the events of the world? If you are an atheist, it’s a meaningless statement because it acknowledges there is no way for you to affect this luck. Either way, you’re out of luck (get it?) Some obvious religious alternatives to “good luck” include “blessings” and “thoughts and prayers.” But there are some great secular options as well.
These both express doubt in a person's ability to succeed. Which sounds worse than "Good Luck" which you consider to be expressing the thought that only sheer accidental success can happen to the well-wishee. This sounds harsher but is less bad than the first two IMO. I'd rather have a Good Luck though. Many things in life do happen outside your control. Wishing someone "Good Luck" expresses the hope that good things will happen by chance in their lives rather than bad things happening. Sometimes, it is a matter of luck. The real knack in life is to learn to make your own luck, at least sometimes. Something like "Don't Worry, Be Happy" is also good. We should all be reminded to take some time for happiness.
Eccl. 9:11 I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all. I sometimes find myself saying "good luck" to the unbeliever...because that's about all they have...time and chance.
Comments (42 - 348) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Gatlin (#1)
#3. To: misterwhite (#2)
#4. To: Gatlin, misterwhite (#1)
The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits …
#5. To: Tooconservative (#4)
What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over,
#6. To: Tooconservative (#4)
to be so unaware of the properties of crystal cocaine and how it looks if exposed to moisture.
#7. To: Tooconservative (#4)
The officer tested the powder, and it tested positive for cocaine with two different kits …
Yes, he did. Which is essentially your admission that drug tests conducted by police departments are either completely corrupt or completely incompetent.
“Essentially” – No. I can't quite imagine how big a dumbass any cop would have to be to be so unaware of the properties of crystal cocaine and how it looks if exposed to moisture. What, did the cop think that the QB had, in the process of being pulled over, thrown his coke stash forward (into the wind) onto his windshield and then tried to wash it away with wiper fluid?
I can’t imagine either – but I must readily admit, I have never tried to imagine it. There is no other way to read this. Corrupt lab and/or corrupt cops. Probably both.
Uh, how about one other way – just maybe “faulty field test kits” or “improper officer training” in the interpretation during their use. But, shit – why should we try to be objective when there is a chance to cast disparity on cops? Oh, look. It's a black QB. Let's just frame his black ass with phony drug tests that make any pile of poop test positive for cocaine.
That is a possibility – it has happened. Thanks for playing. If you were a decent human being, you'd be ashamed of what you've posted here.
That gratuitous remark was uncalled-for, it is unfair, rude, unkind and therefore it was unnecessary. It does matter to have a black man falsely accused of narcotics and to have such an arrest on his record …
Yes, it does matter. … Like you even care about this victim of false arrest.
That gratuitous remark was uncalled-for, it is unfair, rude, unkind and therefore it was unnecessary. I hope he can sue their asses off for defamation of character.
The lawyers are probably already working on this. He should never have been charged with cocaine possession without a full lab test.
How would you want to work that?
#8. To: misterwhite (#6)
It could have been wet/damp powdered cocaine.
#9. To: Gatlin (#7)
That gratuitous remark was uncalled-for, it is unfair, rude, unkind and therefore it was unnecessary.
#10. To: misterwhite (#5)
At least he wasn't shot. And no dogs were shot.
#11. To: Tooconservative (#9)
But you didn't care at all about this falsely accused man …
How do you know this?
#12. To: Gatlin (#11)
#13. To: Tooconservative (#8)
He was trained. He has no excuse for being so ignorant.
#14. To: Tooconservative (#12)
But you didn't care at all about this falsely accused man …
Let me see now – “because none of my remarks focused at all on the injustice that was done to this victim of false arrest” means to you that “I didn't care at all about this falsely accused man.”
#15. To: Gatlin (#14)
It is amazing that you are such a good “diviner” sometimes.
#16. To: Tooconservative (#15)
(Edited)
I stand by my (accurate) observations.
#17. To: misterwhite (#13)
What's he supposed to do when the substance tests positive -- twice? Let the guy go because he's black?
#18. To: Gatlin (#16)
How are you on picking lottery numbers?
#19. To: misterwhite (#13)
(Edited)
What's he supposed to do when the substance tests positive -- twice? Let the guy go because he's black?
#20. To: A K A Stone (#19)
#21. To: Gatlin (#20)
#22. To: Tooconservative (#17)
Every police department using such faulty tests
#23. To: A K A Stone (#19)
Why didn't the police know the drug test was inaccurate, don't they test them?
#24. To: Gatlin (#20)
The Texas police departments stop using the drug-testing kits a couple years ago because of the false positive results.
#25. To: A K A Stone (#19)
Should the police department keep using these field tests since they have been proven to give inaccurate results?
#26. To: misterwhite (#25)
#27. To: A K A Stone (#26)
It makes you happy putting innocent people in jail without due process. Why is that?
#28. To: misterwhite (#27)
#29. To: misterwhite (#25)
That should make you happy. Freeing guilty people.
#30. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#19)
AKA to whitey: Do you go down on cops?
#31. To: A K A Stone (#28)
For the record it is noted that you did not dispute that putting innocent people in jail makes you happy.
#32. To: Tooconservative (#29)
Even so, this is what presumption of innocence means and where it comes from.
#33. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#30)
Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor.
#34. To: misterwhite, Tooconservative, A K A Stone (#33)
(Edited)
Do you go down on cops?
Tooconservative to A K A Stone: I heard he does suck a few nightsticks. Not wanting to intrude here but I thought I'd pass along this ugly rumor.
Misterwhite to Tooconservative, A K A Stone
I say that you are absolutely correct on the defamation lawsuit if you cared to file one.
#35. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone, Tooconservative (#34)
I say that you are absolutely correct on the defamation lawsuit if you cared to file one.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#36. To: misterwhite (#33)
I'd say I have an airtight defamation lawsuit. Or at least enough to get you kicked off this forum.
#37. To: Gatlin (#34)
I also heard he once went down on a state trooper for a gallon of gas but that could just be an ugly rumor someone here at LP made up.
#38. To: Deckard (#35)
Gatlin: I say that you are wrong about ever getting Stone to kick TC off this forum.
#39. To: Deckard (#35)
(Edited)
Yeah good luck with that Parsons.
#40. To: Gatlin (#39)
“Fingers crossed.” This is more of a casual alternative to “Best wishes.”
“Hope it goes well.” If you want to stick with the traditional meaning of ‘I want the best,’ you can stick with saying “hope (whatever it is) goes well.” You can also say “Wish you well.” “Don’t fuck it up.” If you’ve got an asshole streak and a charming disposition, this is definitely the funniest option.
#41. To: Gatlin (#39)
Why are you appealing to a nonexistent ‘luck’ when it is God who directs the events of the world?
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]