He is paraphrasing to make a point.

You didn't even read the whole post before you commented.

That is so typical of you ...

He is paraphrasing to make a point.

That wasn't paraphrasing, dummy. It was "parroting."

That wasn't parphrasing, dummy. It was "parroting."

I'd call it intellectual laziness and lack of originality.

But what do you expect from a guy who spent his career as a mindless enforcement drone for the State?

But what do you expect from a guy who spent his career as a mindless enforcement drone for the State?

Being a file clerk at a TV station spreading main stream lies is a mindless and meaningless job ...

it carried a real meaning.

How could Deckard's post, which was plagerized by GrandIsland, have any meaning for GrandIsland or to the readers? The "meaning" was completely removed just because of the vulgar author: GrandIsland.

The "meaning" was completely removed just because of the vulgar author: GrandIsland.

Only removed from the warped and diseased mind of a Paultard.

You have a problem with that ... and this is not a question.

You have a problem with that

I have a problem with everything about the infamous and irreputable kanary klub klan performs for word, thought and deed.

I have a problem with everything about the infamous and irreputable kanary klub klan performs for word, thought and deed.

Then I will be glad to help you with that.

First, take a large 2-foot square piece of old dirty rough cardboard and write on it:

I have a problem with everything about the infamous and irreputable kanary klub klan performs for word, thought and deed.

Then, roll it into a large diameter tube and jam it up your Paultard ass.

Now, Problem gone "BYE-BYE" and will no longer be a bother to little Bucky boy.

Try the remedy for your problem ... but promise not to sigh and smile while performing the task.

" How do you KNOW the author, Matt Agorist, stated FACTS in the article? "

How do you know that he did not? And what is the source of your info: " " With Cujo behind the bathroom engaged in excessive low-range barking; snarling; growling, snapping and scratching at the bathroom door " "

" That would be the first question an intelligent person with general cognitive problem-solving skills would ask … est-ce pas droit ? " Take your own advice.

unique way

pissed

How do you know that he did not?

I don’t know if Matt Agorist presented “facts” or “judgments” in the article.

I do however know that I go through a thought process each time I read an article to ask myself, “Can I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this is true?” If the answer is yes, then it’s a fact, and I begin the process of acceptance.

On the other hand, if there is even a tiny bit of doubt and wiggle room … then it’s a judgment. Unlike a fact, a judgment is open to interpretation and can be questioned, challenged and disputed … for me, that’s exactly what needs to be done. I do what I do … I challenge a judgment.

Challenging a judgment isn’t an easy thing to do. But the first step is simply recognizing that a judgment is more subjective than objective. And that provides a certain degree of comfort in and of itself.

It appears that it is a natural tendency for some people to accept a judgment as a fact without even realizing it. Or, when they read something they want to believe, they will accept it as a fact and not realize it is a judgment.

Facts have very little power to hurt us, but it’s only when we insert a painful judgment that we can suffer and cause others to suffer.

You missed my point with the Cujo parody, it was used to show that many things are possible and we really don’t know what went on behind a closed bathroom door.

I do know that one of the dogs was an American Pit Bull Terrier and based on the article, it would be pretty safe to make a judgment that the other two dogs were the same breed.

It did not go unnoticed by me that Mat Agorist mentioned “dog(s)” twelve times in the article and not once did use “Pit Bull(s).” Why not? Was it because these fearful two words would nullify the sympathy conditioning he was leading his readers towards? Probably so.

Many insurers will often not provide homeowner’s insurance coverage Pit Bulls because of the massive volume of attacks and because they are so vicious. Quite frequently, these dogs repeatedly make headlines for attacking people. Their aggressive temperament matched with their strength historically saw them bred as fighting dogs. Pit bulls have been known to attack the elderly, their owners, attack and eat small children – anyone that happens to be in their path. If the dog feels provoked or startled, it has been known to attack. Many owners swear that their pet would never attack them; however, this breed has led to more human fatalities than any other. it also cannot be denied that this particular breed is responsible for more fatalities than any other type of dog. I can imagine the Pit Bull behind the bathroom door acting the way I depicted Cujo, but you can imagine the Pit Bull as a docile lap dog cowering in the corner afraid of the big bad cops if you choose to do so.

I feel that is what an intelligent person with general cognitive problem- solving skills would do … I have done so and therefore I have taken my own advice.

If you want to accept what Matt Agorist had to say as fact, believe it and condemn the cops, then that is your prerogative to do so … est-ce pas droit?

" not once did use “Pit Bull(s).” Why not? Was it because these fearful two words would nullify the sympathy conditioning he was leading his readers towards? Probably so.

Many insurers will often not provide homeowner’s insurance coverage Pit Bulls because of the massive volume of attacks and because they are so vicious. Quite frequently, these dogs repeatedly make headlines for attacking people. Their aggressive temperament matched with their strength historically saw them bred as fighting dogs. Pit bulls have been known to attack the elderly, their owners, attack and eat small children – anyone that happens to be in their path. If the dog feels provoked or startled, it has been known to attack. Many owners swear that their pet would never attack them; however, this breed has led to more human fatalities than any other. it also cannot be denied that this particular breed is responsible for more fatalities than any other type of dog. I can imagine the Pit Bull behind the bathroom door acting the way I depicted Cujo, but you can imagine the Pit Bull as a docile lap dog cowering in the corner afraid of the big bad cops if you choose to do so. "

Well, Mr " I want the facts ". I reread the posted article, and went to the source link, and not once did I see " Pit Bull " spelled out. Yet you injected the word into your post. Why is that ? Simple, to inject fear so others will sympathize with the cops, and try to justify their actions. Because the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it.

Looks like you are making up shit there sarge. Not very truthful! Not a sign of " an intelligent person with general cognitive problem- solving skills ". More like a BSer, making up lies !

Go back to being a cop groupie. Maybe some will let you polish their badge, LOL

polish their badge baton.

Fixed it.

Does that include Police Dogs?

If not, how is there an exception?

Dogs are not people. Police dogs are not people. One cannot murder a dog any more than one can murder a cow.

But you can have a murder of crows.

I reread the posted article, and went to the source link, and not once did I see " Pit Bull " spelled out. Yet you injected the word into your post. Why is that ? Simple, to inject fear so others will sympathize with the cops, and try to justify their actions. Because the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it.

It's not just Pit Bulls.

Gatlin is on record here supporting ANY cop shooting ANY dog, even Chihuahuas and other small breeds, even when there is no threat posed by these dogs.

Go back to being a cop groupie. Maybe some will let you polish their badge, LOL

It's what he does best.

You missed my point with the Cujo parody, it was used to show that many things are possible and we really don’t know what went on behind a closed bathroom door.

It doesn't matter - the point is, the door was closed.

The cops shot THROUGH the door.

They were in no danger - they killed the dogs and laughed about it afterwards.

Why?

Because they are mentally disturbed individuals who have no business being cops.

No doubt these sick freaks have issues going back to childhood when they most likely tortured animals for fun.

Pit Bull ...

Well, Mr " I want the facts ". I reread the posted article, and went to the source link, and not once did I see " Pit Bull " spelled out. Yet you injected the word into your post. Why is that ? Simple, to inject fear so others will sympathize with the cops, and try to justify their actions. Because the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it.

Looks like you are making up shit there sarge. Not very truthful! Not a sign of " an intelligent person with general cognitive problem- solving skills ". More like a BSer, making up lies !

Go back to being a cop groupie. Maybe some will let you polish their badge, LOL

Can you recognize a Pit Bull when you see one?

Yes … you say?

Then go to paragraph in the article and click on the Daily News on Thursday link.

You see ole Debo pictured there? Debo was one of three of Nikita Smith's dogs that were killed.

Do you recognize Debo’s jaws as those of a pit bull, which can grab hold of their target and refuse to let to … sometimes even after they have expired. They are hard-wired for this behavior. Look at those teeth, those are pit bull teeth that when he once gets his teeth in, nothing can shake him off. Ralph Waldo Emerson " 'This is the bull-dog bite; you must cut off the head to loosen the teeth." Jack London described the bulldog grip in White Fang as the "clinging death."

Matt Agorist who leads you to believe that pit bulls are "just dogs" is either lying to you, ignorant of the true nature of gripping dogs or concealing information in order to gain sympathy and support for his biased cause.

I have shown you where Matt Agorist “lied by omission.” Now show me where my “lie” is, please.

Why?

I find out the facts on what happened and then I will start to speculate as to why?

I am not going to take the word of a guy who was not, did not personally interview anyone, but simply read another article and wrote his article using quotes from that second article by a pothead who has pit bulls in her home to protect her stash.

It's not just Pit Bulls.

Gatlin is on record here supporting ANY cop shooting ANY dog, even Chihuahuas and other small breeds, even when there is no threat posed by these dogs.

What is true, is that I am on record to ferret out the facts and not be emotionally swayed so as to be led down the agenda path by any author who posts half truths and innuendos.

If YOU want to CONTINUE down that path ... then have at it.

Now, tell your asshole cop-hating buddy, Stoner ... that Debo (shown in the picture in the link) is definitely a pit bull.

" It doesn't matter - the point is, the door was closed.

The cops shot THROUGH the door. "

And what if a child had been on the other side of the door, with the dog. I guess to the cop cult worshipers, " that would have been too bad. The child should not have been there. "

" No doubt these sick freaks have issues going back to childhood when they most likely tortured animals for fun. " That, or they were little wimps and got bullied around. Now, with a gun & badge, they have " the power " and are anxious to use it.

Sooner or later, karma is going to pay those clowns a horrific visit. Then the cult members will be all " boo hoo hoo, wah wah wah wah, poor hero's! "

Like I have said before, if the cops have such an obsession for killing, let them go after the Bloods, the Crips, BLM, Black Panthers, Muslim Brotherhood, etc. Or, they should go join the Army, and volunteer for the sand box.

" your asshole cop-hating buddy, Stoner "

I do not hate cops. I do not like cops that act improperly. I have personal fiends that are cops, local PD, SO, SP, Game Wardens, and Feds.

Sarge, you are the asshole here, and everyone knows it.

This site was much more enjoyable before you came back. FO

"It doesn't matter - the point is, the door was closed.
The cops shot THROUGH the door."
And what if a child had been on the other side of the door, with the dog. I guess to the cop cult worshipers, " that would have been too bad. The child should not have been there. "

I don’t know what the cop cult worshipers would say, but I personally say the mother should have been arrested for leaving a child LOCKED in a bathroom with a PIT BULL.

Why do I say that?

To answer that question, let your mind dwell on the following incident when you envision a child locked in the bathroom alone with a pit bull:

‘They just ate him,’ mom says about [pit bull] attack on son.

Detroit --Lucillie Strickland says she has been “constantly” reliving in her mind the sight of her 4-year-old son being mauled by four pit bulls.

“They pulled him from me and (dragged) him under the fence. They just ate him,” said Strickland, a 33-year-old wife and mother of seven, breaking down in tears.

Strickland was walking with her 4-year-old son Xavier to nearby Thurgood Marshall school, when four pit bulls charged from the back of a home in the 15500 block of Baylis around 12:25 p.m. Wednesday. They attacked her child as she tried to fight them off.

dogs attacked Strickland, too, biting her in the back and the legs as she tried to protect Xavier, a little boy small for his age.

“I fell on top of him,” Strickland said Thursday, explaining how she tried to protect her little boy. “I had him under my arms.”

When police arrived in the neighborhood near the Lodge Freeway and Linwood they fatally shot three of the dogs. The fourth was captured.

Xavier was taken to Henry Ford Hospital where he died despite doctors’ efforts to save him.

Attaboy!

I do not like cops that act improperly.

How do you determine cops acted improperly simply by reading an article someone wrote after reading another about an incident?

'And what if a child had been on the other side of the door, with the dog. I guess to the cop cult worshipers, " that would have been too bad. The child should not have been there. "'

I don’t know what the cop cult worshipers would say, but I personally say the mother should have been arrested for leaving a child LOCKED in a bathroom with a PIT BULL.

And the cops in the scenario under discussion - what should happen to them?

How do you determine cops acted improperly simply by reading an article someone wrote after reading another about an incident?

Here's two more mainstream accounts of the same story. The problem is - you won't believe those either.

'They killed them like a death squad': Detroit cops 'needlessly murdered three dogs during home search before threatening their owner', lawsuit claims

Detroit police accused of needlessly killing dogs while searching house

A couple of comments -

Jennifer Martinez

And the cops in the scenario under discussion - what should happen to them?

I would assume neither guilt nor innocence.

There should be a thorough and impartial investigation conducted either internally or by the Sheriff's Department.

The departmental protocol should be evaluated. If the protocol was wrong or inadequate with respect to directions, then it should be immediately corrected..

If the cops violated departmental protocol at the time of the incident, they should be disciplined.

How severely?

I would need further information to say. Termination would be a paramount consideration.

If the cops violated the law, they should be charged and brought to trial.

If found guilty, then termination would be automatic.

If protocol was wrong or violated and/or if a law was broken … a public apology should be issued and full restitution for damages. plus punitive dames awarded.

That would be my course of action based on what information I can objectively gleen at this time..

I don’t think I missed anything.

What would you do?

Putting the dogs in areas where the cops are going to search is pointless.

How do you determine cops acted improperly simply by reading an article someone wrote after reading another about an incident?

Here's two more mainstream accounts of the same story. The problem is - you won't believe those either.

So your answer to my question is that you would read TWO MORE mainstream accounts of the same story and base your JUDGMENT of the events solely on three mainstream accounts of the story … is this correct? I assume it is, because I can read your statement no other way.

You say three stories in the mainstream media … eh? Okay, I will cover that and raise you with 10 compelling reasons you can never trust the mainstream media. (Let’s concede that I can in order to save time and space … I assure you that I can).

Let’s look at “Fair and Balanced” Fox News to find that a recently released analysis by PunditFact revealed that out of every statement made by a Fox News host or guest, over half of them were completely false. What’s more, only 8% percent could even be considered “completely true.”

So, now tell me again, that you are willing to believe three mainstream accounts of the same story … and I will tell you that I will question the validity in all three.

If the cops have a warrant to search the house, why didn't she temporarily leash the dogs outside?

Putting the dogs in areas where the cops are going to search is pointless.

Pointless?

Maybe not, could have been a strategic deployment of the three pit bulls (assuming the other two were also pit bulls) by the pothead to protect her stash.

First you rag on FTP and Matt Agorist, claiming they are biased.

I give you two more sources, and you still remain adamant in your defense of these psychopaths?

What would it take - a confession from the cops themselves?

Looks to me like they've already done that.

All charges were dropped against Nikita Smith, the cops never showed up in court.

And once again I repeat - these cops were in NO DANGER from any of these dogs!

Yet you continue to defend their actions.

You sick son of a bitch.

Maybe not, could have been a strategic deployment of the three pit bulls (assuming the other two were also pit bulls) by the pothead to protect her stash.

More ignorant assumptions from LF's leading purveyor of bullshit.

The charges were dropped against Smith.

Look - I know EXACTLY how your sick mind works.

Potheads deserve to have their dogs killed by cops.

You fucking drug warriors are insane and a scourge on America.

I can't wait for the day when you or one of the other cop-worshipers ends up getting raided by SWAT.

Oh - that's right, you're a law-abiding citizen.

Tough shit. You think that will matter to the cops when they mistakenly raid your house because of sloppy or careless police work? Don't expect any sympathy from me when that happens.

Sarge, you are the asshole here, and everyone knows it.

But your approval isn’t something I need or want and you don’t speak for everyone.

This site was much more enjoyable before you came back. FO

I was contacted through an intermediary sent by Stone tp personally ask me to return to LF and resume posting. I gracefully accepted the invitation in the spirit it was offered and returned. I am happy to be back and I believe that Stone is satisfied that I have returned.

So, you are definitely out of order when you suggest that I “Fuck Off” and leave LF. I will not do so and I plan to stay as long as Stone, our host, accepts me.

I will go on now to discuss your attempt to stifle my freedom to comment on LF. It is the unassailable truth as I speak from the “high ground” of tolerance and say that I have a right to my opinions and I have been given permission to post those opinions. If you don’t like my opinions, then you can ignore them by not clicking on my comments or place me on the “Bozo” in the setup tab.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated understanding.

No, potheads do not deserve to have their dogs killed by cops or anyone else. The main reason a cop makes the decision to shoot a dog is due to a perceived threat from that animal. When a cop shoots someone’s dog, it deeply affects the dog’s human family, as well as the officer, the neighborhood, and the community.

People can protect their dogs by protecting the officers, that should be simple enough for even your stressed cop-hating mind to understand. The procedures to protect dogs are simple: Follow all leash laws, and keep dogs away from law enforcement during neighborhood searches, 911 calls and searches authorized by warrants..

I will not waste time to comment on the other gibberish in your contemptuous post showing disdain with an attempt to be scornful and disrespectful..

" you are definitely out of order when you suggest that I “Fuck Off” and leave LF."

I never suggested that you "leave LF". But it certainly would not bother me if you did.

As to "being out of order", I guess you think you were "in order" when you called me "asshole" ? TS!

" If you don’t like my opinions, then you can ignore them by not clicking on my comments or place me on the “Bozo” in the setup tab. " I will do that, and suggest you do the same!

arrivederci sarge.

Then go to paragraph in the article and click on the Daily News on Thursday link.

You see ole Debo pictured there? Debo was one of three of Nikita Smith's dogs that were killed.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/detroit-officers-kill-dogs-warning-graphic-photo-article-1.2651260

When the officers showed up at the Detroit home where Smith and Kevin Thomas live in January to execute a search warrant, they were told by Smith there were three dogs present. Smith then put two of the dogs in the basement, and locked the third one in the bathroom, according to the lawsuit. Thomas was not home at the time.

After officers entered the home, one of the dogs was able to get out of the basement, and harmlessly sat next to Smith.

[...]

[Smith's lawyer Chris ] Olson said Smith had done everything correctly in her effort to secure the dogs, yet the officers still "went around and killed them."

Smith's lawyer says Smith had done everything correctly to secure the dogs. And yet, after they were supposedly secured, one of the pit bulls magically appeared sitting next to Smith, harmlessly. Sitting unrestrained next to the owner is not restrained and is not harmless. And then there is the police report.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/313964609/Nikita-Smith-vs-City-of-Detroit-Police

Nikita Smith v City of Detroit et al, MIED 2-16-11882 (25 May 2016) COMPLAINT

https://www.scribd.com/doc/313964688/Nikita-Smith-vs-City-of-Detroit-Exhibits-1-2

Nikita Smith v City of Detroit et al, MIED 2-16-11882 (25 May 2016) (EXHIBITS) 1 of 2

https://www.scribd.com/doc/313964730/Nikita-Smith-vs-City-of-Detroit-Exhibits-2-2

Nikita Smith v City of Detroit et al, MIED 2-16-11882 (25 May 2016) (EXHIBITS) 2 of 2

From Detroit Police Department Arrest Report of 14 January 2016:

C- MEMEBERS OF MVS CODE 2979 MADE ABOVE LOCATION TO EXCEUTE NARCOTIC SEARCH WARRANT. ENTRY TEAM ANNOUNCED PRESENCE AND PURPOSE AND WITH NO RESPONSE FROM INSIDE FORCED ENTRY WAS MADE INTO THE LOCATION. P.O. MORRISON ENCOUNTERED A VICIOUS GRAY PITBULL AT THE FRONT DOOR AT WHICH TIME HE FIRED HIS DEPT ISSUED SHOTGUN STRIKING THE DOG. ENTRY TEAM ENTERED THE LOCATION AT WHICH TIME THE SAME PITBULL CHARGED AT P.O. [REDACTED], P.O. [REDACTED] FIRED 7 SHOTS FROM HIS DEPARTMENT ISSUED HANDGUN AT THE PITBULL, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. SIMULTANIOUSLY A VICIOUS BLACK DOG CHARGED AT P.O. [REDACTED] FROM THE BATHROOM. P.O. [REDACTED] FIRED THREE SHOTS FROM HIS DEPARTMENT ISSUED SHOTGUN, P.O. PAUL AND P.O. GAINES FIRED ONE SOT FROM TEIR DEPARTMENT ISSUED HANGGUNS, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. P.O. [REDACTED] ENCOUNTERED A VICIOUS WHITE PITBULL IN THE BASEMENT AND FIRED HIS DEPARTMENT APROVED SHOTGUN 5 TIMES, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. AFTER THE HOUSE WAS DECLARED SAFE, CREW DETAINED NIKITA SMITH IN THE DINING ROOM. P.O. [REDACTED] RECOVERED BELOW LISTED MARIJUANA FROM THE KITCHEN STOVE TOP AND PLACED IN EVIDENCE. SGT [REDACTED] RECOVERED THE BELOW LISTED MARIJUANA FROM NE BEDROOM CLOSET, SGT [REDACTED] FORFEITED BELOW LISTED VEHICLE TO 2121 FORT STREET, TOWED BY V&F CONTROL #NW23053. MRS SMITH WAS ARRESTED AND CONVEYED TO DDC WITHOUT INCIDENT.

I an actually fascinated by your vivacity and it makes you a great comedic actor because you join in with Bucky and Deckard to attack cops with with their same endless energy.

In fact, your posts are a mirror of Bucky’s posts. You have copied his style and mimicked his choice of descriptive adjectives.

C- MEMEBERS OF MVS CODE 2979 MADE ABOVE LOCATION TO EXCEUTE NARCOTIC SEARCH WARRANT. ENTRY TEAM ANNOUNCED PRESENCE AND PURPOSE AND WITH NO RESPONSE FROM INSIDE FORCED ENTRY WAS MADE INTO THE LOCATION. P.O. MORRISON ENCOUNTERED A VICIOUS GRAY PITBULL AT THE FRONT DOOR AT WHICH TIME HE FIRED HIS DEPT ISSUED SHOTGUN STRIKING THE DOG. ENTRY TEAM ENTERED THE LOCATION AT WHICH TIME THE SAME PITBULL CHARGED AT P.O. [REDACTED], P.O. [REDACTED] FIRED 7 SHOTS FROM HIS DEPARTMENT ISSUED HANDGUN AT THE PITBULL, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. SIMULTANIOUSLY A VICIOUS BLACK DOG CHARGED AT P.O. [REDACTED] FROM THE BATHROOM. P.O. [REDACTED] FIRED THREE SHOTS FROM HIS DEPARTMENT ISSUED SHOTGUN, P.O. PAUL AND P.O. GAINES FIRED ONE SOT FROM TEIR DEPARTMENT ISSUED HANGGUNS, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. P.O. [REDACTED] ENCOUNTERED A VICIOUS WHITE PITBULL IN THE BASEMENT AND FIRED HIS DEPARTMENT APROVED SHOTGUN 5 TIMES, ALL SHOTS TOOK EFFECT AND DESTROYED THE ANIMAL. AFTER THE HOUSE WAS DECLARED SAFE, CREW DETAINED NIKITA SMITH IN THE DINING ROOM. P.O. [REDACTED] RECOVERED BELOW LISTED MARIJUANA FROM THE KITCHEN STOVE TOP AND PLACED IN EVIDENCE. SGT [REDACTED] RECOVERED THE BELOW LISTED MARIJUANA FROM NE BEDROOM CLOSET, SGT [REDACTED] FORFEITED BELOW LISTED VEHICLE TO 2121 FORT STREET, TOWED BY V&F CONTROL #NW23053. MRS SMITH WAS ARRESTED AND CONVEYED TO DDC WITHOUT INCIDENT.

I guess it is a question now of whom do you wish to believe, Smith or all the members of the Detroit PD Narcotics Team.

Thanks to nolu chan … you now have a choice.

Well, Mr " I want the facts ". I reread the posted article, and went to the source link, and not once did I see " Pit Bull " spelled out. Yet you injected the word into your post. Why is that ? Simple, to inject fear so others will sympathize with the cops, and try to justify their actions. Because the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it.

Looks like you are making up shit there sarge. Not very truthful! Not a sign of " an intelligent person with general cognitive problem- solving skills ". More like a BSer, making up lies !

Two Pit Bulls and a Rottweiler - Source

Thank you. Thank you.

You're welcome.

According to Matt Agorist:

According to Smith, when the cops came to the door to tell her they had a warrant to look for marijuana, she asked them if she could secure the dogs. Smith put two dogs in the basement and locked one in the bathroom.

But the fact that the dogs were secured, did not matter to these cruel officers.

A half-dozen cops show up with a warrant to search an alleged drug den. The lady of the house answers their knock at the door, tells them she has three dogs, and asks if it is ok if she secures the dogs.

Presumably, they allow her to do this unaccompanied and return to tell them that it is safe and to invite them in for tea and crumpets.

In the Complaint at 4:

17. Next, Plaintiff Nikita Smith placed two of her dogs, Debo and Mama, in the basement and blocked the entryway to the basement.

18. Plaintiffs other dog, Smoke, was sequestered in the bathroom with the door closed.

19. Defendant police officers next entered the residence without permission.

20. Plaintiffs’ dog Debo got past the obstruction from the basement and sat next to Plaintiff Nikita Smith.

If one assumes the cops accompanied and supervised her in securing the dogs, the cops permitted her to leave the dogs free running in the basement, with an undescribed obstruction that would not obstruct a pitbull. And the harmless pitbull proceeded to, apparently noiselessly, overcome the undescribed obstacle, and sit by its owner's side, interrupting the tea and crumpets.

If one assumes the cops accompanied and supervised her in securing the dogs, the cops watched approvingly as she, without explanation, put two dogs in the basement and one in the bathroom.

Or, there was evidence of gunshots left behind and she had to come up with some explanation for how the supposedly secured dogs were shot — one in the living room, one in the bathroom and one in the basement.

If the cops did not supervise her securing the dogs, that is the damnedest police work ever on a drug search. Can I secure the dogs? Of course, ma'am, take your time, destroy all the evidence you can, and let us know when it is safe to enter. Thank you for your cooperation.

And darn, they had a warrant and entered without permission after the dogs were "sequestered."

Stoner: Because the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it.

It's entirely possible that Nikita Smith lied.

It is also entirely possible that ALL members of the Detroit PD Narcotics Squad lied.

I am not prepared to say who lied ... but obviously, someone did.

You read the article and now you have read the police report.

Do you stand by your statement "the cops were wrong, and everyone here knows it?"

If the cops did not supervise her securing the dogs, that is the damnedest police work ever on a drug search. Can I secure the dogs? Of course, ma'am, take your time, destroy all the evidence you can, and let us know when it is safe to enter. Thank you for your cooperation.

And darn, they had a warrant and entered without permission after the dogs were "sequestered."

I had the same reaction. My intuition told me all along that article stinks to high Heaven and smacked of a pseudo-journalist on a mission to prove an agenda.

Matt wrote an article based on the information he read in anther article. I'm sure that you have noticed this is common practice. One reporter will publish something and a multitude of other reporters will parrot it like they are the original source. That was why I had to laugh when Deckard posted two additional sources and told me they said the same thing as the article posted here.

I don’t think I missed anything.

Nor I.