When did AP start trying cases?

[Ira_Schoffel]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

By Associated Press
Fri Aug 4, 12:13 AM

MIAMI BEACH, Fla. - Detroit Pistons center Dale Davis was shocked with a stun gun and charged with assault and disorderly conduct in an altercation with Miami Beach police.

Davis was arrested Tuesday at a Miami Beach hotel and accused of threatening police, security guards and shouting profanities, police said.

Chubby Wells, Davis' agent, said he plans to file a lawsuit against police for their treatment of the 15-year NBA veteran.

"It was so ridiculous, it's unbelievable," Wells said. "We're going to take a stand."

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

Davis played for Indiana, Portland and Golden State before joining the Pistons as a reserve last season. A Detroit spokesmen didn't return phone messages seeking comment Friday.

 

[Football_Bat]

For a minute I thought AP was switching to Latin.

Nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, ablative.

 

[Idaho]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

...

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

I hear what you're saying, but I can also see why the two citations underlined and bolded might do the trick.

 

[DyePack]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

...

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

I hear what you're saying, but I can also see why the two citations underlined and bolded might do the trick.

In your world, maybe.

 

[Ira_Schoffel]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

...

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

I hear what you're saying, but I can also see why the two citations underlined and bolded might do the trick.

Sorry, but one "police said" and one "according to the report" don't cover an entire story. Maybe one ensuing graph ... maybe one ... but not three.

 

[slappy4428]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

...

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

I hear what you're saying, but I can also see why the two citations underlined and bolded might do the trick.

In your world, maybe.

You are, beyond a doubt, the most negative asshole on this board. Bar none.

 

[DyePack]

http://www.comcast.net/sports/index.jsp?cat=SPORTS&fn=/2006/08/04/448723.html&cvqh=tis_davis

Check out the three graphs toward the bottom. Could we get a "police said" or "allegedly" or something?

...

Police were called to the hotel by the security workers and Davis was repeatedly asked to leave, but refused, according to the report.

After giving officers his identification, Davis and the officers went outside, where the 6-foot-11 player accused the officers of targeting him because he is black. Police said they asked Davis to remove his hands from his pockets for officer safety, and Davis complied after asking officers if they were going to shoot him.

Davis pulled out money, three cellular phones and credit cards. He put the items back in his pockets and said he'd beat up the officers if they took off their badges and got rid of their guns.

Davis then balled his fists and began walking toward officers in an aggressive manner, and he was warned that he would be hit with a Taser gun if he continued.

He didn't stop, and an officer used the stun gun to hit Davis in the chest and he fell to the ground. He was taken into custody and charged with assault, assault on a police officer, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.

I hear what you're saying, but I can also see why the two citations underlined and bolded might do the trick.

In your world, maybe.

You are, beyond a doubt, the most negative asshole on this board. Bar none.

It's basic, basic, basic journalism. I'd point this out to anyone.

But I'd certainly be a lot more tactful if I weren't dealing with a ****tarded prick who goes out of his way to be an asshole whenever possible. The latest is his joke of a post about an outing rule that he enforces whenever he feels like and either ****ing ignores or breaks himself the rest of the time.

But I guess if people don't want to be insulted, they should either learn the basics or stop throwing stones.

 

[slappy4428]

I dont see where he provoked you at all on this thread. A comment was made about the attribution -- set up by the two previous grafs.
You came back with a smarmy shot back for no reason other than "because he's an asshole."

If he shoots you down, then you have just cause.
Just because, however, is no reason.

You don't like selective enforcement? You have options. You might not like the options, but you have options -- the same as everyone else.
Treat people with civility occasionally and you might find you have a little more leeway.

In other words

"lighten up, Francis."

 

[DyePack]

I dont see where he provoked you at all on this thread. A comment was made about the attribution -- set up by the two previous grafs.
You came back with a smarmy shot back for no reason other than "because he's an asshole."

That sword cuts both ways. But I have no intention of treating someone with any civility when they go out of their way to be a prick consistently.

 

[Idaho]

I got no problems with requiring more attribution. I posted what I did to foster the debate, for the most part.

As for the other comments on the thread, well, consider the source.

 

[slappy4428]

I dont see where he provoked you at all on this thread. A comment was made about the attribution -- set up by the two previous grafs.
You came back with a smarmy shot back for no reason other than "because he's an asshole."

That sword cuts both ways. But I have no intention of treating someone with any civility when they go out of their way to be a prick consistently.

You're right. And when that person takes an uninitiated shot at you for no reason, he's fair game. But his job is also to play traffic cop and step in where he sees fit.
But I also see that he is not the person to take an unprovoked shot. He's not going to say "he hit me back first."
In other posts, you two might have disputes.
In this case, he did nothing to provoke you, nothing to provoke anyone -- yet you felt the need to jump in and hit him. If someone else, say "Tom Petty", had said the exact same thing, would you have honestly made that effort to take the shot? My guess is not.
Roll with things for a while. That's all. Dont take things personal.
To paraphrase a former assistant basketball coach at Indiana, "When someone calls you an asshole, ignore it. When they tell you why you are being an asshole, you might want to listen."

 

[DyePack]

As for the other comments on the thread, well, consider the source.

Which is what I was doing with your comment. Since IMO, your credibility is well below zero, I wouldn't listen to you if you told me it was night out.

"In your world, maybe" is really, really tame.

 

[DyePack]

I dont see where he provoked you at all on this thread. A comment was made about the attribution -- set up by the two previous grafs.
You came back with a smarmy shot back for no reason other than "because he's an asshole."

That sword cuts both ways. But I have no intention of treating someone with any civility when they go out of their way to be a prick consistently.

You're right. And when that person takes an uninitiated shot at you for no reason, he's fair game. But his job is also to play traffic cop and step in where he sees fit.
But I also see that he is not the person to take an unprovoked shot. He's not going to say "he hit me back first."
In other posts, you two might have disputes.
In this case, he did nothing to provoke you, nothing to provoke anyone -- yet you felt the need to jump in and hit him. If someone else, say "Tom Petty", had said the exact same thing, would you have honestly made that effort to take the shot? My guess is not.
Roll with things for a while. That's all. Dont take things personal.
To paraphrase a former assistant basketball coach at Indiana, "When someone calls you an asshole, ignore it. When they tell you why you are being an asshole, you might want to listen."

"In your world, maybe" is really, really tame.

 

[slappy4428]

You're right. It was tame. But, as proven in the next few posts, it was an unprovoked shot -- one with history behind it and delivered, as you yourself said, as an insult.
Because you disagree on a point (past history aside) doesn't mean you have to shred someone the first time every time.
Yeah, I'll give you occasionally. Not always.

You can deliver the solution without blurring the message every time

 

[DyePack]

You're right. It was tame. But, as proven in the next few posts, it was an unprovoked shot -- one with history behind it and delivered, as you yourself said, as an insult.
Because you disagree on a point (past history aside) doesn't mean you have to shred someone the first time every time.
Yeah, I'll give you occasionally. Not always.

Already asked and answered. The people who don't want to get shredded should either (1) Grow some nuts; (2) Don't say stupid ****; (3) Don't go around stirring the ****.

The ****tards who go around hinting for a fight with gutless questions are eventually going to get that fight.

 

[slappy4428]

You're right. It was tame. But, as proven in the next few posts, it was an unprovoked shot -- one with history behind it and delivered, as you yourself said, as an insult.
Because you disagree on a point (past history aside) doesn't mean you have to shred someone the first time every time.
Yeah, I'll give you occasionally. Not always.

Already asked and answered. The people who don't want to get shredded should either (1) Grow some nuts; (2) Don't say stupid ****; (3) Don't go around stirring the ****.

The ****tards who go around hinting for a fight with gutless questions are eventually going to get that fight.

You're right again. But you dont have to always start the fight; you don't always have to answer the bell.
You don't have to prove anything to anyone by always jumping in and shredding someone for saying what you observe as stupid ****, especially when it isnt always directed toward you.

 

[DyePack]

You're right. It was tame. But, as proven in the next few posts, it was an unprovoked shot -- one with history behind it and delivered, as you yourself said, as an insult.
Because you disagree on a point (past history aside) doesn't mean you have to shred someone the first time every time.
Yeah, I'll give you occasionally. Not always.

Already asked and answered. The people who don't want to get shredded should either (1) Grow some nuts; (2) Don't say stupid ****; (3) Don't go around stirring the ****.

The ****tards who go around hinting for a fight with gutless questions are eventually going to get that fight.

You're right again. But you dont have to always start the fight; you don't always have to answer the bell.
You don't have to prove anything to anyone by always jumping in and shredding someone for saying what you observe as stupid ****, especially when it isnt always directed toward you.

A good point, and since the back-and-forth here has served its purpose, I'm done.

 

[slappy4428]

You're right. It was tame. But, as proven in the next few posts, it was an unprovoked shot -- one with history behind it and delivered, as you yourself said, as an insult.
Because you disagree on a point (past history aside) doesn't mean you have to shred someone the first time every time.
Yeah, I'll give you occasionally. Not always.

Already asked and answered. The people who don't want to get shredded should either (1) Grow some nuts; (2) Don't say stupid ****; (3) Don't go around stirring the ****.

The ****tards who go around hinting for a fight with gutless questions are eventually going to get that fight.

You're right again. But you dont have to always start the fight; you don't always have to answer the bell.
You don't have to prove anything to anyone by always jumping in and shredding someone for saying what you observe as stupid ****, especially when it isnt always directed toward you.

A good point, and since the back-and-forth here has served its purpose, I'm done.

Agreed... just trying to help soothe an edgy night

 

[sirvaliantbrown]

On the original question: the AP tries cases all the time.

Jay Nordlinger regularly discusses hilariously subjective wire-service language - often from leads, no less - in his online National Review column.

I'm no staunch conservative, but Nordlinger's almost always right on these...and the problem he points out is often, again, the absence of attribution.

 

[Dog8Cats]

For a minute I thought AP was switching to Latin.

Nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, ablative.

That's classic! (Or, should I say, classical?)

Don't forget vocative.