A neighborhood incident

Dateline: Thu 21 May 2009

Dana Bradbury, as has been reported on this blog, is building a home with his wife in the Cottage Home area -- the first new construction since the Near Eastside neighborhood was declared an historic district in 2007.

Good stuff, yes? A spunky little Eastside enclave that's getting a new lease on life, plus its historic creds. Bradbury thinks so,  too. He's been in the Cottage Home area 12 years, and he grew up Downtown, in Lockerbie. Now an IT consultant, he's a product of IPS schools (Tech High) and he is dedicated to urban living. He and his wife are raising their family in Cottage Home.

He doesn't deserve points for any of that, he says. But he does expect to be treated civilly by police officers in the city where he lives, and expects that civility to be extended to all residents.

Bradbury's world view was rattled on April 18, when an elderly neighbor's complaint about a pile of bricks escalated into a visit by a hostile police officer that left Bradbury in handcuffs, feeling threatened with violence inside his own home and rattled to his core about police/citizen relationships.

Now, Bradbury and some of his friends and neighbors are asking not only why this particular police officer took a minor situation and made it much worse, but whether "the (Indianapolis Metropolitcan Police) department does not recognoize the systemic problem some folks feel exists."

Here's an abbreviated account of what happened with Bradbury, his neighbor and the police, as told by Bradbury and submitted in a formal complaint to the police. Bradbury has also sent his concerns to Mayor Greg Ballard, Director of Public Safety Scott Newman, Indiana Rep. John Day, the police of chief and others. Yes, he wants this story to circulate.

"The following incident occurrred Saturday, the 18th of April, 2009, between my neighbor, a police officer and myself, and has damaged the relationship between my community and the police.

"Sometime mid-morning, I had a friend comb the dirt pile behind the house at 1126 East 9th Street  (the address of Bradbury's  new house) to remove bricks in preparation for grading the yard. I had the bricks stacked ....on grass next to the city alley. They were not blocking traffic and were to be picked up later that day by another neighbor.

"That afternoon, my elderly neighbor to the west, Florida Wilbur, whom I have known for years, emerged from her house to yell at me for dumping the bricks on her yard. She was obviously upset as I tried unsuccessfully to explain the situation to her. As further attempts...were useless, I returned to work on my house."

Twenty minutes later, says Bradbury, the elderly woman's daughter and son-in-law arrived. "Uninvited and unannounced, the son-in-law entered my house and proceeded to yell at me without allowing me to explain...A few minutes later, a police officer arrived."

The officer entered Bradbury's house without "asking permission or introducing himself." Rather than allow Bradbury to explain, says Bradbury, he told Bradbury he had to remove the bricks. When Bradbury tried to say that's what he was planning to do, the officer, he says, accused him of having an attitude.

Bradbury acknowledges he was frustrated and annoyed. But his concern is that "this officer simply could not let the situation settle."

The policeman told Bradbury to step outside the house and show some ID. Bradbury says he asked if he needed ID in his own house, and was told he did. "When I turned to go into the house to retrieve my wallet, he pushed me against the door and handcuffed me." The officer told Bradbury's friends that, when Bradbury tried to enter the house, he was resisting arrest.

When one friend asked the officer for his badge ID, he, too was threatened with arrest.

By this time, several neighbors and friends of Bradbury's had gathered, in addition to those who were there initially helping him. They pleaded with the officer on Bradbury's behalf. Bradbury remembers the officer said that one woman's defense would probably "save me."

Bradbury cannot get over the irony of the confrontation: the police officer would not permit him to talk, yet when Bradbury attempted to retrieve his ID as requested, the officer accused Bradbury of ignoring him. It was a lose-lose situation.

"He allowed communication to completely break down," says Bradbury.

Because Bradbury was never arrested, there is no police incident on file. However, one of Bradbury's friends did get the officer's badge number and they later learned his name -- No. 2126, J. Walters.

"In a very short time, this man damaged the critical communication and trust that must exist between law enforcement and civillians. Now every time I see a police officer...I look the other way, hoping to avoid any interaction."

The incident also destroyed was what formerly a good neighbor relationship with the elderly woman, says Bradbury. "This could have been avoided. The officer had a chance to help us resolve what was essentially a  misunderstanding. He could have acted as a mature mediator and calming force to help us resolve the issue in a respectful manner to all..."

An isolated incident? Bradbury has been talking to neighbors and other East Side residents, and he does not believe so. "These sorts of encounters are increasing and are making life worse for all of us, citizens and police alike. The people in our community are becoming more distrustful of the police, and this will lead to more dangerous encounters as the police face an increasingly anxious citizenry."

For the record: Cottage Home is in the Northeast District for IMPD, although it's still referred to as the East District. The neighborhood is bounded by 10th, Oriental and Michigan Streets and I-70.

Comments

i like cheese [Member] said:

I know Dana; I've known him for years. You'll never meet a guy who's nicer and more community minded. He's always willing to lend a hand and help out.

Sounds like the police officer got it in his head that he was going to "teach Dana a lesson". Unless I misunderstand "To serve and protect", I'm not sure lesson teaching is in their job description. Are they cops or second grade teachers?

2009-05-21 12:48:11

hendy [Member] said:

Civil litigation might remedy the injury, but exposing it here, thusly, may do the trick.

It'll be 'fixed' by local government, somehow, just like the BMV is fixed, FSSA is fixed, and so on. Patience is the toll for civility.

2009-05-21 15:15:18

varangianguard [unverified] said:

Unfortunately, for every police officer that is correctly trained and suited for police work, there seems to be a corresponding number who either lack sufficient training or who shouldn't be patrol officers at all.

Currently (and as for as long as I can remember), there is no effective forum for this kind of behavior to be addressed. Commanders, chiefs, PSDs and mayors all keep a broom handy to make sure these things get swept under the proverbial rug.

Litigation may provide a monetary remedy, but the memory will be forever and the behavior of the police won't be modified by taxpayers paying out a settlement.

2009-05-21 16:49:45

Pete [unverified] said:

Anyone do a search to see if this officer has had similar incidents in how he has interacted with the public?

I wonder if this officer has been told about the Matthew Faber/Fred Sanders tragedy about 20 years ago. If Faber hadn't completely escalated a minor dispute all out of proportion, would Sanders have ended up shooting him in the back? Not justifying what Sanders did, nor am I saying that your friend would have pulled a gun, but sometimes police zeal to avoid potentially dangerous situations actually cause them.

2009-05-21 17:53:48

Darren [unverified] said:

With the advent of Twitter and Facebook and, of course, blogs like this, these stories are being told and shared. I'm about to post it to my Twitter feed and facebook where it will meet over 500 potential viewers who may also pass it on. Perhaps some justice will be sped along by this exposure.

2009-05-21 18:24:45

hendy [Member] said:

Civil litigation sounds like a drain on taxpayer's funds. Certainly prevention is a better step. Yet heads don't roll unless there's lots of $$$ and incumbent embarrassment these days. It's just the way things are. The above mentioned rug where many things are swept is a steep price to pay.

I hate to put a price tag on dignity-- but dignity is a part of liberty, and robbing one robs the other.

2009-05-21 18:51:02

i like cheese [Member] said:

@pete:

The Sanders incident was the first thing I thought of when Dana related this story to me. It's dissimilar in the sense that Dana's not crazy (unlike Sanders), but the other similarities are striking. A dispute between neighbors was escalated into violence by a cop who didn't know how to (or simply didn't care to) deescalate the situation.

The cop told Dana that he was going to show him how things were done "down here" (or something to that effect). If the police can get away with doing something like this to a guy like Dana, what can't they get away with?

2009-05-21 19:07:39

ruthholl [Member] said:

Darren, thank you for continuing to distribute this story. It is important, and this is citizen journalism at work.
Again, thanks.

2009-05-21 19:58:37

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Varan, you're right about a few blockheads in IMPD, but it's not nearly a 1-for-1 ratio.

I had a very talented IMPD officer defuse a sticky situation with a gun being waved about by two 13-year-olds last summer. Turns out the guns were fake, but it was dusk, and no one knew any better. Honest to God, it could've been a tragedy, but the officer used his noggin, and without a massive police presence, three total officers got control in about ten minutes.

The kids were arrested. But their mouthiness at the outset was a primer in all-out violence. I was very impressed with IMPD. Even though their mouths wrote checks they couldn't cash, it would've been a huge tragedy if they'd gotten shot over some attitude and fake guns. Which might have happened if Officer Walters got the call.

When an officer over-reacts, as it appears happened in the case posted, unfortunately, the only thing the city understands is being forced to write a check.

Good luck with the complaint process. It's usually a complete waste of time.



2009-05-21 21:27:13

Too many stories like this [unverified] said:

I've lived in this urban community on the city's near eastside for 17 years and am so saddened and shocked to hear similar stories of police dominance and mishandling for two incredibly innocent acts by to very responsible, very kind, individuals. This tells me clearly that these cases are not at all isolated and that we most definitely have something to fear in a police department that makes a judgement about a situation without bothering to hear from one of the par the parties. . Yes, their first prioirty should be to diffuse the situation, not escalate it!

2009-05-22 00:09:29

Pete [unverified] said:

Weirdly enough, Fred Sanders was actually my fourth grade teacher. Unlike basically everyone else from my parish community, I wasn't at all surprised at his actions that night.

2009-05-22 08:44:39

Cottagehomie [unverified] said:

I was very surprised to see the policeman involved was officer Walters. He responded to several break-in at my house last winter and he did not seem like the sort to be so rude and agressive.

2009-05-22 09:57:38

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Yeah, Pete...Fred was an odd duck But he didn't deserve his fate. No one does.

2009-05-22 13:33:16

David [unverified] said:

Please keep us posted on this; I'd like to know how it turns out.

2009-05-22 13:38:15

i like cheese [Member] said:

@pete

Man, we must have led parallel lives. I went to St. Luke for 2 years; 5th and 6th grade, so I just missed Fred. But my overwhelming impression of him was that he was psychotic. The stories of him ripping up phone books in front of the class and breaking desks? He screamed at me, at the top of his friggin' lungs, for pounding on a locked door. It was winter, I was locked outside, and I was trying to get into the school.


I can't say I was surprised at what happened to Fred. The guy really had anger issues. That's not to imply he deserved it. And the cop certainly didn't deserve it either. I think my point is that if you are the police, you can't escalate a situation as your first course of action. It doesn't matter that officer Walters is a nice guy and maybe he was having a bad day. When you carry a gun and are entitled to use deadly force, you don't _get_ to have a bad day.

2009-05-22 15:09:45

Pete [unverified] said:

Good to see we're in agreement about the Fred Sanders situation. Neither he nor the cop deserved their fates, but both of them consciously made choices to escalate the situation, and the cop had even less excuse to do so.

I sort of pegged Sanders as possibly being not the best role model for children when he would feed rats to his boa constrictor during recess. Or maybe it was the time he showed up to school with a black eye. Man, St. Luke was a seriously dysfunctional place.

2009-05-22 15:58:16

i like cheese [Member] said:

God, St. Luke. How I hated, hated, hated that place. If there ever was a place with a bigger concentration of dickheads, I haven't found it.

2009-05-22 17:20:48

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Wow. St. Luke, the physician saint....heal thyself, huh?

2009-05-23 09:30:24

Downtown resident [unverified] said:

The is becoming more common and nothing will be done...Ballard has no clue and Scott Newman works full time to cover up for public safety. If the public ever finds out what the new director ['Doug Rae] is doing at Animal Care and Control that facility would be shut down....Newman knows and continues to cover it up and make excuses...OHSA, PETA, SPCA all are doing investigations and one day soon it will happen. The IMPD believe they elected Ballard and now he owes them and nothing will happen.

2009-05-25 14:15:49

Unigov [unverified] said:

The cop sounds like every IPD cop I've ever dealt with, like in getting a speeding ticket or at an accident scene. They act like they've got something to prove.

2009-05-25 15:29:31

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

I had hoped the anti-IMPD thing had passed in this city. Obviously it hasn't. WHich is sad for all concerned.

It is true that IMPD thinks they elected Ballard. The election wasn't a runaway--their support could've been the difference.

Ask any mayor in history: any group that thinks they "elected you" ultimately turns on you or makes your life very difficult.


2009-05-25 15:35:28

hendy [Member] said:

There are very few places where there <em>isn't</em> police contention with the public. Between Peterson's lack of negotiation with the union, and polarization with the former sheriff's department, there are some angry people out on the streets on patrol.

It takes years of positive and concerted efforts to get a positive image going for public safety people. But that takes leadership, and as constantly is demonstrated around the area, no guts and no glory.

2009-05-25 16:46:04

SuburbanDad [unverified] said:

Preciously the reason (well one of them) I moved out of Marion county. The sentiment from law enforcement in Marion county is that there are "bigger problems than yours".

I moved to the 'burbs to escape less crime, to a place with more family values, to a place where public servants are able to devote time and effort building community relations, instead of having to deal with "bigger problems". This story justifies my decision.

2009-05-26 07:44:56

Hmm? [unverified] said:

While I do believe that not all police officers are perfect I do believe that the majority are trying. There are always two side to every story. I do certainly wonder if Mr. Bradbury is such a wonderful comunicator and stalwart of the community, why in fact was the police called in the first place. Obviously had Mr. Bradbury just removed the bricks the first time he was asked, this blog would not exist. Knowing that the neighbors children had to intervene after a twenty minute cool down leads me to believe that Mr. Bradbury's explanation may have been a little more heated than he is letting on. I also wander if upon the officers arrival Mr. Bradbury got even more upset at the escalating situation, and was not as cooperative as he may lead us to believe.

In the end if Mr.Bradbury would have just respected his neighbors wishes none of this would have happened. Also, it sounds to me like only his pride was hurt and nothing else.

Not knowing what else happened, I'll bet that after the cuffs were taken off he moved the bricks!

2009-05-27 12:58:35

Witness [unverified] said:

@Hmm?

You're right, no one is wholly blameless. Dana could have moved the bricks when the neighbor first complained, and he could have used a more respectful tone of voice when talking to Officer Walters. Of course, the neighbor could have been friendlier and not called the police especially since the bricks weren't on her property and were to be collected by another neighbor that afternoon. Her son-in-law could've politely knocked on the door and discussed the situation like an adult instead of just walking into Dana's house and yelling at him for several minutes while the son-in-law's wife yelled through the door at the same time until the officer arrived. And then there's the behavior of Officer Walters. He could have respectfully knocked before entering the house. He could've introduced himself and discussed the matter calmly with the desire to resolve the dispute in a peaceful manner. Instead, Officer Walters just entered the house, told Dana to move the bricks, and then proceeded to threaten to write lots of tickets. Not surprisingly, this didn't deflate Dana's anger. Even though he said all the right things ("I will move the bricks" and "I put them out there this morning and am moving them this afternoon"), Dana said them with an angry tone.

The incident was originally about the placement of some bricks, but Walters turned it into an issue of pride and decided he was going to prove to himself that he was the stronger man and force Dana's attitude to change. Immediately, Walters demanded ID from Dana in his own house, ordered him out on the porch, hand-cuffed him, and proceeded to yell in his face with such comments as "You think you can have an attitude with me?" and "I'll show you what the police are like down here." He had lost his temper. He was red-faced, yelling, and threatened to arrest Dana and others who tried to talk on Dana's behalf. This was an abuse of power any way you look at it, and this is what makes the whole incident so serious.

Yes everyone shares some of the blame, but Officer Walters escalated it to a new level with his forceful, hands-on and verbal abuse. I don't think all police officers are like this. Some are actually mature and practice self-control. Officer Walters is not one of those, and it's naive to think he's the only one like this. This needs to be dealt with or things will continue to worsen.

Prior to this incident, Dana had fixed the neighbor's furnace, mowed her lawn, and that very morning had paid someone to sweep up the street in front of her house. I guess calling the police was her way of showing her appreciation.

And no, Dana didn't move the bricks after he was freed. It was a sad picture. The police officer, who could have brought peace to all involved, angrily lecturing a hand-cuffed, quiet citizen, while his supportive neighbors were loading the bricks ten feet behind the police officer's back and moving them out of the alley.

2009-05-28 13:41:22

Anonymous [unverified] said:

@ @Hmm?

Let me guess, you are a cop. Every time, EVERY time something like this happens, that is the answer you always get from them: "two sides to every story.

It does not matter whether the "incident" is fully on tape, whether there is ample context on tape too. It's always "two sides", or those magical head "distraction blows"

That cop was confrontational and hell bent on his course of action. I guess it's true: huge egos and "if you are not a cop you are a perp" mentality.

2009-05-28 22:22:34

Benjamin Darrington [unverified] said:

The police are not your friends and it's time we all realized this. Don't act surprised when the people you give power without accountability run rough-shod over the rights of others.

Nor is this an "isolated event" or a "few bad apples" as is inevitably claimed when these sorts of events are publicized. Radley Balko at theagitator.com does a good job of publicizing this sorts of abuses.

2009-05-28 23:55:07

anonymous [unverified] said:

The fastest growing American demographic - elderly women.Why this is a sign of the times? 1.)many older folks are socially isolated. 2.)old taking more number of 'meds',with side effects. 3.)people are unknowingly rude to the elder; are driving too fast. 4.)arrogance from former 'glory days.' 5.)second childhood - mono-mania one idea. 6.)fearful from watching too much TV. 7.)book "Bowling Alone" 8.)pension cuts 9.)EVIL Neighbor

2009-05-29 03:00:23

kt [unverified] said:

Most peaceful citizens of our community do not have the experience of multiple run-ins with IMPD as the previous bloggers, and do not share this bias or metality of "corrupt law enforcement." Maybe if laws aren't broken or neighbors disrespected there would be less to blog about.

The incident stems from a construction site in a historic neighborhood near an elderly woman's house. If the elderly woman felt threatened enough to ask her son to come by, then still in need of IMPD for Dana to comply with her request then maybe we should all be looking at Dana's behavior more carefully.

If I were to be moving into a new neighborhood I would be doing all I could to have positive interactions with my neighbors. Moving bricks for an old woman seems the very least if you look at the larger picture. Just think, now Dana will be living next to neighbors who have already had to call the police. I have lived in my Broad Ripple neighborhood for 7 years and have had no police at my doorstep- anyone else?

Also if a police officer came by to discuss a matter where I felt I was certainly in the right I would have no trouble doing as the officer asked without talking back or attitude. As a parent and a teacher I know nothing gets under my skin more than when a student or my daughters back talk to me after a request.

Dana himself even said he was "frustrated and annoyed." Which after many arguments with his neighbors I am sure is a simplified version of his feelings and the tone in which he addressed the officer.

Yes officers are there to serve and protect but that is for the whole community, not just Dana. What about the elderly neighbor with whom Dana disagreed and walked away from. The police were called to serve and protect her this time. The outcome was that the bricks were removed.

I think what is at the heart of the story is Dana's ego. He is probably very embarrassed as he should be that an old lady had to call the cops in his new neighborhood in front of many other new neighbors and friends.

As a teacher and another public servant I cringe at the thought that every time someone doesn't get their way or has their ego deflated their first thought is "Sue! Litigate! Make them pay!" Why would anyone even think to prolong a ridiculous incident like this all the way to a court room. Get over it. You will be happy the next time when YOU call the police and they respond so quickly and assist you in whatever disturbance you have: theft, break-ins, unruly neighbors...

2009-05-29 17:07:44

gmoore [unverified] said:

lets get this right, dana bradbury was yelled at by his neighbor and her family who followed him into his home, Yet the police went after him and and not the trespassers.....sounds strange to me, just maybe ole brad was very upset by the time the officer arrived and wanted to take it out on him......

2009-05-29 17:54:18

i like cheese [Member] said:

@kt

But that's not what happened at all. Dana has lived in that neighborhood for years. He's helped his elderly neighbor on many occasions: mowing the grass, having the front walk swept, etc. The bricks weren't on her property. They were on a public easement.

As to your point about "talking back" and your relationship with your students, that's a completely different animal. Adults and children have a completely different relationship than two adults. Two adults, a citizen and a police officer, should be able to have a heated, yet civil, dialog without the police officer blowing a gasket. The relationship between teacher/student isn't an appropriate analogy between cop/citizen. Officer Walter clearly felt disrespected and it seems like his primary motivation was to rectify his perceived disrespect rather than understand the situation at hand. A elderly neighbor was complaining about bricks on a public easement. The neighbor responsible for the bricks assured her they would be moved by the end of the day. For whatever reason, this didn't satisfy her. She called her son-in-law and the police. The son-in-law trespassed on Dana's property and behaved in a threatening manner. These are the facts and they are not in dispute. The officer clearly had a different agenda in mind.


2009-05-30 21:16:02

kt [unverified] said:

Are you allowed to put your construction materials on public property? I think legally......no. Maybe the ally where he put the bricks was being used by his neighbors to drive to their homes. Maybe the neighbors around him have listened to loud sawing, nailing....and then to disregard a request was the last act of insensitivity that finally "broke the camel's back."

My comparison to teacher/student, mother/daughter or if you like employee/employer. It is a person of authority in whatever environment being disrespected when trying to solve a problem. There are certain "rules" most of us were taught when speaking to aperson of authority: your mother, your father, a cop, a teacher, your boss...I would never use a raised voice in any of these situations. And to talk back or show attitude would be inconceivable.

Again if Dana's relationship with this woman that he has " helped" on so many other occasions was friendly, I doubt her first her course of action would be to get a male family member and a cop to address the issue.

And apparently we have "key witnesses" blogging today. Let me get this right: The family member and the cop opened his front door without knocking and searched Dana out in his own home. I am thinking that since the home is not complete that there might not be this definable boundary of a door where all these peole just came and trespassed.

I also think you should read the entry from the cop on Ruth's blog. There are procedures cops follow to investigate a disturbance that was called in. When one party is uncooperative it is certainly hard to investigate.

2009-05-31 18:43:18

witness2 [unverified] said:

After much soul-searching about my intentions (to be sure I was not simply reacting emotionally to defend a friend), I feel compelled, as a witness to the incident, to write. This issue warrants thoughtful discussion, and this requires as few assumptions as possible. Please allow me to address several of the assumptions posted.

First, please do not assume that those involved do not appreciate the protection the police provide or understand the dangers inherent in their work. Officers must often use force to ensure personal and community safety. This power, however, comes with the responsibility to tailor a response to each situation and to use force judiciously. In this case, the police officers’ actions did not match the situation. Dana was in no way physically or verbally threatening. His demeanor was frustrated but not angry or disrespectful. The police officer described his role in such disputes as a “blunt force”; his actions (lack of de-escalation strategies, use of handcuffs, and verbal berating) reflected this.

Second, please do not assume that Dana will now “live next to neighbors who have already had to call the police” in his “new neighborhood.” Dana has been living in Cottage Home (three houses from this neighbor) for over ten years. He has helped her (and others) on countless occasions. I understand that many posting here do not know Dana. If you do not, please do not make assumptions about his character; this is infuriating. In fact, I would challenge you to find a Cottage Home resident who does not respect and appreciate Dana's work and dedication to the area. I don't believe that person exists.

Third, please do not assume that Dana “refused an IMPD officer’s request for ID.” He did not. Dana initially questioned the need for ID in his home, but then turned to retrieve the ID. His compliance resulted in being handcuffed. It appears that Dana’s offense was not having prior experience to know not to move when the ID was requested; this expectation was not communicated by the officer. So the statement that “the whole thing could’ve been dialed down a notch if the citizen had given up his ID” is misinformed. I would instead argue that this “whole thing” could have been avoided if the officer had communicated his expectations appropriately.

Finally, as citizens of a free society, please, please do not assume that "only his (Dana's) pride was hurt and nothing else." Being confined against your will is a big deal. Losing the freedom to respond, to defend yourself verbally, to move as you wish - that is a big deal. Forgetting this is dangerous.

So, please, let’s have a productive conversation about this issue, even if we disagree on many points. But let’s not base the discussion on misguided assumptions. And let’s not assume that any person in such a situation “deserved it.” There are many individuals with less of a voice than Dana who are faced with these abuses of power. As citizens of a free society, that should alarm us all.

2009-06-01 08:48:15

kt [unverified] said:

@witness2

Nobody forgets that this was dangerous, least of all the older woman and the police officer. As in another bloggers connection they brought up an incident where an officer was shot and killed in a minor disturbance at a residence. I am sure when an emotional person walks away from an officer that the officer has to take certain precautions to make sure the situation is safe. Handcuffing may seem severe but as I said before there was incident where an officer lost his life.

If you continue to bring up the cop's role to de-escalate the situation I will also remind you of the ridiculousness of the problem itself.Dana should have moved the bricks! He should have done it when the neighbor asked him. he should have done when the son-in-law came. If it was escalated it was Dana being stubborn and difficult that escalated this.

Also if you read the many blogs previously written you will see many people who underappreciate the pollice dept. This "all cops are corrupt" shows a complete disregard that everyday j.Walters and others risk their livesin much larger crime scenes to protect you!

Dana must remember that when cops are called to a scene it is no morea little thing. It is serious and he must behave accordingly. Questioning an officer's requests is not a good way to start. I also think that when you say "Dana's actions were also not threateninng physically or verbally" your friendship has clouded your memory a bit. Dana even metion how "frustrated and annoyed" he was when speaking with the officer. So there is no assumption.

2009-06-02 15:53:43

Comments are closed.

Login

or Register

Search

Syndicate Blog