News Curtis Scott

Didn't take long for him to develop the Canberra culture

 

[TheFrog]

Fair point, we should cast doubt over any arrest because you know, cops can kill and get away with it.

Under strictly defined circumstances.

 

[THE CHAMP]

Fair point, we should cast doubt over any arrest because you know, cops can kill and get away with it.

Wow

 

[Bobby DIGital]

Ok
Cops fault he was throwing punches at em.
Gotcha.

Ricky will be pleased.

They were probably Dylan Walker fans.

 

[BadnMean]

They were probably Dylan Walker fans.

If it was a lone cop I could almost believe that was a possibility... but I hope Curtis isn't relying on convincing a jury that there's two of them out there.

 

[wibble]

Why were the cops called mate?

Or do you think they randomly handcuff football players lying around?

I don't know why the cops were called. I assume because someone wanted them there, because someone else was threatening or upsetting them or their property.

It is not relevant to the point I was making.

I think cops do randomly assault people. Two just got stood down for doing that to a disabled pensioner in Victoria. So my point, in response to cops facing the law in this country, was that it was possible the police are in the wrong, as it happens.

And I also said Scott may be completely guilty.

And that there might be some overlap, in which case Scott will be the one who suffers, but over zealous cops may not "face the law".

I have no particular hate of police. The ones I know (only a few) are outstanding people. I have no particular love for football players, outside of what they do on the field. I don't know any first grade rugby league players personally.

I don't know why it is so hard to accept that it is possible the police over reacted, as they have done in the past, and will do in the future.

 

[THE CHAMP]

I don't know why the cops were called. I assume because someone wanted them there, because someone else was threatening or upsetting them or their property.

It is not relevant to the point I was making.

I think cops do randomly assault people. Two just got stood down for doing that to a disabled pensioner in Victoria. So my point, in response to cops facing the law in this country, was that it was possible the police are in the wrong, as it happens.

And I also said Scott may be completely guilty.

And that there might be some overlap, in which case Scott will be the one who suffers, but over zealous cops may not "face the law".

I have no particular hate of police. The ones I know (only a few) are outstanding people. I have no particular love for football players, outside of what they do on the field. I don't know any first grade rugby league players personally.

I don't know why it is so hard to accept that it is possible the police over reacted, as they have done in the past, and will do in the future.

This post is far too balanced and contains too much sense to be in here. Please delete immediately

 

[wibble]

Fair point, we should cast doubt over any arrest because you know, cops can kill and get away with it.

It is not any arrest we are concerned with.

High profile, pre planned, public arrests seem like they have enough checks and balances that they must mostly be OK. But late at night, no one around, easy target, "public nuisance"/"failure to comply" style arrests must be seen as at least potentially exaggerated or aggravated by police.

I don't know much about Scott, but what I do know makes it easy for me to suppose he was a drunken, violent idiot who was dealt with accordingly by police.

But you can't tell me most people haven't heard of late night incidents where police have basically been bullies to someone, hiding behind their badges (where police, to be fair, face a lot of unknown variables, drunken violence and tough conditions).

 

[Chief_Chujo]

If only there was a fairly recent, high profile case of Sydney police abusing their powers when arresting a person under the influence.

Oh wait there is.

There's a lot of naivety about police in this thread. Particularly in thinking they aren't prone to error or outbursts in an incredibly high pressure and regularly violent job.

 

[Mr Spock!]

I don't know why the cops were called. I assume because someone wanted them there, because someone else was threatening or upsetting them or their property.

It is not relevant to the point I was making.

I think cops do randomly assault people. Two just got stood down for doing that to a disabled pensioner in Victoria. So my point, in response to cops facing the law in this country, was that it was possible the police are in the wrong, as it happens.

And I also said Scott may be completely guilty.

And that there might be some overlap, in which case Scott will be the one who suffers, but over zealous cops may not "face the law".

I have no particular hate of police. The ones I know (only a few) are outstanding people. I have no particular love for football players, outside of what they do on the field. I don't know any first grade rugby league players personally.

I don't know why it is so hard to accept that it is possible the police over reacted, as they have done in the past, and will do in the future.

He was pissed and the cops were called because he was throwing things at cars eg his phone.

I'm sure he was much more sensible when the cops arrived and decided to annoy him.

 

[myrrh ken]

If only there was a fairly recent, high profile case of Sydney police abusing their powers when arresting a person under the influence.

Oh wait there is.

There's a lot of naivety about police in this thread. Particularly in thinking they aren't prone to error or outbursts in an incredibly high pressure and regularly violent job.

No one doubts police abuse their powers on occasion. Everyone knows about deaths in custody that particularly affect the indigenous.

But to nail your colours to the mast when his lawyer hasnt put out an alternative version of facts is a bit silly.

We know the charges, the police facts and that he has had issues in the past.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

No one doubts police abuse their powers on occasion. Everyone knows about deaths in custody that particularly affect the indigenous.

But to nail your colours to the mast when his lawyer hasnt put out an alternative version of facts is a bit silly.

We know the charges, the police facts and that he has had issues in the past.

I've not really taken a position either way. I dunno what happened. My opinion is its a disputed case and the footage will sort it out.

 

[THE CHAMP]

If only there was a fairly recent, high profile case of Sydney police abusing their powers when arresting a person under the influence.

Oh wait there is.

There's a lot of naivety about police in this thread. Particularly in thinking they aren't prone to error or outbursts in an incredibly high pressure and regularly violent job.

The qld police shot a killed a young bloke not far from where I lived a couple of years back. They claimed he pointed a gun at them. The victim was shot in the back however. There were no witnesses other than the police.

 

[wibble]

He was pissed and the cops were called because he was throwing things at cars eg his phone.

I'm sure he was much more sensible when the cops arrived and decided to annoy him.

So says one media report. And it is entirely feasible.

And it is also possible that the police were overly provocative.

And those things aren't mutually exclusive.

I've not really taken a position either way. I dunno what happened. My opinion is its a disputed case and the footage will sort it out.

I agree.

I haven't seen anyone say that Scott is definitely innocent and hard done by. But some of us who have suggested that there is a possibility that police were over reactive here, because they can be, are being told all sorts of reasons why this is not a disputed case and Scott is definitely totally and solely in the wrong.

The qld police shot a killed a young bloke not far from where I lived a couple of years back. They claimed he pointed a gun at them. The victim was shot in the back however. There were no witnesses other than the police.

This stuff terrifies me.

Every time I see an article about some "loony" killed by the police, I check for more details and often find very distressing information. Often the killed "perp" has mental health or diagnosed cognitive disabilities, just like my son. I can imagine it being him some day and it freaks me out.

 

[TheFrog]

The qld police shot a killed a young bloke not far from where I lived a couple of years back. They claimed he pointed a gun at them. The victim was shot in the back however. There were no witnesses other than the police.

The police who shot him may not have been the same police he was pointing his gun at.

 

[wibble]

It seems we have two kinds of discussion happening here.

Stories are leaking out that they cuffed him while asleep. He may have woke up cuffed and confused, struck out, ran and got copped a taser in the back. Cops are farked if thats the case.

Roundhouse, Headbutt? I dunno. I guess this is why he is fighting the charge. Theres footage from both bodycam and cctv so one side is bluffing.

...

Hope y'all know if Mr Scott begins civil proceedings against the NSW Police Force and decides to sue, and he has a favourable outcome, it's your tax dollars the Police will settle with; y'all know that, right?

bUt ThE pOlIcE nEvEr Do AnYtHiNg WrOnG tHeY hAvE ShInY bAdGeS aNd ThE tElEvIsIoN tElLs Me ThEy'Re ThE gOoD gUy hUh DuH

The common assault charge is a very common tact on charge for resisting arrest, stray arms, legs and elbows in the resist may strike the officer and they'll chalk it up.
Often those charges end up being dropped

Not saying that's what has happened here. But it's not uncommon. Scott's defence team have came out pretty hard about police conduct here, so this might be exactly what we all thought it was, or it could be something totally different. As @Chief_Chujo said, you'd think the body footage is pretty clear so someone here is bluffing.

Cops are called all the time for all sorts of stupid shit. A call isn't evidence of guilt. Neither is handcuffing, as plenty of cops abuse their powers.

FWIW Scott has said he was sitting, cuffed, when tasered. That suggests an abuse of power. Thankfully there are not one,but two sources of video evidence. So we should know pretty soon who's telling porkies.

I’m not going to defend Curtis here because it’s odds on he f**ked this up. However it is important for some posters on here to know that the police can kill you and receive little to no punishment.
It’s happened before and will happen again

​

If only there was a fairly recent, high profile case of Sydney police abusing their powers when arresting a person under the influence.

Oh wait there is

There's a lot of naivety about police in this thread. Particularly in thinking they aren't prone to error or outbursts in an incredibly high pressure and regularly violent job.

People who have agreed that Scott has a history of being an idiot, but who haven't claimed to know exactly what happened and are waiting on more evidence.

This group is saying that police have been known to abuse their power, just like Scott and other footballers have been known to do the wrong thing.​

 

[wibble]

And the other "camp".

How do you assault a police officer with your arms cuffed behind your back? Spit at them? Bite them?

How would he have punched them if cuffed?

Why do you keep calling him mr Scott as if you’re representing him? weirdo

I guess we’ll see, the best form of defence when you have nothing else is to attack obviously. Got a feeling “mr” eid might be clutching here

A lawyer talking his client up, who'da thunk it?

Yep poor Curtis.

It's not his fault the cops were called because he was acting a tool.

​

It's the cops fault.​

Why? Apparently hes thrown projectiles at cars. Maybe they shouldve woken him up with a latte and donut.

We all? Lmao.

This was a particularly odd attempt at a burn of Nick87, who as far as I could tell was suggesting "we all" shared Xcalibre's concern over Scott's behaviour and record.

Nor your’s you twit.

You’re acting like you have a vested interest in the case like Craigshark said. My guess is some boys in blue made you their bitch.

Tyrone May said he was not guilty as well.
Just been sentenced.

​

It does sound like that, doesn't it?

Agreeing with Xcalibre's edifying suggestion that police made Timmay "their bitch" (yet somehow we shouldn't suggest they abuse their powers).

Curtis is an upstanding guy and said he's not guilty.
Surely that's enough to say "case closed, he's innocent and it wuz da cops fault".

​

sure does.. mr timmay sounds like one of those f**ken annoying dip shits that stands 10 metres away from the police and yells out “I’m recording this” when he has absolutely no f**ken idea what is going on and then shits himself if the police go anywhere near him.

Back in the heat of the moment we heard Tyrone May was defending his charges as well. Yesterday he got 300 hours community service having pled guilty. Everyone charged comes out indignant at first. In the cold hard light of day when you see what they've got on you things are different.
This is not the US. If the cops have done something wrong, they will face the law. There are no huge civil damages payouts here.

​

What are you on bout?

clearly you have no idea what you are really talking about, so you probably shouldn’t comment. Just because he was tasered doesn’t automatically mean he gets refused bail.

you’re right, your understanding whatever that is of when a taser can be used is different to the police. It definitely doesn’t have to be life threatening.

we’ll soon see I guess. The police would have been wearing body cams and there will be footage from the taser also so it’ll be pretty obvious who’s at fault.

To be fair, this post does then suggest the case is not totally resolved yet.
​

 

[wibble]

Why were the cops called mate?
Or do you think they randomly handcuff football players lying around?

Lol...
Yep it's the cops fault.

Lol at people believing footballers.

Derp ...

No they don't.
I'm not interested in protecting dickheads.
...

Poor Curtis.....

Lol the Raiders tried to ring Curtis but he couldn't answer.
Wonder why that was?

Must've lost his phone.

Scott plead not guilty? Oh well if he says he didn’t do it the cops must be lying! What kind of logic f**k off you footy player apologists. The bloke was drunk as f**k obviously acting like a f**k wit.

But its not his go.​

As if anyone was defending Scott's past behaviour.

Punches a cop while on the piss
Punches another player while on the field but sober

Both have well documented repercussions.

the bloke is not worth the hassle for a footy club.

Ok
Cops fault he was throwing punches at em.
Gotcha.

Ricky will be pleased.

Fair point, we should cast doubt over any arrest because you know, cops can kill and get away with it.

He was pissed and the cops were called because he was throwing things at cars eg his phone.
I'm sure he was much more sensible when the cops arrived and decided to annoy him.

It seems to me this group believe:

A) Scott is absolutely guilty, there is no need to question police motives at all, the media reports are all completely true, the case is closed

B) Police don't abuse their authority, and if they do they are punished for it

C) Anyone who doesn't believe A and B deserves vitriol for daring to discuss things in an online forum

To be fair, some posters like myrrh ken have backed off a bit on the police can do no wrong bit.

And some people above have discussed some things a little more even handedly, they may feel I've misconstrued (not for the first time today, apparently) or cherry picked.

But really, we have a group saying Scott is a moron but police can do the wrong thing too, we don't yet know how much of each has happened. And another group saying Scott is guilty, the police were right, you guys are "d**ckheads" for suggesting otherwise. Judge for yourselves from the "conversations" who is trying to be reasonable and who is trying to out shout any who dare disagree with them.​

 

[betcats]

It is not any arrest we are concerned with.

High profile, pre planned, public arrests seem like they have enough checks and balances that they must mostly be OK. But late at night, no one around, easy target, "public nuisance"/"failure to comply" style arrests must be seen as at least potentially exaggerated or aggravated by police.

I don't know much about Scott, but what I do know makes it easy for me to suppose he was a drunken, violent idiot who was dealt with accordingly by police.

But you can't tell me most people haven't heard of late night incidents where police have basically been bullies to someone, hiding behind their badges (where police, to be fair, face a lot of unknown variables, drunken violence and tough conditions).

Pre planned? Lol you’re joking aren’t you? You’re basing all this bullshit off a not guilty plea? He had the police called on him by the public. People were around.

Everyone knows the cops can break the law I never said they can’t, but I find you’re above rant to be horseshit. I’m not casting doubt over this just because he has a “high profile” ie he is a footy player. Lawyers lie more than cops. Footy player do to, you won’t convince me otherwise.

All these raiders fans getting caught up on the not guilty plea, Jack Wighton claimed innocence also.

 

[carcharias]

Cops usually taser blokes doing nothing.

wake up.

 

[Canard]

Pre planned? Lol you’re joking aren’t you? You’re basing all this bullshit off a not guilty plea? He had the police called on him by the public. People were around.

Everyone knows the cops can break the law I never said they can’t, but I find you’re above rant to be horseshit. I’m not casting doubt over this just because he has a “high profile” ie he is a footy player. Lawyers lie more than cops. Footy player do to, you won’t convince me otherwise.

All these raiders fans getting caught up on the not guilty plea, Jack Wighton claimed innocence also.

I don't think you fully read @wibble post.