Browsing this Thread:
3 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
 
|
was it all BS? maybe he did or said something to cause them to think that he needed a psychiatric evaluation. as someone who knows this guy, and knows how he tends to tell half-truths about incidents in order to make himself look better, i have to say that this all doesn't add up.
Posted on: 2008/3/15 1:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2005/3/21 21:42 Last Login : 2017/6/22 20:18 From Van Vorst Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
170
 |
slacky, you sound like a fun guy on that 1010 interview. in any case my opinion is the whole thing is BS. you were exactly right, that paramedic wanted to be some sort of hero. what a joke. to top it off, its typical of the police to blow the situation out of proportion and then have the gall to say you have to walk home when they realized it was all BS. i wish you the best. cheers.
Posted on: 2007/10/28 2:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
To the apologists:
Let's take the EMT's actions at face value. S/he (they) responded to a call from a man who seems to be in some sort of psychological distress. They find what they believe to be potentially deadly bombs on the premises. What do they do? Run away and call the cops. What if Slacky really was a mad bomber, and now knew that his plot was uncovered? In the intervening 10-15 minutes (by Slacky's account) that occured between the EMT's leaving and the po-lice showing up, Slacky could have easily lobbed the grenades at neighboring houses, Lucky 7s, or probably, running at full clip, made it to the Grove Street Path and destroyed a car full of yipsters. Why didn't the EMTs call for backup if they were so concerned, and then stalled Slacky while it arrived? It seems to me that the EMT's acted incredibly incompentently based on the perceived threat. In a post 9-11 world, we all need to act with greater vigilance, and, when tough times demand it, heroism in the face of the global threat of terrorbombers, evilaxisers, and islamobanditoes. I feel that the people of Jersey City should rise up and demand that the cowardly and inept actions of these EMTs be investigated thoroughly, and that all members of emergency response units be trained in ways to handle potential bomberistas. Thank the angel Gabriel and the gods of the Homeland that Slacky was just an irressponsible foreigner idiotically collecting perfectly legal but easily mistakeable detritus of the american war machine, and not a nineelevenistermujadeenfighter, because this easily could have been Jersey City's own 10-26.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 23:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2004/3/11 23:46 Last Login : 2011/10/29 16:00 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
150
|
An excellent tract on the concept of "exigent circumstances can be found here (and reproduced in part below): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_seizure
Quote: Courts have also established an "exigent circumstances " exception to the warrant requirement. "Exigent circumstances" simply means that the officers must act quickly. Typically, this is because police have a reasonable belief that evidence is in imminent danger of being removed or destroyed. Exigent circumstances may also exist where there is a continuing danger, or where officers have a reasonable belief that people in need of assistance are present. From what's been described in this thread, the EMT personnel were legally present on the premises and most likely have an obligation to contact the police under the circumstances described. They did absolutely the right thing -- it's not even debatable -- and so did the police. Alb, there's no illegal search and seizure issue here... and there's no practical way to go running for a search warrant as you described following a report of possibly unexploded munitions by the EMT personnel who were lawfully present and on their official business. Delay under these circumstances would be close to unconscionable given the potential danger to others. Unfortunately, in a post 9/11 world, I would rather have our emergency professionals err on the side of caution. I have to agree with workin_hard 100%.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 23:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
So let me get this straight. You vilify the EMT for not recognizing a deactivated grenade even though this guy is a medical professional and not trained to recognize explosives. Does that mean we get to log on to a public internet forum and start pissing and moaning about what an idiot you are for not being able to realize the difference between a life threatening situation and a panic attack?
So here is this guy who saw something and was smart enough to say ?Gee, I don?t know what the real story is here this guy might be jerking me around or they really might be duds, but it?s enough of a concern that I?m going to find someone who is trained in this sort of thing to figure it out.? And you malign him for that? I find this rather funny considering that because you didn?t know exactly know what was going on with your medical condition you proceeded to call the people who would and then you libel them in this forum for doing the same thing. Shame on you Mr. Slack. I?m sorry that you were caused the trouble that you were, and you do seem to have a lot going on in your life at the moment. But, to stoop so low as you have in this forum and in the media is despicable. This is a group of individuals that probably don?t get paid all that well, that were out protecting and serving the residents of our community while most of us were asleep, and because you got inconvenienced due to an unfortunate set of circumstances you see fit to throw a public temper tantrum? I for one am thrilled that we have emergency personnel out there that are as eagle eyed as the EMT that was in your apartment the other night. You owe him and his colleagues and apology.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 21:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
If the EMT was -rightly or wrongly - concerned about the POSSIBILITY of explosive devices in the apartment he had little other recourse than to call the cops.
When the cops, as they are required to do, investigated the complaint, they seem to have decided that "Exigent Circumstances" (an emergency situation where the process of getting a valid search warrant could compromise public safety) existed. A search warrant is not needed when "Exigent Circumstances" exist. Handcuffing the individual was a reasonable precaution given the complaint he was harboring explosives. Overreacting is in the eye of the beholder I suppose. Cops always react with a worst case scenario in mind. Part of their training, as well as their "better safe than sorry" attitude. That?s why they can be jumpy when they stop cars for running a red light and so on. I would agree that leaving him unprotected in the weather for a long time, as well as not apologizing and/or explaining when it was all over are certainly problems. And giving little or no information to the people being evacuated seems like a decision bound to cause problems, I wonder why they did it that way, and at what level of command the decision to do so was made.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 20:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Ohh, can I play biased summary as well?
Quote:
A person having physical pain calls 911 for help Quote:
The EMT from the ambulance sees two items that were told to him were paper weights. The EMT was also shown that that the devices had a hole straight through. Quote:
The EMT calls the cops and does NOT say that the person who called for physical pain mentioned that the devices are paper weights and does not describe the devices as having holes through them. He tells the cops that the person has two deadly devices. Quote:
The cops go to the house and over react by calling multiple units and a bomb squad. Quote:
The cops hand cuff and detain the individual without offering anything to help from the weather. They also remove everyone on the block from their homes without telling them what is happening. Quote:
The cops then illegally search the apartment without securing a warrant. Quote:
The cops confirm that indeed, someone suffering from physical pain has collected two paper weights. For some reason they keep the person detained, hand cuffed, and sent away from his home without his consent. They continue to illegally search the home without a warrant. Quote:
They confirm, as described from the person, that nothing is amiss and the individual is released without an apology for the mistreatment.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 19:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Quote:
You've left out the part about bringing Slackey to the hospital, handcuffing him to a bed, and the threat to test him for psychological problems. Well, my version was admittedly a very condensed one, so perhaps you didn't connect Quote: The cops hold onto the individual and Quote: and they continue carefully checking the apartment for a while to holding Slackey in the hospital Quote: and the threat to test him for psychological problems. Quote: All of which happened AFTER the paper-weights were determined to be paper weights. Quote: Your version of reality skews stupid.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 17:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
@realist
Quote:
You've left out the part about bringing Slackey to the hospital, handcuffing him to a bed, and the threat to test him for psychological problems. All of which happened AFTER the paper-weights were determined to be paper weights. Your version of reality skews stupid.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 16:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Why is there even any controversy here? Everyone seems to agree that this is the correct sequence of events:
A person having emotional difficulties calls an ambulance. The EMT from the ambulance sees two items he thinks might be explosive devices. The EMT calls the cops and tells them about it. The cops go to the house with a reasonable belief that there may be at least two explosive devices in an apartment. The cops hold onto the individual and evacuate the area. The cops then carefully check the apartment for explosive devices. The cops confirm that indeed, someone having emotional difficulties has collected two deactivated hand grenades. For some reason this raises their concern and they continue carefully checking the apartment for a while, to ensure there are no actual hand grenades or other explosive articles. This takes a while to complete. They confirm nothing is amiss, and the individual is released. Naturally the cops come into a great deal of criticism because they are so incompetent, rude, and paranoid. Clearly they should have told the EMT to mind his own darn business; instead they inconvenienced the apartment residents and made a lot of unnecessary commotion in a quite neighborhood, their unreasonable overreaction disturbing everyone for absolutely no reason. Darn cops.
Posted on: 2007/10/27 15:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Moderator
 
Joined:
2004/1/6 7:40 Last Login : 2021/9/18 2:12 From Beautiful Downtown Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
204
|
I will assume that the EMT person was truly concerned by the situation and what they saw in the home. The proper police response if they were to expect the worst and presume innocence would be to wake up a judge and have them sign a search warrant. They would go to the home and once Slacky answered the door unarmed with his hands raised they could present him with the warrant. Slacky would have complied and invited the officers in to view the grenades.
Even without warrant the police could have done exactly the same thing because Slacky was going to comply and if he resisted they could have detained him at that point then call the judge. If the Constitution were not treated like a piece of toilet paper people would realize that this looks like a warrantless search and someone's constitutional rights may have been violated. "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -- Benjamin Franklin
Posted on: 2007/10/27 7:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2004/12/12 23:31 Last Login : 2015/12/3 0:37 From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
130
|
Quote:
Tell you what, if you were my neighbor and I saw you having a panic attack on the sidewalk while holding a dog-eared copy of Isaiah Berlin's essays and a "device that looks like a bomb," I'd save the EMTs the trouble and phone JCPD myself, after which I'd pour myself a big glass of Johnny black and ponder such thoughts as, "Was it an explosive or his scrotal inflation system?"
Posted on: 2007/10/27 4:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Maybe this guy is the Mexican Consulate bomber?
Posted on: 2007/10/27 3:47
|
|||
|
"Someday a book will be written on how this city can be broke in the midst of all this development." ---Brewster
Oh, wait, there is one: The Jersey Sting. |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
|
Robotjustin: Ontological.....
So a grenade is everything that it isn't?
Posted on: 2007/10/27 1:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
well... he claimed they were paper weights and had them on the table. He never said if there was paper under them. I think that tiped off the EMT to his lies. Paper weights without any paper under them? You should be locked up and sadomized.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 23:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
a) I'm writing generally here. In human terms, I feel sorry about all that the original poster went through and am glad s/he got out of the poky relatively quickly. I agree that it's mean to criticize someone for collecting what is actually a harmless object. b) I agree with your specific argument here but think there's got to be another way to balance the right of people to collect fake bombs with the right of the authorities to figure out whether people have real bombs or are clearly likely to use fake bombs to commit crimes. Example: the police might not have the right to keep my off an airplane by deciding whether I have a bomber personality, but, if I try to carry a fake bomb onto a plane, they probably have a right to at least detain and question me, no matter what my intentions are, and even if the bomb looks nothing like a bomb. I don't like our airport security and border control systems, but I do approve of the general concept of keeping people with anything that looks a lot like a bomb off the plane until it's clear that the bomb-like object is not a bomb. I contribute to the ACLU, and I would want any measures of this kind to be approved by and possibly written by people at the ACLU. But my suspicion is that smart ACLU lawyers could come up with a strategy for dealing with this sort of thing while minimizing the effect on people who own harmless objects that turn out to look like bombs. Being able to collect harmless but scary-looking objects is a right, and having some kind of ability to deal with people who, at first glance, seem likely to bomb us is also a right. We have to figure out a way to balance both rights, not use one of the rights as a club to beat up the people who are more interested in the other right.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 23:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Bobblehead wrote:
Quote:
bobble, thanks for eloquently putting into words part of what i was trying to convey about the handling of the situation. if slacky had been a dangerous, agitated individual, all of a sudden seeing 12+ first responders could have probably had a much worse consequence if it had been a grenade with the possibility of detonation. +1 to robotjustin. sometimes i think that JC has a forcefield which rejects basic ontology and e-prime language and instead wallows in the back and forths and absolutes of belief which keep us mired within a rather corrupt government. but, its also sort of like living in an rather rundown estate where the nanny is busier getting herself diddled by the butler than paying attention to your transgressions manifesting as finger-painting on the parlor walls.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 22:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
They shouldn't have harassed him (if they did) but they should have had a right to get a bomb expert to look at the disabled grenades, and it seems to me that it would be reasonable for them to have someone evaluate the original poster to make sure he wasn't the kind of person who uses a fake grenade to hold up banks.
"the kind of person?" The fact of the matter is that anyone at anytime could walk into a bank with a roll of toilet paper painted red and an alarm clock and pull off a heist. The police have absolutely zero authority to evaluate people for potential crimes. Talk about the thought police.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 22:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The PD officers were under no obligation to believe what Slacky said about the disabled grenades. They shouldn't have harassed him (if they did) but they should have had a right to get a bomb expert to look at the disabled grenades, and it seems to me that it would be reasonable for them to have someone evaluate the original poster to make sure he wasn't the kind of person who uses a fake grenade to hold up banks. I guess the question would be what people should do to have the right to use disabled grenades as paperweights without worrying about bomb squads. I think, in practice, the only solution is that people who own that sort of thing should make sure to keep them out of eyesight of emergency personnel. Because, really, there's no practica, foolproof way to make it clear to a non-expert whether a grenade or other bomb is real or fake. Even if, say, a citizen got a valid fake grenade collector license, how would the police know that the collector hadn't started collecting real grenades? Maybe you could argue that the Second Amendment ought to give people the right to own real bombs, to keep the power of the federal government in check. I can empathize with that argument on a theoretical grounds, but I don't really want a lot of my fellow citizens sitting at home with bomb collections.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 21:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Within reason (e.g., done once, politely, not 75,000 times per week), the police and other authorities ought to have a right to check out any object that they see that they reasonably think might be a bomb. It seems to me that any fake bomb or disabled bomb certainly ought to count as something that the police should be able to check out, and probably would have wanted to check out long before Sept. 11, 2001. The question is whether the police are being as polite and helpful as they can be to suspects under the circumstances. Maybe, to take the sting out of this sort of thing, the police could give out restaurant coupons or something like that to innocent people who've been inconvenienced by job searchers. But, as long as police aren't using their authority to check out bombs as a tool for harassing someone they don't like (e.g., going into the home of a Healy critic and having a bomb squad checking every object in the office), then they ought to have the right to check out objects that seem to look like bombs, as long as they see the bombs while going about their normal business. People have a right to own funky fake grenade paperweights, but neighbors have a right not to be blown up by grenades that turn out to be real grenades.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 21:40
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
There was no mistake. A hand grenade IS a bomb. The fact that it was decommissioned is irrelevant. Should you always assume an unloaded handgun is safe just because the guy who has it pointing at you says so?
A dead human body is not a human being. A statue of a person is not a person. A drawing of a flower is not a flower. An animation of a talking fish is not a talking fish. A device that looks like a bomb is not a bomb. A hand grenade without the powder, rendered harmless and useless, is no longer a hand grenade. It's an object with the formal, external characteristics of a hand grenade, but is missing the basic elements of "hand grenade-ness" to make it a hand grenade. These are basic ontological principles that even the most thick should be able to understand. Did the PD have the right to question Slacky further about the "being" of the hand grenade? Perhaps. Could they have done so without harrassment and over-reaction? Without a doubt.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 20:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2004/12/12 23:31 Last Login : 2015/12/3 0:37 From Paulus Hook
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
130
|
Quote:
There was no mistake. A hand grenade IS a bomb. The fact that it was decommissioned is irrelevant. Should you always assume an unloaded handgun is safe just because the guy who has it pointing at you says so? Should the JC police have given him the benefit of the doubt and trusted his explanation, or should they have taken every precaution to prevent a potentially lethal incident? You don't have to be a rah rah cop lover to understand that among the potential outcomes, having Slacky inconvenienced was by far the safest and most prudent course. I think another element that many people are ignoring is the fact that, by his own admission, Slacky was in a highly agitated state and suffering from a panic attack. Would the EMT have notified the police if Slacky had summoned them because he'd sprained his ankle? I can't say for sure but I'd suspect not.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 20:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Skadave
You miss the point. There are PLENTY of things that could be mistaken for a bomb. Say Slacky's iPOD was broken and he had it dissasembled on the kitchen table. Or he had a pile of white clay shaped into sausages for an art project. Or a sculpture of a grenade. None of the above things go "boom." Should police have the right to bust in for anything that might be considered suspicious? Like make sure every puff of cigarrete smoke isn't pot, or every argument isn't domestic abuse, or every flickering TV screen isn't transmitting an obscenity, or every sound of sex isn't a rape, or every darkened window isn't concealing a crime? Police need to lay off. A knock on the door would have sufficed. JC is just itchy on the trigger finger since all the WTC plotting was done here, and they were too stupid to catch it.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 19:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2007/10/14 15:17 Last Login : 2017/11/13 17:19 From time to time
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
223
|
Quote:
OK, Slacky, this casts an entirely new light on the situation. What do you have to say to this latest accusation?
Posted on: 2007/10/26 19:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I think the conclusion here is that the police were right to check out the inactivated grenades and probably to arrest and evaluate the original poster, but, to the extent that the police and other people involved were rude to the guy, that's wrong.
The message to officers ought to be, "When in doubt, do what Captain Furillo would do," or, to put it another way, "Speak gently and carry a video recorder with great batteries." That doesn't mean that the police have to be pushovers. But, if someone is cooperating reasonably well and not doing anything worse than whining, the police ought to be as polite and even as friendly as they can be, under the circumstances. Even, if, say, a "suspect" clearly has murdered 25 people with axes, being rude to him will not bring back the dead, and being polite to the guy and getting him soda or whatever else he needs to be comfortable might help gently elicit the information needed to convict the guy of a felony.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 18:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Yes. . . but owning a live grenade IS illegal and am EMT is not an expert who can determine if a grenade is live or not.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 18:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
1. Owning a deactivated hand grenade is not illegal.
2. Owing a ceramic sculpture of a hand grenade is not illegal. 3. Owing a painting of a hand grenade is not illegal. What links these three things? None of the above are weapons. What if Slacky were an inventor, and had a weird and wooly device that looked "bomb-like?" Would the police have the same right to roll in and humiliate and mistreat him? The police should not and DO not have the right to roll into private homes and abuse citizens based on some "post-9-11" rationale nonsense. The JCPD consistently embarrases itself with either outright criminal activity, ineptness, or civil rights encroachments. I feel like JC is at this point an anarcho/fascist state. The police harrass ordinary citizens, ordinary citizens are afraid of the police, and the criminals run wild. The police are, and should be, civil servants. Very much like the post man. IF anything needs to be defused, it's our drug-addled, steroid-cocked, pea-brained hero-wannabee PD, and not ordinary citizens with perfectly legal memorabilia. Maybe the influx of new people, unbeholden to the corroded JC political machine, will be able to elect officials who will be able to reform the absolutely broken JC justic system. But as of right now, I feel less safe in this damn town every day.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 18:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Hey! I'm decommissioned. Leave me alone. Imagine if you were impotent. Then you wouldn't be able to bang. Well, I can't bang. It's pretty much the same thing.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 18:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
1. i didn't know some on this board are bomb experts. if someone can spot a fake one from a real one in a 2 second glance, then you must truly be an expert..wow.. good to know..
2. see the below story from the AP... timely coincidence?? THE ASSOCIATED PRESS NEW YORK: Two improvised explosives were thrown into the rear of the Mexican Consulate early Friday on Manhattan's East Side, shattering some windows, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said. Police believe someone on a bicycle threw the devices made from replica grenades packed with explosive powder at 3 a.m., causing small explosions that blew out some windows, Kelly said at an unrelated event later Friday. The commissioner said witnesses reported seeing someone on a bike at that time near the consulate. Edgar Trujillo, the press attache with the Mexican Consulate, said three windows were shattered. In 2005, an explosion caused by two makeshift grenades fitted with fuses blew out a window near Manhattan's British consulate. There were no injuries, and no one was ever arrested in the incident.
Posted on: 2007/10/26 17:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Bomb Scare on 5th street.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
Why is it always the quiet ones? Does that mean I can relax because my neighbors are incredibly loud?
Posted on: 2007/10/26 14:53
|
|||
|
||||