100 Hours of Training can make you a cop in Maine

Country - good information.

BTW - Could you please edit your quote on the preceding page to the 75 word Fair Use policy? Right now it's 128 words.
Thank you.

Done, Naran. I didn't count the words afterward, so I hope it fits the guidelines. But, the article is worth reading so here's the link again.

Thank you for editing - it's 91 words at present, so just a little more trimming will bring it to 75.

As a helpful hint, I use Word to count words in quotes that I post. I copy and paste the quotes into a Word doc, and then use the "count words" function in "Tools." Fast and easy.

Trimming done. I suppose I could continue, if necessary, and edit it down to next to nothing - which, in a way, I've done. I've made far longer quotes before with no problem. Is it just that the PPH and BD are ready to leap upon AMG at the slightest overage?

The PPH did indeed threaten to sue Scott last year, bigtime, because of postings on AMG from their sites. So, Scott implemented the AMG Fair Use policy, after lengthy research into accepted journalistic practices.

Believe me, I know it's a pain; sometimes there is one line that just "makes" the point of a posted quote, and fitting it all into that 75 words of text isn't easy. I go through exactly the same thing, all the time.

Free online word counter here: link

Toofless- Guess I struck a nerve! Government is government. How it should be organized is the question. There was once a day when what you say might have been true. However, as far as today's sheriff's departments are concerned you are wrong. They are every bit as professional as any local department in he state. Sure they have some bad apples, but so don't every department in the state. In fact, a trooper was arrested last week of reckless conduct with a firearm. If you thing just because they wear blue they are perfect you should think again. In today's world, deputies work with the same job protection as state police and any other classified employee of government.

I know and have known a lot of people in all walks of law enforcement and never have I come to think or have I heard the sheriff's departments described as you do, bottom feeders. You are not telling it the way it is when you start talking about chewing tobacco and the other trash you make mention of. There is a great deal of competition in law enforcement and it sounds like maybe you are in the middle of it.

The question is how are tax dollars best spent. Believe it or not, there is a limit as to what people can afford to pay. However, as usual, the mere mention of change sends some people howling in protest.

With some reluctance, I bring this thread back to life. This is because of an article in today's Lincoln County News. The focus of the article is on the petition to "terminate" the local Waldoboro PD - which I'm not in favor of.

But, for those with an interest in this, the article covers many issues related to the Waldoboro PD, and includes some revelations about Zachary Curtis, the police officer who shot and killed the teenager.

“I think the police department needs to reexamine its mission statement,” said Sumner Richards, who runs the Five and Dime in downtown Waldoboro, just a few doors from the crosswalk.

Richards happened upon the crosswalk accident on his way back from the post office that day. He said passersby were helping Linda Peabody, the woman struck by the police cruiser, as Curtis stood in the intersection with his hands on his hips.

Is that an article or an Opinion piece? There seem to be factual errors in it as well. I thought the officer fired 3 times. If that is the case then it would have been impossible for him to "shoot Jackson multiple times in the head and chest. "

That "article" works very hard to paint a negative picture of the Waldoboro PD.

LMO - At this point we don't know how many times the officer fired. It's been reported, probably by Mr. Chapman, that it was three shots. But, we don't know.

I suppose the article could, by some people, be taken as an "opinion piece". But, the Lincoln County News, in its articles, generally plays things straight.

I think it's terrible that tjc's own MOTHER is working against her son's client.

Tom:

Before I take additional action, I'm just wondering upon what basis you are stating that Patricia Chapman is my mother?

Additional ACTION?

What - are you going to sue Tom for using comedic sarcasm without being trained by Jeff?

Before I unleash unrelenting amounts of sarcasm, I'm wondering upon what basis you are using the Big Lawyer Werds?

I love you, sweetie, but sometimes I wonder if you have to grease your ears to get into your office.

Country, you left something out in your selective quoting:

Fox........hen house.

charlie

knuck:

There are a lot of people who would read this board and not think it funny -- they would believe it. No smilie face - nothing to indicate it as a joke -- even today. It is, on its face, a lie having to do with my employment, and therefore defamation per se. Suit would be easy and fun.

My real mother (no relation to the lady in the article) is currently in remission from fairly recent cancer surgery, and is not in shape to handle some public urination contest that some clown (like you) thinks is "funny". Most of my thoughts about her these days surround hoping she'll beat the 17% five year life expectancy.

PS: I will henceforth feel comfortable making comments, jokes, quips about your mother, knowing that it is all in fun, right? You'd be cool with my suggesting that she dropped you onto your head while reaching for a bottle of Allens Coffee Brandy (totally without basis, of course) and think it all in fun? What a thick skin. Your screen name is quite appropriate.

Sorry, tjc, I didn't think my poor "joke" about the similarity in the name would be taken seriously, no offensive meant, I thought it would be taken as a good-natured ribbing as it was offered.

I have someone close to me going through a tough cancer treatment right now and best wishes for you mother's continued recovery.

tjc, best wishes to your mom on her continued fight against cancer.

I was feeling pretty embarrassed about my emotional outburst over the weekend on this thread. I feel better now, knowing that I'm not the only one who gets wound up and off-topic.

Knuck, as always your posts are filled with intelligent good humor, wisdom, and the occasional gentle slap up alongside someones head.

lucky:

My mother isn't the topic of discussion. Given the media attention on this matter, she could well have been -- had Tom C not retracted his comment.

Butch, That was a selective quote, I admit. I did it because I think officer Curtis' behavior after the accident was important to note. The fact that the LCSO investigated and no summons was issued does not surprise me.

Why doesn't it surprise you?

My mother isn't the topic of discussion. Given the media attention on this matter, she could well have been -- had Tom C not retracted his comment.
THEN WHY DID YOU BRING HER INTO IT DEEPER LIKE YOU JUST DID? SHEESH!

And why are you publicly spouting everything on this thread that you are?

For the record I have a very thick skin - you are the one who stuck your nose into this thread to let us all know you were The One In The Know, and started disparaging everyone else's opinion. Now you are a victim? Nice tactic - I see it all the time on this forum. I hope Mom gets better but that doesn't make you a saint. You'd do well to ice that ego for a couple months and make contributions that I know you are capable of in a much more humble way.

Yeah, I know - Pot, Kettle in this response - but right now you are really acting arrogantly. If you were poster A or poster B I'd know it was a lost hope, but let's just say I know you can be better.

We only hurt the ones we love - huh, Buttermilk?

OK, like I said I retracted my earlier opinion about this issue on page one.

I just read lucky's post and now I feel like a dirtbag for whacking John even though he can be a dinque in his presentation.

Notice I let the post stand......John started it.

Butch, That was a selective quote, I admit. I did it because I think officer Curtis' behavior after the accident was important to note. The fact that the LCSO investigated and no summons was issued does not surprise me.

The problem with the editorial you posted a link to is that it give absolutely no details as to what actually happened, and painted it as something other than an accident.

I don't know Curtis, but I do know a little about law enforcement and law enforcement officers. What I've seen of the media coverage so far is so biased and skewed that it's hardly worth reading. You'd almost think Curtis was related to George Bush the way they gleefully attack him, his weight, his experience, his age, and anything else they can ridicule in their attempts to paint law enforcement as "bad."

Butch, That isn't an editorial. It's a front page article in the print edition of the LCN. There is no editorial in this week's issue, though there are several "Commentaries"; none of with deal with this incident. There are no letters about it.

I don't know Curtis either. If he walked up to me, I wouldn't know who he is. The only media coverage I've seen on this is in the Lincoln County News and the link you gave earlier to the Morning Sentinal article. I don't think I'd characterize it as "biased and skewed". I'd say it's more like no one really knows what happened that night except officer Curtis, and everyone (including myself) wonders what the truth may be.

You're close Country. It's in a place on the front page where you'd expect an article, but as written is an editorial. The anti-law enforcement bias is so blatant that I can't in good faith call it an article.

Since John Chapman, lawyer representing officer Curtis, had earlier made posts attempting to portray Waldoboro as a center of crime in midcoast Maine, I posted last week's Waldoboro PD report from the Lincoln County News. Here is a summary from this week's report.

Phone harassment/ reported residential break-in and theft/vehicle accident/drive-off without paying for gas - $9.99/ 15 year old male assaulted by 17 year old female/speeding/failure to show proof of insurance/minor consuming alcohol/speeding/failure to show proof of insurance/speeding/slashed tires.

What I find interesting is that in neither last week's report, or this week's, is there any mention of officer Curtis' shooting and killing of the unarmed teenager.

Double post.

More proof that you can't judge an area simply by reading or watching the news.

What is your source? Who said he was unarmed? Have we missed something?