March 21, 2012
Read this headline and see if you get it the same way I do.
"Thieves allegedly steal cancer patient's money from Galveston deputies"
That comes from one of the 3 major TV stations in Houston reporting on the home of a Galveston couple, both deputy sheriff's, which was burglarized. Inside the home was $3500 which they had raised in a benefit for the woman's sister, a cancer victim.
Now, this TV station says the 'Thieves allegedly steal" the money. To me, it means that TV station has doubts about the money being stolen. Or, they don't believe their source of the story, which was the daily newspaper in Galveston.
I am amazed everyday at the writings of some of these so-called 'news professionals' who throw in an 'allegedly' every other line and refer to everyone, regardless of circumstances, as a suspect.
If a robber is shot and killed by police running out of a convenience store with a bag of money in one had and a blazing gun in the other, wearing a mask, and the store clerk chasing him, the so-called 'major media' will call that dead gunman a 'suspect', rather than a 'dead gunman' or 'robber'.
What is it with these media types? Are they so paranoid? They profess to be all this and all that, yet they hedge in their reporting.
They like to claim, "Only this channel or that channel" has the story. Then they dice it with 'allegedly' and 'suspect' and other hedge words.
Listen closely. See how many times you can count the 'allegedly's' and 'suspects' in one story when it is clearly a hedge word.
Breck Porter
www.ThePoliceNews.net
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Monday, April 11, 2011
The great "Seawall Enhancement"hoax
April 11, 2011
GALVESTON, TX - Next month voters in Galveston will go to the polls for the third time to vote on whether or not they want people to pay to park on their seawall.
Money starved politicians, desperate to shore up a sinking (or sunk) city economy, are taking one more stab at trying to convince Galveston residents they and everyone who visits the island should feed the meter to park on the beachfront. In two previous elections on the very same issue, voters said NO, loud and clear. But politicians being what they are, either can't hear or won't take NO for an answer, so they're back with another election.
They're approach this time is much different than before. Signs all over the city read "Vote FOR Seawall Enhancements." Not a word about parking meters, or paying to park on the seawall, or the rash of problems paid parking will cause businesses on the seawall who will have a constant battle keeping beach goers from parking in their parking lots to avoid paying the 8 bucks.
This time the politicians are trying to sell voters fancy new bathrooms and palm trees, and bath houses, and playgrounds, that the money from paying parkers will supposedly produce.
The politicians have even enlisted the police department to proclaim paid parking will require no police manpower. Parking violations will be policed by private metermaids leaving police free to fight crime. Supposedly! A police official was recently on a Houston TV station promoting the metermaids.
Question. Who is Kroger's going to call when their parking lot fills up with beach goer cars? Who is Academy Sports & Outdoor going to call? Who are the hotels and restaurants going to call when they find all those cars in their parking lots that don't belong to their customers? NOT THE METERMAIDS. They'll be calling the police. You can bet on it. And cars will be towed. Towing companies should be the biggest supporters of 'Seawall Enhancements' for they will be the profiters of it, not the citizens of Galveston and certainly NOT the businesses on the seawall.
Deception is the game of fools, crooks and politicians and it's in full swing in Galveston. Anyone who can't see through this obvious sinister ploy to mislead voters, should get a walking cane with red and white stripes.
That's the way I see it.
Breck Porter
Sunday, January 9, 2011
'Alleged' reporters are 'Suspect' to me
January 9, 2011
I have written about this before but I'll do it again.
This came up in a conversation with friends in a Galveston coffee shop Sunday morning.
The discussion was about the shooting in Tuscon, Arizona in which the Congresswoman was shot, a child and Federal Judge killed, and 5 others wounded by a psycho who cut loose on them with a semi-automatic Glock pistol loaded with a 30 round clip.
I won't rehash the story because TV is doing a good job of hasing and rehashing and getting every ounce of drama they can squeeze from it.
What came up in the conversation in the coffee shop was not so much the details of the shooting itself but they way the so-called reporters told the story.
As usual, the reporters were using very liberal doses of 'alleged' and 'suspect' when referring to the creep who unloaded on the crowd of people at the Safeway Store.
Now, here's the thing none of us at the coffee shop table understood and never will. Why do the reporters call this shooter a 'suspect' when he was seen by more than one other person doing the shooting? The police don't 'suspect' him. They know it's him. They arrested him. He's in jail.
Why do they say he 'allegedly' shot those people? More than one other person saw him shoot them. One person who saw him shooting, actually tackled him and took the gun away from him. So why say he 'allegedly' shot them? He did it. He 'actually' shot them. There is no 'allegedly' to it, and he's not now, nor has he ever been, a 'suspect'.
He is the 'actual' shooter and he will not 'allegedly' go on trial for the shootings, and it will not be a 'suspected' jury that sends him up the creek for the rest of his 'alleged' life. That is, if they don't send him to a 'suspected' nut house instead.
That's the way I see it. And so do most people I know. And dont' give me that lame excuse that he hasn't been convicted yet. BS.
Breck
http://www.thepolicenews.net/
I have written about this before but I'll do it again.
This came up in a conversation with friends in a Galveston coffee shop Sunday morning.
The discussion was about the shooting in Tuscon, Arizona in which the Congresswoman was shot, a child and Federal Judge killed, and 5 others wounded by a psycho who cut loose on them with a semi-automatic Glock pistol loaded with a 30 round clip.
I won't rehash the story because TV is doing a good job of hasing and rehashing and getting every ounce of drama they can squeeze from it.
What came up in the conversation in the coffee shop was not so much the details of the shooting itself but they way the so-called reporters told the story.
As usual, the reporters were using very liberal doses of 'alleged' and 'suspect' when referring to the creep who unloaded on the crowd of people at the Safeway Store.
Now, here's the thing none of us at the coffee shop table understood and never will. Why do the reporters call this shooter a 'suspect' when he was seen by more than one other person doing the shooting? The police don't 'suspect' him. They know it's him. They arrested him. He's in jail.
Why do they say he 'allegedly' shot those people? More than one other person saw him shoot them. One person who saw him shooting, actually tackled him and took the gun away from him. So why say he 'allegedly' shot them? He did it. He 'actually' shot them. There is no 'allegedly' to it, and he's not now, nor has he ever been, a 'suspect'.
He is the 'actual' shooter and he will not 'allegedly' go on trial for the shootings, and it will not be a 'suspected' jury that sends him up the creek for the rest of his 'alleged' life. That is, if they don't send him to a 'suspected' nut house instead.
That's the way I see it. And so do most people I know. And dont' give me that lame excuse that he hasn't been convicted yet. BS.
Breck
http://www.thepolicenews.net/
Saturday, December 19, 2009
The Media. What can one believe about their stories?
December 19, 2009
Each morning, hours before dawn, I am on the internet scanning news stories from dozens of media sources, looking for stories to post on The Police News. As I do, I often read several accounts of the same incident in different newspapers and on different TV stations.
I am always amazed at how different the same story appears in the various media sources.
This morning I read a report in a daily newspaper about a robbery suspect that was chased by police, abandoned his vehicle and ran into a wooded area where he was finally flushed out by police dogs. The newspaper headlined it's story, "Suspect hides in mud to try to elude police." Didn't happen. He covered himself with some leaves.
The newspaper story went on to say, "search dogs found him covered with mud." It's true he was dirty, but he was not covered with mud. We have pictures of the arrest. There was no mud.
Of course the story clarifies that at the end of the sentence by tagging it with, "authorities said." Oh really! What authorities? Must have been an authority that wasn't there as our photographer was.
The story is perpetuated when a TV station picks up the story from the newspaper and repeats it word for word. Spreading the news is the name of the game, but shouldn't they spread it right?
Now, whether or not this crook had mud all over him or not is no big deal. Who really cares? My point is this. What else do they report wrong? What else do they exaggerate? It was actually a good story without the mud.
Can we really trust the mainstream media to report only the facts to us nowadays, without all the color and hoopla? Probably not. Today's news reporting is all about drama and hype in a competive business where they all compete for the same advertising dollar and reporters are competing for jobs.
Could this be part of the reason we are seeing large, old line, print newspapers dwindling and fading away in preference to online news?
My grandfather always said he took things with "a grain of salt." He beleived only a morsel of what he read and heard.
My grandfather was a smart man.
Each morning, hours before dawn, I am on the internet scanning news stories from dozens of media sources, looking for stories to post on The Police News. As I do, I often read several accounts of the same incident in different newspapers and on different TV stations.
I am always amazed at how different the same story appears in the various media sources.
This morning I read a report in a daily newspaper about a robbery suspect that was chased by police, abandoned his vehicle and ran into a wooded area where he was finally flushed out by police dogs. The newspaper headlined it's story, "Suspect hides in mud to try to elude police." Didn't happen. He covered himself with some leaves.
The newspaper story went on to say, "search dogs found him covered with mud." It's true he was dirty, but he was not covered with mud. We have pictures of the arrest. There was no mud.
Of course the story clarifies that at the end of the sentence by tagging it with, "authorities said." Oh really! What authorities? Must have been an authority that wasn't there as our photographer was.
The story is perpetuated when a TV station picks up the story from the newspaper and repeats it word for word. Spreading the news is the name of the game, but shouldn't they spread it right?
Now, whether or not this crook had mud all over him or not is no big deal. Who really cares? My point is this. What else do they report wrong? What else do they exaggerate? It was actually a good story without the mud.
Can we really trust the mainstream media to report only the facts to us nowadays, without all the color and hoopla? Probably not. Today's news reporting is all about drama and hype in a competive business where they all compete for the same advertising dollar and reporters are competing for jobs.
Could this be part of the reason we are seeing large, old line, print newspapers dwindling and fading away in preference to online news?
My grandfather always said he took things with "a grain of salt." He beleived only a morsel of what he read and heard.
My grandfather was a smart man.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Crooks beware, Sugar Land cops are watching
December 17, 2009
Sugar Land police have a great idea. Experiencing a rash of vehicle burglaries brought on by the holiday shopping season, the SLPD has formed a special impact team made up of officers who will focus exclusively on vehicle burglaries and shopper safety.
As the holiday season progresses, traditionally crime increases. The recent arrests of two men from El Campo caught breaking into cars has put a damper on criminal activity in Sugar Land. Both men were charged with several auto break-ins inside and outside the city limits.
Officers on the impact team have department-wide resources available, including plain clothes investigators, crime prevention officers and citizen volunteers.
The task force is saturating areas identified as "hot spots" with newly created impact teams. Special stings and surveillance operations are also being conducted.
In addition to enforcement, the impact teams work closely with citizens and owners of retail areas, especially shopping centers and fitness clubs.
The Police News thinks the Sugar Land Police have the right idea. They have recognized a traditional problem that arises every year during the holiday shopping season. Rather than just waiting for calls to come in from victims, they are out there, poised to grab those crooks who are sure to appear. And when they do, they're busted.
That's what we call 'police work'.
The following tips can help prevent vehicle burglaries:
• Police suggest shoppers remember the basic, common sense, precautions during their shopping trips.
• Remember to always keep vehicles locked. When parked overnight, remove all valuables from vehicles. When shopping, make one trip to the car with purchased merchandise, and then leave the lot. Thieves have been known to watch shoppers as they place merchandise in their cars before returning to a store.
• Never leave identification, wallets, credit cards or jewelry in vehicles while visiting fitness centers. Doing so is much riskier than using a locker inside the gym or leaving the items at home.
• If personal property must be left in a car, lock it in the trunk. Unfortunately, this option does not exist for pick-up trucks or SUVs. Thieves are aware that there is no secure place to store items in these types of vehicles.
• Finally, before you leave a vehicle, take a second to look inside and make sure nothing is visible from the outside that could attract a thief.
Breck Porter
The Police News
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Galveston Politics STINK!
Most of us who live on Galveston Island, know by now that city politics has hit a new low and there seems to be no end in sight.
The city council is now occupied by at least three new members who pretend to be acting in the best interest of their constiuents, but who we are convinced, just love to watch themselves on Channel 16 re-runs of the meeting.
Council meetings drag on for hours and hours as these three entertain each other, one even laughing out loud at her own remarks, that is, when she is awake.
Next to her sits a black activists who had a short career as a city fireman, then sued the city when they fired him. A lot valuable TV time is focused on him trying desperately to form sentences that are intelligent enough for others to understand. He's the only one on council, who when he finally decides to shut-up, says, "I pass mayor."
At the other end of the council table sits two lady lawyers. One speaks from time to time when she can get a word in edgewide. The other hardly ever shuts up. During her campaign for election she gained the endorsement of the city's only daily newspaper. In that endorsement the paper commented this lady lawyer was sure to raise some points that otherwise would not be raised. That was an under statement. The lady lawyer loves to hear herself talk when others are bored to death and are praying she shut-up.
A sure sign that politics really does stink in Galveston, is when one of the leading political journalists in the city decides to pack up and move to Houston.
Disgusted with the whole damn mess, Jim Guidry, publisher of Guidry News, announced this week that he and wife Lynda, who have been covering city government in Galveston for 25 years, will return to a city of some semblance of sanity. They will leave a reporter behind to endure the misery of city politics in Galveston.
Actually, this is probably not a surprise to many who know Galveston. This so-called tropical resort, with a historical past of gangsters, cronyism, gambling and corrupt government, has long found it difficult to break free of these old habits.
Galveston has forever operated with an undermanned and poorly equipped police department. The department is more of a training ground for new cops who move on to careers elsewhere within a couple years, leaving the city spending more and more money rehiring and retraining new cops rather than provide them pay and benefits which would keep them on the island.
Even at that, the local newspaper brands them rich cops and blames many of the city's financial woes on the expense of providing police service to the citizens of Galveston. The publisher who makes these complaints, feels so safe in his own home, he has erected an 8' high, solid wall around his own home.
The story about the current state of Galveston politics cannot be told better than by Jim Guidry in his Comments on Galveston Municipal Government, published on March 16, 2009.
It's a damn shame when politics is so rotten, that a good and decent, professional journalists, decides to move 60 miles away to get away from the stink.
The city council is now occupied by at least three new members who pretend to be acting in the best interest of their constiuents, but who we are convinced, just love to watch themselves on Channel 16 re-runs of the meeting.
Council meetings drag on for hours and hours as these three entertain each other, one even laughing out loud at her own remarks, that is, when she is awake.
Next to her sits a black activists who had a short career as a city fireman, then sued the city when they fired him. A lot valuable TV time is focused on him trying desperately to form sentences that are intelligent enough for others to understand. He's the only one on council, who when he finally decides to shut-up, says, "I pass mayor."
At the other end of the council table sits two lady lawyers. One speaks from time to time when she can get a word in edgewide. The other hardly ever shuts up. During her campaign for election she gained the endorsement of the city's only daily newspaper. In that endorsement the paper commented this lady lawyer was sure to raise some points that otherwise would not be raised. That was an under statement. The lady lawyer loves to hear herself talk when others are bored to death and are praying she shut-up.
A sure sign that politics really does stink in Galveston, is when one of the leading political journalists in the city decides to pack up and move to Houston.
Disgusted with the whole damn mess, Jim Guidry, publisher of Guidry News, announced this week that he and wife Lynda, who have been covering city government in Galveston for 25 years, will return to a city of some semblance of sanity. They will leave a reporter behind to endure the misery of city politics in Galveston.
Actually, this is probably not a surprise to many who know Galveston. This so-called tropical resort, with a historical past of gangsters, cronyism, gambling and corrupt government, has long found it difficult to break free of these old habits.
Galveston has forever operated with an undermanned and poorly equipped police department. The department is more of a training ground for new cops who move on to careers elsewhere within a couple years, leaving the city spending more and more money rehiring and retraining new cops rather than provide them pay and benefits which would keep them on the island.
Even at that, the local newspaper brands them rich cops and blames many of the city's financial woes on the expense of providing police service to the citizens of Galveston. The publisher who makes these complaints, feels so safe in his own home, he has erected an 8' high, solid wall around his own home.
The story about the current state of Galveston politics cannot be told better than by Jim Guidry in his Comments on Galveston Municipal Government, published on March 16, 2009.
It's a damn shame when politics is so rotten, that a good and decent, professional journalists, decides to move 60 miles away to get away from the stink.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Will There Be A Police Review Board For Those Who Shot Cop Killer?
A good man in Corpus Christi was run down and killed Wednesday by an asshole with a long criminal record who had already attacked one cop and was being chased by several others.
Lt. Stuart Alexander was only 47-years old, about the same age as my oldest daughter. He had been a Corpus Christi police officer for 20-years and was highly respected by everyone in the department. He was a "cops cop" said another officer in his department. That's a term of endearment in the police business.
As a Lieutenant and field supervisor, Alexander didn't have a partner riding with him. He was alone when he set up at a spot on a freeway to set out a spike strip in an effort to blow the tires on the car heading in his direction, being driven by 21-year old Daniel Lee Lopez. A pack of police cars hot on his tail.
Lopez, a local turd, known by the cops as a street thug, saw Stuart on the side of the road ahead of him and swerved to hit him, and he did.
Hearing about this good man's death makes my blood boil when I think of all the police antagonists we have been reading about lately. It makes be cringe when I see these people on city councils and in positions of public leadership, who make it their mission to micro-manage the police departments in their communities.
It make be want to puke when I watch some Galveston city council persons spend hours grilling the police chief over bullshit they know absolutely nothing about. I get sick to my stomach to watch an idiot on TV who mumbles and bumbles and repeats himself over and over, in and effort to make a sentence that others can understand. My gosh, who in hell elected this fool? And to think that Stuart Alexander laid down his life in Corpus Christi to protect people like this.
And it's not just in Galveston. These same self-annointed prima donnas (a vain or undisciplined person who finds it difficult to work under direction or as part of a team) are dealing misery to police officers in Bayou Vista. In Santa Fe they have a mayor who wanted to do away with the entire police department and turn their duties over to the Sheriff who told him right off he didn't want the job and didn't have the manpower to do it.
In Houston they have Quanell X who is mostly a TV performer who defends black criminals against the police department, doesn't have a real job, and wears high dollar suits and ties, drives a fancy car, lives in an upscale home and probably drinks something better than Bull Dog Malt Liquor. Where in the hell does he get his money and why don't he raise hell when a black cop kicks someone's ass?
These are the kinds of people that Stuart Alexander died protecting. These are the kind of people that any officer, from Galveston, Bayou Vista, Santa Fe, or anywhere else, would go to any early grave trying to protect.
Do you think that for one minute any of these so-called political or community leaders give a shit? Hell no! They never even think about it.
These kind of people don't care that Galveston cops gave up part of their monthtly pay to help the city recover from a devastaing storm. All they care about is having a civilian review board so they can hamstring the police department.
Have we ever heard of a review board for the public works department. Where do we complain about the city worker who leans on his shovel all day long while talking on his cell phone and drinking a Diet Pepsi? What about the bus driver we see driving a big city bus down the street while eating a hamburger and playing his I-Pod? Is there a review board for these people? Hell no!
I have found over the years that people of this ilk have usually had an experience with the police in which they didn't fare well. Maybe just a traffic ticket, may their delinquest kid was arrested, maybe someone stole something out of their unlocked car and the police didn't get it back and arrest the thief. They were busy trying to solve a double-murder somewhere.
People, wake up! How many cop funerals must you watch on TV before you realize that some people who sit in responsible positions, on city councils and commissioner courts, are idiots and are there to carry out their own personal agendas. They are supposed to be there to see that the people in their districts or precincts get the services they are entitled to. They are not elected to manage anything, especially the police or fire departments. Most of them have never even ridden in a police car, unless it was in the back seat.
The next time you hear about one of our police officers being shot down, run down or beat down, by some worthless piece of human fecal matter, just remember those who want him reviewed by a civilian review board.
If Stuart Alexander's wife and kids sues Daniel Lopez for the loss of their husband and father, what in the hell are they going to get? Not a damn thing. But if Alexander had killed that worthless scum, you can bet his criminal family would have sued the hell out of the city of Corpus Christi, the police department and Alexander himself. And you can also bet that he would have gotten a money settlement from one of them.
That's the way I see it, and if you see it different, I don't give a damn.
Breck Porter
Lt. Stuart Alexander was only 47-years old, about the same age as my oldest daughter. He had been a Corpus Christi police officer for 20-years and was highly respected by everyone in the department. He was a "cops cop" said another officer in his department. That's a term of endearment in the police business.
As a Lieutenant and field supervisor, Alexander didn't have a partner riding with him. He was alone when he set up at a spot on a freeway to set out a spike strip in an effort to blow the tires on the car heading in his direction, being driven by 21-year old Daniel Lee Lopez. A pack of police cars hot on his tail.
Lopez, a local turd, known by the cops as a street thug, saw Stuart on the side of the road ahead of him and swerved to hit him, and he did.
Hearing about this good man's death makes my blood boil when I think of all the police antagonists we have been reading about lately. It makes be cringe when I see these people on city councils and in positions of public leadership, who make it their mission to micro-manage the police departments in their communities.
It make be want to puke when I watch some Galveston city council persons spend hours grilling the police chief over bullshit they know absolutely nothing about. I get sick to my stomach to watch an idiot on TV who mumbles and bumbles and repeats himself over and over, in and effort to make a sentence that others can understand. My gosh, who in hell elected this fool? And to think that Stuart Alexander laid down his life in Corpus Christi to protect people like this.
And it's not just in Galveston. These same self-annointed prima donnas (a vain or undisciplined person who finds it difficult to work under direction or as part of a team) are dealing misery to police officers in Bayou Vista. In Santa Fe they have a mayor who wanted to do away with the entire police department and turn their duties over to the Sheriff who told him right off he didn't want the job and didn't have the manpower to do it.
In Houston they have Quanell X who is mostly a TV performer who defends black criminals against the police department, doesn't have a real job, and wears high dollar suits and ties, drives a fancy car, lives in an upscale home and probably drinks something better than Bull Dog Malt Liquor. Where in the hell does he get his money and why don't he raise hell when a black cop kicks someone's ass?
These are the kinds of people that Stuart Alexander died protecting. These are the kind of people that any officer, from Galveston, Bayou Vista, Santa Fe, or anywhere else, would go to any early grave trying to protect.
Do you think that for one minute any of these so-called political or community leaders give a shit? Hell no! They never even think about it.
These kind of people don't care that Galveston cops gave up part of their monthtly pay to help the city recover from a devastaing storm. All they care about is having a civilian review board so they can hamstring the police department.
Have we ever heard of a review board for the public works department. Where do we complain about the city worker who leans on his shovel all day long while talking on his cell phone and drinking a Diet Pepsi? What about the bus driver we see driving a big city bus down the street while eating a hamburger and playing his I-Pod? Is there a review board for these people? Hell no!
I have found over the years that people of this ilk have usually had an experience with the police in which they didn't fare well. Maybe just a traffic ticket, may their delinquest kid was arrested, maybe someone stole something out of their unlocked car and the police didn't get it back and arrest the thief. They were busy trying to solve a double-murder somewhere.
People, wake up! How many cop funerals must you watch on TV before you realize that some people who sit in responsible positions, on city councils and commissioner courts, are idiots and are there to carry out their own personal agendas. They are supposed to be there to see that the people in their districts or precincts get the services they are entitled to. They are not elected to manage anything, especially the police or fire departments. Most of them have never even ridden in a police car, unless it was in the back seat.
The next time you hear about one of our police officers being shot down, run down or beat down, by some worthless piece of human fecal matter, just remember those who want him reviewed by a civilian review board.
If Stuart Alexander's wife and kids sues Daniel Lopez for the loss of their husband and father, what in the hell are they going to get? Not a damn thing. But if Alexander had killed that worthless scum, you can bet his criminal family would have sued the hell out of the city of Corpus Christi, the police department and Alexander himself. And you can also bet that he would have gotten a money settlement from one of them.
That's the way I see it, and if you see it different, I don't give a damn.
Breck Porter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
