If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Fox news: 2004 murder scene DNA linked to Occupy Wall Street subway vandalism. Article: there is no immediate evidence that the DNA belongs to one of the OWS protestors who chained open the gates   (foxnews.com) divider line 65
    More: Fail, Occupy Wall Street, DNA, NBC 4 New York, murder scene, emergency exits, DNA linked, Juilliard  
•       •       •

3030 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jul 2012 at 9:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-11 08:58:24 AM
Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.
 
2012-07-11 09:21:36 AM
OWS is obviously innocent, as murdering someone would involve actual accomplishment.
 
2012-07-11 09:21:36 AM
Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.
 
2012-07-11 09:22:39 AM
To be fair, even NPR news reported it this way
 
2012-07-11 09:23:39 AM
Well duh. Middle school students that murder someone ALWAYS become commie socialist college student protestors!

/what the herp is this derp?
 
2012-07-11 09:24:00 AM
Fail Trifecta.
 
2012-07-11 09:25:35 AM
Wonder if there was a chain of custody on the DNA.
 
2012-07-11 09:25:59 AM
My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?
 
2012-07-11 09:29:55 AM
Not surprising at all. Murdering OWS scumbags.
 
2012-07-11 09:30:04 AM

Moosecakes: To be fair, even NPR news reported it this way


That doesn't matter! Just whine and howl and gnash your teeth about Fox.
 
2012-07-11 09:31:00 AM

Pocket Ninja: Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.


I'll be in my bunk.
 
2012-07-11 09:31:59 AM

fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


Yeah, seriously. And they have a database that can match up such divergent samples? Pretty amazing.
 
2012-07-11 09:32:08 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.


*soft music*
This massive load of NYPD bullshiat has been brought to you by JPMorgan Chase, where the right relationship is everything. And boy oh boy can a $4.6 million dollar donation to the NYPD create the right relationship for us.
 
2012-07-11 09:34:57 AM

fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


Was kind of curious on that as well. There's so many untested rape kits but they have time to test chains at the scene of a... What? Protest? Someone chained a gate open and they're making dna tests for THAT?
 
2012-07-11 09:35:45 AM

fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


They were ordered to destroy OWS, and given every means available to do so.
 
2012-07-11 09:38:24 AM

fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


This!

It is like the movie Gattica.
 
2012-07-11 09:40:08 AM
the tfa doesn't contain that statement.
 
2012-07-11 09:40:51 AM

fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?



Because the New York city Police Department is probably the single most corrupt Law Enforcement agency in the entire country. They were bought out by the banks when the NYC Police Union retirement fund was magically gifted (out of the blessings of their pure hearts, of course) by Chase and several other companies to the tune of nearly a quarter Billion dollars.

They openly bribed the entire NYC Police Department and there wasn't so much as a whimper from the press.
 
2012-07-11 09:42:51 AM
There is a difference between "linked" and "belongs to". Of course the DNA is linked to the OWS protestors, the new agencies just linked the two.

All a "link" takes is an assertion.
 
2012-07-11 09:47:56 AM

Pocket Ninja: Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.


Evidence: OWS didn't exist in 2004.
 
2012-07-11 09:48:49 AM

Pocket Ninja: Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.


I love you and I want to make babies with you.
 
2012-07-11 09:53:07 AM

colon_pow: the tfa doesn't contain that statement.


welcometofark.jpg
 
2012-07-11 09:53:52 AM
This new lead in an unsolved murder case should be inadmissible in court on the grounds that it caused butthurt for submitter and several random farkers.
 
2012-07-11 09:56:08 AM
Talk about a streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch.
 
2012-07-11 09:56:56 AM

Deathfrogg: fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


Because the New York city Police Department is probably the single most corrupt Law Enforcement agency in the entire country.


More corrupt than New Orleans ? You're kidding yourself. Not now, not 40 years ago, not even during prohibition would I compare any police dept corruption to today's NOPD.


They openly bribed the entire NYC Police Department and there wasn't so much as a whimper from the press.


Sounds more like a corrupt press to me.
 
2012-07-11 09:59:07 AM

Moosecakes: To be fair, even NPR news reported it this way


..and the New York Times, and MSNBC, The Washington Post, CBS, and more.


But yeah..."FAUX" NEWS!!11 LOL and all that. You're not Jon Stewart. Stop trying.
 
2012-07-11 09:59:58 AM

HotWingConspiracy: fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?

They were ordered to destroy OWS, and given every means available to do so.


some group in Guy Fawkes masks closed the hasp of a lock on the chains and jizzed all over themselves with self-satisfaction, then bled all over the crime scene when they broke their arms patting themselves on the back "YEA! take that society!"
 
2012-07-11 10:01:20 AM
In other news, there is still no evidence that Glenn Beck killed that poor girl in 1991.
 
2012-07-11 10:01:55 AM

Cubs300: Pocket Ninja: Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.

I'll be in my bunk.


Man, your gun barrel smells like s*it dude.
 
2012-07-11 10:02:08 AM

deadcrickets: Evidence: OWS didn't exist in 2004.


So what? Occupy Wall Street not existing until 2010 is only a fact on the surface. Any true American who looks deep into their heart knows the real facts. Obviously they used Fartbama's time machine. The same time machine that was used to create that fake birth announcement from 1961 in the Honolulu Advertiser.
 
2012-07-11 10:03:13 AM
Everyone involved with OWS is a murderer and a cop-car pooper besides.
 
2012-07-11 10:07:13 AM

One Bad Apple: Deathfrogg: fruitbatnt: My question - Why were they pulling DNA samples off the chain in the first place?


Because the New York city Police Department is probably the single most corrupt Law Enforcement agency in the entire country.

More corrupt than New Orleans ? You're kidding yourself. Not now, not 40 years ago, not even during prohibition would I compare any police dept corruption to today's NOPD.


They openly bribed the entire NYC Police Department and there wasn't so much as a whimper from the press.

Sounds more like a corrupt press to me.


Yeah, you're probably right. Police Corruption is endemic in every city in the country, I suppose it is just a matter of degree. My experiences with San Francisco, Seattle and Portland PD's and the year I spent in Houston have colored my perceptions of what the job is really about.

It isn't about enforcing anything but the right to use force. They could give a shiat about the actual law.
 
2012-07-11 10:12:04 AM
Whoa, a lot of butthurt for fox"news".
 
2012-07-11 10:29:22 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.


NYPD planted a black man's CD player near a murder scene.

makes perfect sense. Really. No joke.

NYPD is the most corrupt force in the nation.
 
2012-07-11 10:32:46 AM

EbolaNYC: In other news, there is still no evidence that Glenn Beck killed that poor girl in 1991.


...and no evidence that he didn't. Hey, I'm not accusing him, I'm just asking questions.
 
2012-07-11 10:42:01 AM
I assume the FAIL tag was for OWS.

Or pehaps for Subby and his bizarre obsession with Fox News?

Because I've read four or five different stories about it, and they are all consistent with the linked story.

"The chain protesters used to keep the gate ajar, seen clearly on the video, was tested for DNA and the sample was found to match the DNA collected and preserved from Fox's CD player, an official said."

OWS? Man, that takes me back, what are those rapscallions up to lately anyway?

Protesting AGAINST people who are trying to put an end to child trafficking? No, way, c'mon, that would be mind bogglingly stupid.
 
2012-07-11 10:45:02 AM

fluffy2097: HotWingConspiracy: Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.

NYPD planted a black man's CD player near a murder scene.

makes perfect sense. Really. No joke.

NYPD is the most corrupt force in the nation.


Uh they did? Kinda stupid of them considering that this is their main suspect:

www.nypost.com
 
2012-07-11 10:45:20 AM
With all the un-tested rape kits, they use their funds to test for DNA at street protests. They must really hate those masks.
 
2012-07-11 10:45:51 AM

fluffy2097: HotWingConspiracy: Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.

NYPD planted a black man's CD player near a murder scene.

makes perfect sense. Really. No joke.

NYPD is the most corrupt force in the nation.


Except for the apparent fact that it was the dead girl's CD player. Besides, everyone knows those bad-ass negroes from uptown, who murder white girls in Central Park, carry boom-boxes on their shoulders, not CD players in their hands.
 
2012-07-11 10:59:43 AM
So this is News about Fox?
 
2012-07-11 10:59:58 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Not surprising at all. Murdering OWS scumbags.


Not surprising at all. Right wing is full of murdering liars.
 
2012-07-11 11:00:25 AM

Farkengruven: With all the un-tested rape kits, they use their funds to test for DNA at street protests. They must really hate those masks.


What untested rape kits?

Human Rights Watch specifically mentioned New York City as one of the leaders in the nation in getting the rape kits tested.
 
2012-07-11 11:05:22 AM

EbolaNYC: In other news, there is still no evidence that Glenn Beck killed that poor girl in 1991.


I hear he also chained and killed a girl in 2004. Hmmmm...
 
2012-07-11 11:08:34 AM

LineNoise: OWS is obviously innocent, as murdering someone would involve actual accomplishment.


Well, they could sit around and demand that some else must do the murdering for them because it's their right.
 
2012-07-11 11:08:36 AM

Farkengruven: With all the un-tested rape kits, they use their funds to test for DNA at street protests. They must really hate those masks.


Yeah, but we all know rape is a media lie, it doesn't really happen. All girls want it.
 
2012-07-11 11:10:56 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: Pocket Ninja:
I love you and I want to make babies with you.


a baby between Pocket Ninja and PC Load Letter would implode the Fark-Space continuum.

/NTTAWT
 
2012-07-11 11:20:05 AM

Deathfrogg: Because the New York city Police Department is probably the single most corrupt Law Enforcement agency in the entire country.


Hey now!

Don't offend the New Orleans PD or Chicago PD. They've worked long and hard to be the most corrupt.

NYPD is probably #3, or maybe #4 behind the LAPD.
 
2012-07-11 11:35:59 AM

nyseattitude: HotWingConspiracy: Smells like a massive load of NYPD bullshiat.

*soft music*
This massive load of NYPD bullshiat has been brought to you by JPMorgan Chase, where the right relationship is everything. And boy oh boy can a $4.6 million dollar donation to the NYPD create the right relationship for us.


yyyyyup
 
2012-07-11 11:36:30 AM
All this butthurt is funny, because the way they stated it...is true.

DNA was linked between an old crime, and a new crime. One of those new crimes was carried out by OWS. Ergo, DNA was linked between an old crime, and something involving OWS.
 
2012-07-11 11:46:40 AM

Pocket Ninja: Subby, I'm assuming you have no experience in law enforcement, so I'll try to explain this to you. In a crime investigation, "immediate" evidence refers to evidence that is insubstantial, fleeting and swift. Evidence that, like a fleet-footed rabbit, scampers out in front of you, twitches its ears in a what seems to be a promising invite, and then, just as you begin to approach it with your hand out and your heart open, vanishes like a brown lightning flash into the twisted thicket. It is evidence, in short, that seems promising at first but ultimately does not pan out. A crime scene investigator does not want "immediate" evidence. He wants "solid" evidence. "Stable" evidence. "Long-term evidence with a stamina and lasting power." He wants to feel the evidence in his hands, firm yet malleable. Hot -- yes, even pulsing -- with possibility. He wants to attack that evidence from every angle, to turn it on its head and penetrate it as deeply as he can, penetrate all the way to its very center because he knows that only then will it yield its bountiful clues up to him, time and time and time again, until finally, exhausted from the effort, he's able to set it aside, utterly drained, and turn his mind finally to the hunt for the next invaluable lead. No immediate evidence? That's a good thing, a very good thing.


And once more, the bright green highlight pays off.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report