Skip to content
 
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.

(WTVR)   Richmond VA Police Chief be like, "Protesters kept firefighters from a house fire... (Sob)... WITH A CHILD INSIDE (meltdown)" Richmond VA Fire Department be like: "Cool story, bro, but here's what really happened"   (wtvr.com) divider line
    More: CSB, Riot, Richmond Police Chief William Smith, Richmond Fire Department, Automobile, Lt. Chris Armstrong, Water cannon, Constable, Protest  
•       •       •

6259 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jun 2020 at 3:31 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-06-02 11:18:57 PM  
Firefighters don't play those bullshiat games.
We actually save people. We don't kill them.
 
2020-06-03 2:39:23 AM  
Cops are just lying about everything now and hoping no one checks.
 
2020-06-03 3:33:20 AM  

fusillade762: Cops are just lying about everything now and hoping no one checks.


Now?
NOW!
Nowwwwwwwwwwwwww?
 
2020-06-03 3:38:15 AM  
Fact checking LEO PIOs?

Inconceivable!
 
2020-06-03 3:43:06 AM  
Whoever the protestor was that stood in front of the firetruck probably imagined himself like the guy in the Tiananmen Square massacre who stood in front of the tanks. And he was, in the same way that Donald Trump is the best President ever for his African Americans.

Don't block firetrucks asshole, and the cops need to stop interfering with paramedics treating injured protestors.
 
2020-06-03 3:43:24 AM  
It's almost like a culture of not being accountable for theur actions has made it to where they don't think stuff through.
 
2020-06-03 3:43:41 AM  
Their*

fark
 
2020-06-03 3:48:23 AM  
Police chief is a drama queen. That's pretty much the story. Give him a tiara and some lace stockings for the Xmas ball. That's only if the entire country isn't in a nuclear winter by then.
 
2020-06-03 3:51:24 AM  
A lying police officer!? Color me surprised
 
2020-06-03 3:51:56 AM  

Theeng: Their*

fark


Never acknowledge a mistake.
 
2020-06-03 3:54:14 AM  
Sounds like Richmond needs a new mayor and police chief.
 
2020-06-03 3:55:14 AM  

powhound: Give him a tiara and some lace stockings for the Xmas ball


This is my 187th favorite sentence ever.
 
2020-06-03 3:55:46 AM  

Sandelaphon: Sounds like Richmond needs a new mayor and police chief.


Sorry, just police chief, I thought the mayor was in on this too.  But they will need one if the mayor doesn't do what he can to get rid of the police chief.
 
2020-06-03 4:00:40 AM  
Dammit so much, I'm usually overly cynical and try to hold out for a second viewpoint.  But I grabbed this one (emotional police chief covered by a major local station) hook, line, and sinker.
I should know better; I don't blindly believe Trump...
This seems like a prime case of the three versions of truth, though.

C'mon, Virginia... be better (but perhaps not best).
 
2020-06-03 4:20:04 AM  
Are you trying to tell me that a police officer lied about a story to serve a political agenda about the vicious protestors?  I, for one, am shocked!!
 
2020-06-03 4:20:33 AM  
Seems like this piece of shiat police chief should be fired, lose his pension and maybe even face charges for such bullshiat.
 
2020-06-03 4:22:07 AM  

petuniapup: Dammit so much, I'm usually overly cynical and try to hold out for a second viewpoint.  But I grabbed this one (emotional police chief covered by a major local station) hook, line, and sinker.
I should know better; I don't blindly believe Trump...
This seems like a prime case of the three versions of truth, though.

C'mon, Virginia... be better (but perhaps not best).


In the big picture, Richmond is still a relatively small town. Police chiefs in much larger cities have said even stupider shiat.
 
2020-06-03 4:22:27 AM  
Cops are lying assholes, with Rick Romero, at the top of the hour.
 
2020-06-03 4:29:06 AM  
So....this is a story all about how, the house got lit and burned right down, I'd like to take a minute just sit right there, while I tell you all the police chiefs hot air. .
 
2020-06-03 4:30:39 AM  
What's that you say?  ACAB?  Perhaps not strictly true, but some days it's pert' darn close.
 
2020-06-03 4:38:45 AM  
So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?
 
2020-06-03 4:51:35 AM  

Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?


You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire with a child inside?  Or how his officers had to force their way through them to get the fire department safely on site?
 
2020-06-03 4:54:22 AM  

Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?


This. I came here to say this but see you beat me to it. He literally confirmed every fact except the street name. The building wasn't on Broad, but was on Monroe, even though the original call was actually for Broad.
 
2020-06-03 5:02:44 AM  

omnimancer28: Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?

You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire with a child inside?  Or how his officers had to force their way through them to get the fire department safely on site?


He confirmed both those things. The building didn't just spontaneously combust. It was set on fire. It was set on fire by protesters. The fire did not breach the interior. There was a child inside. A protestor blocked the firetruck. Other protesters fled when the riot police showed up. The firetruck made its way through the now cleared street to the fire. The child had already been removed from the structure.
 
2020-06-03 5:02:45 AM  

Alien Robot: Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?

This. I came here to say this but see you beat me to it. He literally confirmed every fact except the street name. The building wasn't on Broad, but was on Monroe, even though the original call was actually for Broad.


Go back and read the article.
Might want to take the jack boot out of your mouth for better comprehension ability.
 
2020-06-03 5:04:26 AM  
How do you know a cop is lying? His lips are moving.
 
2020-06-03 5:11:53 AM  

omnimancer28: Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?

You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire with a child inside?  Or how his officers had to force their way through them to get the fire department safely on site?


The fire department guy didn't speak to the intent of the car for spreading to the building.

And he confirmed that more protesters were moving to block the fire truck until police in riot gear arrived on the scene.

So, yes, besides the bits that you made up.
 
2020-06-03 5:44:40 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-03 5:48:12 AM  

Alien Robot: You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire


"...there was a car fire on W. Monroe that spread to the exterior of a nearby building".
 
2020-06-03 5:51:42 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: Alien Robot: You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire

"...there was a car fire on W. Monroe that spread to the exterior of a nearby building".


Sorry, I'd meant to quote this:

The building didn't just spontaneously combust. It was set on fire. It was set on fire by protesters.
 
2020-06-03 5:52:20 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: Alien Robot: You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire

"...there was a car fire on W. Monroe that spread to the exterior of a nearby building".


Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Or do you mean to say that police should get a pass for shooting bystanders when they were aiming at somebody else?
 
2020-06-03 5:58:29 AM  

Sandelaphon: Sandelaphon: Sounds like Richmond needs a new mayor and police chief.

Sorry, just police chief, I thought the mayor was in on this too.  But they will need one if the mayor doesn't do what he can to get rid of the police chief.


No, Mayor as well. That guy is woefully unprepared for the job, and is in way over his head now.

Can't see him winning re-election now, and his goal for higher political office is probably ranked as well.
 
2020-06-03 6:04:40 AM  

Alien Robot: He confirmed both those things.


No, he didn't.

Alien Robot: The building didn't just spontaneously combust. It was set on fire. It was set on fire by protesters.


He didn't say that.
 
2020-06-03 6:08:39 AM  

Dork Gently: ArcadianRefugee: Alien Robot: You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire

"...there was a car fire on W. Monroe that spread to the exterior of a nearby building".

Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Or do you mean to say that police should get a pass for shooting bystanders when they were aiming at somebody else?


There is a difference between a fire spreading out of control and deliberately setting fire to an occupied building.   Or do you think a police officer involved in an accidental shooting should be charged with murder in the first because there is no difference between that and manslaughter?
 
2020-06-03 6:25:42 AM  

powhound: Police chief is a drama queen. That's pretty much the story. Give him a tiara and some lace stockings for the Xmas ball. That's only if the entire country isn't in a nuclear winter by then.


A drama queen, indeed. And not the type of person I want making difficult and consequential decisions quickly and under pressure...
 
2020-06-03 6:31:02 AM  
One of the biggest, systemic, and corrosive problems in our society is the normalization of institutional lying. It's now taken almost as a matter of course that lying "for the good of the institution" (usually conflated with the good of the people in charge) is something people should do as a matter of course.

I work at a public institution and have heard one of our "leaders" justify lying about a fairly mundane thing because telling the truth would make the institution "look bad." That attitude is widespread and cancerous.
 
2020-06-03 6:32:12 AM  

Dork Gently: Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?


Do you think the car and the building are the same thing?  If not, why defend a blatantly obvious lie?
 
2020-06-03 6:40:32 AM  
cops lie
 
2020-06-03 6:57:32 AM  
So THAT'S what they be like.
I was wondering.
 
2020-06-03 7:06:08 AM  

omnimancer28: Dork Gently: ArcadianRefugee: Alien Robot: You mean besides where the police said protesters deliberately set the building on fire

"...there was a car fire on W. Monroe that spread to the exterior of a nearby building".

Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Or do you mean to say that police should get a pass for shooting bystanders when they were aiming at somebody else?

There is a difference between a fire spreading out of control and deliberately setting fire to an occupied building.   Or do you think a police officer involved in an accidental shooting should be charged with murder in the first because there is no difference between that and manslaughter?


People committing felonies have been convicted of murder when police (accidentally) shot and killed a third party while trying to stop the felonies. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

If somebody started that fire intentionally, they committed arson in burning the house.  You may not like it, but the fact that they maliciously started a fire that burned the house satisfies the legal standard for intent.
 
2020-06-03 7:07:15 AM  

cretinbob: Firefighters don't play those bullshiat games.
We actually save people. We don't kill them.


AND that is why cop wives date firefighters...

/ loveable
// fun
/// ain't skeerd
 
2020-06-03 7:07:38 AM  

The Envoy: Dork Gently: Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Do you think the car and the building are the same thing?  If not, why defend a blatantly obvious lie?


I don't know why you all bother with these idiots. They don't mean anything. They're agitators. Think about it - do you ever see them in other threads? Are they fun to interact with for anyone? No. They're generally loathed around here and only visit the one tab where they're most loathed. And they come back every day.

Why else would someone do that?

Just ignore them.
 
2020-06-03 7:14:58 AM  

The Envoy: Dork Gently: Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Do you think the car and the building are the same thing?  If not, why defend a blatantly obvious lie?


It's not wrong.  It's just using the definition of "intent" that is relevant to police work and criminal investigations, rather than the sense that most people in this thread are using.

A dude in California was sentences to death for murder after he started a fire that burned a home, killing firefighters trying to put it out.  That's because he intentionally started that fire.  People are responsible for fires that they set intentionally.
 
2020-06-03 7:38:31 AM  
The cops say...

Lets see the police report.
And Any one have video?

Trust. You don't have it, popo
 
2020-06-03 7:45:15 AM  

Alien Robot: Dork Gently: So, uh, the fire department confirmed that protesters did delay the fire truck by burning trash cans in the road and standing in front of the truck.  And they confirmed that the house's residents were outside by the time the fire truck arrived (they obviously had no way of seeing how that happened, so their observations were consistent with what the police chief said).  Exactly where did the fire department substantively disagree with the police chief?

This. I came here to say this but see you beat me to it. He literally confirmed every fact except the street name. The building wasn't on Broad, but was on Monroe, even though the original call was actually for Broad.


So the guy who dismisses every criticism of Trump by sneering "orange man bad" bravely steps up and agrees with the guy who compared keeping children in cages in Texas to having to wait in line at the DMV.

Talk about an exciting meeting of great minds. Gosh, what other fascinating things do you fellows think about?
 
2020-06-03 7:50:51 AM  

Dork Gently: The Envoy: Dork Gently: Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Do you think the car and the building are the same thing?  If not, why defend a blatantly obvious lie?

It's not wrong.  It's just using the definition of "intent" that is relevant to police work and criminal investigations, rather than the sense that most people in this thread are using.

A dude in California was sentences to death for murder after he started a fire that burned a home, killing firefighters trying to put it out.  That's because he intentionally started that fire.  People are responsible for fires that they set intentionally.


Point out where I even mentioned "intent".  The lie I revealed was that the protesters deliberately set the house on fire.  I did not state that I didn't believe that the fire spread from the car.
 
2020-06-03 7:51:40 AM  

Dork Gently: People committing felonies have been convicted of murder when police (accidentally) shot and killed a third party while trying to stop the felonies. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

If somebody started that fire intentionally, they committed arson in burning the house.  You may not like it, but the fact that they maliciously started a fire that burned the house satisfies the legal standard for intent.


Nice goalpost moving. No one said anything about charges or responsibility, we were discussing intent and actual.

They may be legally responsible for the "secondary" fire but that doesn't change the fact that they did not do so intentionally.
 
2020-06-03 7:55:13 AM  

Sandelaphon: Sandelaphon: Sounds like Richmond needs a new mayor and police chief.

Sorry, just police chief, I thought the mayor was in on this too.  But they will need one if the mayor doesn't do what he can to get rid of the police chief.


Hey, mayors hire and fire police chiefs.  Mayors should be held accountable for their employees.  It's part of why I hated our last mayor, she hired a complete idiot of a chief, couldn't even legally carry a gun with his badge.  The day she got voted out, he resigned, because he knew the new mayor was going to fire his dumb butt.  To let you know how stupid he is, he closed a store down illegally because crimes happened in that part of town around it.  Another lawsuit against our city.  Now he's really showing his stupid, and think he's going to run against Chris Swanson in the next sheriff election.  Dude, no one is going to unseat Swanson anytime soon with that protest video.

So yes, if your city has a problem with city police, fire your mayor.  Nationwide, put mayors on notice.  Fix your cops, or pound sand.  Elect new sheriffs if your sheriff is not Swanson.  State cops suck, put governors on notice.  Elected officials have power over cops, use it to our benefit.
 
2020-06-03 7:55:51 AM  

The Envoy: Dork Gently: The Envoy: Dork Gently: Do you think the car spontaneously combusted?

Do you think the car and the building are the same thing?  If not, why defend a blatantly obvious lie?

It's not wrong.  It's just using the definition of "intent" that is relevant to police work and criminal investigations, rather than the sense that most people in this thread are using.

A dude in California was sentences to death for murder after he started a fire that burned a home, killing firefighters trying to put it out.  That's because he intentionally started that fire.  People are responsible for fires that they set intentionally.

Point out where I even mentioned "intent".  The lie I revealed was that the protesters deliberately set the house on fire.  I did not state that I didn't believe that the fire spread from the car.


It is right in TFA: "Chief Smith highlighted the "particularly poignant" incident over the weekend, telling reporters that protesters intentionally set fire to an occupied building on Broad Street[...]."  The police chief used the word "intent".  You may want to argue against something he didn't say, but I'm not going to help you build that strawman.
 
2020-06-03 7:56:57 AM  

Theeng: It's almost like a culture of not being accountable for theur actions has made it to where they don't think stuff through.


Are you talking about the cops, or the protesters?
 
Displayed 50 of 83 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.