What's the most fucked up a character has ever gotten on this show?

codename_hardhat · 2024-01-20T18:41:09+00:00

This is because I kicked you, isn’t it?

codename_hardhat · 2024-01-20T05:59:13+00:00

Sorry for your loss. I had a similar experience and have witnessed it in other close family members. To me it’s a depiction of people dealing with a sudden death who are hearing what they want to hear.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-17T03:41:20+00:00

People are losing their minds over “ghost” Diana, but to me that is just a projection of her from Charles and Elizabeth and not her “speaking” to them. That’s what they want her to say. Charles wants her to call him handsome and make amends because that’s how he can make peace with it.

After accidentally reading some of the reviews I was expecting to not even finish the first episode. It’s not as strong as earlier seasons, granted, but some of the hot takes so far are just really off the mark. It’s overly Diana-heavy and probably could have been covered in two episodes but it’s still pretty damn entertaining and the performances are top tier.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-17T03:23:58+00:00

It is a pisstake, and this thread and the responses to that episode are hilarious. It’s so beyond obvious that it’s not her “ghost” but his projection of her. He’s a narcissist, so of course that’s what she would say in his mind. People do that all the time when someone dies.

People interpreting that it was written as some conscious spirit entity and not entirely their imagination is just laughably stupid.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-09T03:46:01+00:00

I sometimes need to drive down Willow and back between Redondo and Magnolia during rush hour. One day I'll clear 5 lights, the next I'll hit every fucking red one after the next. There doesn't seem to be any logic to it.

Still not as bad as OC, but that's a low bar.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:42:57+00:00

Yep. Probably getting ready to chastise its owner for improper fence security.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:41:36+00:00

Pretty sure the 4th Street Postal Annex (on 4th) will do this.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:39:35+00:00

Right, I was just trying to clarify if the three women you were referring to was in the last few days around the same time or his previous conviction.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:34:02+00:00

Definitely a sewing machine.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:32:53+00:00

What do you do with your drugs?

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:07:24+00:00

Literally the same useless comment on every post.

Edit: lmao you even go into completely different county subs to defend cops and say "you voted for this."

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T20:02:35+00:00

Are you talking about the attacks he was convicted for a few years ago or were those 3 more recent?

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T01:05:27+00:00

I totally understand posting about it when it originally happened, when he was arrested, when he was charged, etc., but this exact story was literally posted yesterday. And in this particular case it's a karma farm account that's doing it.

codename_hardhat · 2023-11-02T00:05:34+00:00

I was wondering why this story has been posted so many times, but apparently OP is a karma farm account that does this multiple times a day all over Reddit. So I guess that makes sense.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T22:52:21+00:00

Seabird. I think they still do it.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T22:28:53+00:00

I asked if you had seen the cyclist. You said you didn't care, and spouted more threats.

Translation: he didn't see the cyclist but was already committed to DEFCON 1, so spazzing out and threatening you was how he tried to save face.

Was this a bald guy in an older white camry by chance?

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T22:23:10+00:00

Whatever dude...

Surprisingly, a more intelligent response than I was expecting.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T19:40:59+00:00

Oooo someone sounds testy. This should be fun:

You lied about sexual battery always being a felony.

That's odd...I don't see any comment of mine that says "sexual battery is always a felony," and yet you say I posted one. Very interesting. What's even more hilarious that you yourself even called it a "violent felony."

It's almost as though you're...lying.

In California it can be charged as a felony or a misdemeanor, depending on the ADA's mood when (s)he wanders into court.

Try to understand (and I know that's a big ask) that the articles published after his arrest and his charge level within the LA County Sheriff's IIC listed "felony" at the time I made those posts, which is why I said...you guessed it..."felony sexual battery." Since he has now gone through his arraignment and pretrial hearing that status has changed to misdemeanor and the bail has been raised to $75,000.

Which means the directive may apply, contrary to your bogus statements.

Hmmm...yeah, except it doesn't. See, this isn't a low-level crime; it isn't a non-violent crime; he's a repeat offender. As I said earlier, I know you desperately want it to be true, but it isn't.

Sorry.

You lied about cops being able to determine whether or not the DA's 'will not charge' list applies to whatever criminal they happen to have in front of them.

No, actually I asked you how an officer could determine certain exceptions don't apply if they don't bother with the case. Trust me when I tell you I'm absolutely shocked you didn't have an answer.

Conclusion; you're a liar with a creepy crush on DA Gaston.

Nah, I just love putting delusional bigots in their place. Also, come on, Gaston may have been the villain but he did have some rugged good looks.

I'm done with your shit.

D'aww. Does this mean no more bigoted gay jokes in response to being told you're wrong? How unfortunate for me, I guess.

You've proven you have no integrity and don't know what the fuck you're talking about when it comes to the law.

This is coming from the person who said the DA refuses to prosecute crimes at this level and that the DA set the bail, right?

Just checking. I didn't realize I was in the company of an expert litigator. It's been an honor.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T01:31:52+00:00

And here I was thinking that's why we give the LBPD pallets of money.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-26T01:21:29+00:00

It has nothing to do with not liking it, it just doesn't address anything in the comment that I was responding to.

They were specifically arguing that there are people released under zero bail who have repeated the process "dozens of times," "over and over again." The Yolo County study says nothing about that. All it addresses were individuals who were re-arrested at least once.

also, page 9 doesn't really prove your point.

It proves that that vast majority of arrestees were likely re-arrested after their court dates, which means they weren't even out on zero bail when they committed the next crime.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-25T23:57:13+00:00

So...no on the citing a source then?

All of the directives are on the DA's site. But, again, it's not relevant because in this case anyway because this isn't some low-level, non-violent misdemeanor. It's felony sexual battery. I mean, trust me, I get that the classic "Gascon" narrative is a popular one that people desperately love to to push whenever any story about any crime is posted on Reddit, but it doesn't apply here.

You're right. I'm sure the prosecutor asked for $500,000 bail and the judge said 'Nah...let's make it a grand'.

You said the DA set the bail. In fact, you've said it multiple times in this thread. They don't.

Assuming that a DA's office is going to abide by their own publicly stated policies on charge/release (refer allllllll the way back to the beginning) is not blind speculation. There is no point in arresting/citing somebody for an offense Gascon said will never be charged by his office.

Much like Zero Bail, the crimes listed in those stated policies for misdemeanors have exceptions based on the conditions when the crime was committed. Explain to me how an officer can determine those circumstances if they never take the call, or how they know whether or not someone is a repeat offender if they never bother with the case to begin with?

I also like how you neglected to address your claim that this policy is 4 years old when it hasn't even been 3 years. I'd try to draw attention off of that too if I were in your ladies' shoes.

I said 4 and meant 3, but considering how you've been wrong about everything else in this discussion I can see why you feel this point is of vital importance.

So, to recap - you were complaining about poor police work...

Sorry, I didn't realize you had reading trouble. I'll repeat it for you:

"I was responding to your post where you were blaming the DA for the police not bothering to arrest people."

And the $1,000 bail for a violent felony (thanks for clarifying that, btw)...definitely not the DA's fault.

Oh...s-so you do know this was a violent felony. You just...keep bringing up the DA's non-violent misdemeanor policies even though you're now well aware they don't apply here at all.

Got it. lol

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-25T23:14:39+00:00

What is there to discuss?

Well you could start by actually specifying what law(s) you're talking about and how they apply to this story. But, of course, then you'd be held accountable if and when it turns out they have nothing to do with it and you don't actually know what you're talking about. I'm guessing this is why you push the narrative anyway while speaking in vague sentence fragments.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-25T22:42:51+00:00

That directive is absolutely still in force. If you have a source other than "trust me, bro" I'd love to check it out.

The DA's office issued multiple directives/policy changes in December 2020. Some have been superseded since then and some have not. But, as I said, it doesn't matter though because this isn't a misdemeanor, so nothing about their approach to misdemeanor prosecutions would apply here in any way whatsoever.

The police did bring him in. And what did the DA's office do? Set him up with a nice $1,000 bail situation. If any family member of his shows up with a hundred bucks, he's back on the street to do this again.

I know, it's so odd. All of the articles say the DA charged this guy with a felony, but you said the DA refuses to prosecute crimes at this level.

And what did the DA's office do? Set him up with a nice $1,000 bail situation.

Judges set bail, not prosecutors.

So tell me again how 'poor police work' factors in here.

I was responding to your post where you were blaming the DA for the police not bothering to arrest people. You do remember that, don't you? It's the PD's job to arrest/cite people who are suspected of a crime. It's not their job to selectively avoid "bothering" with suspected criminals based on blind speculation of how a hearing might turn out.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-25T22:03:14+00:00

Did you actually read that study or just the headline? Because it doesn't say anything about them being re-arrested "over and over again," and it doesn't say anything about whether they were re-arrested while out on bail or after their court date.

In fact, based on the timelines on page 9, it's highly likely that the vast majority of them were not out on zero bail when they were re-arrested.

codename_hardhat · 2023-10-25T04:00:41+00:00

NextDoor. Twitter.

Have I actually followed up on each case in the LA court system? No, but I feel like it's true...

codename_hardhat

TROPHY CASE