|
Rocket man
|
Posted 9:45 am, 10/30/2018
|
Looks like lies to me. The shooting could have been avoided if Howell and the rest of the officers used a little common sense and defused the situation before it escalated. Lets see - went by Brandon when in school but now going by Phil trying to ride his dad's coat tells. Lying in federal court, implicated in shooting death of a blind man, lacks law enforcement and management experience to be sheriff and displays a big cross on political ads ignoring freedom of religion for others! What else can we come up with. Why is this guy running? Not a legitimate candidate no matter how you feel about Bucky. Please Ashe County don't vote Brandon I mean Phil or is it Brandon. We have had enough turmoil and bad publicity in our Sheriffs office lately!
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 9:43 am, 10/30/2018
|
What part of:
Under these facts, the Court cannot say, at this time, that Defendant Howell (a detective with the Ashe County Sheriff's Department) could not "foresee" that a deadly encounter would result from his false and material misrepresentations.11
do you not understand. There it is in black and white!!! Signed the Honorable Richard Voorhees!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
jack rip her
|
Posted 8:51 am, 10/30/2018
|
New clown why are you all of a sudden wanting to crucify Howell when he never fired a shot. You should be redirecting your attention to Porky the pig and his side kick. They killed him not Howell.
I bet you are kin to bucket arent you?
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 8:17 am, 10/30/2018
|
Illiterate, the liar is you
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 7:54 am, 10/30/2018
|
You are the one that is uneducated and illiterate!!! The case absolutely says he lied!!! Go read the case again moron!!! I printed the courts argument directly from the case you idiot!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
Huskies_Fan1
|
Posted 7:22 am, 10/30/2018
|
That’s correct, I’m saying that he never lied or at least there’s NOTHING in any of those court filings that would even remotely suggest that he lied.
I’m sorry that you don’t have the educational background to understand what you’re reading.
Tell the truth NEW READER!!!!!
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 7:14 am, 10/30/2018
|
Husky, so are you denying he lied!!!! Yes or no!!!!
I can see all the cases brought before the court now;
Mr Howell have you ever lied in a judicial proceeding before???
Yes your honor I lied to the SBI in the Houck case!!!!
Verdict case dismissed!!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
Huskies_Fan1
|
Posted 6:51 am, 10/30/2018
|
New Reader,
I’m sorry but you simply don’t understand what you’re reading. That’s how lawyers respond to those types of very common lawsuits. That’s the language you use to say “Even if all this crap is true, and we aren’t saying it is, but EVEN if it is, my client still has done nothing wrong. It’s an argument to the court that even if we stipulate to all of this being true, the plantiff STILL has no case.
You can pull quotes from that lawsuits until you’re blue in the face, you’ll just keep looking crazy and desperate.
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 12:02 am, 10/30/2018
|
Afic, maybe you should see an atty!!! What part of him admitting don't you understand!!!
Defendant Howell argues that, even if he failed to disclose the facts alleged by Plaintiff, and even if he made the alleged false statements prior to the deadly encounter....
He is making the argument on his on behalf!!!
He is a liar according to his own admission per the court case!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 11:30 pm, 10/29/2018
|
You really should find an attorney and ask them to explain that ruling to you. The fact that the decision uses the word alleged is very important. Start with that.
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 10:38 pm, 10/29/2018
|
You are right Afic, he should have fired Brandon for Omitting and Falsifying Statements to the SBI per the court case!!
Kase, I have seen no public statement from the family supporting your statement!!!
Are you really trying to defend someone who lied!!!
He is no better than Terry!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 10:30 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Let’s keep in mind that after Houck was killed, the chief deputy of the ACSO made no changes to policy or personnel to try to prevent the same type of tragedy from happening again.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 10:26 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Sassy, you don’t know crap about addiction or drug use. First of all, it’s not a modern problem. It has nothing to do with kids being raised “soft”. You’d do yourself a favor to quit talking on this subject because you are only proving how little you know. Fortunately, addiction was accepted by medical professionals as a disease and now they treat it as other illnesses when treating and researching it. Science works.
|
|
Kase
|
Posted 9:59 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Reader, you keep trying to blow smoke. The Houck family is supporting and voting for Howell. That should tell you a lot. You must be in danger of losing your job.
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 9:56 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Houck v. Howell et al, No. 5:2014cv00187 - Document 55 (W.D.N.C. 2016)
Quit lying!!!! It was heard in Federal Court in the Western District of NC in 2016!!!!
This is the decision from the court not a trial attorney!!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!
|
|
monty
|
Posted 9:33 pm, 10/29/2018
|
onlyinashe From past experience, assisting in the defense of several wrongful action suits, the plaintiff's attorney will write the complaint as if the person being sued were the worst scum to ever walk the face of the earth. Words are carefully chosen, statements are made which appear to be facts, all in an attempt to make the case against the defendant seem to be a slam dunk.
What you have to remember is that the document you read has not been heard before a jury, no allegation has been proven as fact, it is just a well paid attorney doing his job to extract a settlement from the named defendants. Many times cases are filed which name many defendants some of whom have no or very limited involvement in the case, this tactic preserves the plaintiff's ability to collect information and fill out the case against the principal defendants. You'll often see defendants dropped from a case prior to settlement or trial because the plaintiff has not gathered enough hard evidence to move forward.
|
|
Alford
|
Posted 9:19 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Phil Howell is a good man. Me and my family have already voted for him.
|
|
new reader
|
Posted 9:06 pm, 10/29/2018
|
Tabs, Phil's website said "My ONLY involvement was dialing 911 after someone stepped on the front porch and fired 18 rounds from a shotgun at 11:00 at night towards my home."
The only problem with that statement is that there is more to the story!!!! Looks like Brandon Omitted a Few FACTS!!!!
Here is an excerpt from the trial Houck vs Howell:
Defendant Howell challenges the Plaintiff's causation theory. He argues that he cannot be held liable for the Decedent's death because his actions, viewed separately and independently, but in context, were not the proximate cause of the Decedent's injury. In essence, Defendant Howell argues that, even if he failed to disclose the facts alleged by Plaintiff, and even if he made the alleged false statements prior to the deadly encounter, Defendant Deputy Hopkins' actions constituted an intervening and superseding cause of the Decedent's death, thereby breaking the causal chain between Defendant Howell's actions and the shooting. At this juncture, the Court disagrees with Defendant Howell's argument. After Defendant Howell made the call to report Decedent to the authorities, Defendant went on to direct a method by which the responding officers might approach and confront the Decedent. Defendant Howell, however, allegedly omitted and falsified critical facts respecting the Decedent's dangerous propensities and his inability to utilize his senses of eyesight and hearing to distinguish between friendly law enforcement and hostile intruders. Defendant Deputy Hopkins and the others are alleged to have followed Defendant Howell's suggestions. Based on the complaint's allegations, the Court must conclude that Plaintiff has plausibly alleged that Defendant Howell's alleged falsified statements and omissions acted to "prime" and catalyze the subsequent encounter between the Decedent and responding officers, thus establishing the context in which a deadly encounter could occur between (1) a man incapable of distinguishing between law enforcement and those that might do him harm, and (2) law enforcement officers "primed" to anticipate a confrontation with a dangerous, erratic, and armed individual, who had previously threatened to kill any police officer daring enough to step onto his property. Under these facts, the Court cannot say, at this time, that Defendant Howell (a detective with the Ashe County Sheriff's Department) could not "foresee" that a deadly encounter would result from his false and material misrepresentations.11
You have to ask yourself one question, do we want someone who even the court recognizes has omitted and falsified statements to be our sheriff!!!!!! This is not my word, this is directly from the case Houck vs Howell. He directed his fellow deputies to respond to a situation and omitted and falsified facts that might have changed the outcome of the situation!!!!
Dont't take my word for it, google Houck vs Howell and read the case for yourself!!!!!
Tell the Truth Brandon!!!!!!
|
|
sassy62
|
Posted 12:08 am, 10/28/2018
|
Fins....your foolishness knows no bounds......our son is a doctor. You talk just to hear your head roar. Solutions to today's problems will not come easy or ever from your warped mind. Politics never had anything to do with it. We are raising our kids too soft. They are ripe for the drug culture.Your attempt to always have the last word is just that......an attempt. What is right will be what people remember.
|
|
aFicIoNadoS
|
Posted 10:08 pm, 10/27/2018
|
Sassy, you are starting to prove yourself to be another Democrat idiot. Don’t be afraid of science. There is a reason doctors trust it
|
|
|
