Media is snooping: Wootton officer was not at Lakewood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

NP, I think PP is inferring, based on lots of different data points, that there is a sense of complacency and entitlement that is rampant in these positions. If we gather all the various clues (if they would only be transparent!) we would see that there is a definite pattern of them not being where they are supposed to be, for various reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

NP, I think PP is inferring, based on lots of different data points, that there is a sense of complacency and entitlement that is rampant in these positions. If we gather all the various clues (if they would only be transparent!) we would see that there is a definite pattern of them not being where they are supposed to be, for various reasons.

Wait, so now we have gone from concern about not being clear about where this one officer was at one specific time....to a conclusion that ALL officers are complacent and entitled in general?

What are these data points?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

NP, I think PP is inferring, based on lots of different data points, that there is a sense of complacency and entitlement that is rampant in these positions. If we gather all the various clues (if they would only be transparent!) we would see that there is a definite pattern of them not being where they are supposed to be, for various reasons.

+1 Precisely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

NP, I think PP is inferring, based on lots of different data points, that there is a sense of complacency and entitlement that is rampant in these positions. If we gather all the various clues (if they would only be transparent!) we would see that there is a definite pattern of them not being where they are supposed to be, for various reasons.

Wait, so now we have gone from concern about not being clear about where this one officer was at one specific time....to a conclusion that ALL officers are complacent and entitled in general?

What are these data points?

Not a conclusion. A suspicion.

We can only reach conclusions once someone holds MCPS or Rockville PD accountable for the noted discrepancies.

[Anonymous]

The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My brother is a LEO in another area. A few years ago, there was a barricade situation near a daycare center and all LEOs in the immediate vicinity were called in to respond.

One guy never showed up.

He claimed he was chasing a suspect in a mugging. However, no victim ever came forward.

It turned out that he was working a second job while on the clock.

And there you have it.

Just so I am interpreting this right, you are concluding based on an unrelated anonymous anecdote that the officer in this instance was working a second job at the time of the shooting?

NP, I think PP is inferring, based on lots of different data points, that there is a sense of complacency and entitlement that is rampant in these positions. If we gather all the various clues (if they would only be transparent!) we would see that there is a definite pattern of them not being where they are supposed to be, for various reasons.

Wait, so now we have gone from concern about not being clear about where this one officer was at one specific time....to a conclusion that ALL officers are complacent and entitled in general?

What are these data points?

Not a conclusion. A suspicion.

We can only reach conclusions once someone holds MCPS or Rockville PD accountable for the noted discrepancies.

Your suspicion is that all officers are complacent and entitled? Based on what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

She said it countless times to parents who asked. Then she put out a formal statement via parent square tueday 10:55 am (the day after the shooting) because so many parents emailed and asked in person.

Then she continued to maintain that he doesn’t show up on tape after 1:30 pm. Literally, she’s told me this in person at least three times.

Then when the article came out, she had an all staff meeting w Lakewood staff where she confirmed that the tapes show a police cruiser did a loop around our bus lanes for 45 seconds, never exists, and was off of Lakewood property by 1:30 pm. She told the staff that she has not lie and will continue to tell the truth, and asked all staff to tell the truth if parents keep asking as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

She said it countless times to parents who asked. Then she put out a formal statement via parent square tueday 10:55 am (the day after the shooting) because so many parents emailed and asked in person.

Then she continued to maintain that he doesn’t show up on tape after 1:30 pm. Literally, she’s told me this in person at least three times.

Then when the article came out, she had an all staff meeting w Lakewood staff where she confirmed that the tapes show a police cruiser did a loop around our bus lanes for 45 seconds, never exists, and was off of Lakewood property by 1:30 pm. She told the staff that she has not lie and will continue to tell the truth, and asked all staff to tell the truth if parents keep asking as well.

Never exits* as in the police officer in the cruiser who was at Lakewood for all of 45 seconds before driving off, never once exits his car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

She said it countless times to parents who asked. Then she put out a formal statement via parent square tueday 10:55 am (the day after the shooting) because so many parents emailed and asked in person.

Then she continued to maintain that he doesn’t show up on tape after 1:30 pm. Literally, she’s told me this in person at least three times.

Then when the article came out, she had an all staff meeting w Lakewood staff where she confirmed that the tapes show a police cruiser did a loop around our bus lanes for 45 seconds, never exists, and was off of Lakewood property by 1:30 pm. She told the staff that she has not lie and will continue to tell the truth, and asked all staff to tell the truth if parents keep asking as well.

It is really disgusting that you would lie like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

She said it countless times to parents who asked. Then she put out a formal statement via parent square tueday 10:55 am (the day after the shooting) because so many parents emailed and asked in person.

Then she continued to maintain that he doesn’t show up on tape after 1:30 pm. Literally, she’s told me this in person at least three times.

Then when the article came out, she had an all staff meeting w Lakewood staff where she confirmed that the tapes show a police cruiser did a loop around our bus lanes for 45 seconds, never exists, and was off of Lakewood property by 1:30 pm. She told the staff that she has not lie and will continue to tell the truth, and asked all staff to tell the truth if parents keep asking as well.

It is really disgusting that you would lie like this.

How and why are you claiming that PP is lying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cars all have trackers. This is really really easy for Rockville PD to answer. He probably stopped for an errand or a coffee on his way back from the ES but it’s very odd that they won’t just say that.

It really is easy! And thus it is rather weird that they won’t clarify…especially when you have the principal of said ES doubling/tripling/quadrupling down and with footage that supports her.

Did the principle say it more than once?

She said it countless times to parents who asked. Then she put out a formal statement via parent square tueday 10:55 am (the day after the shooting) because so many parents emailed and asked in person.

Then she continued to maintain that he doesn’t show up on tape after 1:30 pm. Literally, she’s told me this in person at least three times.

Then when the article came out, she had an all staff meeting w Lakewood staff where she confirmed that the tapes show a police cruiser did a loop around our bus lanes for 45 seconds, never exists, and was off of Lakewood property by 1:30 pm. She told the staff that she has not lie and will continue to tell the truth, and asked all staff to tell the truth if parents keep asking as well.

It is really disgusting that you would lie like this.

How and why are you claiming that PP is lying?

PP here: not lying. Ask any Lakewood staff about the meeting that happened. Ask them also if the officer was there at time of shooting. Ask them about the footage. Ask them about the principal’s parent square message the day after the shooting—in fact, ask the hundreds of Lakewood parents who got this message saying the officer was not at Lakewood. Our principal and our story have been consistent since the shooting.

I’m not offended because I know I’m not lying. And why would I? What would be my incentive?

But I am quite disgusted by people who are silent on this and those actively covering it up.