Comments
LeeOblivious t1_j9mm7or wrote
Not following the Law and destroying evidence/personal belongings opens the county up to liability. I for one would rather my tax dollars go to something useful instead of paying for this dipshits stunts. Who wants to bet that there is not bodycam footage of the camp cleanup/arrests. Also, it is such a great use of our taxpayer dollars doing this when they could be patrolling the streets looking for intoxicated drivers, catalytic converter thieves, people driving at stupid speeds well above the speed limit, and helping to curd domestic violence. Part of the job of law enforcement leadership is to set up priorities and work on what helps the most people be safe. This sheriff just seems to like stunts and I'm sad for the deputies that have to work under him.
probably_inside t1_j9mxzr3 wrote
Arnott is also on the board of a far right sheriff's group. That is known for being election denialists, pro insurrection. Protect America now. Membership is 17.76 a month, non tax deductible. The website reads like your standard far right grift.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9mjw7k wrote
Well that feels a bit damning
Donohoed t1_j9moki9 wrote
Declining to comment isn't an admission of guilt. Absolutely nothing was established in that entire statement other than its wrong to treat homeless people that way, to which nobody disagreed. I can definitely see why they wouldn't comment to them if that's how they spin things.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9oju2m wrote
If what's how they spin things? That treating homeless people that way is wrong? If nobody disagrees, then what's the problem? Especially if they didn't actually do it?
All they need to say is "That's inaccurate." Or "This isn't the full story." Instead they're just blowing off journalists with blanket generaliztions about fake news. This is the only sensible response to being caught red handed, and a nonsensical response to be falsely accused
Donohoed t1_j9olo80 wrote
You got real hostile real quick for absolutely no reason and you sound absurd. It's clear from all your comments that you read whatever you want instead of what people say and were actually just looking for a circle jerk, not actual information. They can't just comment without investigating. Maybe somebody did do this, maybe it was even cops. I don't disagree at all that it needs investigated by state or federal authorities and/or independent sources and i certainly never suggested its OK to treat anyone like that, ever, and nobody else suggested that either. That's just your paranoid imagination.
Whatever happened there was a crime. Period. Whether real cops did it, fake cops, teenagers, the homeless people themselves, the property owners, whoever, it was a crime. Active investigations almost always are responded to with no comment until they have enough information to comment. Yes, obviously if he authorized it he's not going to admit that openly. But if it was done without his authorization by some gung-ho asshole cops and he says cops didn't do it then that'll come back on him as a lie even if he just didn't know until after the investigation.
Don't just pretend that anybody who doesn't immediately want the death penalty for all cops without an investigation into what actually happened must hate all homeless people. That's what you sound like. This needs investigated by whoever is in the appropriate position to do so, just like any other crime. The statement that i was referring to above acts like them not making a comment is an admission of guilt, and that's not how things work. They wrote an entire article based around how guilty they must be for not immediately commenting. That's crap journalism.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9phipr wrote
If you read hostility in my reply, then it's because I take issue with shrugging one's shoulders at the oppression of the marginalized, especially when it's justified with flimsy and unfounded skepticism.
I'm not going to play the ad-homenim game, so I'll just ignore all the jabs at my character. It's a waste of our time and energy.
>Active investigations almost always are responded to with no comment until they have enough information to comment.
But that's not what happened here. Not only do they have plenty of information to comment - but they also specified that they will not comment because they don't have any trust in the media reporters. It isn't that they lack information or that they are investigating - it's that they refuse to share any information at all.
>Don't just pretend that anybody who doesn't immediately want the death penalty for all cops without an investigation into what actually happened must hate all homeless people
Just going to point out: The idea that I'm pro-death-penalty, anti-cop, and that I don't think there should be an investigation... all incorrect.
Not making a comment isn't an admission of guilt. But it's foolish to pretend that their hostility towards the very question of it is anything but suspicious. The least they could say is "we have no comment at this time." But their response conveys "We have no comment to give at ANY time."
Wendypeffy t1_j9qoyhf wrote
He’s not wrong that KY3 tends to take some significant “journalistic liberties” with their writing. With that being said, I think I should be illegal for law enforcement to flat out decline to comment on their actions. If you are concerned about your public perception, don’t behave in a way that would be publicly rejected. At the very least sign a contract that all interviews must be recorded with exclusively raw, unedited footage published. It would accomplish the same goal and maintain the true integrity of the interview for both parties.
hatesgod t1_j9o4ihg wrote
highly suggesting this article for anyone seeking more information, a very thorough story.
Donohoed t1_j9m8op9 wrote
Looked around at a few articles and it doesn't sound like there's any evidence either supporting or refuting it, just a few opinion articles expressing what at this point seems to be unfounded outrage.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9ma7d6 wrote
Yeah, if this actually happened then that's outrageous but there's so little to go off of.
They say that they're being stonewalled when asking questions about it, which does seem a little suspicious. It'd help if the police department would at least make a statement
edit: In case anyone's curious, someone shared a link to the original video of the aftermath, and someone else shared an article posted today where the police again declined to comment. I'm as convinced as I'll ever be. If this didn't happen, the police have no reason not to deny it
Donohoed t1_j9mbhwq wrote
Yeah but as many unnamed witnesses as the article claims there were, including people from various ministries, you'd think at least one person would've recorded something or even taken a picture. Even of the aftermath by somebody who didn't personally see it happen. But there's nothing. That sounds even fishier to me than the sheriff not feeding into it
_ism_ t1_j9mc9xh wrote
I believe videos of the smoldering aftermath were submitted to Pastor Christie love which she shared from those unnamed victims on her Facebook in the story in early February that spurred this
-lurkbeforeyouleap- t1_j9mvo2w wrote
I don't have a dog in this fight at all, but is it possible the property owner burned it rather than the deputies? The deputies would not be able to burn the camp on private property without breaking the law themselves (even if they have permission, I would view this as a public funds misuse). Just offering a different viewpoint.
DTaH_Flux t1_j9nknnh wrote
Police break the law all the time.
Fallout_NewCheese t1_j9ol50q wrote
Is this your first time seeing cops do something horrific? And at that point is this your first day in America? Cops do shit like this and much worse things constantly because who's gonna arrest the cops? Then if they do something bad enough to actually see any consequences the "consequences" are usually just a paid leave. They also have the strongest unions in the country with a massive budget to give these cops legal protection.
_ism_ t1_j9myirm wrote
i don't know why you are replying to me, i was simply offering what they'd asked about before they edited to reflect that
Iron_Worker_ t1_j9miq6f wrote
Outrage concerning the treatment of homeless people by law enforcement in this area is anything but unfounded.
Donohoed t1_j9mlf3g wrote
The treatment is outrageous but the authenticity is unfounded.
VaderTower t1_j9ml0ab wrote
Yeah as stated previously, I think we're all ready with pitchforks if it turns out to be true, and on one hand many of us won't be surprised.
That being said, we do need some more evidence unfortunately. While eyewitness testimony should be enough, it's just not in this case.
If proven correct, this has national news written all over it.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9oji9a wrote
>edit: In case anyone's curious, someone shared a link to the original video of the aftermath, and someone else shared an article posted today where the police again declined to comment. I'm as convinced as I'll ever be. If this didn't happen, the police have no reason not to deny it
VaderTower t1_j9pvmbf wrote
Yeah I saw the smouldering video. I agree it was burned but by who?
And I read the article, sounds like the department just doesn't share with that paper because they have a grudge.
Again I think all of this is plausible but I'm not ready to hang anyone yet.
Arc-ansas t1_j9mp8c8 wrote
Demanding evidence on Instagram isn't enough. Is anyone going to file a FOIA with the department? Have any activists/organizations approached local media to pitch a story?
Interesting_Spot7363 t1_j9mrkmx wrote
That’s what they plan to do. Organize people to demand answers from the police department. Awareness is a start. By itself it doesn’t do a lot but these posts are very necessary for informing the public
_ism_ t1_j9ogegb wrote
Yes. The advocates for the homeless are trying to raise awareness and get media coverage in a community that generally despises the homeless and ignores homelessNESS. I get so irritated by these people asking for evidence or a proper news release about it already.
​
Journalism starts on the ground and Christie Love and crew do that kind of ground work as just one small part of their massive outreach and awareness efforts. I respect that. I wish the community as a greater whole would help bring these stories up, but some people want to quash it down because it's "not a story yet, nothing's been proven" or they expect the newspaper to generate its own accurate facts somehow out of thin air, facts that are being concealed by those in power when observant folks have questions.
ghenghis_could t1_j9oicw5 wrote
It's been two weeks and not one story. I find it kinda inflammatory and if there is one thing I'd like to watch burn it would be this shitty police department
Mysteroo OP t1_j9ok4n3 wrote
Hope I'm not being included in that irritation towards those asking for evidence. Half the reason Is shared this was to get it some publicity if it WAS real - which I now wholeheartedly believe it is
_ism_ t1_j9okipk wrote
thank you. i am a formerly homeless person myself. my experiences and the anecdotes of those i shared the experience with, cause me to intuitively believe this story even if I didn't personally know Christie Love. But since i've been housed i haven't stayed in touch, been doing a sort of media diet and trying to get healthy mentally here now, but this is the one local topic I still follow.
Donohoed t1_j9osuz2 wrote
You get irritated by people that don't immediately just believe things they read on the internet without evidence?
SansSheriff_MO t1_j9yzvat wrote
I’ve submitted a sunshine request to the GCSO. Copied the attorney general and crystal quade as well
Arc-ansas t1_ja00s38 wrote
Nice work!
I've never heard police calling it a "sunshine request" before. Usually it's referred to as FOIA (Freedom of Information Act Requests). From what I can tell generally a Sunshine request has to do with government meetings and being able to get access to those minutes, actions, votes etc. And originally the Sunshine law was a federal law passed after Watergate that some states also passed their own version later. Guess it's a Missouri thing to call it Sunshine.
DrinkWaterDaily7 t1_j9mhgp7 wrote
This happened. Regarding the request to verify it’s real:
- If you were given two minutes to gather as much as possible before it was torched, would you be videoing?
- If you were unsheltered, you might not have a phone.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9mje9i wrote
I'm not looking for evidence out of hard skepticism, was just curious if this instagram post from a political profile was the only source claiming it even happened
Turns out, it's not. u/EcoAffinity linked an older post about it with a video of the aftermath. Convincing enough for me
DrinkWaterDaily7 t1_j9mkt1s wrote
This action is horrendous. Absolutely cruel, mean, and any other adjective of hurtful you want to apply.
EcoAffinity t1_j9mhfh0 wrote
Edit: link to another post here shortly after the incident was reported on social media with discussion
Benway23 t1_j9mm5mi wrote
Anyone who does not accept that this event happened is a damned fool.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9okkq1 wrote
Gotta be honest - That really strikes me as needlessly polarizing and unhelpful
I didn't accept that this happened at first because I literally only heard about it one time on a political Instagram profile.
Now that I've read more about it and saw a video of the aftermath, I completely believe it. Am I still a fool? Or are we maybe handing out insults a little too liberally
Imactuallyadogg t1_j9n39uq wrote
I highly doubt there are cops in full uniform burning down homeless camps. I can maybe bulldozing but not fire.
[deleted] t1_j9nhbk4 wrote
[deleted]
Great-Bratton t1_j9rhg7s wrote
Official response:
“Regarding Illegal Encampments and Trespassers
A LETTER FROM THE SHERIFF:
As the elected Sheriff of Greene County, I have promised to uphold the law and protect the constitutional rights of our citizens. It is my duty and obligation to respond to crime and assist citizens who are seeking law enforcement action.
I want to make it very clear, that when a person enters onto the property of another or remains unlawfully, whether it’s a poacher on a farmer’s rural land or a person setting up camp on private property in the city, they are trespassing and this is a crime. A property owner / land owner is under no obligation to delay the removal of the trespasser or permit the continued trespassing or occupancy of their property by a trespasser.
During the summer of 2022, I began responding to the outcries of Greene County Citizen’s whose private properties within the city of Springfield and outside the city had been overrun by trespassers who had set up illegal encampments. These criminals had damaged and contaminated their land, polluted their waterways, and cut down their trees. These criminals had littered acres and acres of property with garbage, stolen property and hazardous items such as drug paraphernalia, syringes, chemicals and human excrement. These criminals had set up dangerous booby traps and instruments which would seriously harm the property owners or anyone not aware of them.
At the request of private property owners, I responded with deputies to a number of their properties and arrested and removed these trespassers from their land. Leaving behind for the property owners an indescribable, overwhelming amount of hazardous garbage. While some of these property owners have the financial resources to clean up and remove this garbage, most do not. These people are left concerned about local government deadlines and cleanup fines with no resources to help restore their land and properties back to a safe and clean environment.
On February 10, I responded with deputies to a location in northern Springfield, the site of an illegal encampment. This particular site was made up of several connected parcels, owned by multiple citizens who have spent their entire lifetimes living in this area. These citizens, a grandmother of three, and elderly woman and other neighbors described that they were afraid to enter onto their land or even allow their children to play outside. They expressed fear they would be harmed and requested assistance and protection during cleanup of the most hazardous garbage on their land. Inspecting over twelve camp and debris sites, deputies and property owners worked together to identify and separate the most hazardous garbage from the five worst sites into piles. Sheriff’s deputies did not ignite the piles.
Because this issue concerns so many of our citizens, I have recently been contacted by a number of business owners and citizens who have offered to assist. These concerned citizens have offered to provide resources such as dumpsters and equipment to help private property owners clean up and restore their land back to environmentally safe conditions.
In closing, those who claim that land owners should allow transient strangers to take up residency on their land are not being honest about what they would expect from law enforcement if they were in the position of the land owner. Am I to believe that these advocates for trespassing would allow these transient people to pitch tents in their front yards? There are in fact Springfield area property owners who allow and welcome people to camp and live on their property. I am not concerned with the choices made by these property owners; I am simply standing up for the rights of the property owners who do not welcome trespassers and crime.
Sheriff Jim C Arnott”
Mysteroo OP t1_j9tl869 wrote
Thanks for sharing this!
It sounds like there's still a LOT of missing information. He talks about "twelve different camp and debris" sites they visited on February 10th and their efforts to help the owners clean up, but he doesn't even mention any interactions with the homeless people who were there that day.
If deputies did not ignite the piles, then where is this story coming from? There's a whole video showing a smoldering pile of stuff that hasn't been explained.
Did the homeless people there all just spontaneously decide to burn their own belongings and collectively lie to the pastor about it? In which case - why does the Sherriff mention anything the police did on Febuary 10th at all since it's apparently entirely unrelated to what happened?
And if they DID burn their own belongings, why doesn't the Sheriff include the fact that one of those piles of garbage they cleaned was a smoldering heap of burnt stuff? Or is he just talking about totally unrelated locations and trash?
Then in the last paragraph, the Sherriff argues a strawman against people who think land owners should let the homeless live wherever they want - but that's not the issue here. People aren't angry that the homeless were made to leave, they're angry that their belongings were seized and burned without apparent warning
This kind of just leaves more confused
cock_a_doodle_dont t1_j9mv8jj wrote
VOTE ARNOTT OUT OF OFFICE
AND STUPID FUCKING BOB DIXON TOO
PossibleSatisfaction t1_j9qikko wrote
You can't vote him out if no one runs against him. He's ran unopposed for at least the last 3 elections. 2020, 2016 and 2012.
laffingriver t1_j9ozfw9 wrote
greene county and the police have done themselves no favors by treating us with contempt.
based on their behavior, of course we think they are capable of this. of course we dont believe what they say.
[deleted] t1_j9myevh wrote
[deleted]
Koyoteelaughter t1_j9p25zz wrote
Then someone needs to file a federal lawsuit against the greene county sheriff's department. They may be homeless, but there are federal protections against these kinds of things. In California where the homeless population is much larger than other states, it is illegal for police to destroy the possessions of transients including the cardboard box they're living in. It counts as a fourth amendment seizure under the law.
Using gasoline to incinerate personal items of the homeless if a violation of their civil rights. If someone were to file a lawsuit on their behalf, a federal judge would put a stop to this kind of activity.
Someone should refer this to the ACLU.
existentialkush t1_j9pwscn wrote
I'd say we could get proof from the body cam footage from that day that they use our tax money for but life isn't that fair.
Miserable_Figure7876 t1_j9ogqzs wrote
The response from the Sheriff's office should disqualify Jim Arnott from holding public office.
It won't disqualify him, but if should.
whatlaw-wasbroken t1_j9ojjk2 wrote
Anybody have an address for where this took place ? Public or private property?
smith_winston_1984 t1_j9oour4 wrote
It was probably diesel, gasoline is to volatile to light controlled fire with.
fouronesevenland t1_j9qrjm3 wrote
What is this fucking clandestine section 31 bullshit. Christ.
[deleted] t1_j9mzirx wrote
[deleted]
frankydank1994 t1_j9ow708 wrote
Everyone should be foia requesting all officers interaction that day! How can we let our paid public servents treat American citizens this way!!! I'm going to the sheriffs office today to request the C.A.D. and incident reports for all officers that day! This is disgusting behavior.
ghenghis_could t1_j9oi6xt wrote
There is literally no stories anywhere except supposedly from this pastors conversations. If this happened it should be considered domestic terrorism and the fbi should be involved
Mysteroo OP t1_j9okp70 wrote
Not accurate >edit: In case anyone's curious, someone shared a link to the original video of the aftermath, and someone else shared an article posted today where the police again declined to comment. I'm as convinced as I'll ever be. If this didn't happen, the police have no reason not to deny it
ghenghis_could t1_j9ol5z0 wrote
Literally the only article and that picture could be from anywhere. And they have every reason to deny it and no positive reason to confirm it. Again, if true this is terrorism and the fbi should be involved.
Mysteroo OP t1_j9pfmr3 wrote
Picture?? That link is a full video evaluating all the damage. This is posted by a well-known local pastor who advocates for the homeless.
It is wildly speculative to believe she's just making it up rather than to consider that this might have actually happened - ESPECIALLY when the police department is repeatedly refusing to even deny it. There is EXCLUSIVELY evidence to believe it DID happen, and none to support the idea that it didn't. To pretend like there are "literally no stories anywhere" is just straight-up wrong.
It doesn't matter who "should" be involved because the reality is that no one is doing anything about it right now. Probably because there's too many 'skeptics' who'd rather ignore the plight of the homeless people who annoy them than consider that the police might actually be acting with reckless disregard for the marginalized
EcoAffinity t1_j9micy5 wrote
From FB group: Springfield /Greene County Start Local, here is the post commentary regarding the Springfield Daily Citizen's article posted today:
>For a story on the torching of unsheltered encampments, Sheriff Arnott declined to answer questions from the reporter and said “no thanks, you do not print accurate information anyway so there is no sense in responding to you.” >Monica Horton, who is the council person for the area where the camps were burned, termed it “a complete nightmare. We should not be at war — burning personal belongings, life necessities. We are not at war with residents who are without shelter.” The Sheriff refused to confirm the story, but three unsheltered people told the reporter the same story they told Christie Love, that deputies showed up with gas cans, gave them minutes to leave, and their belongings were burned. >Greene County Commissioner Bob Dixon also declined to comment, although last month he called Arnott’s actions “tough love” and the right thing to do. >This isn’t the first time Arnott has attacked reporters. I remember in 2018 when the MEC ethics investigation into Greene County was concluded Arnott said to KY3 reporter Emily Wood: “This is why we don’t talk to Emily. Because you don’t report facts, you make things up. And that’s why we don’t talk to you anymore.” (SGF News-Leader, April 26, 2018)
The Sheriff has renewed raids against the homeless community this year.