Cameron Sutton in trouble

#103
#103
Jaxon_Vol2017 said:
Tldr.
All of that may be true, I didn't have the energy to try and decipher your incoherent ramblings. However, what I responded to was what your original post said that isn't true. Because you definitely implied that leo would just go around and put a tracker on random people just to keep tabs on them, and that sir, 100% isn't true. If there is a tracker put on a car by law enforcement it would have to be okayed by a judge. Similar to what happens with a search warrant.
Click to expand...
And I think you're deliberately misinterpreting my post. By hoice you ignored me saying actions/policy dffer by precinct, region, or jurisdiction. So your accusation I said PDs were installing trackers willnilly is an intentional falsehood. Agencies that employ this practice, I call it supreme butt covering, covering their rears with both hands and all four feet.

The reason the Supreme Court ruled that police can't put tracking devices on vehicles was because that was exactly what they were doing. Someone got pizzed off enough to take it to court. It went all the way up to the highest court due to police resistance. PDs, of course, contested this as they wanted to continue to be ABLE to do so. You can dance around, insult me, pretzel twist my words all you want, fact is PDs were already doing this. Does the SCOTUS ruling stop illegal warrantless installing trackers? NO! Typical of human beings, when you create a better lock, people will invent better ways to circumvent that lock. In the case of trackers, PDs adapted. They discovered when they can't get a warrant to do so, they don't have to. Here's why:

Reason 1. Insurance companies offer voluntarily trackers to monitor drivers and help be more selective for the safest drivers to insure. Also, it acts as a deterrent for unsafe driving. Thus reducing driver premium rates. Does Sutton have such a voluntary device on his vehicle, I don't know, and I doubt it.
Reason2. Car dealers are known to install trackers in case they have to repossess the car. They'll know where to find it, and send a tow truck. Sutton has one? I don't know, but it's possible.
Reason 3. Rental car agencies are known to install trackers for the same reason as dealers, but also for maintenance intervals, recover a rental that ends up being stolen. Among other reasons.

So? PDs don't have to get a warrant to install trackers, just find out if a car has one from an insurance company, car dealer, and car rental agency. Does Sutton's vehicle fit any of these categories? I don't know, BUT IF it does, the PD can and will find out, and find the vehicle if not Sutton himself. And that is what my post was about, despite you trying to detour it into an anti-police conspiracy. I hope they find him, either for the sake of justice for the girl, or to clear his name if he deserves that. I worry that whatever this is, he might end up harming himself, which is why the CTE question still has me a bit rattled.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pimo1
#104
#104
Interesting, the Detroit Lions now say Sutton was working out at their facility when the warrant hit social media, which is the day this thread was started. They went and talked to him and told him to turn himself in. He then left the facility. It appears they did not call the number in the police public announcement to tell them where he was. At least they don’t mention it.
apnews.com

Lions President says DB Cameron Sutton was at team building when news of warrant surfaced

Cameron Sutton was in the Detroit Lions’ Allen Park training facility when the team learned of a domestic violence warrant issued for the defensive back in Florida.
apnews.com apnews.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: WillisWG
#105
#105
WoodsmanVol said:
And I think you're deliberately misinterpreting my post. By hoice you ignored me saying actions/policy dffer by precinct, region, or jurisdiction. So your accusation I said PDs were installing trackers willnilly is an intentional falsehood. Agencies that employ this practice, I call it supreme butt covering, covering their rears with both hands and all four feet.

The reason the Supreme Court ruled that police can't put tracking devices on vehicles was because that was exactly what they were doing. Someone got pizzed off enough to take it to court. It went all the way up to the highest court due to police resistance. PDs, of course, contested this as they wanted to continue to be ABLE to do so. You can dance around, insult me, pretzel twist my words all you want, fact is PDs were already doing this. Does the SCOTUS ruling stop illegal warrantless installing trackers? NO! Typical of human beings, when you create a better lock, people will invent better ways to circumvent that lock. In the case of trackers, PDs adapted. They discovered when they can't get a warrant to do so, they don't have to. Here's why:

Reason 1. Insurance companies offer voluntarily trackers to monitor drivers and help be more selective for the safest drivers to insure. Also, it acts as a deterrent for unsafe driving. Thus reducing driver premium rates. Does Sutton have such a voluntary device on his vehicle, I don't know, and I doubt it.
Reason2. Car dealers are known to install trackers in case they have to repossess the car. They'll know where to find it, and send a tow truck. Sutton has one? I don't know, but it's possible.
Reason 3. Rental car agencies are known to install trackers for the same reason as dealers, but also for maintenance intervals, recover a rental that ends up being stolen. Among other reasons.

So? PDs don't have to get a warrant to install trackers, just find out if a car has one from an insurance company, car dealer, and car rental agency. Does Sutton's vehicle fit any of these categories? I don't know, BUT IF it does, the PD can and will find out, and find the vehicle if not Sutton himself. And that is what my post was about, despite you trying to detour it into an anti-police conspiracy. I hope they find him, either for the sake of justice for the girl, or to clear his name if he deserves that. I worry that whatever this is, he might end up harming himself, which is why the CTE question still has me a bit rattled.
Click to expand...
Actually had a car stolen last year. Not to jump in on an argument. The car company would not release the info to the police without a warrant. Talked to insurance they told me not to worry with it. They paid out the claim and I got a nicer car. I found that weird then so now everything is set up where I can track my vehichles from my phone. I made that mistake with the last. It's a circus to set all that up. Just my take on something I had some experience with
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
#106
#106
BigALWiLson said:
Actually had a car stolen last year. Not to jump in on an argument. The car company would not release the info to the police without a warrant. Talked to insurance they told me not to worry with it. They paid out the claim and I got a nicer car. I found that weird then so now everything is set up where I can track my vehichles from my phone. I made that mistake with the last. It's a circus to set all that up. Just my take on something I had some experience with
Click to expand...
That can happen, depends on the state, the level of cooperation PDs have with a particular agency, local regulations, and any number of things. In your case, I'd venture your insurance and dealer were leery of being sued for violating customer privacy. There may even be a tax or other financial incentive to take a loss rather than provide the info that may lead to recovery or location of the vehicle. Which is why said in an earlier post that what you get out of it varies region by region, PDs and local regulations, etc.
 
#107
#107
WoodsmanVol said:
That can happen, depends on the state, the level of cooperation PDs have with a particular agency, local regulations, and any number of things. In your case, I'd venture your insurance and dealer were leery of being sued for violating customer privacy. There may even be a tax or other financial incentive to take a loss rather than provide the info that may lead to recovery or location of the vehicle. Which is why said in an earlier post that what you get out of it varies region by region, PDs and local regulations, etc.
Click to expand...
Fair enough I guess I read through or totally missed that part. Since you broke it down that way I can see that. Everyone makes money if it isn't recovered.
 
#110
#110
BigALWiLson said:
Fair enough I guess I read through or totally missed that part. Since you broke it down that way I can see that. Everyone makes money if it isn't recovered.
Click to expand...
It has been an interesting topic tacked onto the Sutton matter. Usually, since SCOTUS ruling, dealers and insurers, IF they do provide that info to PDs, it's a courtesy, not a requirement. As for Sutton, the more we don't have a follow-up, the more I fear it will end up with him inflicting self harm or worse. I hope not, but these days, so many folks aren't as resilient as we once were. I detest seeing a VFL'er in such dire straits, but we all must individually answer for our actions if/when accountability comes calling.
 
#112
#112
I’m pretty amazed if he really hid this long. I suppose in a case like this there is no reason to spend serious resources on it. If I was a rich person I would want to just deal with it and go back to being rich, I think. Too bad about the future earning though.
 
#113
#113
Firebirdparts said:
I’m pretty amazed if he really hid this long. I suppose in a case like this there is no reason to spend serious resources on it. If I was a rich person I would want to just deal with it and go back to being rich, I think. Too bad about the future earning though.
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't know. In this age of MeToo terrorism, a man is guilty even when found innocent. Triple so if you're a male of color. Maybe Cam is in secret meetings with his lawyers to formulate legal plans to either minimize the charges/accusations, or make sure (assuming she lied) gets an outcome equal to what he'd get if it was true. I'd rather that than my other fear of what might be the ultimate outcome of this mess. And once again, just speculating cause I don't know Diddly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pimo1
#114
#114
WoodsmanVol said:
It has been an interesting topic tacked onto the Sutton matter. Usually, since SCOTUS ruling, dealers and insurers, IF they do provide that info to PDs, it's a courtesy, not a requirement. As for Sutton, the more we don't have a follow-up, the more I fear it will end up with him inflicting self harm or worse. I hope not, but these days, so many folks aren't as resilient as we once were. I detest seeing a VFL'er in such dire straits, but we all must individually answer for our actions if/when accountability comes calling.
Click to expand...
To touch on the Sutton situation it is really weird he just went into hiding and disappeared in this situation. One would believe that you go ahead and face the consequences. I mean I guess people run away at times it just doesn't seem to fit in this situation. Hopefully the girl who was allegedly assaulted is ok and will be long term but I also have the same thoughts for Cam.
 
#115
#115
The idea one does not make oneself immediately available is somehow fleeing or guilty is not part of the American legal system. Without knowing or hearing ANYTHING from Cam himself or his legal counsel I for one am sticking to innocent until proven guilty in court. If you’ll recall Cam was always one of those quiet types rather than big mouth and loud. It would be just like him to go off and seek counsel privately before doing anything else. Can he be guilty? Yes. Can he be completely innocent? Yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and davethevol
#116
#116
Jaxon_Vol2017 said:
Tldr.
All of that may be true, I didn't have the energy to try and decipher your incoherent ramblings. However, what I responded to was what your original post said that isn't true. Because you definitely implied that leo would just go around and put a tracker on random people just to keep tabs on them, and that sir, 100% isn't true. If there is a tracker put on a car by law enforcement it would have to be okayed by a judge. Similar to what happens with a search warrant.
Click to expand...
Have you read some of his posts/threads? I’ll leave it at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc, P.O.T.S. VOL, MemphisVol77 and 2 others
#117
#117
JRich said:
Dang, dude's already been convicted in the court of Volnation opinion.

Nobody on here knows this man's business.
Click to expand...
This! There is a lot more nuance to situations between men and women than 'woman = good' and 'man = bad.' I've known a lot of women in my life who were very provocative and irresponsible in the way they interacted with men. I've noticed a trend where women who claim they were victims of sexual assault are usually the most flirtatious. I currently work with a woman who flirts with every guy at work and then casually mentions how she was assaulted by several guys. Yeah, you better believe I stay away from that train wreck waiting to happen. I just know all the white knighting stuff and black and white narratives make me cringe. Women are not sugar and spice and everything nice, but people can keep believing that to their own detriment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc, Big Al Orange and davethevol
#118
#118
That’s disappointing, if true. Seems uncharacteristic for him. I don’t recall anything bad ever being said about him before.
 
#120
#120
All you guys saying he is innocent until proven guilty and then IMMEDIATELY insinuating that the woman is probably guilty of lying need to see the irony in that argument and then go jump off a bridge. Let the legal system do it’s job and quit acting like you have a clue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WillisWG and VFLBerg
#121
#121
jaguinn5 said:
All you guys saying he is innocent until proven guilty and then IMMEDIATELY insinuating that the woman is probably guilty of lying need to see the irony in that argument and then go jump off a bridge. Let the legal system do it’s job and quit acting like you have a clue.
Click to expand...

Yep. And it is important to realize that the knife cuts both ways here. Some of the reaction you're seeing is related to a Vol or two (and many other men) who have been wrongfully accused by their girlfriend/wife/etc, had their careers/lives ruined or nearly so, because hormones or emotions or whatever. Each instance is different, and ought to be viewed as such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc and Big Al Orange
#122
#122
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
#124
#124
Remy said:
The idea one does not make oneself immediately available is somehow fleeing or guilty is not part of the American legal system. Without knowing or hearing ANYTHING from Cam himself or his legal counsel I for one am sticking to innocent until proven guilty in court. If you’ll recall Cam was always one of those quiet types rather than big mouth and loud. It would be just like him to go off and seek counsel privately before doing anything else. Can he be guilty? Yes. Can he be completely innocent? Yes.
Click to expand...
I hope he is innocent, however, if he is, he is not doing a very good job of trying to prove it. At least, that seems to be the drift of the majority of posts on this board.
 
#125
#125
tbh said:
Yep. And it is important to realize that the knife cuts both ways here. Some of the reaction you're seeing is related to a Vol or two (and many other men) who have been wrongfully accused by their girlfriend/wife/etc, had their careers/lives ruined or nearly so, because hormones or emotions or whatever. Each instance is different, and ought to be viewed as such.
Click to expand...
I get that, but it’s this kind of reaction from these goobers that makes people feel trapped in abusive relationships. If abused people don’t feel like they can name their abuser without being ridiculed and dismissed, then they will never escape. Sure, there are insane (and I’ll point out also abusive) people who will lie just to get people in trouble, but those people are the exception and not the rule.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top