| Author |
 Topic  |
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 08 2009 : 11:11:35 AM
|
Police Departments, generally, hire candidates at the age of 21. Retirements are generally 20 years, 25, and 30. retirement is generally 55 % with inducements (unused leave,etc) to increase the rate to 75%.
An officer may stay longer as long as he or she is medically fit to do so. the question is, however, why would you?
I have a friend who retired upon achieving his 30th. year when he realized that with incentives the pay difference between his current salary and retirement was approximately 20 cents per hour.
He was 51 years old. Buddy, at 61 you must be paying your department to work! Just kidding!
Joe as usual you get it all wrong. My Department requires a degree so add a minimum of 4-5 years to the starting age. For me I was in the Marines Corps and slower in school because I worked full time to support my family and attended school part time for the first few years. I then enrolled in the University of Arizona and it took three years to get my degrees. With all that I start around 30 years of age.
In Arizona at 20 years you can retire at 50%. At 32 years it is 80%. At 30 years it is 75%. I went into the public safety retirement DROP plan at 30 years which banks your retirement and allows you to work for up to an additional 5 years. So while in DROPs you are banking in my case 75% of the average of my 3 highest years. So if I chose to stay the full 5 years I will have 5 years of my retirement banked.
It works great for the agency since they don't have to pay into the retirement system. The retirement system gets to use my money until I request it. The amount is fixed so I am stuck with 75% but unless I live to be over 100 then I am still ahead.
Our officers like the job so why not continue? Had no trouble arresting a gang-banger stealing liquor from the Safeway recently. In fact the Flagstaff police officer taking the report could not believe I caught one. They were unsuccessful in catching the other one. He was charged with assault on the manager also.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 08 2009 11:20:22 AM |
  |
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 11:37:55 AM
|
| If I didn't lie Ranger, then go back and answer the rest of my post, Posted - November 05 2009 : 10:30:41 AM Prove to me that you believe that I didn't lie. And if you can't, if you won't then what are your trying to tell me Ranger? That I did lie? |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 11:40:28 AM
|
| If you are still out there arresting "gang bangers" at your age then you have nothing but my admiration and respect. Now a days, I have trouble catching the flue. Kudos to you my man! |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 3:35:08 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
If I didn't lie Ranger, then go back and answer the rest of my post, Posted - November 05 2009 : 10:30:41 AM Prove to me that you believe that I didn't lie. And if you can't, if you won't then what are your trying to tell me Ranger? That I did lie?
Sorry I don't do homework teach. I posted my opinion and have nothing to prove.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 08 2009 : 3:37:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
If you are still out there arresting "gang bangers" at your age then you have nothing but my admiration and respect. Now a days, I have trouble catching the flue. Kudos to you my man!
Thanks Joe
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 08:41:39 AM
|
In generic terms any horse, going at any generic pace, during any particular generic time could have moved slower or faster at any given period of time. The troopers generic recall was not always true, using their methods of calculation, which the COI shows was not precise nor dependably accurate, therefore their testimony was/is not only subject to error from accurate recollection when figuring gait in miles traveled divided by the time they state, simply because it was based upon a guess from that recollection, which was how they answered their questions at the COI. Way too many time’s and distance’s stated, were merely based upon extrapolation of recalled gait speeds rather than actual measurements of time. If there was any consistency to be found, with regards to miles with the rate of speed and time, the best one can explain this phenomenon is the word “average”, which would not and should not tell anyone where they would have been at any given moment from one place &/or event to the next. Which is why I think it best not to exclude any and all statements concerning time, unless one can prove through factual evidence their average times are way out of line with what others state. Two that did stand out in the early morning hours of the 25th of June was Benteen and Reno’s times. Their start times, when they left camp was within ½ hour of each others estimate. Reno’s was 5am, and Benteen’s 5:30 am.
From the aforementioned thought process then, all one can hope to do is construct with reasonable accuracy, using any and all stated mileages and times, or gait speeds, when & where their next halt was or should have been. As for events, like the “valley fight”, the best one can do there is use their combined average times as an indicator, and see if any surrounding movement coincides with events during that fight. Movement like the Rees, Benteen’s column or even Custer’s column. Sightings in most cases during this time are also subject to great error due to battle stress, and even placement of events before, during and after a fight are greatly exaggerated by the participants themselves. The only dependable source then is to compare in a “surround” fashion everyone’s statements, and see how those averages can be brought together in a meaningful & understandable way.
The dependence today is upon ome watch time, Wallace’s. Yet he stated, perhaps conveniently so, that he only looked at his watch that ONE time. Which was during the time Reno was called by Custer over to Custer’s side of the stream. When questioned about the accuracy of that timing as to whether it may “have been an hour or more slow or fast?” He replied:
A: “ I am not sure about that. It may have been fast or it may have
been slow. I never have claimed that it was the local time of the place.” (page 74)
On page 544 he stated that he did not make any notations of time from the place where the division of the regiment was made to the river, and stated further “I only looked at my watch once.” In further questioning on down the page it comes out when he looked at that watch, saying, “…I remember the time, that was the time I pulled out my watch and looked at it.” That being when “Gen. Custer beckoned Major Reno to come on the opposite side of the tributary”.
The greater question then should be, what time was the division of the regiment, as Wallace did not note any particular time on his watch then? And in conjunction with this, was Wallace’s watch time, at the time he said he looked at it, accurate? This throws a whole new light upon the quality of times as he stated them, especially when Reno and Benteen’s start times from camp were from 2 ½ hours to 3 hours prior to Wallace’s stated time.
The question remains, can Wallace’s times be reconciled with other times stated? Notice in particular Girard’s assessment of time when Custer gave Reno his orders near the tepee/knoll about 1 mile from ford “A“, he said that time was about 12 o’clock. Was Wallace’s watch off, or his recollection of “place” wrong? Pg. 540, “(We) started out at 11:45, at 12:05 it (the regiment) halted and the division into battalions was made, it moved on at 12:12. That is the only record of time I have….” The time seems right, but his recollection of the placement of that division should have been where according to Girard?
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 09 2009 : 09:29:07 AM
|
I believe Girard states he judges it about 12 O'Clock. He also judged it about 12 O'Clock for being in the timber and had to amend his testimony. I think Girard gave his best recollection of times without stating he looked at a watch. It is not a fact just because he judges it about 12 O'Clock. It is his testimony and nothing more. Obviously since he had to amend his testimony he was not sure of all the times when he first testified.
Recollections are not fact. Girard had faulty recollections at first and amended his testimony.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 11 2009 : 8:48:53 PM
|
Benteen, I have recenlty rediscovered "Custer Vendicated" after I threw in a waste basket. I originally believed that his theories were pure hogwash. I was wrong! After reading you fine dissertation above, my eyes have been open to new possibilities.
For example, I believed that Gray's time line was infallible. I'm not so sure anymore. I agree with you! Benteen and Reno in reports written shortly after the battle did, in fact, give times of 5:00 and 5:30 AM. Forgive my arithmetic but that means that the possibility exist that the battle may have taken place hours earlier than stated at the Inquiry. I know it sounds fantastic but I'm going to pursue further.
In addition, a horses gait subject to so many variables that staking out an "average" gait based on time alone may not be credible. There are some who will call us crazy but, keep up the good work. Hell, we may be crazy! |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 11 2009 : 10:56:13 PM
|
Ranger,
quote:
Recollections are not fact. Girard had faulty recollections at first and amended his testimony.
And Wallace's recollection?
A: “ I am not sure about that. It may have been fast or it may have
been slow. I never have claimed that it was the local time of the place.” (page 74)
Joe,
Custer Vindicated is about as fine a book as you'll get. Keep going, there's more work to be done, alot more. |
Edited by - Benteen on November 11 2009 10:58:16 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 07:07:16 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
Ranger,
quote:
Recollections are not fact. Girard had faulty recollections at first and amended his testimony.
And Wallace's recollection?
A: “ I am not sure about that. It may have been fast or it may have
been slow. I never have claimed that it was the local time of the place.” (page 74)
Joe,
Custer Vindicated is about as fine a book as you'll get. Keep going, there's more work to be done, alot more.
If you can't see the difference that is not my problem. Girard changes his testimony by amending it. He changes it 1 hour. Wallace does not amend his testimony. He states his watch could be off but he recorded what he saw.
I believe Girard is estimating time and has only a ballpark figure for times. When confronted with being two places at the same time and miles apart he changed his testimony by amending it. That doesn't give me much confidence in the accuracy of his times.
Wallace's time may or may not be accurate but since he recorded he will not have to amend it in testimony. If asked over and over to read the recorded time it will remain the same.
Reno states that in is official report there is only one time that he is sure of and that is 9. The rest of the report was taken from estimations and from persons such as Wallace.
What is more interesting to me is time intervals from the same watch.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 07:37:14 AM
|
In addition, a horses gait subject to so many variables that staking out an "average" gait based on time alone may not be credible. There are some who will call us crazy but, keep up the good work. Hell, we may be crazy!
Joe I have data for 500 miles from a GPS and the average moving speed is around 3.5 miles per hour. There is an engineer manual that uses that same rate. For the area that I have been riding in I feel confident on estimating time or distance. This winter I will be in lower country and will see if that average changes.
I think when you read testimony you can see they are using horse gait, distances, and time to answer questions. This would be very basic for people use to moving around horseback. The military also worked hard at having the gaits be the same rate of speed in order to keep formations together.
I do believe that terrain can change the rate of speed within the same gait. So a walk of 4 mph could become 3 mph and the rider may not notice the difference.
So depending on terrain I believe you could be correct that they could under/over estimate time or distances.
I am sure when I walk up hill I think I have walked further and that is probably common among hikers.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 10:12:20 AM
|
quote:
Recollections are not fact. Girard had faulty recollections at first and amended his testimony.
And Reno's recollection?
Q. Was not your official report made when everything was fresh and more liable to be correct than statements made two years afterward?
A. The date shows when it was made.
Q. Were not the details more liable to be correct than to depend on recollection for two years?
A. As I stated, there was embodied in that report many things of which I had no personal knowledge. I think official reports are always reliable as far as reliable information will make them so, but there must, of necessity, be many things of which the author had no personal knowledge.
Q. Would it not be more reasonable to expect a report made at that time would be more correct than a report based upon recollections two years after?
A. No sir. |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:04:50 PM
|
Az, Benteen got you! You fell into a neatly laid trap. What possessed you to refer to Girards "recollections"(or anybodies else for that matter)when the testimony of Reno and Benteen was horribly faulty?
Reno made the above remarks because his original report was introduced by the recorder, Lee and he knew it. When asked about the earlier reports he was very casual and flippant saying he may have said this or may not have. he knew the report would not be used against him as evident by what occurred; not too much of anything.
Ironically, his original official report, written when the events were fresh in his mind) was disregarded in light of his oral testimony three years later when his butt was on the line!.
A report written shortly after the battle when his mind was fresh. A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial. A report wherein he stated (paraphrase) that from the sound of Gunfire (coming from the North) it could only be Custer. A report in which he stated that he anticipated Custer intended to strike the Indians flank but, must have been prevented from doing so.
From all this (and there was so much more) you chose to denigrate Girards's testimony? Absolutely amazing! |
Edited by - joe wiggs on November 12 2009 6:10:39 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:24:28 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by joe wiggs
Az, Benteen got you! You fell into a neatly laid trap. What possessed you to refer to Girards "recollections"(or anybodies else for that matter)when the testimony of Reno and Benteen was horribly faulty?
Reno made the above remarks because his original report was introduced by recorder Lee. A report written shortly after the battle when his mind was fresh. A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial. A report wherein he stated (paraphrase) that from the sound of Gunfire (coming from the North) it could only be Custer. A report in which he stated that he anticipated Custer intended to strike the Indians flank but, must have been prevented from doing so.
From all this (and there was so much more) you chose to denigrate Girards's testimony? Absolutely amazing!
In your dreams it is Benteen that stated the senior officer in his official report BS and I still waiting for his proof. It is Benteen that stated Benteen got it right.
Joe you can't even recount what Reno states in his report correctly.
You make a statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial." which anyone could see as false. It would only take one thing that is the same as in the report to prove you made a false statement.
You still don't get it I am not stating anything pro or con to Girard's testimony. It is what is expected of a civilian years later and that is what I would expect of it. It is recollection not a report that he us using.
I am beginning to believe that DC may be right that Joe and Benteen are the same.
AZ Ranger
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:30:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
quote:
Recollections are not fact. Girard had faulty recollections at first and amended his testimony.
And Reno's recollection?
Q. Was not your official report made when everything was fresh and more liable to be correct than statements made two years afterward?
A. The date shows when it was made.
Q. Were not the details more liable to be correct than to depend on recollection for two years?
A. As I stated, there was embodied in that report many things of which I had no personal knowledge. I think official reports are always reliable as far as reliable information will make them so, but there must, of necessity, be many things of which the author had no personal knowledge.
Q. Would it not be more reasonable to expect a report made at that time would be more correct than a report based upon recollections two years after?
A. No sir.
And your point is? Your the one that stated Reno got it right at the RCOI regarding times. Your the one stating you believe the senior officer. Right?
Looks like to me you are rebutting your own statements about the senior officer. Are you forgetting your own positions?
You post above is my position thanks for posting it.
AZ Ranger |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:35:36 PM
|
quote:
Joe you can't even recount what Reno states in his report correctly.
I think he did a damn fine job.
quote:
You make a statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial." which anyone could see as false. It would only take one thing that is the same as in the report to prove you made a false statement.
Hmmmm.... You calling Joe a "liar" too? First me, now Joe?
quote:
You still don't get it I am not stating anything pro or con to Girard's testimony.
It sure doesn't sound that way to me.
quote:
If you can't see the difference that is not my problem. Girard changes his testimony by amending it. He changes it 1 hour. Wallace does not amend his testimony. He states his watch could be off but he recorded what he saw.
I believe Girard is estimating time and has only a ballpark figure for times. When confronted with being two places at the same time and miles apart he changed his testimony by amending it. That doesn't give me much confidence in the accuracy of his times.
It sounds as if you're calling him a liar too.
quote:
I am beginning to believe that DC may be right that Joe and Benteen are the same.
Only if you and Joe are the same.
|
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:37:43 PM
|
quote:
And your point is?
Is this always your standard answer Az? What the hell do you think my point was? Joe got it right, dumbkopf. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 6:47:51 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
quote:
And your point is?
Is this always your standard answer Az? What the hell do you think my point was? Joe got it right, dumbkopf.
Funny you spell Az the way Joe does, Did you forget you were posting as Benteen who usually addresses me as Ranger?
Since the post quoted is supposedly yours Benteen how could Joe posibly got it right in your post unless Joe is Benteen. There is no statements made by Joe in the post I responded to.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
Edited by - AZ Ranger on November 12 2009 6:56:05 PM |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 7:19:50 PM
|
What Joe said, Ranger,
quote:
Az, Benteen got you! You fell into a neatly laid trap. What possessed you to refer to Girards "recollections"(or anybodies else for that matter)when the testimony of Reno and Benteen was horribly faulty?
Reno made the above remarks because his original report was introduced by the recorder, Lee and he knew it. When asked about the earlier reports he was very casual and flippant saying he may have said this or may not have. he knew the report would not be used against him as evident by what occurred; not too much of anything.
Ironically, his original official report, written when the events were fresh in his mind) was disregarded in light of his oral testimony three years later when his butt was on the line!.
A report written shortly after the battle when his mind was fresh. A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial. A report wherein he stated (paraphrase) that from the sound of Gunfire (coming from the North) it could only be Custer. A report in which he stated that he anticipated Custer intended to strike the Indians flank but, must have been prevented from doing so.
From all this (and there was so much more) you chose to denigrate Girards's testimony? Absolutely amazing!
quote:
Funny you spell Az the way Joe does
hmmmm... I vonder, does your germane intellect sometimes lead to schizoid paranoia? |
Edited by - Benteen on November 12 2009 7:23:31 PM |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 7:33:24 PM
|
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You make a statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial." which anyone could see as false. It would only take one thing that is the same as in the report to prove you made a false statement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmmm.... You calling Joe a "liar" too? First me, now Joe?
I'll let others decide. I all ready have. Here are two statements made at RCOI
Here is Reno's Official Report.
quote:
I was ordered by Lieut. W. W. Cooke, adjutant, to assume command of Companies M, A, and G; Captain Benteen of Companies H, D, and K.
So is the it a false statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial"? Or does what he said in the testimony match the report.
There are many more matches and the use of "everything he said" makes it a false statement in my opinion.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 7:51:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
What Joe said, Ranger,
quote:
Az, Benteen got you! You fell into a neatly laid trap. What possessed you to refer to Girards "recollections"(or anybodies else for that matter)when the testimony of Reno and Benteen was horribly faulty?
Reno made the above remarks because his original report was introduced by the recorder, Lee and he knew it. When asked about the earlier reports he was very casual and flippant saying he may have said this or may not have. he knew the report would not be used against him as evident by what occurred; not too much of anything.
Ironically, his original official report, written when the events were fresh in his mind) was disregarded in light of his oral testimony three years later when his butt was on the line!.
A report written shortly after the battle when his mind was fresh. A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial. A report wherein he stated (paraphrase) that from the sound of Gunfire (coming from the North) it could only be Custer. A report in which he stated that he anticipated Custer intended to strike the Indians flank but, must have been prevented from doing so.
From all this (and there was so much more) you chose to denigrate Girards's testimony? Absolutely amazing!
quote:
Funny you spell Az the way Joe does
hmmmm... I vonder, does your germane intellect sometimes lead to schizoid paranoia?
Nice try Joe/Benteen but the below post is where Benteen uses Az and it is not the one he trying to mislead in his Joe quote above
quote:
Is this always your standard answer Az? What the hell do you think my point was? Joe got it right, dumbkopf.
Let's see tens of posts by Benteen using Ranger and tens of posts by Joe using Az. Show us a previous post where Benteen uses Az. Looks like a clue to me.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 12 2009 : 9:16:32 PM
|
quote:
So is the it a false statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial"? Or does what he said in the testimony match the report.
There are many more matches and the use of "everything he said" makes it a false statement in my opinion.
So were in agreement that Reno didn't put anything in his official report that wasn't false? |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 13 2009 : 07:30:03 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benteen
quote:
So is the it a false statement "A report that contradicted everything he said at the trial"? Or does what he said in the testimony match the report.
There are many more matches and the use of "everything he said" makes it a false statement in my opinion.
So were in agreement that Reno didn't put anything in his official report that wasn't false?
Your question is the same as Joe's position only the report is all false. It doesn't surprise me. Is that what you meant to write. It implies if one agrees that everything is false in the report.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 13 2009 : 09:24:35 AM
|
| Does it? Is it? |
Edited by - Benteen on November 13 2009 09:25:55 AM |
|
|
|
joe wiggs
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 13 2009 : 10:18:13 PM
|
Az, Buddy, you have truly loss it. You have absolutely become paranoid beyond anything I could ever imagine. Now I'm Benteen? Do you realize how incredibly insane you are beginning to sound.
According to you I have more personalties than China has Chinese.
I have a job, I have a 7 year old daughter (not bad for a 61 year old man) I have a life. How in the world, if your theory is correct, do you think I have nothing to do but swarm through cyber space and assumed the identities of a cast of thousands!!
Man, GET A GRIP BEFORE IT'S TO LATE!!! |
Edited by - joe wiggs on November 13 2009 10:19:32 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Why Did Wallace Lie?
