Friday, March 15, 2013

Statement Analysis: Steve Katz

Steve Katz voted against legalizing medical marijuana.  He was arrested for speeding and possessing marijuana and issued a statement.

The allegation is unstated, but is, "did you have marijuana on you?"  Statement Analysis in bold type.


The assemblyman, Stephen M. Katz, 59, a Republican from Mohegan Lake, was found with a “small bag” of marijuana when stopped on Thursday, the State Police said in astatement. Assemblyman Katz was charged with unlawful possession of marijuana, a violation that is punishable by a fine of up to $100.
In a statement, Mr. Katz described his arrest as an unfortunate incident.
unfortunate is not illegal.
This should not overshadow the work I have done over the years for the public and my constituency,” he said, adding, I am confident that once the facts are presented that this will quickly be put to rest.”
Note that "put to rest" is not to be found innocent, and he does not tell us that he did not have marijuana on him. 
If the subject does not deny, we shall not deny it for him. 
By telling us "I am confident", he is already showing weakness.  
Note that the facts need to be "presented", rather than him simply stating the facts here and now. 
On Thursday, Mr. Katz was arrested around 10 a.m. after he was detected driving 80 miles per hour on the New York State Thruway in Coeymans, south of Albany, where the speed limit is 65 m.p.h. The State Police said the trooper who stopped him noticed the smell of marijuana and then found the bag of marijuana.
Mr. Katz was released on an appearance ticket and is due in court on March 28.
The assemblyman, who is a member of the chamber’s Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, voted against a bill last year that would have legalized medical marijuana.

7 comments:

Hobnob said...

off topic BBM


State to retry caretaker on murder charge in case of missing Fla. foster child Rilya Wilson
Published March 15, 2013
Associated Press

MIAMI – Prosecutors in Miami have decided to retry the caretaker of missing 4-year-old foster child Rilya Wilson on a murder charge.

A jury in January convicted 68-year-old Geralyn Graham of kidnapping and child abuse but could not agree on a murder count. Graham was sentenced to 55 years in prison for the convictions, but prosecutors said Friday they will try her again for murder.

A judge set a September trial date.

Rilya vanished in December 2000 from Graham's home but her disappearance wasn't noticed for 15 months, largely because a Department of Children and Families caseworker neglected to check on the girl. Rilya's body has never been found.

The state's case hinges largely on jailhouse informants who say Graham confessed to them. Graham insists she is innocent.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/15/state-to-retry-caretaker-on-murder-charge-in-case-missing-fla-foster-child/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz2NeJuGpsU

ME said...

Off topic,,,"I have not changed my story to match the facts"is that statement an admission??? (it's a case about a father accused of killing his children by starting a fire in his home)Am I wrong?I thought of this blog as soon as I heard his"words"thanks

Anonymous said...

Daily Mail is reporting that C. Anthony is pregnant with a rich man obsessed with her.

Julie Moon said...

He votes to deny the weed to people that need it medically, while he smokes it himself. That is worse than a hypocrite. Guess the legalization of the weed wouldn't cover him to possess it, so he voted "no", (not to mention, even where it is legal you can't use it in a vehicle or operate a vehicle under the influence.)

Hobnob said...

off topic

A quick analysis on mick philpott responses on the witness stand


Oh Dear Oh dear Oh Dear no strong reliable denial


He said: "You ruled number 18 with a rod of iron, didn't you? You wouldn't take dissent."

Mr Philpott replied: "You're talking a lot of rubbish."

No strong reliable denial, No first person singular,past tense, event specific denial

If he can't say it, we can't say it for him


Mr Smith then asked him: "Did you start the fire or arrange the fire while Mairead was asleep?"

Mr Philpott began sobbing and said: "I love my kids and I would never endanger them."


No strong reliable denial, No first person singular, past tense event specific denial.

If he can't say it we can't say it for him.

A strong reliable denial would be I did not start the fire that killed my kids.

Instead what i see is no denial about starting the fire or arranging for it to be started and i also see minimising of what happened.

He doesn't say he would never kill his kids, instead he says endanger them.

Never does not mean would not or did not, never is only applicable is the question includes the word ever, which it doesn't

He also doesn't answer the question asked showing sensitivity, did you start the fire or arrange the fire whilst mairead was asleep?

I would then ask did you start the fire or arrange the fire whilst she was awake.

Lying is stressful so the subject will avoid sensitive words, they also will not lie about a lie.

I would follow the above questions with why should i believe you?

Pretty much anything other than i told the truth will reveal the lie.

His story about not bathing for 12 weeks doesn't work or even make any kind of logical sense.
If the council were redoing the bathroom it takes a couple days at most since there has to be facilities for the children to use the toilet and bathe, the non essential work would be the redecorating of the room and that wouldn't stop personal hygiene practices nor take weeks.
As a council tenant when i had the old bath removed and replaced with a walk in shower as both my mum who i cared for and myself were both raspberry rippled (arthritis runs in our family which made for a fun bathtime both getting in and out plus she had all sorts of smoking related ailments and i have ME/CFS and sundry joint problems) It took a day and this included the tiling.

equinox said...

“This should not overshadow the work I have done over the years for the public and my constituency,” he said, adding, “I am confident that once the facts are presented that this will quickly be put to rest.”

"This" - is close, he takes some ownership of the "unfortunate incident." There is confirmation, not denial in this one word.

"should not" - said in the negative is important, he draws our attention away from "this" by attempting to frame it against all the "work he has done over the years." I'm sure there are many hard working people in prison right now who's only crime was marijuana.

"the public and my consituency" - the order shows us he wants to be forgiven by everyone, not just his voters. He recognizes the huge impact of his hypocrisy.

"once the facts are presented" - The facts of "this" have already been presented to the public, he is not contributing any exculpatory facts to us, so we can assume these facts are intended for behind closed doors. He is betting on his influence and power to get him off the charges - not any facts that will ever come to the light of the public.

"this will quickly be put to rest." - as Peter noted, he does not say anything about being found innocent or even in any way to deny the facts we have already been told, instead he expects the blanket to be pulled over the sleeping charges, swept under the carpet, killed off - all synonyms for his euphemism.

Sadly, he's probably right.

Anonymous said...

YES, it should overshadow the work he has done.

Lying phony hypocritical dopehead. ha ha... glad he got caught.

Not necessarily so that a liar will not lie about a lie. Casey Anthony certainly did. So has this cold-bloodied mudering criminally insane Arial b'tch.