Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Novasadog t1_j4l1nwj wrote

Why is the investigation 'ongoing '? And why does there need to be an investigation?

−16

Glucose12 t1_j4lih2h wrote

OMG. I remember living there for awhile in a previous life. Cheap and close to the U where I worked. Very cheap ... and old ... and run down.

Cheap enough that ... yikes. The people there seemed to be extra-specially "precious".

If the creek next door flooded, half of the first-floor studios in back could flood out right up to waist height.

5

Glucose12 t1_j4ljpe5 wrote

Replying to smartest_kobold (#1,375,519)

Police in that area(Durham/Dover/Lee) seem pretty easy-going. No significant gang-banger crime in the area to make them worry about getting shot down. Probably just dealing with taking fentanyl OD's to the hospital, the less-than-occasional UNH student working on their DUI scorecard, etc.

9

otiswrath t1_j4mm8s1 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,373,627)

The article literally says "held without bail".

JFC, the smallest amount of effort to glance over the article was too much for you. Apparently you would just rather make shit up to be outraged about.

2

Glucose12 t1_j4mss8s wrote

Replying to Novasadog (#1,378,018)

Like I said, there's no question that he'll be charged with something, the question is, what can they charge him with. Why did you have a problem with what I said? They're trying to make sure they don't miss/undercharge him.

2

Glucose12 t1_j4n5ush wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,379,710)

Just a bunch of coordinated gang or otherwise organized crime. Of course, I could be wrong, but it doesn't -feel- like there's that much going on in the immediate Durham/Dover/Portsmouth corridor. Maybe I'm just living a protected life. :-D

1

rudyattitudedee t1_j4nzcxi wrote

Replying to Novasadog (#1,378,018)

I’m not exactly a lawyer but I know a lil bit. Usually, especially when it involves units being shot at, the DA will put together a case for the judge to consider how dangerous an individual is and whether or not they should be held without bail pending trial (done) and how much of a danger to society a person might be. They need time to consider the priors (of which I’m sure there are some, being judgmental about it) and put together a case for the judge and recommend the sentence to the judge who weighs that among other factors. This guy will probably get a public defender and tell the guy to plead no contest and, depending on the other factors (is this a first offense?) he is probably looking at 5 years. I mean they could really say “attempted murder on a public servant” etc if they think the charge will stick. That’s what they mean by pending investigation. Think about how much of this shit happens in a DA’s district every day. They need time to process this, among other cases.

1

sheila9165milo t1_j4q5778 wrote

Replying to Glucose12 (#1,376,752)

LOL, I grew up in Dover and had a friend who lived there in the 90s, his grandmother lived there in a different apartment during the same time frame, and my dad lived there in the 70s. Definitely has not been updated since they were built in the early 70s - same crappy little weed choked "pond" out front and the world's smallest community swimming pool, lol. The studios were decently laid out with privacy area for the bedroom but yeah, I can see how the creek wold flood the place although I never knew anyone who had to deal with that.

1

baxterstate t1_j4qfqok wrote

If Bruce doesn’t go to prison, can he be evicted and have this event on his record so that it will surface on a background check?

I used to be a landlord, and I would have wanted to know if an applicant did something like this. Knowing this, I wouldn’t have rented to him.

I realize having an event like this coming up on a background check would make it nearly impossible to get an apartment, but bad behavior should come with bad consequences.

0

Glucose12 t1_j4qjqgp wrote

Replying to sheila9165milo (#1,385,428)

Ha! I was actually there long enough to see it get flooded out twice.

One time it was enough for a lot of the cars in that large parking lot to the WSW to have water up to their hubcaps. It follows the slope of the land, so the cars in the north end of it were high and dry, and the ones at the other end... yeah.

The other time was bad. I remember wading out(knee level) to the back side, and actually seeing people trying to get into the studios on the South/SSE side(closest to the brook), wading in to them at about waist height. Those were down at ground level, as opposed to the rest of the facility which was built up on a berm to a certain extent. Some of the people going in were, I think, workers for OML trying to ensure that breakers were shut off, etc(?)

I think they may have decommissioned that row of studios after that(?)

PS: That "pond"! I'm sure the frogs loved it once it got choked by cattails.

2

sheila9165milo t1_j4sa0k2 wrote

Replying to Glucose12 (#1,386,351)

LOL, what a major drag! I had no idea those places flooded out so badly. However, with the acceleration of global warming since the 90's, I guess it doesn't surprise me. I'm sure the city building inspectors told them to shut down those units b/c you know Corporate America would have just kept renting them out...

2

Glucose12 t1_j4si0u4 wrote

Replying to sheila9165milo (#1,389,979)

This was actually back in the mid/early 2000's, so well before the current spate of environmental wackiness. Just a "normal" one out of ten year flood probability. I wonder how much the OML developers paid to grease the palms of the insurance adjusters.

2