Police misbehavior thread

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

KrytenKoro
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:58 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby KrytenKoro » Fri Nov 06, 2015 6:46 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Choosing to completely disregard the father as any kind of victim here doesn't magically make what you're doing not victim-blaming.

Also, if there are angry men with guns shooting at you, getting out of there as quickly as possible is fulfilling your obligation to your child.

Yeah...honestly, depending on how bad the blood was between this guy and the cop, fleeing and trying to hide his child could have been the best thing he could do.
From the elegant yelling of this compelling dispute comes the ghastly suspicion my opposition's a fruit.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:17 pm UTC

A parent who loved his child wouldn't have taken the risk.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:19 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:A true Scotsman who loved his child wouldn't have taken the risk.

Well, I'm convinced.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:26 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:A parent who loved his child wouldn't have taken the risk.
Oh fuck the entire way off.

People don't logically think through all possibilities in panic situations. (Honestly, if you do stop to think through everything when your child's life is in danger, I'd argue that you are the one who doesn't really fell that much for your child...)

Fleeing with your child to get your child out of harm's way is exactly what we should expect a parent who loved his child to do.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:46 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:A parent who loved his child wouldn't have taken the risk.


I mean, if you love your child, and a murderiffic cop is after them, clearly, presenting them to the murderer is the best bet.

Preferably with a red bow upon the wee one's head, so it matches, after.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:48 pm UTC

@ Mighty Jalapeno
I suppose it is, in so much as he in fact, did run, exposing his child to the fusillade that killed him. The story however doesn't support the assertion
gmalivuk wrote:Also, if there are angry men with guns shooting at you, getting out of there as quickly as possible is fulfilling your obligation to your child.
since the woman never reports gunfire at the light and the child died elsewhere. In addition without supporting it, I'm fairly sure you would be charged with child endangerment if you attempted to elude the police with a minor child in the car, no matter the outcome, assuming that the child didn't die. Even if you were innocent. I however will restate my assertion, As a parent I would rather die then place my child in a position where my actions could harm him/her, even if it in fact caused me to die. Are we at a happy place?

gmalivuk wrote:People don't logically think through all possibilities in panic situations.
I'm aware. However once I had kids I quit placing myself in situations where I might have to panic when my children where with me. I didn't take them to bars, start feuds that could end in violence, take them to score drugs, leave them in a car unattended, or otherwise quit thinking. Personally I have to tell you, my belief is that if you can't do those things, don't have kids. And don't expect me to give you a pass if you do something stupid with them when they are with you.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:50 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I'm aware. However once I had kids I quit placing myself in situations where I might have to panic when my children where with me. I didn't take them to bars, start feuds that could end in violence, take them to score drugs, leave them in a car unattended, or otherwise quit thinking. Personally I have to tell you, my belief is that if you can't do those things, don't have kids. And don't expect me to give you a pass if you do something stupid with them when they are with you.


And if any parent falls short of that standard, it falls to the police to end their gene-line immediately. It's only fair.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby SDK » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:54 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I'm aware. However once I had kids I quit placing myself in situations where I might have to panic when my children where with me. I didn't take them to bars, start feuds that could end in violence, take them to score drugs, leave them in a car unattended, or otherwise quit thinking. Personally I have to tell you, my belief is that if you can't do those things, don't have kids. And don't expect me to give you a pass if you do something stupid with them when they are with you.

That argument would hold a lot more water if the kid had been shot by a rival gang instead of by the people who are meant to protect you.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:56 pm UTC

SDK wrote:That argument would hold a lot more water if the kid had been shot by a rival gang instead of by the people who are meant to protect you.
Why?

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby SDK » Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:59 pm UTC

I'm going to answer that with a question: Do you think dealing with the police is more or less dangerous than dealing with a rival gang?
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3994
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Dauric » Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:01 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
morriswalters wrote:I'm aware. However once I had kids I quit placing myself in situations where I might have to panic when my children where with me. I didn't take them to bars, start feuds that could end in violence, take them to score drugs, leave them in a car unattended, or otherwise quit thinking. Personally I have to tell you, my belief is that if you can't do those things, don't have kids. And don't expect me to give you a pass if you do something stupid with them when they are with you.


And if any parent falls short of that standard, it falls to the police to end their gene-line immediately. It's only fair.


Well clearly anyone who doesn't meet Morriswalter's moral standards deserves to be harassed or killed by the police, be they a publicly affectionate couple, or a father in fear for his and his child's lives. His standards should be applied to everyone regardless of any other circumstances, or indeed disagreement with the stringency of those standards.

SDK wrote:That argument would hold a lot more water if the kid had been shot by a rival gang instead of by the people who are meant to protect you.


Pretty much this. Police have an extreme power asymmetry with regards to most of the population. They have methods other than blasting away at any target that presents itself to deal with conflicts. As the 'imminent threat' story of this particular incident seems to be a fabrication, the use of firearms -at all- was unjustified by most standards of proper police work.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:01 pm UTC

SDK wrote:I'm going to answer that with a question: Do you think dealing with the police is more or less dangerous than dealing with a rival gang?


No difference, really. Same basic rules apply. Be polite. Give them anything they want. Comply. Pray they are merciful.

At least, if you want to hit the Morris standard, and attempt to save your own skin, but not actually change anything.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:35 pm UTC

SDK wrote:I'm going to answer that with a question: Do you think dealing with the police is more or less dangerous than dealing with a rival gang?
As an example for investigation consider the causalities in the ongoing gang war versus police killings in Chicago. Who is killing more of who. I think the bangers have an edge. Including a 9 year old who was evidently shot because daddy was a banger. Evidently total gang homicides are approximately 2300 in 2012 subject to shitty data. For 2015 the Guardian tally's around a 1000 killed by law enforcement. Is that what you wanted?

Tyndmyr wrote:At least, if you want to hit the Morris standard, and attempt to save your own skin, but not actually change anything.
I would point out that all four cops are breathing, as is the father. The only dead body is that of a 6 year old. So apparently the fathers skin is safe, if riddled with bullet holes.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:11 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:Reread.


Chen wrote:Yeah I read that as pointing out the kid to the mother not the police. Not that that absolves the police of anything. Considering the other part says the car was shot while perpendicular to the officers, definitely goes against that whole "backing into us" story. Seems there's some bad blood between the PD and the marshalls too. Probably means they won't be helping cover it up. So yay for that I guess.


Yes, I agree that I misunderstood that, and I've fixed it. It's not like it was all my fault: the way it's worded I understood it to mean he was indicating "uncertainty" to the police. But maybe the event left them unaware of the kid in the back. Doesn't help them on the other points, though; especially the "bad blood" angle.
In all fairness...

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:17 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
SDK wrote:I'm going to answer that with a question: Do you think dealing with the police is more or less dangerous than dealing with a rival gang?
As an example for investigation consider the causalities in the ongoing gang war versus police killings in Chicago. Who is killing more of who. I think the bangers have an edge. Including a 9 year old who was evidently shot because daddy was a banger. Evidently total gang homicides are approximately 2300 in 2012 subject to shitty data. For 2015 the Guardian tally's around a 1000 killed by law enforcement. Is that what you wanted?


Yeah, but that's ALL gangs vs cops. Compare the cops to any one gang, and I figure they look a lot more lethal.

Tyndmyr wrote:At least, if you want to hit the Morris standard, and attempt to save your own skin, but not actually change anything.
I would point out that all four cops are breathing, as is the father. The only dead body is that of a 6 year old. So apparently the fathers skin is safe, if riddled with bullet holes.


Perhaps we have different definitions of safe, you and I.

Mine does not include "riddled with bullet holes".

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Diadem » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:22 pm UTC

Police kill over 1000 people per year in the US? Wow. I never realized the scale of the problem.

Police kill more people per capita in the US than are killed in total in many other western countries.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:26 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Police kill over 1000 people per year in the US? Wow. I never realized the scale of the problem.

Police kill more people per capita in the US than are killed in total in many other western countries.


Probably more. Not sure how many. Police in the US are not usually very bothered by keeping overall statistics on their misbehavior, so it falls to external agencies to compile them as best as they can from many sources.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby SDK » Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:40 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
SDK wrote:I'm going to answer that with a question: Do you think dealing with the police is more or less dangerous than dealing with a rival gang?
As an example for investigation consider the causalities in the ongoing gang war versus police killings in Chicago. Who is killing more of who. I think the bangers have an edge. Including a 9 year old who was evidently shot because daddy was a banger. Evidently total gang homicides are approximately 2300 in 2012 subject to shitty data. For 2015 the Guardian tally's around a 1000 killed by law enforcement. Is that what you wanted?

What I wanted was for you to realise the absurdity of your original question, "Why?"

Did it work? Have I gotten across the fact that you shouldn't have to fear police officers in the same way you fear rival gangs? That this man's response to police shouldn't have resulted in a single shot fired?
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:40 pm UTC

SDK wrote:What I wanted was for you to realise the absurdity of your original question, "Why?"

Did it work? Have I gotten across the fact that you shouldn't have to fear police officers in the same way you fear rival gangs? That this man's response to police shouldn't have resulted in a single shot fired?
I find the current part of this thread absurd.
SDK wrote:That this man's response to police shouldn't have resulted in a single shot fired?
In an ideal world it would be true to say that the child should have been at zero risk. In an ideal world the man wouldn't have rabbited and the police would have been polite and did whatever. I would also point out in an ideal world I would never fuck up and hit somebody or be hit by somebody necessitating the need of a car seat to protect my child. I don't live in that world. And child car seats are mandatory as is your responsibility to provide a safe environment for a minor. He shouldn't have rabbited.
Tyndmyr wrote:Yeah, but that's ALL gangs vs cops. Compare the cops to any one gang, and I figure they look a lot more lethal.
You should wish. 700,000 or so cops spread over 12000 or so jurisdictions ignoring the Feds. Try apples and apples.
Tyndmyr wrote:Perhaps we have different definitions of safe, you and I.
OK. Lets see, he's shot up, the cops are wherever. The sons on a slab. I would say that all of them are safer than the child. Safe is a relative term.
Coyne wrote:Doesn't help them on the other points, though; especially the "bad blood" angle.
You are correct.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:47 pm UTC

"Safe" is a relative term but "dangerous" is only for things you fear enough to kill? At least try to be consistent in your absurdities.

As for numbers, the FBI places total gang membership at about 1.4 million, so twice as many gang members as police and twice as many gang killings as police killings.

What point were you trying for again?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:30 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:"Safe" is a relative term but "dangerous" is only for things you fear enough to kill? At least try to be consistent in your absurdities.
Why?
gmalivuk wrote:As for numbers, the FBI places total gang membership at about 1.4 million, so twice as many gang members as police and twice as many gang killings as police killings.

What point were you trying for again?
Maybe. But numbers are funny. Question. How many gang killings are murder and how many of the people killed by cops are really murder? Careful. Unless of course you wish to suggest that all cops who kill murder.

Since I'm here.
@Diadem
All things considered equal it is worse than you imagine. With about 14,000 homicides a year. The majority by gun, including suicide. For intentional killings we are quite a ways down the list. At about 108. Lower number lower rate. Meaning we are much higher than almost any first world countries. North Korea is 116 by comparison.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:39 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:"Safe" is a relative term but "dangerous" is only for things you fear enough to kill? At least try to be consistent in your absurdities.
Why?

... I just kinda want to sig this entire thing.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:20 am UTC

I encourage it. But "danger" as a label, made to draw an inference not implicit in its definition, is different than the relative "safety" enjoyed by the father as evidenced by his survival. I didn't want to drag this out of SB, but since you've twice snipped at me I felt compelled.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:24 am UTC

Last I heard the father was still in critical condition though?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:33 am UTC

Exactly. He's alive, and therefore fine. (And a terrible father.)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:49 am UTC

He's alive, which means he could die, which is a dangerous situation to be in.

Much less safe than being literally impossible to kill (again)...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:59 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:He's alive, which means he could die, which is a dangerous situation to be in.
Quite so. Of course he is in better condition than his son. Who is dead with no possibility of being alive. On the other hand the boy is safe since no one can harm him any more, neither his father or his fathers enemies. :roll:

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Sat Nov 07, 2015 3:05 am UTC

Bloomfield, NJ, officers Sean Courter and Orlando Trinidad were found guilty of conspiracy, official misconduct, tampering with and falsifying public records, and lying to authorities. A third officer, Albert Sutterlin pled guilty in 2013 to falsifying and tampering with records. Courter and Trinidad are looking at a mandatory five years.

The charges related to a 2012 stop on the Garden State Parkway, of Marcus Jeter. He was accused of aggravated assault (trying to grab Courter's gun), resisting arrest and other charges. These charges were dropped after video from a second police car proved he had his hands in the air for nearly the entire time he was in his car, stopped. One of the other offenses would have been eluding police, but the first car dashcam video shows that he pulled to a stop about 20 seconds after the first police car came up behind him.

It's interesting to note that he says in the video he was afraid to get out of the car because two guns were being held on him. We've heard how often officers justify shootings because they were afraid, but apparently it does not justify a citizen refusing to get out of a car--even if not otherwise resisting.

Dashcam video of man holding hands up helps convict officers

video
In all fairness...

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Mon Nov 09, 2015 1:09 am UTC

(Sorry in advance for post-post.)

Officer Norris Greenhouse Jr. and Officer Derrick Stafford, are under arrest for second degree murder and attempted second degree murder. These are the Marksville, LA, officers who fired on Chis Few and his son, Jeremy Mardis, killing the latter.

link
In all fairness...

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Lazar » Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:29 pm UTC

Exit the vampires' castle.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 09, 2015 5:02 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:"Safe" is a relative term but "dangerous" is only for things you fear enough to kill? At least try to be consistent in your absurdities.
Why?
gmalivuk wrote:As for numbers, the FBI places total gang membership at about 1.4 million, so twice as many gang members as police and twice as many gang killings as police killings.

What point were you trying for again?
Maybe. But numbers are funny. Question. How many gang killings are murder and how many of the people killed by cops are really murder? Careful. Unless of course you wish to suggest that all cops who kill murder.


Police don't call them murders. Of course.

But, that doesn't matter overmuch to me. If they label it "an unfortunate accident" after killing me, I'm not any less dead. If the risk is the same, the risk is the same, and the labels are irrelevant.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:53 pm UTC

Also it's worth remembering that a sizable portion of gang-involved homicides are of other gang members, while 98% of police-involved homicides are of civilians.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:38 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Also it's worth remembering that a sizable portion of gang-involved homicides are of other gang members, while 98% of police-involved homicides are of civilians.


Hmm. I wonder how this actually breaks out if we seperate out "cops and gang members" and "everyone else". I'd wager that police kill the former somewhat frequently...but yeah, it might actually be worse.

And of course, gang members don't fine me for speeding whenever they need to pad out the budget.

Granted, you've got cases where cops do charity and so forth, but...so does organized crime. Huh. This is way more on point than I initially thought.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby PolakoVoador » Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:46 pm UTC



Student: "Good thing we got all this on video"
Cop: "I don't give a fuck"

User avatar
Grop
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:36 am UTC
Location: France

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Grop » Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:58 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Also it's worth remembering that a sizable portion of gang-involved homicides are of other gang members, while 98% of police-involved homicides are of civilians.


Also is it murder when a gang murder kills an other one who they thought might have a gun? Because apparently it's ok for police homicides.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:05 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Also it's worth remembering that a sizable portion of gang-involved homicides are of other gang members, while 98% of police-involved homicides are of civilians.
Can killings between gang members be other than murder, even if you assume mutual self defense? One might assume that some justified homicides by police cleared by the system are murders in fact, but sometimes police have to kill. I don't know the answer but assume that it isn't either all police killings are murder or all police killings are justified.
gmalivuk wrote:As for numbers, the FBI places total gang membership at about 1.4 million, so twice as many gang members as police and twice as many gang killings as police killings.
So given your statement, did you make a valid comparison between gang killings and police killings per population? In any case I'm gone from here.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 09, 2015 9:22 pm UTC

Grop wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Also it's worth remembering that a sizable portion of gang-involved homicides are of other gang members, while 98% of police-involved homicides are of civilians.


Also is it murder when a gang murder kills an other one who they thought might have a gun? Because apparently it's ok for police homicides.


Which is odd, given that ownership of a gun is generally legal. Mere "I thought he had a gun" shouldn't really be cause. There should be at least reasonable belief of intent to harm.

Applying the same standards to police and gang members here is interesting. Gang members seem relatively more tolerant.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26817
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:37 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:As for numbers, the FBI places total gang membership at about 1.4 million, so twice as many gang members as police and twice as many gang killings as police killings.
So given your statement, did you make a valid comparison between gang killings and police killings per population?
Yes, a comparison is exactly what I made. Well spotted!

In any case I'm gone from here.

Image
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Tue Nov 10, 2015 7:03 am UTC

A former Georgia sheriff’s deputy, convicted for using a stun gun on a restrained detainee who later died alone in his cell, was sentenced on Friday to one month in jail and three years’ probation.

His conviction for cruelty of an inmate carried jail time of up to three years. But significantly shorter jail time was not the only way Chatham County superior court judge James Bass issued a more lenient sentence: he also allowed the former deputy to serve his time on the weekends.

While experts say weekend-only jail sentences are not unheard of, they’re not common, either. In fact, some say they’d like to see those sentences used more often – for defendants who aren’t members of law enforcement.

“It is the type of creative sentence that in one sense seems a great reform move because it allows people to serve time while keeping their jobs, thus promoting re-entry and life stability,” said Andrea Roth, an assistant professor at the UC Berkeley school of law. A similar remedy sees inmates allowed to serve time in a halfway house and attend work during the day, she said.

Roth, who is an expert in criminal law, said the weekend sentence is typically used for defendants who hold down a job that a judge finds “socially valuable” or when the individual is the “breadwinner for the family”.

“One would hope, however, that all defendants, and not just sheriff’s deputies, would get the benefit of such creative sentencing practices,” she said.

Last month, former Chatham County sheriff’s deputies Jason Kenny and Maxine Evans were found not guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the January death of 21-year-old Matthew Ajibade, a former Savannah College of Art and Design student. Though the manslaughter charge was dismissed, Kenny was found guilty of cruelty to an inmate, a felony.

Ajibade was taken into custody on domestic violence charges the evening of 1 January following an altercation with his girlfriend. His family has said Ajibade was having a manic bipolar disorder episode.

As deputies attempted to book him, Ajibade became “combative” and started a fight, according to the sheriff’s office. A video later released showed Kenny shocked Ajibade four times with a Taser, while the Nigerian man’s hands and feet were shackled. A local coroner ruled the student’s death a homicide by blunt force trauma. Kenny and eight other deputies were fired after the incident.


It's nice that the justice system is so considerate and makes every effort to ensure that people convicted of crimes can 'do the crime, do the time' and move on with their lives with minimal disruption.

Oh, but wait:

A widespread practice in the US known as "pay to stay" charges jail inmates a daily fee while they are incarcerated. For those who are in and out of the local county or city lock-ups - particularly those struggling with addiction - that can lead to sky-high debts.

David Mahoney is $21,000 (£13,650) in debt. Not from credit cards. Not from school loans. He's accumulated the massive tab because of the days he spent locked up in the local jail in Marion, Ohio, which is a small town with a major heroin epidemic. Mahoney, a lanky 41-year-old, has struggled with addiction since he was a teenager, eventually stealing to fuel his habit. He got caught a lot, even burgling the same bar twice.

"The urge to use cocaine and crack - that's what it led to it. Once I start using there's no going back for me," he says.

Today, he's 14 months sober, and is a resident and employee of the Arnita Pittman Community Recovery Center, a sober living house on the northern edge of town. His counsellor says he is doing "awesome" and he hopes to one day to become an addiction counsellor himself.

But while Mahoney may have left his habits behind, he can't shake his debt. It has accumulated over 15 years of trouble with the law and is a separate charge from the restitution he must pay to the victims he stole from, or any administrative costs he has incurred by going to court.

It comes from a daily "pay-to-stay" fee - sometimes called "pay for stay" - that he was charged by the local jail, the Multi-County Correctional Center. He was charged $50 each day he spent in jail, plus a $100 booking fee. It works almost as if he checked into a hotel and got a bill when he checked out.

"Obviously, it's my fault I'm in the situation I am in. I'm trying to start over," he says. "People that end up in jail are usually down on their luck anyway. They're going through some trials and tribulations in life. Why focus on the people who are already struggling?"

...

According to Lauren-Brooke Eisen, senior counsel in the Brennan Center's Justice Program at New York University's School of Law, these types of fees are legal in nearly every state - only Washington DC and Hawaii do not have a law authorising pay-to-stay charges. Her group is working on a multi-year project to show what the revenue and costs are of these programmes around the country, but at the present time the practice remains largely unexamined.

"You're really shifting the onus onto the poorest members of our society in the justice system. If they can't pay their family members pay, or their grandmothers pay," she says.

In the aftermath of Ferguson, courts around the country from Michigan to Texas have been called out for using law enforcement as a revenue-generating arm of the local government. Brickner says pay-to-stay policies are just another example of attempting to make money off poor people caught in the criminal justice system.

"They simply don't work. People are coming out of jail with hundreds or thousands of dollars' worth of debt, and if you are a returning citizen, having that is just another albatross around your neck," he says. "It's a programme that maybe feels good to people who have a tough on crime mentality, but in fact it's sort of a fruitless exercise."

Dale Osborne, the jail administrator at the Multi-County Correctional Facility, makes the same argument for pay-to-stay that's been made since the practice became legal in Ohio in the mid-90s: "It offsets the expenses that the taxpayers are required to have," he says. "The more revenue I can generate within a facility, the less the taxpayers have to pay."

But he admits that while the programme bills for about $2m a year, they collect only about $60,000-$70,000. That's about a 3% collection rate. "If we lost the ability to have a pay-for-stay programme here I'm not going to have any huge heartache over the loss of it," he says.

The sum that is able to be collected doesn't go straight into the county coffers, either - the jail contracts with a company called Intellitech Corporation, which acts as a collections agent, sending letters and making phone calls to former inmates. If the debtor sends a check to Intellitech or arranges a payment plan with them, 30% of the money goes to the county and 70% goes to Intellitech.

According to the company's president, John Jacobs, Intellitech runs pay-to-stay programs in 12 counties in Ohio and in six other states. He says that by becoming the "Walmart" of pay-to-stay collections, his company makes the practice viable for counties.

"It's something we'll continue to do because we believe in it," he says, calling it "a win for the taxpayers and a win for the sheriff."


link 1
link 2

Free bonus story!

We usually lay blame at the feet of wardens and corrections officers for inmate recidivism. They didn’t offer enough treatment. The staff is abusive. Prisoners are discharged without education or job skills.

But the creeping trend toward requiring indigent defendants in the US legal system to pay for public defenders proves that recidivism starts before any defendants even hit a correctional facility – and that it springs directly from the process that was designed to defend them. They receive substandard representation that essentially guarantees convictions and incarceration. They are saddled with the bills for this representation and incarceration and then it becomes a crime not to pay them.

Since 1963, when the US supreme court decided Gideon v Wainwright, any defendant who can’t afford an attorney is entitled to have one appointed to protect the right to counsel as provided in the sixth amendment of the US constitution.

While the phrase “absolutely free” doesn’t appear in any of the supreme court decisions on the right to counsel, neither do the phrases “at cost” or “on layaway”. Public defenders are supposed to be appointed at no cost to the defendant – not because of a legal requirement, but out of fairness and common sense, to give everyone equal access to the justice system.

Yet 43 states charge indigent defendants for the cost of their counsel. This might not be as galling if the representation rendered to clients were adequate, but it’s not.

(continues)


link

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Tue Nov 10, 2015 4:17 pm UTC

The American economic system has actually found out how to mine resources from poor people? THAT'S BRILLIANT!


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests