Ragitsu Posted November 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34769178Baffling and disturbing. I don't expect much, if anything, will arise to clear the officers in this case. --- http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/11/tuscaloosa_police_investigatin.html Disproportionate force, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34769178 Baffling and disturbing. I don't expect much, if anything, will arise to clear the officers in this case. Nothing has arisen to clear officers in previous cases and yet they still usually keep their jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted November 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Nothing has arisen to clear officers in previous cases and yet they still usually keep their jobs. Where else can you get that kind of job security? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnia Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Where else can you get that kind of job security? Politics Hermit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Marshals who killed 6-year-old had history of violence, rulebreaking, and stalking, and probably did not have authority to patrol in the city Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Impudite Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 So Stafford and Greenhouse been thrown in the slammer and their bail is set at a cool million each? Unexpected, but promising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Promising, but: - The prosecutor has to be willing to prosecute cops. - The jury has to be willing to convict a cop. - The judge has to be willing to sentence a cop. - Reasonable doubt means "I saw a gun/I feared for my life" works pretty well as a defense. Cops can literally choke a man to death on video and not even get fired, let alone indicted. So we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcus Impudite Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 Promising, but: - The prosecutor has to be willing to prosecute cops. - The jury has to be willing to convict a cop. - The judge has to be willing to sentence a cop. - Reasonable doubt means "I saw a gun/I feared for my life" works pretty well as a defense. Cops can literally choke a man to death on video and not even get fired, let alone indicted. So we'll see. Perhaps, though I doubt the fact that they ventilated an innocent 6-year-old child will win them very many points with any jury (provided it goes to a jury trial). Plus there's the fact that they're behind bars right now instead of enjoying a paid vacation. I'm not going to jinx it by saying it's a sure thing, but this one sort of looks like justice might be done... for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csyphrett Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 The Winston-Salem Journal reported a man was pardoned after 30 years in prison and is suing for malicious prosecution. As part of his defense, he alleged that the police who picked him up dangled him from a bridge, and then threatened his parents to get a confession. When he was retried, a jury found him not guilty of the crime. CES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 this one sort of looks like justice might be done... for a change. Yeah, he might have to serve a couple years of jail time. On the weekends, of course. You don't want to disrupt the man's life too much. And while banning him from being an officer might be too harsh, they will politely and cautiously ask that he not be 'on the beat' while he finishes his weekend sentences. Unless, you know, they really need him to do it. SOAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Here is a show for all those CSI fans out there. Oh, and for every single adult who cares about the truth of criminal investigations. ^^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nSgUVmdDSs SoaR. Hermit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdoc Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Here is a show for all those CSI fans out there. Oh, and for every single adult who cares about the truth of criminal investigations. I simply cannot watch those shows. Long, long ago, before I moved to the US, I used to work in a pathology department, and one of my teachers was a leading forensic pathologist (a brilliant guy, but like all pathologists, I've met, a wee bit strange: he's the guy who played the "jelly brain" trick I'v' mentioned here before). There is pretty close to zero overlap between fantasy TV forensic pathology and actual real life forensic pathology. cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cygnia Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Yeah, CSI and L&O make me cringe with their portrayal of forensics. Not that the real thing is very encouraging, given the constant delays and screw-ups... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted November 18, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 18, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted November 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/11/24/3725633/laquan-mcdonald-shooting-video/ I wonder which part of police marksmanship training teaches the sexdecuple tap. 薔薇語 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
薔薇語 Posted November 26, 2015 Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 It is right before the session where they teach you to search for surveillance footage and delete anything that could convict your dirty rotten ass. Soar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csyphrett Posted November 26, 2015 Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 I believe that police officers are taught to shoot until the target falls down. A man was shot in New York over thirty times because his door frame held him up a few years ago. The squad responsible was disbanded CES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 26, 2015 Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 Oh my god, they were disbanded?! Those poor, poor murdering cops! Won't someone think of their benefits? /s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted November 26, 2015 Report Share Posted November 26, 2015 I believe that police officers are taught to shoot until the target falls down. A man was shot in New York over thirty times because his door frame held him up a few years ago. The squad responsible was disbanded CES While this is true, it's also common for people to simply keep pulling the trigger in a shooting and not even realize it. It's something that has to be trained out of people, and is hard to do. Often, when asked how many shots they fired, people will grossly underestimate their shot count. Of course, that still begs the question of whether shots needed to be fired in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csyphrett Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 In the case I mentioned, the cops thought this guy was breaking into his own house. When they asked him what he was doing, he turned around with his wallet in hand. I guess he thought he was being robbed. So they started blasting away. The doorframe held the victim up in the line of fire so he couldn't fall down. It might have looked like he was still trying to shoot. CES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattern Ghost Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 I should probably clarify that I wasn't disagreeing with the training to shoot until the person falls down. Just pointing out that a lot of these excessive round counts come from adrenal reactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted November 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 I believe that police officers are taught to shoot until the target falls down. The man (victim) was down after the first two shots. Unless I missed something, he didn't look to be practicing an impromptu mime technique of propping one's self up on thin air after taking both nine-mill rounds to the torso. On top of that, nearby Burger King footage of the vicinity at the time was conveniently deleted, and it seems that the cruiser that recorded the damning video swerved a little too far to the right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markdoc Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 Trying to shoot .... with a wallet? In most jurisdictions "He had something in his hand" is (thankfully) not considered grounds for the use of lethal force. cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 As a practical matter, that's incorrect. All the cop has to say is "I thought he had a gun/I was in fear for my life". IIRC cops have gotten off without penalty using this defense after slaughtering people armed with wallets, phones, stuffed animals, and nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Posted November 27, 2015 Report Share Posted November 27, 2015 The man (victim) was down after the first two shots. Unless I missed something, he didn't look to be practicing an impromptu mime technique of propping one's self up on thin air after taking both nine-mill rounds to the torso. On top of that, nearby Burger King footage of the vicinity at the time was conveniently deleted, and it seems that the cruiser that recorded the damning video swerved a little too far to the right... I think you're conflating the recent Chicago street execution outrage with the older doorframe outrage. But you're not the only one who thought it was odd that the driver of the police cruiser almost managed to get the camera pointed away from the execution. It doesn't matter anyway. Prosecutor Alvarez is really tight with the police union; she has no intention of actually convicting this executioner. She plainly wasn't going to even charge him until it turned out the video was going to be released. As I understand it, a murder one conviction in Chicago requires significant premeditation, multiple victims, or other heinousness that even this case doesn't reach. (It's actually the same here, I believe. 1st degree murder charges are extremely rare.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts