Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 30, 2013 11:37:04 GMT -5
In the now-defunct "police" thread, a wise young philosopher ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png) posed the following ethical conundrum:
| As part of being held to a higher standard, should police officers face summary charges for deaths caused by negligence or depraved indifference to human life?
Like it or not, America is becoming more of a police state by the day. Prison populations are booming. Federal and state powers are multiplying. The Internet provides no shortage of news stories, amateur video, and testimonials documenting sporadic police brutality. The issue isn't so much whether police abuse of authority is systemic as it is whether this abuse is becoming systemic. And more importantly: do "fog of war" exemptions for civil defenders contribute to mounting abuses?
Consider the [story below], where we'll suppose that the arrest occurred as described and was caught on camera. It constitutes negligence and depraved indifference to human life, which under normal circumstances would result in severe civil or criminal penalties (apparently, up to and including second-degree murder charges). As I understand it, negligent homicide in most US states carries roughly the same penalty as manslaughter.
One side of the police brutality issue would argue that police (civil defenders in general) are faced with grave risks and stressful circumstances that should realistically afford some leniency to officers who make bad judgment calls. The other side [...] sees these same factors in the opposite way: it is precisely during high-risk, high-stress circumstances that police officers need to be mindful of the consequences of bad judgments. There can be no doubt that police occasionally go overboard in their administration of force, and the issue comes to a head if police accidentally kill a man during an arrest.
Supposing the officer in the [story] was caught on video, what do you say is the appropriate punishment? Please read the story carefully before replying.
Steve made himself more than clear (a life for a life), but what about the rest of us? A manslaughter charge? Disciplinary action within the police force?
|
The story being referenced is this (unconfirmed, insofar as I'm aware) piece from reason.com: The questions posed stand. I hope this is an issue we can debate civilly, otherwise I suspect this thread will end up in the trash bin fairly soon. But I'm genuinely interested in people's perspectives.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 12:03:38 GMT -5
so, is this a tragic accident caused by police using standard procedures?
i have a buddy in the dc metro police department
the first rule always as he tells me...control the area, clear rooms, and subdue all possible perps
imagining the story as stated, the scene was probably very chaotic
everyone yelling, trying to be heard over the din of noise coming from everyone else
cops want everyone in a controlled hold....
depends on how much time elapsed on how i may judge this
once everyone was in a controlled position, they could have made him more comfortable
sounds like he wouldnt get on his stomach for even a few minutes
again...would like more info, but right now, based on what i know, i side with the officers
with the right to change my mind if i find out they still were fucking around 10-15 minutes after breech
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:07:05 GMT -5
private prisons are the new MIC.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on May 30, 2013 12:08:58 GMT -5
I'd have to know WHY the officers were demanding that the subject get on his stomach. The family/friend account (conveniently?) doesn't include that information.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:14:06 GMT -5
In the now-defunct "police" thread, a wise young philosopher ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png) posed the following ethical conundrum:
| As part of being held to a higher standard, should police officers face summary charges for deaths caused by negligence or depraved indifference to human life?
Like it or not, America is becoming more of a police state by the day. Prison populations are booming. Federal and state powers are multiplying. The Internet provides no shortage of news stories, amateur video, and testimonials documenting sporadic police brutality. The issue isn't so much whether police abuse of authority is systemic as it is whether this abuse is becoming systemic. And more importantly: do "fog of war" exemptions for civil defenders contribute to mounting abuses?
Consider the [story below], where we'll suppose that the arrest occurred as described and was caught on camera. It constitutes negligence and depraved indifference to human life, which under normal circumstances would result in severe civil or criminal penalties (apparently, up to and including second-degree murder charges). As I understand it, negligent homicide in most US states carries roughly the same penalty as manslaughter.
One side of the police brutality issue would argue that police (civil defenders in general) are faced with grave risks and stressful circumstances that should realistically afford some leniency to officers who make bad judgment calls. The other side [...] sees these same factors in the opposite way: it is precisely during high-risk, high-stress circumstances that police officers need to be mindful of the consequences of bad judgments. There can be no doubt that police occasionally go overboard in their administration of force, and the issue comes to a head if police accidentally kill a man during an arrest.
Supposing the officer in the [story] was caught on video, what do you say is the appropriate punishment? Please read the story carefully before replying.
Steve made himself more than clear (a life for a life), but what about the rest of us? A manslaughter charge? Disciplinary action within the police force?
|
The story being referenced is this (unconfirmed, insofar as I'm aware) piece from reason.com: The questions posed stand. I hope this is an issue we can debate civilly, otherwise I suspect this thread will end up in the trash bin fairly soon. But I'm genuinely interested in people's perspectives. it sickens me when "procedure" and "the law" lead to the deaths of people who should be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 12:15:01 GMT -5
perp on stomach with hands cuffed behind is the SAFEST position an officer can put someone in
it is a totally dominated position...which is what all officers want
if they have control, everyone should be safe
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on May 30, 2013 12:15:17 GMT -5
I agree, dj. However, if the account included that the 350 pound asthmatic had a .44 laying on the table in front of him, I might change my mind.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:16:35 GMT -5
perp on stomach with hands cuffed behind is the SAFEST position an officer can put someone in it is a totally dominated position...which is what all officers want if they have control, everyone should be safe other than, apparently, the suspect. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:17:28 GMT -5
I agree, dj. However, if the account included that the 350 pound asthmatic had a .44 laying on the table in front of him, I might change my mind. i was thinking of another case when i wrote that. but as you know, i try to speak generally to issues rather than using specific cases like this one.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on May 30, 2013 12:20:00 GMT -5
I know what you are saying, dj. It's just that the above account is a bit....incomplete. I know we are to post assuming it's true, but I can't even do that without their complete version of the truth.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on May 30, 2013 12:25:16 GMT -5
The story is being reported in other mainstream media outlets: www.wfaa.com/news/local/tarrant/police-tase-man-who-later-dies-207943331.htmlI had a Great Uncle who was a Chicago Cop so I tend to side with the men in blue. However the facts of the story as reported are disturbing and appear to show a lack of regard for human life. IF he was in fact tazed three times that could easily cause a heart attack. Unless it was caught on film we will never be sure if he was resisting or not. As far as the breathing thing, I can see both sides of the argument. The protocol is to have the accused lie on their stomach while being handcuffed to make is near impossible for them to reach for an officer's gun or try to grab something/attack someone. If you refuse to lie on your stomach the police are conditioned to suspect danger. However a 300+ pound man cannot breath while lying on his stomach. I can understand why he was trying to roll on his side. I also note that it appears tazers are being used far too often (5 deaths in 12 years in this jurisdiction alone). There is no mention of a weapon present and no apparent clear and immediate danger to the arresting officers. If poor judgement was used, and a man died because of it, then the arresting officers should be held responsible.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:27:08 GMT -5
I know what you are saying, dj. It's just that the above account is a bit....incomplete. I know we are to post assuming it's true, but I can't even do that without their complete version of the truth. yeah, it is. and you are right. however, i am STILL not sure this would be justified, even if there was a "danger".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:28:06 GMT -5
They were searching for drugs. . oh, in that case there was no justification for the homicide. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 12:31:44 GMT -5
it sickens me when "procedure" and "the law" lead to the deaths of people who should be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
when cops in general error on the other side is when we end up with dead police
how many stories of patrol officers going up to a car, and just being shot in the face?
or cops busting down a door being greeted with shotgun blasts?
which would you prefer....people treated like criminals until things are sorted out, or dead cops?
do the men in blue ruffle a few feathers once in a while...of course
there are bad cops just as there are bad (every other job in the world) managers around
but they are what we have to TRY and keep law and order on our streets
they get paid for shit....and they risk their lives for us
to me....that gives them the benefit of the doubt
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:33:03 GMT -5
it sickens me when "procedure" and "the law" lead to the deaths of people who should be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
when cops in general error on the other side is when we end up with dead police sorry, but i tend to side with citizens before law enforcement. i know that most people feel differently than me. i am ok with that.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:36:27 GMT -5
oh, in that case there was no justification for the homicide. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png) It wasn't homicide... it was an accidental death. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png) Dude shouldn't haven't been so fat and unhealthy... ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png) LOL! yeah. blame the fat guy. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/grin.png)
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on May 30, 2013 12:43:25 GMT -5
The fat guy issue is actually a valid point.
Remember the death row inmate who tried to get out of the death penalty because he was too fat to be guaranteed a painless death by lethal injection?
If we did make a procedure exception for extremly obese people (lying on stomach to be handcuffed) you know they will immediately be the ones carrying the guns when questionable activities are taking place.
Sorry - no exception that might put our officers at risk.
It's the tazed three times thing that's bothering me.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,447
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 30, 2013 12:55:00 GMT -5
The fat guy issue is actually a valid point.
Remember the death row inmate who tried to get out of the death penalty because he was too fat to be guaranteed a painless death by lethal injection?
If we did make a procedure exception for extremly obese people (lying on stomach to be handcuffed) you know they will immediately be the ones carrying the guns when questionable activities are taking place.
Sorry - no exception that might put our officers at risk.
It's the tazed three times thing that's bothering me.
it is the "at risk from a 350 lb sleeping guy" that is bothering me.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on May 30, 2013 12:58:37 GMT -5
DJ - the sleeping guy could have been pretending to be asleep while reaching for a weapon under the cushions.
This was a drug bust, right? Drugs and guns usually go hand in hand.
Or do you think no one ever tries to pull a fast one?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 13:01:11 GMT -5
That's a nice idea in principle but really scary in the real world. If I know that a man has attacked women even though it hasn't been legally proven, I'm an idiot if I engage him the same way I do most people. In this case the police would have knowledge of the man's history even though it hasn't been proven yet.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 30, 2013 13:05:10 GMT -5
I'm always torn by reports like this. I have to take into consideration what the jobs of law enforcement officers entail. These folks are walking into situations where their lives are on the line. They don't know what they're going to find. It makes sense to me, if a call has been received that there's trouble somewhere and the police are sent to investigate, they're going to go in prepared for trouble. It's logical to get the scene under the best possible control; otherwise, the lives of your responders are in jeopardy along with the lives of anyone else at the scene. Frankly, that's not a position in which I'd like to find myself.
The case mentioned here, for me, doesn't have enough detail for me to make a decision with regard to what the officers did. If I assume it's all true, of course I'm going to rant and rave about the police overstepping their bounds and causing someone's death. However, is that fair to the officers? Would I want someone to make assumptions about my actions in a given situation and condemn me based on those assumptions? No, I would not. That's why I try not to make unfounded assumptions and base my judgements on those assumptions.
The family in this case has lost a family member. They're grieving, and that's understandable. However, because they're grieving, and because the situation may have been pretty volatile, their story(ies) could be somewhat inaccurate. We don't know, because we don't know why the police were there. Were they called to the home? We don't know. A distraught family can be pretty confused and can draw some wrong conclusions under difficult circumstances. Unless we know those circumstances, there's no way we can really evaluate what happened here.
I'm with the captain in that the man was put on his stomach per police protocol, but he couldn't breathe in that position. I understand that can be very frightening. He was trying to roll to his side and the police wouldn't let him do so. I'd want to know if they let him do so once they got him cuffed, or if he was fighting them so they couldn't get him cuffed. Sorry, but there are just too many unknowns here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 13:13:40 GMT -5
Were they called to the home? We don't know. A distraught family can be pretty confused and can draw some wrong conclusions under difficult circumstances. Unless we know those circumstances, there's no way we can really evaluate what happened here.
no...they were executing a proper search warrant for drugs (cocaine)
it is not unusual for drugs and GUNS to be together in a house
ergo...control the scene and all perps is number one priority
i feel for the family.....but even if he had difficulty breathing on stomach, he "probably" could have dealt with it for a few minutes
once they had control, they would have let him sit up or roll....still cuffed of course
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on May 30, 2013 13:16:52 GMT -5
It's hard to say without knowing specifics. But I don't think any officer can anticipate every suspects medical issues and respond appropriately. It's not the officer's fault this guy was very much overweight and had breathing issues. On the other hand, I do think once the scene is secure the officers should check on everyone's well being and make adjustments.
As with Gydyva, I think it depends on how long this guy was in this position.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on May 30, 2013 13:17:34 GMT -5
On a related note it appears this police department may have serious training "issues" www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Waller-Family-Releases-Statement-on-Fort-Worth-Police-Shooting-209401361.html"Although we wish to devote this time with family and friends, we felt it was important to respond to the media coverage of this event. We were deeply troubled by the police department misrepresenting details of the incident in their interviews with the media. We would ask that the police refrain from providing details to the media until a thorough investigation has been completed, preferably by an independent body." I find it more telling in this case that the family is the ones asking the police to refrain from going to the media until an investigation is complete.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 30, 2013 13:20:46 GMT -5
I don't understand the police judgment in this case. You have a morbidly obese man trying to roll over onto his side, with his family pleading that he's an asthmatic and he can't breathe. Hence for repeatedly electrocuting the man (which is what tasing is) to be justifiable, we have to accept that one (or several) officers legitimately believed that having him lying on his side rather than lying prone presented an unacceptable threat. I just don't see that as reasonable. Certainly if they're worried he might have access to a weapon, get him to lie down on his side somewhere in the open with his hands in plain view. But repeatedly shocking him as he's struggling for life? That's negligent homicide, I'm sorry. It is an unreasonable and unlawful application of force, and it killed him. It doesn't even border on the "justifiable in the face of a threat" gray area. You won't convince me that the threat posed by a handcuffed 350-pound man lying sidelong exceeds the threat he poses while lying prone so greatly that it obviates all other concerns--up to and including his life, in this case. The question underlying the OP is: How bad can a police officer's judgment get before he crosses the line from professional misconduct to outright homicide? I've seen videos of everything from kyphotic old ladies being tased, teenagers being thrown off skateboards, pet dogs being blown away (in botched raids on the wrong house ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/tongue.png) ). The public has to have confidence we won't reach the point where a 15-year-old's cellphone suddenly goes off in his pocket during an arrest and the arresting officer empties his clip into the kid's back in "self defense". The whole system breaks down if people don't trust the police to be beholden to a reasonable standard of judgment, with meaningful penalties for criminal negligence in the line of duty.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:05:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2013 13:38:47 GMT -5
You won't convince me that the threat posed by a handcuffed 350-pound man lying sidelong exceeds the threat he poses while lying prone so greatly that it obviates all other concerns--up to and including his life, in this case
Virgil
I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that they were TRYING to cuff him...he wasnt already cuffed
Once cuffed, the threat goes to almost nonexistant
But until then...anything can and has happened in cases like this
Now if that is not the case....then my viewpoint starts to radically change
Same as if they took to long to get the scene under control.....
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 30, 2013 14:13:21 GMT -5
You won't convince me that the threat posed by a handcuffed 350-pound man lying sidelong exceeds the threat he poses while lying prone so greatly that it obviates all other concerns--up to and including his life, in this case
Virgil I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that they were TRYING to cuff him...he wasnt already cuffed Once cuffed, the threat goes to almost nonexistant But until then...anything can and has happened in cases like this Now if that is not the case....then my viewpoint starts to radically change Same as if they took to long to get the scene under control..... What upsets me about this case is that if the reported details are accurate, this man had no choice but to try to roll over onto his side. It was either roll over or die of asphyxiation. In cases where a perpetrator is able to comply (for example, if police warn a man not to reach for his pockets but he nevertheless decides to reach for his cell phone), I have little sympathy for him. The solution to the problem is simple: comply with police. If you have to reach into your pocket to get your heart medication: don't; tell the arresting officer "Please, my heart medication is in my pocket. Can you have another officer take it out for me?" and expect (hope) that the officer will make a reasonable concession. In this case, we have a man with no choice. We have the family fervently appealing to police that he had no choice. Yet the police make no reasonable concessions (and quite the opposite, shock him three times), and ostensibly sentence him to death either way. Any time you run into a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, there is a serious procedural problem. Under no circumstances should a perpetrator face lethal action by police contingent on compliance with a directive that it is impossible for him to comply with. Hence if the arresting officers were operating within procedural bounds in this case, change the bloody procedures. If they weren't operating within procedural bounds, they're guilty of negligent homicide. They sentenced an innocent man to death.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on May 30, 2013 14:25:07 GMT -5
Actually,. there seem to be about 8 people who really know what happened. Bet we get 7 different accounts.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on May 30, 2013 14:50:06 GMT -5
Virgil? I dont' disagree with a lot of what you posted, assuming the family account is even close the truth. However, I disagree that the officers "sentenced him to death". Had they shot him, I would agree. But they tased him. There is a reasonable (and proven) expectation that a taser incapciates a suspect without seriously or fatally injuring him - the reason they are employed. Of course, we've all heard stories where the taser has caused death (usually due to another existing health condition). I'm guessing, tho, that the ratio of deaths to the number of times the taser is employed is infinitesimal. Should officers who use tasers be aware it could cause a death? Of course. Should they expect it will cause a death? No.
It's my feeling here that if the officers were just out to "off" somebody, they would have just shot him. It sounds like they employed the least traumatic force at their disposal to subdue the subject. It ended tragically.
What are the seemingly undisputed facts here? The guy had a prior drug conviction. He was on probation for said drug conviction. His family says he has been testing clean, but anybody with half a brain and the internet can test clean if they need to. The police has a search warrant. That means they had evidence of drug activity, that they presented to a judge who deemed it to be enough evidence to issue said warrant. They weren't looking for a burned out roach in the ashtray. They have, by the familys' account, five people screaming at them while they are trying to execute that warrant. They have one subject who is refusing (perhaps rightly) to do as he is told.
I think it's unfair to second-guess those officers in this type of situation. It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback and say what they should have done. I mean, I can scream, "I can't breathe" and then shoot you 2 seconds later when you believe me and let me up.
It's so sad and I feel for the family....AND for the officers. And if some type of misconduct comes to light, they should be punished. But I still don't think anyone intended to kill anybody.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 30, 2013 14:51:46 GMT -5
Virgil "Hence if the arresting officers were operating within procedural bounds in this case, change the bloody procedures. If they weren't operating within procedural bounds, they're guilty of negligent homicide. They sentenced an innocent man to death" Fact will suffice after the investigation until then only two persons really knows what happened. Until then it's just "he says she says". I know, snowbird. I'm just wondering: even if the whole affair was caught on video in HD and bore out the witness accounts, what disciplinary action would be taken? A few weeks of administrative leave and a slap on the wrist? Or something more commensurate with the crime of manslaughter? If I'm an achronic asthmatic and police storm my house, am I a doomed man? Are we all expendable in that sense?
|
|