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 31, 2013 12:44:00 GMT -5
I've got to wonder how many people here have actually faced a 350+ lb individual who doesn't want to be touched. I have - more than once, and my associates and I were there to help the person. I don't think I'd want to face that situation, at all, if the 350+ lb person was in a position to be antagonistic. No! Thanks, but no! ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/yikes.png) I've also been in a position in which there were multiple family members standing around said individual and screaming their heads off. Can I tell you what they were saying? In that cacophony? Ummm, nope. I was concentrated on the one on the gurney, not the peanut gallery. Had to call in security to deal with the peanut gallery, just as I imagine some of these officers were trying to deal with these family members. It all reads so easy in print. When you've been there, you have a different perspective. What the truth is, we don't know. Hopefully, further investigation will lead to the correct action being taken. If the officers were out of line, they should pay the cost for contributing to this person's demise. If, however, they were following procedures and did not overstep their authority, this was a tragic occurrence, but not to be blamed on officers of the law who were doing their jobs. Whether we like the prison system as it is, or the drug laws as they are, has no bearing on whether this was an accidental death, or negligent homicide.
|
|
kgb18
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 8:15:23 GMT -5
Posts: 4,904
|
Post by kgb18 on May 31, 2013 13:17:14 GMT -5
Thanks, GeL and z.
My DH would be the first person to say there are some crummy cops out there. He gets frustrated when his coworkers defend some of the bad ones.
There are a lot of other really dangerous jobs. While traffic fatalities are the leading cause of death for police officers, the threat of being shot is still very real. A friend of ours was shot (thankfully he's okay now) in the leg chasing an armed robber last summer. Another officer in our area was killed a few years ago. He got ambushed and shot in the back of the head while he was walking his beat. It might not be common, but it's still a very real possibility.
|
|
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 31, 2013 13:28:23 GMT -5
I've got to wonder how many people here have actually faced a 350+ lb individual who doesn't want to be touched. I have - more than once, and my associates and I were there to help the person. I don't think I'd want to face that situation, at all, if the 350+ lb person was in a position to be antagonistic. No! Thanks, but no! ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/yikes.png) . they were doing alright if they could wrestle him to the ground and kill him.
|
|
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 31, 2013 13:33:40 GMT -5
Dj, I don't know they "killed" him. I know the man died. I know he won't be the first who has died after being tazed. Tazers are not benign. I don't think anyone has suggested they are. Thing is, I'm not about to jump to the conclusion the officers "murdered" this man. There's not enough in evidence for me to do that with any inkling of confidence.
|
|
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 31, 2013 13:38:22 GMT -5
Dj, I don't know they "killed" him. I know the man died. i think it is pretty clear they killed him. is there some doubt? not really. reason being: it doesn't matter if he was going to die imminently. this is the same line of reasoning the CIA used when they tortured people to death, and it is also wrong. it is PIC = person in custody. you are responsible for them. if they die, and it is due to stress cause BY YOU, then it is killing. whether it is murder, homicide or accident is for the courts to decide, if they ever even hear this case.I know he won't be the first who has died after being tazed. Tazers are not benign. I don't think anyone has suggested they are. Thing is, I'm not about to jump to the conclusion the officers "murdered" this man. There's not enough in evidence for me to do that with any inkling of confidence. whatever you say. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/confused.png)
|
|
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 31, 2013 13:45:51 GMT -5
Dj, I don't know they "killed" him. I know the man died. i think it is pretty clear they killed him. is there some doubt? not really. reason being: it doesn't matter if he was going to die imminently. this is the same line of reasoning the CIA used when they tortured people to death, and it is also wrong. it is PIC = person in custody. you are responsible for them. if they die, and it is due to stress cause BY YOU, then it is killing. whether it is murder, homicide or accident is for the courts to decide, if they ever even hear this case.I know he won't be the first who has died after being tazed. Tazers are not benign. I don't think anyone has suggested they are. Thing is, I'm not about to jump to the conclusion the officers "murdered" this man. There's not enough in evidence for me to do that with any inkling of confidence. whatever you say. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/confused.png) Semantics, I suppose. I think of the phrase "they killed him" to mean the act of "killing him" was purposeful. You may not mean it that way; however, comparing what happened in this case to the CIA torturing people seems to indicate you mean it that way. If you do, we disagree. These officers may have been doing their jobs and doing them correctly. In that case, there would have been no intent to torture, nor to kill.
|
|
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 31, 2013 13:51:59 GMT -5
whatever you say. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/confused.png) Semantics, I suppose. I think of the phrase "they killed him" to mean the act of "killing him" was purposeful. no, i think they purposefully put him in a position/situation that caused him to die. that is not the same thing. but i might remind you that there is a lot of killing that is excused by this line of reasoning. ie- apparently that woman that killed her 4 kids thought she was baptizing them.You may not mean it that way; however, comparing what happened in this case to the CIA torturing people seems to indicate you mean it that way. no, not really. the objective of torture is not to kill the suspect. it is to extract confessions in the general case. if he dies, then he was just a piece of shit anyway, so who cares, right? that is some of what i am seeing in this case.If you do, we disagree. These officers may have been doing their jobs and doing them correctly. In that case, there would have been no intent to torture, nor to kill. intent is actually not that important. if you intend merely to drive home before Jon Stewart is on, and you kill someone pushing their pram in a crosswalk because you weren't paying attention, it doesn't excuse that death. once again, there is murder, negligent homicide, and accidental homicide. i am not certain which of these applies here, but i am certain of one thing: dude is dead. edit: if i seem a little unsympathetic to law enforcement, particularly in situations involving illegal drugs, i am. so, you can discount my posts on that basis. i am going to side with the dead guy 90% of the time, unless he is shooting. that goes for TV Williams, and all of the other discussions we have here.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:05:05 GMT -5
My point exactly. A 350+ lb man who's actively resisting arrest is doing a heck of a lot more than trying to roll over onto his side. If a suspect is kicking, flailing, then fine, subdue him by any means necessary. But it is not unreasonable for police training to include a caveat: If a suspect is morbidly obese and trying to roll over onto his side, if he is otherwise showing no signs of resistance, he may be trying to orient himself so that he can breathe. If you force him to lie on his stomach for any length of time, you will kill him. If a morbidly obese suspect otherwise shows signs of resistance, take that into consideration when subduing him. Even if police are aware of this caveat, it gives the asthmatic man a chance of surviving a police raid. We don't just write him off as a matter of procedure. Your Reply #78 took the sarcasm in Reply #76 literally. You didn't 'blame me' so much as you censured me for a sarcastic remark you're calling "hyperbole". GEL, on the other hand, accused me of "get[ting] all pissy and stompy-footy" and "acting like a baby" for my use of hyperbole and sarcasm in #76, which apparently means she's "acting like a baby" in Replies #101, #102 and #103--or otherwise a raging hypocrite. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/coffee.gif) Nobody is disputing that police officers be given due process. And in fact I think everyone here, including me, believes that police should be granted a certain degree of leniency due to the dangerous, stressful nature of their work. The problem is that I don't know police can "face harsh consequences" for causing injury or death. You can find hundreds of stories online where police officers were cleared of any wrongdoing in the death of a suspect. You can find a good number where investigators conclude that police action "contributed" to a death, and the officers involved are hit with a minor penalty. But we find no stories of police facing penalties anywhere near those of what you or I would face. As far as I can tell, even officers with the worst imaginable judgment can kill with impunity. Steve brought up several articles. I jumped on this one because the man was "doomed" by the raid. He tried to save his life, the police shocked him to death as a matter of procedure, and thus from the minute police entered his residence, he was a dead man. It would have been better if the police had just stayed in the station.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:11:04 GMT -5
My point exactly. A 350+ lb man who's actively resisting arrest is doing a heck of a lot more than trying to roll over onto his side. If a suspect is kicking, flailing, then fine, subdue him by any means necessary.. um....no. such a man might be DYING. that is not going to work for me.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:30:53 GMT -5
Sighhhhhhh. Once again, you deliberately misinterpret my writings. I was accusing you of getting all pissy and stompy-footy and acting like a baby for, in the absence of intelligent argument, choosing instead to deliberately misinterpret my writings. At no point did I mention "hyperbole" or "sarcasm". Of course, you already know that but, instead of just saying, "You are right, GEL. I apologize.", you do it again. You can be as sarcastic as you want. I don't care. Just don't get mad at me because I'm better at it.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:34:56 GMT -5
My point exactly. A 350+ lb man who's actively resisting arrest is doing a heck of a lot more than trying to roll over onto his side. If a suspect is kicking, flailing, then fine, subdue him by any means necessary.. um....no. such a man might be DYING. that is not going to work for me. At some point I have to agree with mmhmm and GEL that police don't have time to distinguish between the dying and the belligerent. An obese man trying to roll over onto his side but otherwise passive: the added risk he'll get away isn't worth killing him over. Anything more than that, even if he's acting in defense of his own life, I'm willing to concede with mmhmm and GEL that he's a dead man as a matter of procedure. The police essentially have no choice but to shock him to death. I did apologize in Reply #88. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/huh.gif) I'm obviously missing something here, and so rather than drag it out, I give you a hearty Canadian hug ![](http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/smileys/hug.gif) and concede that we may never see eye to eye on this topic.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:47:17 GMT -5
um....no. such a man might be DYING. that is not going to work for me. At some point I have to agree with mmhmm and GEL that police don't have time to distinguish between the dying and the belligerent. then maybe they should find another line of work. this thread has gone to a bad place for me. i am done here.
|
|
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 31, 2013 14:49:45 GMT -5
You raise some excellent points, dj, that always make me think. I enjoy that. I believe I'll take my leave also. Time will tell...maybe. Maybe not.
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:14:55 GMT -5
As far as I know, we don't have information as to the cause of this man's death. We can ASSume. Is that wise? It isn't to me.
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:16:58 GMT -5
Thank you, Virgil. That's the only point I've been trying to make, and I think GEL stands in the same stead. If these officers *ahem* over-performed, they deserve to have the book thrown at them. My point, from the beginning, has been we simply don't know for sure. Fortunately, the matter is being investigated.
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:21:06 GMT -5
That's a very common thing criminals do to get themselves taken to the ER instead of to the jail. "I can't breathe!" and "Aggghhhh! Chest pain!" are the most regularly used, but they can get very creative. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png)
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:38:43 GMT -5
As far as I know, we don't have information as to the cause of this man's death. We can ASSume. Is that wise? It isn't to me. All we have to ask is: What are the odds that this man's death wasn't a direct result of the raid? If we believe the article's claim that his heart stopped, out of the 19,460,520 minutes of his life, what are the odds he'd go into cardiac arrest by coincidence during the exact 5 minutes police are repeatedly shocking him with 50,000 volts? And even if the coroner discovers that he actually choked to death on a peanut, what are the odds he'd just happen to randomly choke on a peanut during the 5 minutes police are storming his house?
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:48:10 GMT -5
That's a very common thing criminals do to get themselves taken to the ER instead of to the jail. "I can't breathe!" and "Aggghhhh! Chest pain!" are the most regularly used, but they can get very creative. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/wink.png) An obese man trying to lie on his side, with his family yelling "Please let him lie on his side, he has asthma." isn't your run-of-the-mill malingering. If you quantified the added threat from accommodating such a man, it would pale in comparison to the risk of killing him if you didn't.
|
|
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 31, 2013 15:56:50 GMT -5
Reply #122: All I said, Virgil, is we don't know what caused this man's death. You may assume whatever you wish. I'll wait for the results of the investigation. Yes, I have my suspicions based on my education and experience. That doesn't mean I have the answer, though.
Reply #123: If the whole family is yelling, I'd be darned lucky to be able to make out what any of them were saying. Been there, done that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 26, 2024 1:02:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2013 15:59:18 GMT -5
are we talking before or after being cuffed?
that is where there is little room to manuever
uncuffed, he is a threat....whether his family is yelling he cant breathe or not
he is on the floor....nothing has been searched.....there could be weapons within reach
every police agency from the fbi to hhs to local cops learns to cuff suspects certain ways
the reason they all use the same techniques is that they are proven to work
i understand your point....you think they should be trained to recognize an obese man as "something different" and treated differently
i disagree....
|
|
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 31, 2013 18:06:57 GMT -5
Over a period of a few seconds, fine. Over anything longer than that, we'll agree to disagree. "He has asthma. He can't breathe on his stomach." is not a difficult message to communicate.
...so that they don't end up killing people they're supposed to be protecting? Yeah, I do in this case.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 31, 2013 19:32:54 GMT -5
Question. Was this man the person of interest in the arrest scene, or was it someone else who also lived on the premises?
|
|
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 31, 2013 19:37:03 GMT -5
Over a period of a few seconds, fine. Over anything longer than that, we'll agree to disagree. "He has asthma. He can't breathe on his stomach." is not a difficult message to communicate. ...so that they don't end up killing people they're supposed to be protecting? Yeah, I do in this case. Since I've been in the position of trying to make out what someone is yelling when several other people are yelling and milling around at the same time, Virgil, I'll trust my own judgement on that one, if it's all the same to you.
|
|
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 31, 2013 19:38:20 GMT -5
Question. Was this man the person of interest in the arrest scene, or was it someone else who also lived on the premises? The person of interest, as I read the article, Value Buy.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 2, 2013 14:57:13 GMT -5
Well, I've been trying to call attention to this kind of thing with my conservative "law and order" type friends for a very long time. The police have a right and a duty to execute the search warrant as ordered. I understand that they have training, and procedures mostly to protect themselves and the public- however, at some point a law enforcement officer has to see the situation for what it is and use his or her brain. It's clear that non-compliance was due to a physical impairment that made the man unable to comply with the order. The use of the tazer was inappropriate- and yes, the police need to be exempt from personal liability for negligent behavior, especially gross negligence and/or reckless disregard for human life.
It doesn't sound like it was even absolutely necessary to cuff the man- it would seem to me that he was in such poor physical condition that he posed no threat to the officers. He wasn't otherwise non-compliant, so it seems they should have instructed him to get up and escorted him outside where they could have cuffed him standing at the side of a squad car, or in the front yard.
Then there's the whole matter of the underlying "war on drugs" which is at the root of this whole incident. It seems some people are hell bent to process the coca plant into a powder which they can snort up their noses to get high. The drive by some people to use drugs seems to be impossible to impede through laws and their stringent enforcement. The drive also to produce the product(s) which are in high demand, and for which people are willing to pay the artificially high prices due to the war on drugs and the inherent risks is equally uninhibited by the law.
In the name of stopping people from smoking, injecting, and snorting whatever they will to get high, we have turned whole sections of America over to production, distribution, and sales syndicates-- armed to the teeth and prepared to kill anyone who gets in their way. Tough as it may be to swallow, we are going to have to come to terms with the fact that we can't stop people from doing self-destructive things. And it's an inappropriate use of government power to try.
The drug laws, like the failed alcohol prohibition before them, have caused more problems than even the strictest enforcement could possibly prevent.
It's time to re-think barging into people's houses with guns, and killing them in search of the forbidden product of a south American plant- or any other plant.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 2, 2013 19:18:06 GMT -5
On with my rant. Sometimes I think I'm to the right of Decoy 409..where is Decoy?? We can not have police or law enforcement investigating each other. The brotherhood of the Blue Clouds their vision. We need citizen committees, not entirely made up of pro law enforcement people to over see this. All we need to do is look on YouTube you will see video after video of police pulling over people that have done nothing just so they can search their cars or trucks. we see the police beating, using tazers on people that are not resisting or handcuffed. The spokesman will come out and state our officers acted properly, or we will have another agency investigate this. Missing video, It's amazing the amount of video that disappears while in police hands.
Now one of my favorite law enforcement agency, The Maricopa County Sheriff Dept. Sheriff Joe Arapio. Sheriff Joe crew regularly kill or beat inmates at the jail. We the taxpayers have already paid out over $25,000,000 in lawsuits. We have many more millions in pending lawsuits, most which we will lose.
Now law enforcement investigating law enforcement, The DOJ investigated Sheriff Joe for three years for racial discrimination. Things like Driving while brown. The DOJ found no evidence of racial discrimination, Then Federal Judge G. Murray Snow in a 142 page decision is peppered with stinging criticism of the policies and practices of going after illegal aliens, the problem is they were targeting anyone that was brown, many were U.S. citizens or legal immigrants. Sheriff Joe had over 8000 documents shredded. Police investigating police really works.
|
|
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 Jun 2, 2013 19:30:15 GMT -5
Oldcoyote, check your PMs, please. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/smiley.png)
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 2, 2013 19:40:46 GMT -5
mmhmm, how do I do that ? sorry
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jun 2, 2013 19:46:54 GMT -5
mmhmm, there it is right on top. Should have looked before I leaped. Thanks.
|
|
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 Jun 2, 2013 19:54:00 GMT -5
On with my rant. Sometimes I think I'm to the right of Decoy 409..where is Decoy?? We can not have police or law enforcement investigating each other. The brotherhood of the Blue Clouds their vision. We need citizen committees, not entirely made up of pro law enforcement people to over see this. All we need to do is look on YouTube you will see video after video of police pulling over people that have done nothing just so they can search their cars or trucks. we see the police beating, using tazers on people that are not resisting or handcuffed. The spokesman will come out and state our officers acted properly, or we will have another agency investigate this. Missing video, It's amazing the amount of video that disappears while in police hands. Now one of my favorite law enforcement agency, The Maricopa County Sheriff Dept. Sheriff Joe Arapio. Sheriff Joe crew regularly kill or beat inmates at the jail. We the taxpayers have already paid out over $25,000,000 in lawsuits. We have many more millions in pending lawsuits, most which we will lose.Now law enforcement investigating law enforcement , The DOJ investigated Sheriff Joe for three years for racial discrimination. Things like Driving while brown. The DOJ found no evidence of racial discrimination, Then Federal Judge G. Murray Snow in a 142 page decision is peppered with stinging criticism of the policies and practices of going after illegal aliens, the problem is they were targeting anyone that was brown, many were U.S. citizens or legal immigrants. Sheriff Joe had over 8000 documents shredded. Police investigating police really works.
I understand your grievance, but police investigating police is the equivalent of peer review for law enforcement. Police officers and ex-officers are arguably the only ones can consistently make reasonable judgments on procedure, justifiable use of force, officer safety, etc. By no coincidence, academic peer review suffers from the very problem you mention: the experts aren't always objective. Yet we stick with the system because it's better than any of the alternatives (which includes making judgments based on inexpert committees). I do agree with you that there's a problem. The very reason I introduced the OP is because I firmly believe that even if the officers involved in the death are found to have violated procedure and demonstrated extraordinarily poor judgment, none will face any severe penalties. And even that assumes the inquiry will be exhaustive and objective, which I doubt.
|
|