[Discussion] Violence by or at Police

Posting news articles about recent events involving either violence directed at police officers or violence done by them, as well as discussion of those events and the general subject.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Florida police kill black man while he eats dinner in his backyard

Maybe more information will come out. Even keeping in mind the tendency of police to shoot without cause, this story seems especially egregious.

Officers ordered Frazier to get on the ground, to which he responded, “Leave me alone,” according to his nephew Quartaze Woodard. When order to the ground once more, Frazier gave them the same response. Police then opened fire, according to Mr Woodard.

Police handcuffed the wounded Frazier, before attempting to perform CPR. Officers reported that Frazier was dead at the scene.

WTF.

I mean I know some idiots are going to say he wasn't complying with police. But you shoot an unarmed guy and then handcuff him? That can't be the way things go.

That's nice, but the bigger question is why isn't de-escalation taught during the 480 hours of basic coursework/training required for all Illinois police?

And why does state law mandate 40 hours of training specifically for firearms, but de-escalation training only lasts two days? I mean which skill is going to be used the most during an officer's career and, generally, will be more helpful to the community: shooting people or de-fusing volatile situations?

Something tells me the biggest thing to come out of this, if anything does, is training on how to tell if the camera is on or off.

These cops will keep their jobs and the taxpayers will pay for a settlement.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...

"A videotaped police shooting of a black man in Tulsa on Friday has prompted the chief of police to ask the Justice Department to investigate and has the man's family crying foul.

Graphic video showing the shooting death of Terence Crutcher, 40, on Friday, went viral, adding the case to the list of police-involved shootings raising questions about relations between law enforcement in the United States and black men."

When you say you hold police accountable, shouldn't the burden be on the police officers who were found guilty, and not the taxpayers? Something tells me that entire line of policy on settlements should be rethought.

LarryC wrote:

When you say you hold police accountable, shouldn't the burden be on the police officers who were found guilty, and not the taxpayers? Something tells me that entire line of policy on settlements should be rethought.

Unfortunately, Police Unions have the political clout to prevent the types of policies that would target an offender's income or pension.

Oklahoma Officer Fatally Shoots Unarmed Black Man In Alarming Video
The man appears to be walking with his hands above his head.

Terence Crutcher, 40, was shot and killed Friday after officers responding to an unrelated call spotted his vehicle stalled in the middle of the roadway, Tulsa World reports. The police department earlier said Crutcher refused orders to put up his hands, but the footage appears to show him walking toward his vehicle with his hands above his head.

So not the usual script of "he matched a description of an criminal we were chasing" Just straight up murder as far as I can tell.

IMAGE(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/57e05aab180000113cbd27ca.png?cache=j5h1d7j0fu)

LarryC wrote:

When you say you hold police accountable, shouldn't the burden be on the police officers who were found guilty, and not the taxpayers? Something tells me that entire line of policy on settlements should be rethought.

A lot of things should be rethought. That doesn't mean they will be.

LarryC wrote:

When you say you hold police accountable, shouldn't the burden be on the police officers who were found guilty, and not the taxpayers? Something tells me that entire line of policy on settlements should be rethought.

That sounds interesting but it will need a lot of fleshing out of what exactly the burden should be. A simple case of walking a detainee to the squad car, having them slip and tear something can become a costly settlement. Should the officer walking the person be responsible?

I grant you that it would make officers think hard about using force but perhaps not in a good way. "If I shoot that person they will sue, but if I just let him get away I bet the family of the victim will sue for less...."

[O]ne of the troopers says “we gotta punch a number on this guy,” which means open an investigation in the police database. And he says “we really gotta cover our asses.” And then they have a very long discussion about what to charge Michael with—none of which appear to have any basis in fact. This plays out over eight minutes. They talk about “we could do this, we could do this, we could do this….”

In the end they decide on two criminal infractions: “reckless use of a highway by a pedestrian,” and “creating a public disturbance.” They have a chilling discussion on how to support the public disturbance charge, and the top-level supervisor explains to the other two, “what we say is that multiple motorists stopped to complain about a guy waving a gun around, but none of them wanted to stop and make a statement.”

So not only A) What charges can we bring up on this guy that are plausible, but B) What lies can we make up to support these charges that will be difficult to dispute in court. Absolutely disgusting.

The most unsurprising part is how the video with the evidence sat in the Police Dept for a year without their Internal Affairs doing anything with it other than making up excuses to not do anything with. IA is not going to punish them for something that is probably commonplace in that department.

Maq wrote:

I suspect massive underfunding of law enforcement agencies (or indeed any government body) in the US would have something to do with it.

Actually I suspect that LEOs are very well funded, just in the wrong areas. Training is minimal, but damn to they get some fine toys.

So that will be the excuse this time. Sure, not threatening, sure complying, but he looked like he was on drugs so he deserved to be gunned down.

Like, can you even drive on PCP? I was under the impression its disassociative aspects would have made you far more likely to be like... just chilling.

That he even complied with any orders at all makes the idea that he was on PCP reaaaaaally f*cking weird.

*off topic

I was watching Maverick (Mel Gibson version) with my kids last weekend and there is that part where the Duke pays to "kill" an indian. I wonder if the payment Arizona (or Tulsa) will make is more or less (in adjusted dollars) than the Duke paid to shoot an unarmed man.

LarryC wrote:

When you say you hold police accountable, shouldn't the burden be on the police officers who were found guilty, and not the taxpayers? Something tells me that entire line of policy on settlements should be rethought.

You assume they are found guilty. Most of these incidents over the past few years, the cops have no real punishment and are still cops afterward. Like that cop at the start of this thread that shot the little girl and walked away? He was not punished and is still working. And then people wonder why groups have no faith in the 'justice' system.

The April death of Terrill Thomas, an inmate at the Milwaukee County Jail, was just ruled a homicide.

The cause of death was "profound dehydration." Jail officials turned off the water to Thomas' cell for six days. Inmates in nearby cells said they heard Thomas repeatedly begging corrections officers for water before he died.

The Milwaukee County Jail is run by Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. You might recognize Clarke from his numerous media appearances promoting the idea that Black Lives Matter is a violent hate group that kills cops and praising Trump at the Republican National Convention.

Over the past four years ten other people have died while in custody of the Sheriff's Office. Thomas wasn't even the first inmate to die of dehydration.

I'm sure Clarke considers Trump a kindred spirit, considering that Trump bemoaned how the Chelsea bomber suspect will get medical attention and a lawyer.

The bad part, now we will give him amazing hospitalization. He will be taken care of by some of the best doctors in the world. He will be given a fully modern and updated hospital room. And he’ll probably even have room service, knowing the way our country is. And, on top of that, he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer.
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I'm sure Clarke considers Trump a kindred spirit, considering that Trump bemoaned how the Chelsea bomber suspect will get medical attention and a lawyer.

The bad part, now we will give him amazing hospitalization. He will be taken care of by some of the best doctors in the world. He will be given a fully modern and updated hospital room. And he’ll probably even have room service, knowing the way our country is. And, on top of that, he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer.

Trump also channeled Jack Bauer and basically said that we should torture Rahami to get information from him (and that Congress should pass laws mandating the use of torture).

We must also use whatever lawful methods are available to obtain information from the apprehended suspect to get information before it’s no longer timely. And Congress should pass measures to ensure that foreign enemy combatants are treated as such. These are enemies, these are combatants and we have to be tough we have to be strong.

Also note the use of "enemy combatant" instead of prisoner. It's totally not a super slippery slope to treat an American citizen arrested in America by law enforcement as an enemy combatant.

For those of you keeping score at home Trump has repeatedly said things that show he thinks the 1st, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments are just barriers preventing him from making America great again.

Ahem, Jack Bauer didn't just torture people willy-nilly--he only did so when there was no time!

Dammit!

Don't forget, Jack Bauer was conveniently always right. The people he tortured were always guilty and always had the information he was after.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Don't forget, Jack Bauer was conveniently always right. The people he tortured were always guilty and always had the information he was after.

Also conveniently, they universally responded to the torture with usable information.

Another police shooting in Charlotte. Rioters on the streets tonight.

In the last two days we've had a Black man executed for his car breaking down, and another for waiting for his kids bus.

Yeah, there are some really scary lines being drawn across the civil fabric of the US at the moment.... Multiple counts of actual murder conducted by police with visual evidence that goes unpunished, the rise of a demagogue with a serious chance of being elected, enemies of the state being executed by remote via extrajudicial channels, increasing levels of digital surveillance that, despite increasing public awareness, continue to grow... Feels like a truly disastrous brew is fermenting away, waiting for the right combination of events to unfold and I'm not sure if it's going to start as violent civil unrest and escalate or if things will just go global from the get-go.

It truly is a scary time to be devoting any serious thought to geopolitics as an outsider to this situation.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

In the last two days we've had a Black man executed for his car breaking down, and another for waiting for his kids bus.

Yet Kapernick is the one disgracing the country...

http://www.wbur.org/news/2016/09/20/...

Black men who try to avoid an encounter with Boston police by fleeing may have a legitimate reason to do so — and should not be deemed suspicious — according to a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.