Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread #2

That cop is drunk. And if he isn’t, well…he is.

Police fired 24 shots at a handcuffed man. Why didn’t they turn on their body cameras? (

Because they didn’t want their story ruined by inconvenient facts.

Did you even read the linked article? Here is the first line - “A 21-year-old eastern Missouri man suspected of shooting a police officer was shot and killed when he fired several rounds at officers who were pursuing him, authorities said.” So I guess, if they were competent, they would have arrested him and not shot back. Please explain how that would work. Seriously, WTF are you talking about?

Yes, and we have learned to absolutely trust and believe everything the police tell us as gospel


this is a complete sentence, you fucks

There are a lot of stories that would be easier to fake than that one. It doesn’t have to be taken as gospel on faith, not by itself, there will be an investigation, witness statements, video, whatever, on which to base one’s measured opinion.

The idea that police officers in this country, in the line of duty, would never have just cause to shoot at someone and possibly cause their death is not rational. Lots better training is needed, but that possibility will never go away even for the best trained force.

A suspect is spotted. What options does law enforcement have but to go after him, provoke a gunfight and kill him?
A suspect gets out of his car and shoots at you. What options does law enforcement have but to shoot back?

As you seem to struggle with imagining answer; I’ll help a bit – They could act like fucking cops: put their car in reverse; maintain a safe distance; cordon off the area for the public and wait. (did they close the highway before they initiated this little shootout? Then what is the point of having “several law enforcement agencies involved in the pursuit” ?)

They didn’t set out to arrest him–they did nothing to protect the public–they set out to get revenge. And with complete impunity. And in you eyes they did nothing wrong and I must have not read the article to question the outcome.

…I think at this stage of the game things are the complete opposite. From the outside looking in: policing in America is hopelessly compromised, institutionally racist and corrupt, and there is no reason why we should believe any statement they make unless we have some sort of independent verification.

So do police in America sometimes have cause to shoot at someone and possibly cause their death? Sure. But the burden is on them to prove that this is the case. And one of the ways the police can do that is to follow procedure in regards to things like body-cams. And if they don’t follow those procedures then they deserve all the skepticism we can muster. Because the only way you can make change is to keep the pressure on.

I am inclined to go where evidence takes me. In this day and age, there is absolutely no reason why body cams shouldn’t be on every officer, shouldn’t be on at all times someone is on duty, and shouldn’t be easily reviewable upon a formal public request, with sufficient interest and justification.

I agree that there are times when officers are completely justified in using deadly force and there are also times when suspects put officers in a situation in which they might reasonably fear for their life, even if it later turns out they were unarmed. I’m not knee-jerk anti-cop. But the days of just taking deputy dawg’s word for it are over.

With improving robotics, drones, and similar, rationality is approaching.

having too much to drink is a capital offense – well, maybe not for everyone, but if you fail to produce ID when asked and you look like your name end in a “-z”, beware

Which linked article were you referring to?

Who will do the investigation? Who’s reports and evidence gathering will it be based upon? Who will question the witnesses? How many cases in this very thread have allegations of cops threatening witnesses to produce the testimony they want? How many times in this thread do we have cops planting evidence on people?

You have way too much faith in cops in general. I actually envy it. But this thread is proof positive that cops are just as likely to be lying theiving raping murderous thugs as the general public.

We could talk about the number of cops convicted of murder,. And not ‘in the line of duty’ shootings. But that may be a very lengthy conversation.

We could limit the conversation to the ones who were featured on the original Forensic Files. TV show. Still a surprisingly lot to work with. The Golden State Killer was cop in California not once, but twice.

I still go back the the cop who shot the guy in the back several times as he was running away, walked up the body and dropped his taser on him and reported that he was in fear for his life when the ‘criminal’ took it from him and HAD to use deadly force.

Unbeknownst to him, a bystander recorded it with his cell phone, showing it for the cold blooded killing it was.

The thing is…if there had not been cell phone video, that cop’s story would be the official record. That would have been FACT. And he would be decorated as a hero and not sitting in cell in prison.

And the question that cop defenders do NOT want to ask is, how many times did this happen and there was no video? They do not want to allow for the possibility.

His shooting the ‘criminal’ in the back and dropping a weapon on him was business as usual. His partner witnessing it and keeping quiet was business as usual. Chauvin kneeling on the neck of someone in a prone position was business as usual. They were just caught on camera.

THIS is why cops do not want to be recorded. THIS is why they leave their body cams off. These events are like cockroaches. For every one we see…

This turned out to be a much longer post than I intended.

Police who held a handcuffed man pressed to the ground until he died of asphyxiation have been denied qualified immunity by Fifth Circuit, overturning the District Court’s grant of QI for the officers.

Now, eight years after Jesse Aguirre was killed, his family will be able to confront his killers in court and sue them for his death. They still might not win, but at least they’ll get their day in court.

Which illuminates a larger problem. Imagine a world in which casual video is not a realistic option. If this is our only defense again misbehavior by LEOs, what world happen to our society if we were to lose this bit of technology?

In other words, we have to face the reality that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way we have been doing things. Body cameras are but a band-aid “solution”. We must address policing itself, and perhaps criminal justice in general, or the problem remains and threatens to become worse. Because no one wants to do their job under constant surveillance, and when that job includes the possibility of duly sanctioned violence, it is troubling to imagine how that imposition will impact the attitudes of those police.

So 2010?

Evil cop finally caught and arrested for raping a child.

Killing a man who is running away is no justification for firing. Says Atlanta racist board.

I was thinking more along the lines of 1984.