# Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942 "2014-10-10T07:35:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 218
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4341 "2015-06-29T15:03:18Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > doesn’t provide evidence of any reasonable fear for one’s life, in my view. So what? I disagree, obviously, but even if you’re right, so what? It doesn’t provide evidence. So, along with the police officer’s report not providing evidence (in your opinion) about what actually happened, you _don’t know_ what happened. And yet, you are claiming that you do, in fact, know what happened, and that is that they were not justified in shooting him. You need to provide actual evidence to make that claim, not simply claim that the police can’t prove their innocence. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4342 "2015-06-29T15:09:32Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > So what? I disagree, obviously, but even if you’re right, so what? It doesn’t provide evidence. So, along with the police officer’s report not providing evidence (in your opinion) about what actually happened, you _don’t know_ what happened. And yet, you are claiming that you do, in fact, know what happened, and that is that they were not justified in shooting him. You need to provide actual evidence to make that claim, not simply claim that the police can’t prove their innocence. I’m not claiming anything with any certainty about whether or not they (he) were justified in shooting him. I don’t think he was, based on the video, but I’m not absolutely certain. Based on the evidence, and my understanding of the law, there’s enough evidence to indict them (him) for murder or manslaughter or something comparable, and we’ll see what the investigation and grand jury says. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4343 "2015-06-29T15:09:49Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > I have no idea how someone who is not a psychopath could watch that video and not conclude that the officer fired well before he had any reasonable fear for his life. That’s because, quite frankly, you’re an absolute fucking moron who’s views have no connections with either the law or reality. Kid had a gun. Police approached, he reached for the gun. That is, at the _very_ minimum, a possible interpretation of the video - it’s the only reasonable one in my opinion, but others obviously disagree. It certainly doesn’t show a situation where no-one could reasonably fear that he would shoot them. > [@](#): > > Further, both officers made decisions and engaged in tactics that almost guaranteed a poor outcome. Functionally, there was no difference between what they did and just driving their car into the child. And that just proves that you have no connection with reality. You are quite obviously starting with the assumption that the cops went in to kill him, then twisting the facts to fit that view. Your argument would only begin to make sense if the car was silent, and he had no way of knowing they were approaching. But you know what? If he was pulling a gun on them, they’d have been well within their rights to run him over. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4344 "2015-06-29T15:12:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m not claiming anything with any certainty about whether or not they (he) were justified in shooting him. I don’t think he was, based on the video, but I’m not absolutely certain. So presumably, based on the evidence you’ve seen, you’d find him not guilty then. > [@](#): > > Based on the evidence, and my understanding of the law, there’s enough evidence to indict them (him) for murder or manslaughter or something comparable, and we’ll see what the investigation and grand jury says. Maybe. But if the DA or Grand Jury conclude that a jury would likely find him not guilty, then it would be wrong to prosecute. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4345 "2015-06-29T15:15:02Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It certainly doesn’t show a situation where no-one could reasonably fear that he would shoot them. In my opinion, it does show this. By the way, I don’t think the cops were necessarily intent upon killing him as soon as they got the call, or as soon as they got to the park and saw him from a distance, but I think it’s very possible that the cops behaved in a very negligent (and perhaps criminally negligent) manner, possibly with criminally reckless disregard for life, and this resulted in the boy’s death. I think it’s very possible that training was at least partially to blame, not that this necessarily excuses any possible criminal negligence and recklessness that resulted in the death of a child. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4346 "2015-06-29T15:17:06Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > So presumably, based on the evidence you’ve seen, you’d find him not guilty then. I’m not sure – I’d have to hear the case of the prosecutor, hear the testimony of the accused (if he so chooses) and witnesses, hear/see any other physical evidence, and perhaps see a better or blown up version of the video. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4347 "2015-06-29T15:28:36Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Lied? No, that assumes that they intentionally said things that weren’t true, and just from reading that there’s no way to know that. 1.Police said that Rice was seated at a table with other people. The video showed that Rice was alone.[39] What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? Hallucinations of extra people on the part of the cops? 2.Police said that as they pulled up, they saw Rice grab the toy gun and put it in his waistband. This is not supported by the video.[40] Judge Adrine said the video does not show the toy gun in Rice’s hands in the moments immediately before as as the zone car approaches.[6] What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? Hallucinations on the part of the cops? 3.Police said they got out of the car and told Rice three times to put his hands up but he refused. The video shows Rice being shot before the police car even comes to a halt.[22][41] What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? Hallucinations on the part of the cops? They thought that they were out of the car when they were actually still inside of it? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4348 "2015-06-29T15:29:22Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m not sure – I’d have to hear the case of the prosecutor, hear the testimony of the accused (if he so chooses) and witnesses, hear/see any other physical evidence, and perhaps see a better or blown up version of the video. I’m talking about if all you have is the currently available evidence. You are speculating that there’s further evidence, and that that will show them to be guilty. This is something that happens far too often in these threads. But if you’re not sure _then they are not guilty._ ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4349 "2015-06-29T15:35:12Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > 1.Police said that Rice was seated at a table with other people. The video showed that Rice was alone.[39] > What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? > Hallucinations of extra people on the part of the cops? > > 2.Police said that as they pulled up, they saw Rice grab the toy gun and put it in his waistband. This is not supported by the video.[40] Judge Adrine said the video does not show the toy gun in Rice’s hands in the moments immediately before as as the zone car approaches.[6] > What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? > Hallucinations on the part of the cops? > > 3.Police said they got out of the car and told Rice three times to put his hands up but he refused. The video shows Rice being shot before the police car even comes to a halt.[22][41] > What conditions would make this an unintentional falsehood? > Hallucinations on the part of the cops? They thought that they were out of the car when they were actually still inside of it? False memories in an extremely stressful situation. Possibly a conflation of what actually happened with what was said on the 911 call. Do we really have to go over all of that again? It’s neither new nor controversial. You need more that just proof that what they said was false to prove they were lying. Changes in statements are the most common one, as are particular kinds of inconsistency. And you’ll need that sort of proof if you’re going to prove it was an unlawful killing, I suspect. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4350 "2015-06-29T15:42:04Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Do we really have to go over all of that again? It’s neither new nor controversial. But it does contradict the cops. > [@](#): > > You need more that just proof that what they said was false to prove they were lying. Changes in statements are the most common one, as are particular kinds of inconsistency. And you’ll need that sort of proof if you’re going to prove it was an unlawful killing, I suspect. We don’t have to prove they are lying for them to be guilty. If they are merely mistaken, and the jury believes it was not a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence, they are guilty. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4351 "2015-06-29T15:50:02Z")
False fucking memories? Jesus, when it looks like there’s nowhere lower for you to go… ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4352 "2015-06-29T16:07:05Z")
There’s no point in arguing anything at all then. The police can say whatever they want and claim false memories post hoc. Amazing. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4353 "2015-06-29T16:07:08Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > I’m talking about if all you have is the currently available evidence. You are speculating that there’s further evidence, and that that will show them to be guilty. This is something that happens far too often in these threads. But if you’re not sure _then they are not guilty._ So I’m in a trial in which the prosecutor has said nothing, there are no other jury members with which to deliberate, no witnesses have called, no evidence is presented (except a video), there is no judge to confer with, etc…? I wouldn’t participate in such a “trial”. I have no idea what I’d do if forced at gunpoint to participate in such a sham, but whether or not someone else is guilty or not of a crime would be low on my list of things to worry about ('cause, you know, the _gun at my head_). ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4354 "2015-06-29T16:08:52Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > False memories in an extremely stressful situation. Possibly a conflation of what actually happened with what was said on the 911 call. > Do we really have to go over all of that again? It’s neither new nor controversial. > You need more that just proof that what they said was false to prove they were lying. Changes in statements are the most common one, as are particular kinds of inconsistency. And you’ll need that sort of proof if you’re going to prove it was an unlawful killing, I suspect. As a juror, a finder of fact, you would just jump straight to false memories rather than the simpler explanation? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4355 "2015-06-29T16:10:07Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > There’s no point in arguing anything at all then. The police can say whatever they want and claim false memories post hoc. > Amazing. Can’t really see as where I would be justified as a juror giving any weight to any testimony from someone who is plagued with this sort of a psychological condition. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4356 "2015-06-29T17:51:46Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > But it does contradict the cops.We don’t have to prove they are lying for them to be guilty. If they are merely mistaken, and the jury believes it was not a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence, they are guilty. My point is that any evidence that proves them guilty of murder or manslaughter will prove that they were lying, rather than that proving that they were lying is actually necessary. Otherwise you’ll be trying to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that they were mistaken but that no reasonable person could have made those mistakes. If that’s what you think, why _did_ they shoot him? If not because their experience and training, and the information they had, lead them to believe that he was a threat, then why? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4357 "2015-06-29T17:56:20Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > False fucking memories? Jesus, when it looks like there’s nowhere lower for you to go… > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > There’s no point in arguing anything at all then. The police can say whatever they want and claim false memories post hoc. > Amazing. You two fuckwits need to do a _lot_ of research on how memory works, especially in traumatic situations, before you can say things like that. Sadly, so does the justice system as a whole. None of which changes the fact that it doesn’t actually matter in terms of murder or manslaughter whether or not they were lying. The video clearly shows they had reason to be in fear of being shot, so it really doesn’t matter what they said. It’s actually interesting that we have hear a case where the police may well have lied, but that doesn’t actually change anything. That should put into perspective all the claims that people have been convicted based solely on a lying police officer. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4358 "2015-06-29T17:59:38Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > As a juror, a finder of fact, you would just jump straight to false memories rather than the simpler explanation? No, not at all. I’d certainly think they were _probably_ lying, but without proof, my opinion would be that we do not know the facts. I was asked for a possible, reasonable alternative, and provided one. I also said the sort of things that would be needed to prove lying. Occam’s Razor is not something that should be used a criminal trials. We should not convict based on what is likely or unlikely. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4359 "2015-06-29T18:00:12Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Unless and until you break the rules. And what rule did they break? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/4360 "2015-06-29T18:06:42Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Are Cleveland police officers trained to administer first aid and/or required to do so? > > Except that it makes _all_ the difference, unless you’re suggesting that people who acted in self-defense because they legitimately believed they had seconds to live otherwise should be imprisoned for murder. Here’s the thing. Cops frequently seem to think they can handle a situation with conversation when they are faced with an armed white citizen but consider their lives in danger (in much less dangerous situations) when the citizen is black. I don’t think this is a deliberate attempt by cops to be racist or kill blacks but there is a problem and there has got to be some effort made to eliminate or at least reduce this disparity in how cops treat black people in a way that does not compromise the safety of the officer. Why are cops so much more on edge when facing a black suspect than when facing a white suspect? I mean how many white kids get blown away by cops because they have a toy gun? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=217) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=219)