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

[Peremensoe]

The use of tasers to “enforce compliance” (on handcuffed prisoners!) needs to be criminalized. Tasers were supposed to be a less-lethal alternative to firearms, not a more-lethal alternative to hands and clubs.

[BobLibDem]

A guy brandishing a handgun at the White House entrance gets told multiple times to drop his weapon, he refuses, and is shot ONCE and is subdued and taken away. An unarmed black teen has to be shot a dozen times because some cop thinks he might have a gun. A guy in handcuffs has to be tasered to death. Cops are fucking nuts. Yes, I know, we’re supposed to verbally fellate everyone in a uniform but fuck them, they need to clean up their act. For too long they’ve been murdering people with impunity and the advent of video cameras they still can’t help themselves.

[AtomicDog]

New York cop pulls gun on bystander recording arrest, then punches him(?)

Fortunately, this thug was stripped of his badge and gun, hopefully permanently.

[Shodan]

One of the white officers in the Freddy Gray case has been found not guilty of all charges. Not that this will resolve anything, but FWIW.

Down with the white supremacist power structure, Attica, Attica, etc.

Regards,
Shodan

[JSexton]

@mhendo

San Francisco police shoot and kill an unarmed black woman.

Mayor Ed Lee asks SF Police Chief Greg Suhr to resign. Suhr complies.
SF Chronicle

The tone of the article really shows the underlying problem, doesn’t? The important part is not the death of yet another person. The important part is that the timing is just really, really unfortuante for the mayor and chief of police, who are really going to suffer from this, guys. Why didn’t that cop stop and think about the position of his boss before murdering someone?

[iiandyiiii]

@Shodan

One of the white officers in the Freddy Gray case has been found not guilty of all charges. Not that this will resolve anything, but FWIW.

Down with the white supremacist power structure, Attica, Attica, etc.

Regards,
Shodan

How come it was a judge and not a jury? Did the defendant waive his right to a jury trial?

[Happy_Fun_Ball]

@iiandyiiii

How come it was a judge and not a jury? Did the defendant waive his right to a jury trial?

Yes.

[Boyo_Jim]

@iiandyiiii

How come it was a judge and not a jury? Did the defendant waive his right to a jury trial?

This is exactly the kind of trial that the defense would typically have decided by a judge rather than a jury – something overtly outrageous that would tend to inflame public opinion, and likely jury members as well.

[mhendo]

@iiandyiiii

How come it was a judge and not a jury? Did the defendant waive his right to a jury trial?

Yep. He chose a bench trial.

I’ll be interested to see how the rest of the trials play out. From my reading of the issue, this guy wasn’t the one involved in the initial detention and arrest, and he was essentially following the lead of his partner. I’m going to reserve judgment until those other trials are done.

In other news, more related to the justice system than to law enforcement, a black man has had his death sentence thrown out by the Supreme Court because, due to “discriminatory intent” on the part of the prosecution, he was tried by an all-white jury:

On a list of potential jurors, prosecutors had highlighted the black candidates’ names in green, with a legend showing that the highlight “represents black.” An affidavit Foster obtained showed an investigator writing about one potential juror, “If it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors, [this one] might be okay.” A document about the church one prospective juror attended contained a note reading “NO. No Black Church.”

It was a 7-1 decision. No points for guessing the dissenting vote.

[Shodan]

@iiandyiiii

How come it was a judge and not a jury? Did the defendant waive his right to a jury trial?

IIRC both the defendant and the prosecution need to consent to a bench trial. I am sure Officer Nero would see the problems with finding a jury in that jurisdiction, but not the prosecution.

Regards,
Shodan

[eschereal]

@Shodan

One of the white officers in the Freddy Gray case has been found not guilty of all charges. Not that this will resolve anything, but FWIW.

Down with the white supremacist power structure, Attica, Attica, etc.

Regards,
Shodan

In the linked story, the judge says, “… the state failed to prove that (officer) Nero was informed and aware of an updated transport policy regarding seat belts.”

So he gets off on a technicality. But, for the rest of us, ignorance of the law is no defense.

[Shodan]

You do know the difference between law, and police policy, don’t you?

Regards,
Shodan

[elucidator]

Yeah, I get to vote about the first one.

[Typo_Negative]

@Shodan

IIRC both the defendant and the prosecution need to consent to a bench trial. I am sure Officer Nero would see the problems with finding a jury in that jurisdiction, but not the prosecution.

Regards,
Shodan

This is the 2nd time I have seen this, and I still disagree. I do not, however, have the confirmation of a cite. Everything I have seen says only the defendant can waive right to a jury trial. Nothing *I have seen *says the prosecution needs to consent.

Can one of our Law Talkin’ Guys give us the final word?

[Shodan]

@Typo_Negative

This is the 2nd time I have seen this, and I still disagree. I do not, however, have the confirmation of a cite. Everything I have seen says only the defendant can waive right to a jury trial. Nothing *I have seen *says the prosecution needs to consent.

Can one of our Law Talkin’ Guys give us the final word?

IANALawTalkin’Guy, but this is the best I can come up with.

In criminal cases, the defendant is entitled to a twelve-person jury unless he or she makes a voluntary and knowing waiver of that right. In addition, most courts require the prosecution and the court to agree to the waiver of the jury.

Not specific to Ohio, I know.

Regards,
Shodan

[Typo_Negative]

Thank you.

[Evil_Economist]

@Shodan

IANALawTalkin’Guy, but this is the best I can come up with.

Not specific to Ohio, I know.

Baltimore, Ohio?

[Evil_Economist]

Here’s the summary for Maryland: https://govt.westlaw.com/mdc/Document/NB73955F09CEA11DB9BCF9DAC28345A2A?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

It says, “A defendant may waive the right to a trial by jury at any time before the commencement of trial. The court may not accept the waiver until, after an examination of the defendant on the record in open court conducted by the court, the State’s Attorney, the attorney for the defendant, or any combination thereof, the court determines and announces on the record that the waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily.”

So, nothing about prosecution needing to agree that I can see. ETA: on closer reading: “The State does not have the right to elect a trial by jury.” So, defendant can unilaterally decide.

Ohio is a different story, though.

[Typo_Negative]

@Evil_Economist

Ohio is a different story, though.

All us Ohioans know this.

[septimus]

@Smapti

In my system, disobedience of authority is unnecessary, because it will be possible to enact positive social changes without resistance. Lack of public respect for law and order is the root cause of the problems you want to solve, not its solution.

Can you link to a manifesto? I did Google, but found only

The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.

Nice work if you can get it.