We all missed it…this is obviously ‘huge on the internet’, according to the Columbia Journalism Review! :eek: I think we all have to admit it at this point…there are CIA run blacksites in Chicago that are using Gestapo tactics, just like the OP and The Guardian originally said! And all of the major news outlets are pretty obviously deliberately not reporting this because they are all in on it, or they are sucking on the Chicago teat and thus are working for The Man. It’s a sad, sad day, but luckily we have The Guardian and Pjen keeping an eagle eye on things for us…
They’re afraid to report on it, 'cause they know they’d be the next to be disappeared! Only the Guardian has the courage to face certain detention, never to be heard from again. See how they bravely stand up to the Gestapo tactics of the Illinois tyranny!
Maybe the local reporters are afraid of being laughed at by middle aged white men for following the lead of an “anti-american” leftist newspaper. 
Maybe they’re waiting for the big guns like Bill O’Reilly or Brian Williams or 60 minutes (Benghazi!) to cover it (then we’ll know it must be true!). Maybe they don’t decide what stories make it to print, and the editors don’t want to open this can of worms until after the run-off election.
Or maybe they did cover it, and some of you conveniently ignored my (multiple) posts about it. 
From the Chicago Tribune:
Considering the history of the CPD, I’d think it will take more than a week or so to see any serious results from these allegations.
It has taken 8 years to get the CPD to release information requested through an FOIA filed by a journalist, finally released in December after numerous appeals and delays by the city. They’re still waiting for more requested files.
It took over 5 years to see results in this 2006 misconduct scandal.
One of the convicted offers had this to say after his sentencing:
Meanwhile, the Chicago taxpayers get stuck with the bill for tens of millions of dollars in settlements and legal fees, year after year.
Considering who the Mayor of Chicago is (and likely will be again), and that he has friends in high places, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for a DOJ investigation anytime soon.
But then again, consider that there was no local or mainstream media coverage of the Ferguson Police Department’s abuses, until a bunch of protesters made enough of a stink about it, both on the ground, and on the internet.
Reasonable is vague, legally vague terms often cause disturbing outcomes and this is a good example of one. Like I said, some states make it a matter of statute how long you can be held before the police must allow you to contact someone. But not all of them do. There’s never been any firm constitutional guideline that just because you’re held for 18 hours and not given access to an attorney your rights have been violated. Particularly in cases where no custodial interrogation or legal proceedings have occurred.
If someone’s attorney shows up at a facility and the police lie about the presence of the client, that should be dealt with harshly. But again, I have seen no real proof of that. Attorneys have every reason not to be trustworthy when talking about the interests of their client. If you’re asking me who I believe, a cop who may have done something wrong an attorney that’s damn close to a wash for me, especially when thus far all we have is the word of both parties and no objective evidence.
A licensed lawyer faces discipline from courts and bar associations for outright lying, including contempt of court and disbarment. A police officer is not subject to such a standard of conduct.
:dubious: A lawyer actually has protection from misrepresenting their adversaries for the sake of argument. I have been questioned on the stand about my technical abilities in regard to being a Unix admin. The lawyer in question was trying to present her son as my superior on the subject. If I had known that was her angle at the time, my response would have been: “He calls me all the time to fix his server, almost daily.”. He wasn’t qualified to troubleshoot a mail issue on the server, much less perform forensics on it, which was the subject of the court case.
The lawyer in question has a history spurious allegations in court, not to mention the press, and has yet to be stopped by the legal process. With her history in consideration, I hold the assertions of a lawyer on about the same level as the assertions of a cop. Both professions are necessary, but I wouldn’t put a great deal of weight on their assertions without some supporting evidence.
What will the headlines about Homan Square be in 2050?
Who knows? That depends on what happened there, which events from the 70s and 80s are not evidence of.
Could be a story about renovation, or maybe about the original Sears Tower…
(feel free to revive this wonderful thread when it comes back that the police were in fact operating Detention Blacksites(tm…arr) and more than the Guardian have picked up on this assertion)
There won’t be any.
Of course there won’t - the Ministry of Truth takes care of that sort of thing.
Why else do we pay taxes?
Regards,
Shodan
I’m sure you’ll revive this thread to post Guardian headlines on the 35th anniversary of the Breaking Story That The World Ignored (that is, if you can take time out from Scottish Separatists Demand Greater Devolvement).
I pay them to make sure the beatings of innocent Chicagoans continue. I didn’t know I was paying them to do it secretly.
The possibility of a perjury charge make a cop no different from anyone else. There’s no additional licensing body—like the bar for lawyers—that can take away his right to practice coppery.
Each department has their own rules and regulations that they must follow. They include code of conduct. Police officers do get fired for not following policy or not following the code of conduct. You generally will not hear about it because it is an internal personnel move and not a criminal matter. It only makes the papers if someone is charged criminally. You can choose to believe me or not but I have seen it happen multiple times.
Yeah sure and then they can get a job at a different department. In another city. Perhaps some Podunk sheriff’s department. Or working security, where they still he in their hands the power of life and death over the general public. And they’ll always have the moral support of the FOP and thin-blue-liners who will assure them that they were only doing what’s good for society. And that’s assuming that they’re ever charged or convicted. For the most part, cops are accountable to no one for their lies under oath or abuses. Every day that a court somewhere is in session there are hundreds of cops lying on the stand. That’s not true for lawyers.
I believe it happens. I believe cops get fired for appearing in sex-related videos and that sort of thing.
It is harder to believe that they get fired for being bad cops–or that their future employers care. The “rookie” that shot Tamir Rice in Cleveland had gotten a bad review at the suburban department where he had his first job, but that did not stop him from getting hired by the much larger Cleveland Police Department.
Yeah, that’s really a gyp. Things weren’t like that back in '68! “The whole world’s watching,” indeed.
Ok, what happened between March 8 and today when this thread was resurrected?
Spencer Ackerman, a fine reporter who made an utter jackass out of himself by pretending that Chicago abuses were focused in Homan Square, reported on March 19th that the Chicago police chief of the bureau of organized crime had resigned. He did not operate out of Homan Square though, contrary to the headline.
April 14: The brave Guardian makes a FOIA request. Truly we are lucky to share the world with them.
Another article on the settlement regarding police torture during the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s. It does not mention Homan Square. Wikipedia: “Jon Graham Burge (born December 20, 1947) is a convicted felon and former Chicago Police Department detective and commander who gained notoriety for torturing more than 200 criminal suspects between 1972 and 1991 in order to force confessions.”