This web site said the cameras should had been turned .
Officer Noor has refused to be interviewed by investigators and his attorney refuses to say if he will cooperate.
Good opinion piece on there as well about taking back civilian control and oversight of the police. I can say as a prior 17.5 year resident of the City of Minneapolis that the Minneapolis PD has fought any kind of civilian oversight tooth and nail. To merely suggest it brings a smear campaign that you are anti-police, pro-criminal, in favor of mob rule or just plain a criminal yourself.
When I heard that the officer was Somali, it explained a lot about the silence associated with this shooting. In short, Somali refugees have basically taken over the Twin Cities, and criticism of them is simply not allowed even though people in the communities they’ve been forced upon have nothing good to say about them. They have never had to follow laws, and aren’t exactly good at assimilating. Because of this, all rules at schools, employers, other public places, etc. have to be changed to accommodate them. I’ll bet he was hired because his town’s police force was under so much pressure to hire a Somali, any Somali, that they grabbed the first one who applied.
:dubious: :rolleyes:
According to his department policy:
I’d say that pretty solidly covers any situation in which he’d feel the need to shoot an unarmed pajama-clad woman, but I understand that sometimes situations be can be tense / rapidly-evolving / dynamic, and there’s not always time to activate it before-hand. That’s why the policy not only gives them the “When safe to do so” out, but also outlines how soon after such a tense, rapidly-evolving situation is resolved that they should activate their BWCs. Their policy gives this additional guidance:
It’ll be interesting to see, in Officer Noor’s judgement, when it was safe to do so. Was it 30 seconds after the shots were fired? One minute? Two? Three? 10? 20? Sometime the following day? Inquiring minds want to know.
The policy also states:
Like I said, I look forward to reading the reasons for his failure, either in his report or supplement, or from the CAD. Certainly, if he was complying with policy, the reason(s) are there, right?
Every other person in this thread perfectly understands what I’m saying. My words are not the problem here.
Oh please. This is bullshit. No one has ‘forced’ them on communities and they haven’t ‘taken over’ the Twin Cities. There are about 30,000 of them in a metro area exceeding 3.5 million people. That’s < 1% of the population. I’ve worked with Somalis, I’ve had them as neighbors.
Even better - all those juries that convicted people that were later FACTUALLY PROVEN innocent.
Or research that shows that cops that perjure themselves are rarely punished.
HurricaneDitka;
I think you stopped reading a little early:
If they’re just rolling up to get info from the reporting party before investigating they’re not obligated to turn the BWC on.
[QUOTE=purplehearingaid]
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/us/min...ice/index.html
This web site said the cameras should had been turned .
[/quote]
In that CNN article I didn’t find any statements to the effect that the BWC’s should have been turned on. The mayor said she was disappointed that they weren’t turned on, but that doesn’t mean she said it was a policy violation. Besides, I wouldn’t take her word on what LE policy is.
[QUOTE=FavreCo]
There is no valid reason the in car camera should not be recording.
[/quote]
What is the policy for the dash-cam being activated? What turns it on automatically?
And what about after the use of force? How long afterwards would Officer Noor have to have delayed turning on his BWC for you to start to believe “ehh, that was a little too long, he should have activated it before then” (given what the policy mandates)? Would you give him a minute? ten minutes? an hour?
I’m sure you think you would instantly think of department policy after shooting someone for what is likely the first time for both of them. Cool as a cucumber. Easy to say when one is typing that from behind a keyboard.
I would probably give them ten minutes. The problem is that that amount of time would be eight minutes too much. The BWC’s only record two minutes worth of data prior to the activation. That’s a pretty short window while one is experiencing a very traumatic event.
Here’s an interesting case. A woman was on death row for 22 years,put there solely on the testimony of a cop, a cop who had a history of misconduct including self-confessed criminal sexual extortion which his only punishment was 5 days suspension and the DA dropped the charges.
But here’s the thing, the cop had been caught committing perjury before. It was his word against hers - his was that she made an unrecorded and unsigned confession which she denied. His testimony about her confession was the only evidence and the jury convicted her.
So what do you want to do with that Shodan and Steophan? Defend how the cop was never held accountable for his crimes of perjury and sex extortion (except 5 days vacation)? Discuss how crazy we are that we contend juries accept the police’s word over defendants? Would you like to defend the DA for not charging the cop with perjury after costing a woman 22 years of her life? Oh and get this, despite his history of misconduct, he was never dismissed as a cop so now he lives on a nice pension. Care to defend that too?
And I think that is one of the issues we’re raising. How did it escalate from an situation not even needing dash or body cams on to HOLY FUCK I NEED TO SHOOT HER RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!! so quickly?
You are wrong. I don’t claim, or believe, that I “would instantly think of department policy after shooting someone”. Nevertheless, it is a violation of policy if he didn’t turn it on “as soon as it [was] safe to do so” after the shooting, agreed?
I can appreciate and sympathize with the stresses involved, although I do tend to sympathize more with Mz. Damond and the physical trauma she was enduring than Mr. Noor and his mental trauma.
Thanks for the answer. It’ll be interesting to learn if he did turn it on, and when.
If anyone cares about my opinion on this… This is the point where the rational move becomes “fire the entire Phoenix PD, then find new people for those jobs”. If this guy was allowed to stay on the force after perjury and extortion, then there is something deeply corrupt in the leadership of the Phoenix PD, and absolutely every single part of it is suspect to the point where I would not trust a single cop in that city. If I were a “good” cop in Phoenix, I would have tendered my resignation long ago, rather than belong to an organization to keeps scumbags like this on even after they commit serious crimes. Ergo, it’s reasonable to believe that there are no “good cops” in Phoenix. Just bad cops and stupid cops. Get rid of the lot of them, find officers who aren’t fucking evil.
While I agree, that’s just a start.
Then you prosecute the cops for the crimes that they committed while wearing a state sanctioned badge and a gun.
If cops want all these extra protections and laws to shield them, when something is clearly wrong and they get convicted the sentence should be double that of the civilian.
Well, if I were in that situation I’d probably be freaking out – but I’d also make a terrible police officer. (I’m pretty darn good at “typing from behind a keyboard”, though.)
I think it’s fair to hold people to a higher standard than, “You need to be able to do your job at least as well as I personally would do it.”
Especially if those people have the power to end or ruin your life more or less on a whim.
Bullshit.
And you’re again libeling those in the profession.
Considering both the law & agency policy strictly detail when deadly force can be used, please provide evidence that police officers can kill on a whim.
Do you think Michael Slager would have faced any justice without that cell phone video of the shooting?
Again, you’re talking legal doctrine, and I’m talking practical fact.
In theory, there is a strict basis in law and policy which restricts the use of deadly force.
In practice, these laws and policies excused the murder of Philando Castile and Terence Crutcher, and allows officers to gather a long list of complaints against them before any action is taken.
In theory, the cops have well-established rules with regards to warrants, arrests, gathering evidence, etc.
In practice, it’s well-established that cops can and sometimes will plant evidence on people for no apparent reason, and that knowing your rights is no defense if the police decide you don’t have those rights.
It is not libel to point this out. For someone being so lawyerly, you should know that.