Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Some More Cops Who Need to Be Fired


Recommended Posts

I like that last article.  We’ve (temporarily) moved from just covering incidents where cops killed someone to where they’re just threatening people without reason.  Local papers should never let up on that.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I understand the argument that police don’t live in the neighborhoods they serve being a problem, you’re never going to get professionals making good money, which veteran police officers do, to live in the bad part of town.  This is especially true of those with families.  Someone could offer me 200k more a year and I wouldn’t raise my daughter in a gang infested bad neighborhood.  
 

Best you can hope for is that they live in the city itself.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Police officer charged, fired after holding gun to handcuffed man's head for refusing to give his name

 

A sergeant with the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office in Tampa has been fired and charged with a felony after aiming his gun inches from a handcuffed black man's head and threatening to kill him if the man did not give his name, according to the sheriff.

 

Sgt. Janak Amin, a 21-year veteran with the sheriff's office, was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon on Friday for threatening the life of the unarmed black man on Thursday, Hillsborough County Sheriff Chad Chronister said at a news conference Friday.

 

Chronister called Amin's behavior "despicable," saying that the man under arrest was not being aggressive with officers in any way. He was only quiet - apparently enraging Amin, Chronister said.

 

"I assure you, he wasn't being uncooperative," the sheriff said of the victim, whom the sheriff declined to identify. "The bottom line is there is no reason, no rationale or justification why anyone had to point a gun at his head and threaten his life simply because he refused to identify himself."

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

So much for your right to remain silent (which as someone who comes from a family of lawyers, encourage everyone to do, no matter the situation, upon arrest).

@techboy has posted this before, but it bears reposting.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s concerning that whoever is teaching that course says he destroys the tapes of interviews because they aren’t needed.  Whatever the cops says took place, or was said by the accused, is simply accepted as evidence.  This means that a corrupt cop could simply state that you confessed, in a closed room with no other witnesses and no recording.  Who are they going to believe?  
 

He doesn’t outright say that they can lie, but he takes great pains to remind them that they are free to destroy evidence.  That those tapes are just extras and not evidence at all.  That an officers notes and testimony are the real evidence.
 

Thats terrifying.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cop who threatened to kill protesters shoots, kills colleague who knocked on door, affidavit says

 

An Arkansas police officer who told a colleague he would “shoot through the door” any protesters who came to his home has been charged with killing a fellow officer who knocked on his door last month, court records show.

 

Calvin Nicholas “Nick” Salyers, 33, of Alexander, is charged with manslaughter in the June 3 slaying of 36-year-old Scott Hutton, who was shot through Salyers’ front door.

 

Salyers turned himself in to state troopers Thursday, according to the Arkansas State Police. He was booked into the Saline County Jail with bail set at $15,000.

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Baltimore police sergeant allegedly kidnapped, extorted contractor in patio dispute

 

A Baltimore police sergeant kidnapped a home contractor — then threatened to take the man “in the woods” — in a dispute over his botched patio, police said.

 

James Lloyd, 45, was arrested Thursday on kidnapping and extortion charges after the victim told Baltimore County detectives he was forced to go to a bank and refund the 21-year department veteran for the project, Baltimore County police said.

 

“During the dispute, the suspect identified himself as a police officer,” police said in a statement. “The victim stated he was in fear of being arrested and complied with Lloyd’s demands.”

 

The sergeant was unhappy with the patio after some stones had come apart and Lloyd’s significant other wanted it to be much larger, prompting the contractor to ask for another $1,400, according to charging documents obtained by the Baltimore Sun.

 

“You are going to give me my money back, and I’m going to give you freedom,” Lloyd told the contractor.

 

Lloyd, who has been suspended without pay, went to the contractor’s home on June 25 and demanded the refund while saying he could arrest the man because his driver’s license was suspended, police said.

 

Lloyd made the contractor get into his car and go to a bank to get a certified check for $3,500 — half of the original quote for a patio at the officer’s home, charging documents allege.

 

Click on the link for the full article

Link to post
Share on other sites

Former Las Cruces police officer charged with second degree murder for chokehold death of suspect

 

New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas announced Thursday that he has increased the charge against former Las Cruces officer to second degree murder.

 

Christopher Smelser is accused of killing Antonio Valenzuela after he ran during a traffic stop.

 

“We are taking over prosecution and focusing on appropriate charges for violent and dangerous chokeholds,” said Attorney General Balderas.

 

Lapel video shows Smelser struggling with Valenzuela before saying "I'm going to (expletive) choke you out."

 

Valenzuela died at the scene. An autopsy report says Valenzuela died from asphyxial injuries due to physical restraint. The report also says Valenzuela had meth in his system, which also "significantly contributed" to his death.

 

Following the incident, Smelser was fired, and charged with involuntary manslaughter. 

 

Click on the link for the full article

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man Arrested, Charged With Assault After Taunting Police With A Donut

 

A man of color was shoved, arrested, and charged with 4th-degree assault after he taunted some police officers and their supporters during a “Back the Blue” pro-police rally in Everett, Washington. The incident was caught on film by a local teen, and the footage appears to show that the young man with the donut hanging from a string on a stick did not make contact with anyone, and rather was shoved violently from behind by one of the officers before they arrested him.

 

According to the Everett Herald, the young man came to the rally as part of a larger counter-protest, with the rest of the counter-protesters staying across the street. The encounter starts amicably, with one of the officers he approached laughing at the sight of the donut, and a cop supporter joking that he’d already eaten “like 10 donuts” before he came to the rally.

 

Things take a sudden dark turn when the young man again offers the donut, asking if “any of you bootlickers want this,” and a man who turned out to be a police lieutenant in plain clothes tells him to “get that f***ing s**t away from my face or I’ll whoop your a**.”

 

The individual filming balks at the violent threat. The young man doesn’t move from his spot until one of the other officers, who had been amused a second ago, violently shoves him, causing him to stagger away. He then starts demanding names and badge numbers in order to file a complaint. Instead, one of the officers arrests him, saying “I think it’s time for you to go” to audible jeers from witnesses.

 

Click on the link for the full article and video

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2020 at 3:56 AM, Destino said:

It’s concerning that whoever is teaching that course says he destroys the tapes of interviews because they aren’t needed.  Whatever the cops says took place, or was said by the accused, is simply accepted as evidence.  This means that a corrupt cop could simply state that you confessed, in a closed room with no other witnesses and no recording.  Who are they going to believe?  
 

He doesn’t outright say that they can lie, but he takes great pains to remind them that they are free to destroy evidence.  That those tapes are just extras and not evidence at all.  That an officers notes and testimony are the real evidence.
 

Thats terrifying.


He says they’re allowed to lie while talking to people. The interviews. And that’s consistent with how I was raised - there is nothing that says the police cannot lie to you. 
 

obviously no one is “allowed” to lie under oath in court, that’s sort of the purpose of the oath. The reality is police, the smarter ones, know what they can get away with. And ultimately there’s a culture aspect - for instance the person I know that ran an investigative arm had a mentality of “if you lie in court once you’re fired because you have zero credibility and I, as your superior, will not answer for why I put a known liar on the stand again”

 

but... the unstated implication is don’t get caught lying.  
 

as for the “destruction of evidence” aspect it’s sort of interesting. If you witness something yourself you’re allowed to testify in court what you witnessed. Hearsay isn’t allowed. And that is extended to both sides. The idea that every tape must be kept to prove someone witnessed something is not reasonable. Are we going to start throwing out defendants testimony because they don’t have a tape to back it up? It’s not the way it works. 
 

but more importantly the fundamental setup of the situation flies in the face of innocent until proven guilty. As he states - you’re sitting next to a defense attorney, strike 1. The person you’re in opposition with is wearing a uniform and all that (traditionally) carries an element of respect, strike 2. Etc. you can make the the ‘rules’ whatever you want, you cannot change the human condition and how that works in this scenario. And everyone involved understands that. Except for the jury members who are doing this for the first time and probably aren’t aware of their biases. 
 

as much as there is a problem with how things become stacked against the accused, there’s also a reality of investigating crimes. Anyone with familiarity understands how difficult it is. Common sayings I’ve heard from multiple investigators throughout life

”were fighting a fight with a blindfold on and one arm tied behind our backs”

”we only catch the stupid ones”

 

and, as personal advice to me, and this is from career law enforcement and investigative people:

”don’t talk to us, we’re not your friends and we’re not here to help you (in regards to investigative a crime), we’re here to figure out who did what and build a case to charge someone for crimes they committed”

 

(side note: another piece of advice when I moved out to live on my own 

“get a gun. Something happens we only show up to pick up the pieces and find out what happened. You don’t wait for the fire department to try to escape your burning house do you?”)


I realize there’s abuse of power. I realize the “results” are horrid. 
 

but as someone who lives in a community, the reality of investigating crimes needs to be considered in all of this. Assuming a crime was committed, what’s your threshold for having it solved? How does that change if it happened on your street, vs if it happened on the other side of town?

 

theres crime statistics like arrests, convictions, sentences, interactions etc. and we know the narrative there. At least the current one. 
 

there’s also crime statistics like victimization rates, victim outcomes, the state of certain neighborhoods etc. we don’t seem to be hearing much about that in this conversation. 

 

you can say there’s a problem because certain people are arrested more, or punished more severely, or have more tense interactions with bad/unacceptable outcomes. 
 

you don’t often hear those people talk about the victims. Are the victims fake? Is the crime not actually happening? Why are people in some areas significantly more likely to be robbed/raped/beat up/murdered/whatever than others? If the first part of the stats are overblown by racism (either by the police or by builtin systemic issues) then how do we explain the second part (the victim part)? If the crimes don’t exist or are overblown then we shouldn’t have the victims, right?

 

anyways, got off track, but the point is it’s really easy for a person who lives in a low crime area to adopt a stance that pushes for policies that make it even harder to investigate real crimes, and not care what the fallout is because that fallout occurs in a neighborhood they don’t live in. 
 

its it’s not their stuff being stolen. It’s not their property values going down. It’s not their kids growing up around it and becoming inclined to grow into that lifestyle. It’s not their neighbors being hurt. 
 

it’s a little more complicated and as much as someone like me has to be cognizant of the fact that I generally grew up in areas where I wasnt actively targeted by the police and therefore have a lack of understand and a bias, I think people on the other side need to be more cognizant of the fact that they don’t really have any idea of what it means to have to investigate this stuff; of what it means to spend day in, day out, dealing with this stuff; what it means to see real victims of real crimes that really happened. and that many of the people pushing for certain changes and ideas, aren’t going to be affected negatively by the consequences, and therefore probably aren’t even thinking about them. 
 

have you heard anyone advocating for how bad the system is and how drastic it needs to be changed, mention conviction rates and unsolved crime rates? Have you ever been a victim and seen the investigation process? Most seem to be unhappy with the result and process and how hard it is to hold someone accountable for something even if it’s seemingly quite clear who did it. 
 

the investigator in the video even said, at least once but I think more, that in his example he didn’t have anything to charge the guy until he tricked him into confessing. The guy did it, the property was stolen, the victim exists. But without that confession there was no case to move forward with. 
 

im not trying to blanket defend the police or say nothing should be changed, just that I think a perspective is being lost in all this that is important. A perspective that’s easy to ignore if it never affects you. Just like it’s easy to ignore police brutality if you’re entire perspective is based on your experiences which are limited to being pulled over for speeding and rolling through a stop sign that one time. 

Edited by tshile
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/24/2020 at 7:34 PM, China said:

Man Arrested, Charged With Assault After Taunting Police With A Donut

 

 

Click on the link for the full article and video

 

Update:

 

No charges against police-taunting teen arrested at rally

 

A teenager who was arrested for taunting police with a doughnut last week will likely not face criminal charges, the Snohomish County prosecutor said Thursday.

 

Prosecutor Adam Cornell said the decision came after he reviewed video taken of the July 17 encounter at the end of a pro-police rally. The prosecutor also reviewed a court marshal’s arrest report.

 

“I don’t think there’s any jury in the county that’s going to convict that young man of (fourth-degree assault) based on the evidence I know so far,” Cornell said. “… I have an ethical obligation to only bring charges where I think the facts meet the law. In this case, the facts and the law do not establish at all the commission of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”

 

Benjamin Hansen, 18, of Duvall, submitted a claim for damages to the county’s risk management division Thursday. To settle the claim without moving ahead with litigation, he’s seeking $150,000, a written promise that charges will not be filed, an independent investigation, and a written apology from Snohomish County Sheriff Adam Fortney, who spoke at the rally.

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Newly Released Video Shows Austin Police Shooting An Unarmed Man

 

Video released by the Austin Police Department on Monday shows officers fatally shooting a 42-year-old man who told police he was unarmed and was holding his hands above his head before they began firing.

 

The footage shows the confrontation leading up to the April 24 killing of Michael Ramos, whose death has fueled protests in Austin as people around the world march against racism and police brutality.

 

Austin police officers were responding to a 911 call about a man and a woman using drugs in a vehicle outside an apartment complex in South Central Austin when they made contact with Ramos. The caller reported that the man was holding a gun, but police did not locate any firearms in the vehicle after the shooting.

 

A transcript and edited audio of the call was also released as part of the video, which includes dash and body camera footage from the incident. 

 

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Was that a shot I heard after the cop said "impact him" or was it some type of non-lethal weapon discharged?  

 

They called it less lethal so im assuming its like a sand bag or something. 

 

You cant blame the dude for being scared and running. I would want to. I probably wouldn't. But by the time you have a bunch of cops screaming at you and pointing guns at you, you need to be praying to whatever god you believe in anyway. Its all random luck at that point. Its impossible to stay calm and think through that situation as the victim. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

They called it less lethal so im assuming its like a sand bag or something. 

 

You cant blame the dude for being scared and running. I would want to. I probably wouldn't. But by the time you have a bunch of cops screaming at you and pointing guns at you, you need to be praying to whatever god you believe in anyway. Its all random luck at that point. Its impossible to stay calm and think through that situation as the victim. 

 

Yeah, the article says it was a sandbag.  But that's escalating the situation, not de-escalating it.  He didn't run until they scared him by shooting the sandbag at him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...