Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Some More Cops Who Need to Be Fired


Dan T.
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

...But I cant fathom how lifting her up into the air and holding her against a car in the air is showing restraint. If he had pulled her to the side or even handcuffed her if she wasnt cooperating I wouldnt have had much of an issue if she wasnt listening.

 

I really have no disagreement with anything else in the rest of your post, but specifically to this paragraph...

For one thing, she is pretty short compared to the officer.  He looked fairly well built.  Her being held off the ground may just be a result of those two things and being on the curb.  If her feet were on the ground would you see this the same way?    

The inability to see the whole event in context is hampering our ability to debate this objectively, so subjectivity and hypothetical possibilities is where we find ourselves.  I give the benefit of the doubt to the officer until proven otherwise.  

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Painkiller said:

 

I really have no disagreement with anything else in the rest of your post, but specifically to this paragraph...

For one thing, she is pretty short compared to the officer.  He looked fairly well built.  Her being held off the ground may just be a result of those two things and being on the curb.  If her feet were on the ground would you see this the same way?    

The inability to see the whole event in context is hampering our ability to debate this objectively, so subjectivity and hypothetical possibilities is where we find ourselves.  I give the benefit of the doubt to the officer until proven otherwise.  

 

 

 

I think yes, if he wasnt holding her up in the air but just had her against the car I would probably feel differently.

Fair enough, its all academic at this point with no other information.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MisterPinstripe 

All of those are lawful orders regardless of context.  Context comes in to play with how the cop responds to the non-compliance.  

Even in your situation if a cop is investigating a crime and he suspects you are the perp, he can come onto your property and order you to do whatever he needs to investigate the crime.  He can order you to drop your gun under the same circumstances.  If he can articulate why those things were reasonable under the color of law...he is acting lawfully and you must comply. You have been given "lawful orders."

Edited by Painkiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Painkiller said:

@MisterPinstripe 

All of those are lawful orders regardless of context.  Context comes in to play with how the cop responds to the non-compliance.  

Even in your situation if a cop is investigating a crime and he suspects you are the perp, he can come onto your property and order you to do whatever he needs to investigate the crime.  He can order you to drop your gun under the same circumstances.  If he can articulate why those things were reasonable under the color of law...he is acting lawfully and you must comply  You have been given "lawful orders."

Thats why I said context is important, because if you arent suspected of committing a crime a cop CANT order you to do whatever he wants/needs. If you are, sure he can. It becomes a lawful order once you are suspected or have committed a crime as then is backed up by the law.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Painkiller said:

A "lawful order" is an order given where failure to give the order would/could result in a crime being committed.  A "lawful order" is given to stop a crime from being committed. 

 

Apologies for not getting to this, last night.  I wound up getting busy.  And thanks for attempting what I know is difficult.  (Trying to codify our own opinions into clearly stated rules is difficult.  I sometimes have trouble with it, myself.) 

But I'm seeing problems with this definition. 

One is that, once again, you've created a definition of "lawful order" which means that you don't need the "lawful order" clause at all.  To pick an extreme example, if a cop tells someone "Stop beating on that person", then there's no need to say that he's "issuing a lawful order".  He's telling someone to stop committing a crime. 

If the person, after being told to stop, hits Person 2 again, then he's not guilty of "failing to comply with a lawful order".  He's guilty of "assault". 


But the other problem with your definition, is that we got into this discussion by discussing the woman in the video.  (And whether the cop's actions were justified).  in order for your argument of "failing to comply with a lawful order" to render the cop's actions justified, here's what has to have happened: 

1)  The woman was committing some kind of crime.

2)  The cop arrives, and tells her to stop. (And his order is a "lawful order", because he is telling the woman that "If you do <X>, that will be a crime" 

3)  The woman went ahead, and did <X>.  (Thus, committing said crime.) 

4)  The video starts.

5)  The cop assaults her.  (To get her to stop committing the crime.) 

The problem is, you're attempting to argue that the officer's actions are justified (or at least, might be) because the woman was in the act of committing a crime, instants before the video started. 

And yet, the other fact we have, other than the video, is the fact that the woman was neither arrested nor charged with any crime at all. 

So now, your argument that this officer's actions might be justified (by something that happened before the video started), revolves around the assertion that, at Step 3 above, the woman did something that wasn't important enough to arrest her, but that was important enough to assault her. 

And I don't think that there is (or should be) anything in that category. 

To me, the cop's actions are justified, if and only if, they are performed as part of an arrest. 

(Because they are an arrest.  "Arrest" means "stop".  A person who is not allowed to walk away, is a person who is under arrest.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said:

Read it and my jaw literally dropped.

 

I mean I knew Baltimore PD's rep but......:(

 

I loved the part where the trespassing documentation template already had "black male" filled out on it. 

Or maybe it was the part where the one officer was afraid to report another officer planting evidence on an innocent man. That really stood out to me, because Freddie Gray's friends and family said he didn't have a knife but the officers sure pulled one off him when they arrested him. 

Edited by Gamebreaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

It paints a picture of a monstrously dysfunctional department.  Not sure where you even begin to fix that mess.

 

I think you have to start from the top down. Fire the current leadership and put people in place who will enforce the policies and guidelines that have been ignored for too long. Make some common sense changes like admitting the n-word is a racial slur when their officers say it to citizens. 

Then start actually punishing officers who are bad cops. Punish them until they either resign or are fired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

I think you have to start from the top down. Fire the current leadership and put people in place who will enforce the policies and guidelines that have been ignored for too long. Make some common sense changes like admitting the n-word is a racial slur when their officers say it to citizens. 

Then start actually punishing officers who are bad cops. Punish them until they either resign or are fired. 

It would also have to be leadership that has no connection to the Baltimore PD. Gotta be someone from the outside or nothing will change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been rewatching The Wire over the last month. It's amazing how on point a show from 10 years ago still is. David Simon should run for mayor.

 

Anyway...

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/homeowner-calls-police-and-grabs-gun-after-robbery-and-indianapolis-cops-shoot-him-on-arrival/

Homeowner calls police and grabs gun after robbery — and Indianapolis cops shoot him on arrival

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BornaSkinsFan83 said:

Been rewatching The Wire over the last month. It's amazing how on point a show from 10 years ago still is. David Simon should run for mayor.

 

Anyway...

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/homeowner-calls-police-and-grabs-gun-after-robbery-and-indianapolis-cops-shoot-him-on-arrival/

Homeowner calls police and grabs gun after robbery — and Indianapolis cops shoot him on arrival

incredible story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Taylor703 said:

So maybe they should fire the cop who shot and killed the deaf guy in South Carolina? 

Wrong race to make much noise nationally, but credit to Shaun King for covering it.  http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/king-n-police-kill-unarmed-deaf-mute-man-sign-language-article-1.2760714

That article lead me to this one from a year ago that covers police training.  It's worth reading: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/training-officers-to-shoot-first-and-he-will-answer-questions-later.html?_r=1

Quote

Training Officers to Shoot First, and He Will Answer Questions Later

 

When police officers shoot people under questionable circumstances, Dr. Lewinski is often there to defend their actions. Among the most influential voices on the subject, he has testified in or consulted in nearly 200 cases over the last decade or so and has helped justify countless shootings around the country.

His conclusions are consistent: The officer acted appropriately, even when shooting an unarmed person. Even when shooting someone in the back. Even when witness testimony, forensic evidence or video footage contradicts the officer’s story.

He has appeared as an expert witness in criminal trials, civil cases and disciplinary hearings, and before grand juries, where such testimony is given in secret and goes unchallenged. In addition, his company, the Force Science Institute, has trained tens of thousands of police officers on how to think differently about police shootings that might appear excessive.

A string of deadly police encounters in Ferguson, Mo.; North Charleston, S.C.; and most recently in Cincinnati, has prompted a national reconsideration of how officers use force and provoked calls for them to slow down and defuse conflicts. But the debate has also left many police officers feeling unfairly maligned and suspicious of new policies that they say could put them at risk. Dr. Lewinski says his research clearly shows that officers often cannot wait to act.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So apparently we're paying police to bully old ladies now...

 

And yes, she was definitely catching an attitude but come on. 

Positive note: Supervisor showed up and had him release her with a citation.

And props to then for releasing the body cam footage I guess

 

Edited by BornaSkinsFan83
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-off-duty-chicago-police-beating-met-20160904-story.html

Three off-duty Chicago police officers who allegedly had just been drinking at a nearby bar were also inside the Taco Burrito King, eating at a table as DeLeon walked inside complaining about a car blocking the parking lot. Brian Murphy, one of the cops, jumped up from his seat with his service weapon drawn, pointed the semi-automatic pistol at DeLeon's head and shoved him against a wall, surveillance video shows.

The two other officers, Jason Orsa and Daniel McNamara, joined in, too, along with a Marine friend who had just returned from Iraq. DeLeon was punched, knocked down twice, kicked, hit and held facedown on the tile floor of the crowded restaurant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2016 at 4:34 PM, Gamebreaker said:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-off-duty-chicago-police-beating-met-20160904-story.html

Three off-duty Chicago police officers who allegedly had just been drinking at a nearby bar were also inside the Taco Burrito King, eating at a table as DeLeon walked inside complaining about a car blocking the parking lot. Brian Murphy, one of the cops, jumped up from his seat with his service weapon drawn, pointed the semi-automatic pistol at DeLeon's head and shoved him against a wall, surveillance video shows.

The two other officers, Jason Orsa and Daniel McNamara, joined in, too, along with a Marine friend who had just returned from Iraq. DeLeon was punched, knocked down twice, kicked, hit and held facedown on the tile floor of the crowded restaurant. 

 

On 9/9/2016 at 4:34 PM, Gamebreaker said:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-off-duty-chicago-police-beating-met-20160904-story.html

Three off-duty Chicago police officers who allegedly had just been drinking at a nearby bar were also inside the Taco Burrito King, eating at a table as DeLeon walked inside complaining about a car blocking the parking lot. Brian Murphy, one of the cops, jumped up from his seat with his service weapon drawn, pointed the semi-automatic pistol at DeLeon's head and shoved him against a wall, surveillance video shows.

The two other officers, Jason Orsa and Daniel McNamara, joined in, too, along with a Marine friend who had just returned from Iraq. DeLeon was punched, knocked down twice, kicked, hit and held facedown on the tile floor of the crowded restaurant. 

****ing outrageous

Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...