Law and Order 2 - Page 204 - Politics and Economics

Jesus, don't forget the most important part, that led to the rest of this, a cop killed his wife, a bunch of other cops helped him cover it up and make it look like suicide, then the cop actually committed real suicide and left a note implicating everyone in the kiddie rape.

??!?!???!?!!!!

06-18-2016 , 11:40 PM

#5077

pvn

Guest

Posts: n/a

here's the cliffs

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...oyed-16-tweets

06-19-2016 , 11:05 AM

#5078

mmbt0ne

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 22,077

You touch a police dog, you get arrested for "assaulting an officer."

Police officer kills his police dog, no charges.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/o...rol-car/nrh5N/

06-19-2016 , 11:06 AM

#5079

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

Mandatory

06-19-2016 , 02:49 PM

#5080

DCUERVO

banned

Join Date: Jun 2016 Posts: 207

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2...purs-protests/

chicago cop kicks handcuffed suspect in the head

06-21-2016 , 12:15 PM

#5081

bobman0330

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 24,234

Oakland PD story is extremely insane. A nice summary here.

06-22-2016 , 06:47 PM

#5082

Melkerson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 11,066

Just based on the headline, it would appear that this version of events maybe somewhat slanted. But if it went down as described, then I find it odd that they settled.

http://mynorthwest.com/323175/seattl...lting-officer/

06-22-2016 , 11:09 PM

#5083

pvn

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkerson

Quote:

But she sued because it’s easy to find a lawyer who will defend an intoxicated woman who feels she’s a victim after physically assaulting a cop.

yeah, it might be "somewhat slanted."

06-23-2016 , 07:15 PM

#5084

sweep single

banned

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,558

Another Baltimore cop who killed Freddy Gray walks free today. Shocker!

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...623-story.html

06-24-2016 , 03:43 PM

#5085

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

A good long read on a Mother Jones reporter who went undercover at a private prison for 4 months. Basically it's extremely underfunded, unregulated sh*tshow of craziness with the company doing everything based on the bottom line including waiting until a prisoners' legs turn back and ooze puss before sending him to the hospital, just to have the hospital take the prisoners' legs

Quote:

Every time I have a problem with a prisoner, I try the same approach and eventually we tap knuckles to show each other respect. Still, these breakthroughs are fleeting. In the moment, they feel like a glimmer of a possibility that we can appreciate each other's humanity, but I come to understand that our positions make this virtually impossible. We can chat and laugh through the bars, but inevitably I need to flex my authority. My job will always be to deny them the most basic of human impulses—to push for more freedom. Day by day, the number of inmates who are friendly with me grows smaller.

There are exceptions, like Corner Store, but were I to take away the privileges Bacle and I have granted him, I know that he, too, would become an enemy.

My priorities change. Striving to treat everyone as human takes too much energy. More and more, I focus on proving I won't back down. I am vigilant; I come to work ready for people to catcall me or run up on me and threaten to punch me in the face. I show neither fear nor compunction. Sometimes prisoners call me racist, and it stings, but I try as hard as I can not to flinch because to do so would be to show a pressure point, a button that can be pressed when they want to make me bend.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...tigation-bauer

06-27-2016 , 12:34 PM

#5086

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Popehat's piece in Reason about being a prosecutor

This part on lies is interesting

Quote:

American criminal procedure, as developed during the four-decade retreat from the Warren Court's recognition of defendants' rights, encourages prosecutors to argue that rights are irrelevant. The argument goes by genteel names like "harmless error" and "lack of prejudice" and "immaterial," and it is omnipresent in modern criminal procedure. As a prosecutor, it was my job on dozens of occasions to invoke those doctrines to assert that even if defendants' rights were violated, those violations didn't matter.

Take search warrants, for example. Under most circumstances, the Fourth Amendment requires police to get a warrant before they make forcible entry to your home search it. May police officers lie to a magistrate to get that warrant, or deliberately omit information that contradicts the evidence they offer? No, says the Supreme Court—that would violate your rights. But the violation only has a remedy if the lie is material—that is, if the warrant application, stripped of the lie or supplemented with the deceitfully omitted information, would no longer be enough to support probable cause. If you identify a lie that's immaterial, you're not even entitled to a hearing on whether it's a lie in the first place.

So when a defendant discovers that law enforcement agents have lied to get a warrant, a prosecutor has every incentive to argue that the lie didn't matter, that the evidence was strong enough without it to get the warrant. The prosecutor will be making this argument in the context of a search that did turn up incriminating evidence (the defendant wouldn't be making the argument if it didn't), which tends to bias judges towards upholding searches. After all, the judge thinks—wasn't the cop's suspicion proved right? Moreover, probable cause—the proof necessary to support a warrant—is a very relaxed and inherently subjective standard, requiring only a "fair probability" that evidence will be found. The practical effect is that law enforcement can lie in warrant applications with relative impunity, and it's a prosecutorial duty to think of ways to explain how those lies are irrelevant.

On the other hand, prosecutors are encouraged to think differently about lies by mere civilians. If federal agents lie about you to a magistrate to get a search warrant, the question is whether the lie did actually make a difference. But if you lie to federal agents, the standard is far less forgiving. The materiality of a false statement to the federal government is measured by whether it is the sort of statement that could hypothetically have influenced the government's decision-making, not whether it actually did. Thus prosecutors are trained to treat defendants' wrongdoing harshly and government wrongdoing leniently.

http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/2...ex-prosecutor/

06-29-2016 , 09:33 PM

#5087

sweep single

banned

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,558

WTF?

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...er_forced.html

Cliffs: Cop pulls a man over, puts a gun to his head and forces him to give a bj.

07-05-2016 , 11:31 PM

#5088

LastLife

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 4,593

Baton Rouge PD pretty much executes guy:

07-06-2016 , 07:16 PM

#5089

PeteMesquite

grinder

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 441

New video of the Baton Rouge shooting surfaced and it's easily the worst thing I've ever seen. I feel sick to my stomach. The cop literally pulls his weapon, puts it against his chest, and fires 6 shots directly into his chest when he moved a little. The guy bleeds out on camera. I'm describing the video so you don't have to watch it.

07-07-2016 , 04:14 AM

#5090

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Knife violence is a big problem in England, yet British police have fatally shot only one person wielding a knife since 2008 – a hostage-taker. By comparison, my calculations based on data compiled by fatalencounters.org and the Washington Post show that US police have fatally shot more than 575 people allegedly wielding blades and other such weapons just in the years since 2013.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_56...b079b2818b8870

07-07-2016 , 02:50 PM

#5091

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Road side chemical drug tests are unreliable, but when combined with a poor defendant cause innocent people to plead guilty.

https://www.propublica.org/article/c...ent=1467914696

Quote:

Based in part on the information gathered by Marie Munier, the former prosecutor Anderson hired to examine the drug convictions, we determined that 301 of the 416 variants began as arrests by the Houston Police Department, with the rest coming from surrounding municipalities, and that 212 of those 301 arrests were based on evidence that lab analysis determined was not a controlled substance, or N.C.S.

The use of field tests is seen as a way of lightening the load for overwhelmed crime labs.

In our own examination of those 212 cases — thousands of pages of arrest reports, court filings and laboratory-testing records, along with interviews of prosecutors, police executives, officers, defense attorneys and innocent defendants who pleaded guilty — we saw a clear story about both who is being arrested and what is happening to them. The racial disparity is stark. Blacks made up 59 percent of those wrongfully convicted in a city where they are 24 percent of the population, reflecting a similar racial disparity in drug enforcement nationally. Patrol units, not trained narcotics detectives, appeared to be the most prolific field-test users.

...

All of the 212 N.C.S. defendants struck plea bargains, and nearly all of them, 93 percent, received a jail or prison sentence. Defendants with no previous convictions have a legal right in Texas to probation on drug-possession charges, even if they’re convicted at trial. But remarkably, 78 percent of defendants entitled to probation agreed to deals that included incarceration. Perhaps most striking: A majority of those defendants, 58 percent, pleaded guilty at the first opportunity, during their arraignment; the median time between arrest and plea was four days. In contrast, the median for defendants in which the field test indicated the wrong drug or that the weight was inaccurate — that is, the defendants who actually did possess drugs — was 22 days. Not only do the innocent tend to plead guilty in these cases, but they often do so more quickly.

Quote:

...

Last year, as we examined records in Harris County, we came upon Albritton’s file and decided to search for her ourselves to find out what had happened to one representative figure out of hundreds. Her case fit the larger pattern of convictions for no controlled substance: It moved rapidly, with Albritton pleading guilty within 48 hours of her arrest, and it involved an exceedingly small amount of supposed drugs. We searched for Albritton in public databases, finding likely relatives but no phone numbers or a current address. We called her sister, who said that Albritton was in Baton Rouge and provided a cellphone number. It was disconnected. But knowing where Albritton lived now, we found a Facebook profile she had been updating regularly with details of her life, including her work. Interestingly, we also found that Albritton had pleaded guilty to a 2008 misdemeanor, a D.U.I. conviction in Louisiana, despite breathalyzer results showing her blood-alcohol level at 0.0. When we asked her about this, she said that she had caused a collision by pulling onto the wrong side of a two-lane highway, and because she was guilty of that, she did not protest the other charges; she’s still unable to explain why she confessed to a crime there was no evidence she committed.

In August, we called and left a brief message for Albritton at the Sporting News Grill. She returned the call a couple of hours later, her voice small, wondering what this was about. When we described the details from the lab report and the letter from the district attorney that she never received, Albritton gasped. She didn’t make a sound for several seconds before shouting into the phone: “I knew it! I told them!”

Quote:

If Albritton’s case is one of hundreds in Houston, there is every reason to suspect that it is just one among thousands of wrongful drug convictions that were based on field tests across the United States. The Harris County district attorney’s office is responsible for half of all exonerations by conviction-integrity units nationwide in the past three years — not because law enforcement is different there but because the Houston lab committed to testing evidence after defendants had already pleaded guilty, a position that is increasingly unpopular in forensic science.

07-08-2016 , 01:31 PM

#5092

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

A yearlong NPR investigation found that the costs of the criminal justice system in the United States are paid increasingly by the defendants and offenders. It's a practice that causes the poor to face harsher treatment than others who commit identical crimes and can afford to pay. Some judges and politicians fear the trend has gone too far.

A state-by-state survey conducted by NPR found that defendants are charged for many government services that were once free, including those that are constitutionally required. For example:

In at least 43 states and the District of Columbia, defendants can be billed for a public defender.

In at least 41 states, inmates can be charged room and board for jail and prison stays.

In at least 44 states, offenders can get billed for their own probation and parole supervision.

And in all states except Hawaii, and the District of Columbia, there's a fee for the electronic monitoring devices defendants and offenders are ordered to wear.

These fees — which can add up to hundreds or even thousands of dollars — get charged at every step of the system, from the courtroom, to jail, to probation. Defendants and offenders pay for their own arrest warrants, their court-ordered drug and alcohol-abuse treatment and to have their DNA samples collected. They are billed when courts need to modernize their computers. In Washington state, for example, they even get charged a fee for a jury trial — with a 12-person jury costing $250, twice the fee for a six-person jury.

Should probably start offering criminal justice fee insurance.

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/19/312158...unish-the-poor

07-10-2016 , 02:53 PM

#5093

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

I'm sure what got put in the report was they feared for their safety or something but lol at this paragraph

Quote:

The day before, police in San Jose, California were called to Anthony Nuñez’s house, who the police chief said was then described as suicidal. Nuñez reportedly left the house with a gun when police arrived, and after 14 minutes of police trying to convince him not to kill himself, they shot Nuñez instead. He was 19 years old.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/new...0708-0024.html

07-12-2016 , 05:27 AM

#5094

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

The press release is titled "Governor McCrory Signs Legislation to Promote Transparency and Safety for Law Enforcement and the Public". This dangerous bill does the opposite of that--it explicitly lays out that police dash cam and body cam footage is NOT part of the public record and not subject to public viewership. Want to look at some police cam footage? Just file a request with THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, and they will decide if you get to or not.

And he signs it with a bunch of ****ing cops watching over his shoulder smiling proudly about all the murders they are gonna be able to get away with freely with no oversight from the public. Nowadays a cop shoots somebody dead his name doesn't even get released to the public. If you get pulled over with a joint in my town your name and picture is getting plastered all over the paper the next day, long before you get a chance to go to trial. And now they want to make this footage secret so police will ONLY make it public when it helps their case, and they will hide it every single time it doesn't. And they call this increased transparency.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/new...#storylink=cpy

Quote:

Gov. Pat McCrory signed controversial legislation Monday regulating the release of recordings from police body and dashboard cameras.

There were growing calls for McCrory to veto the legislation because it makes it difficult for the public – including people involved in a recorded police action – to see it. But the Republican governor said the law will strike a balance between improving public trust in the police and respecting the rights of officers.

McCrory signed the bill while surrounded by law enforcement officers from several departments and against the backdrop of fatal police shootings last week of black men by police officers in Minnesota and Louisiana, along with the shooting deaths of five police officers by a black gunman in Dallas who was targeting white cops.

These shootings or their aftermath were captured on the telephone cameras of witnesses.

McCrory referenced those deaths in his remarks and said the law “ensures transparency.”

But the legislation was the subject of heated debate before it easily cleared the General Assembly on a 48-2 Senate vote and a 88-20 House vote. Some lawmakers wanted to loosen restrictions on access. Groups that wanted McCrory to veto the bill because they said it re-enforced secrecy held a rally in Raleigh last week and produced a petition they said was signed by more than 3,000 people.

“Body cameras should be a tool to make law enforcement more transparent and accountable to the communities they serve, but this shameful law will make it nearly impossible to achieve those goals,” Susanna Birdsong, policy counsel for the ACLU of North Carolina, said in a statement.

Body camera footage is not now spelled out in state law as public record, and law enforcement agencies often made it inaccessible to the public by declaring recordings part of personnel files. The new law, which goes into effect Oct. 1, says the footage is not a public record or a personnel record.

The law allows people who are recorded, or their representatives, to see footage if law enforcement agencies agree. The police chief or sheriff would decide whether to grant access. The law enforcement agency can consider a number of factors in making the decision, including whether disclosure may harm someone’s reputation or jeopardize someone’s safety, or if confidentiality is “necessary to protect either an active or inactive internal or criminal investigation or potential internal or criminal investigation.”

07-15-2016 , 12:25 PM

#5095

mmbt0ne

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 22,077

Savannah cops taze the wrong guy for "lying" to them about his name.

http://theweek.com/speedreads/636190...econds-meeting

07-15-2016 , 03:05 PM

#5096

sweep single

banned

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,558

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmbt0ne

Savannah cops taze the wrong guy for "lying" to them about his name.

http://theweek.com/speedreads/636190...econds-meeting

They didn't tase him for lying they tased him for refusing to put his hands on the car. In America the police are the gestapo. If they tell you to put your hands on the car you do it. Not "I didn't do anything." Not "Why?" Just do it. The police demand 100% compliance and when they don't get it situations escalate quickly and it never ends well for the suspect.

07-15-2016 , 03:28 PM

#5097

Oroku$aki

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 7,063

Sweep, where you went wrong was not focusing on the shameful behaviour of the cops in the video. Which was the important part. Not the scared, confused kid.

07-15-2016 , 03:44 PM

#5098

sweep single

banned

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,558

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oroku$aki

Sweep, where you went wrong was not focusing on the shameful behaviour of the cops in the video. Which was the important part. Not the scared, confused kid.

Of course the cops were in the wrong and it isn't right that they can walk up to anyone and say "put your hands on the car" but that is reality, cops can do what they want and there's nothing we can do about it, you just have to obey and pick your battles.