|
Lemming posted:A layperson did a google search and found something from a law school and they linked it. What else can you expect a layperson to do in a discussion like this? quote:Yeah hand wave away research by an individual whose focus in life is apparently ethics in the courtroom
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:17 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 15:05 |
|
ActusRhesus posted:As for lemming, anyone can have an opinion on the justice system. But a no content post just citing someone else's article isn't much of a discussion, is it? And I'm not the only one who (correctly) pointed out the problems with treating law review articles like other scholarly works. It wasn't a no-content post, it was continuing the conversation that was talking about prosecutorial misconduct, which started with the post about something that went on at Riker's. nm agreed that they're generally bad (which is a fair criticism) but went on to say he read it and in this case agreed with the article. He went on to constructively say what sort of thing might be more useful if you were going to look for this sort of thing in the future.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:19 |
|
Laughing at the thought of two lawyers looking down on this guy that disagrees with them because he teaches at a sub-tier school, meanwhile they're shitposting on something awful dot com.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:27 |
joeburz posted:Laughing at the thought of two lawyers looking down on this guy that disagrees with them because he teaches at a sub-tier school, meanwhile they're shitposting on something awful dot com. I'll have you know that goons are the true experts of law/hotdog stands/spacefighting
|
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:30 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Jesus christ, no one cares about whatever gotcha you think you're going for here. The fact that you literally appear not to understand is troubling. This is the ethical blind spot of police, prosecutors and their admirers. Order is more important to you than suffering.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:39 |
Dum Cumpster posted:Are there any reasonable suggestions for how to keep police officers from wanting to help each other cover up mistakes so frequently? I know there's no real comparison, but when someone fucks up in the corporate world their coworkers aren't jumping at the chance to help them cover it up. I don't remember reading anything in these threads addressing it, but I could have just missed it. The first problem is that you need to actually be willing to punish the officer who made the mistake. If the prosecution, judge, juries, and DA are all so pro-cop that they're throwing cases or inherently trusting a cop's word or being unwilling to throw the book at an officer simply because he's a cop, you're not going to do anything to stop cover-ups from happening. Technically officers already should be getting in trouble for contributing to cover-ups of police misconduct, but they have even less chance of getting in trouble for it than the officer who just shot an unarmed black guy in the back for not responding in less than half a second to a slurred scream of command after he committed no crime except panicking and running at the sight of a gun being drawn on him for no apparent reason.
|
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:56 |
|
We're getting two or three of these videos leaked every week now. How many more are going to come out, dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? Is there going to be a tipping point, or are we being desensitized? 23 years ago the Rodney King footage and acquittals caused the worst rioting in decades, but if it came out today it would be lost in the pile.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 19:58 |
|
You know, just throwing a spitball out there, but the whole 'conflict of interests' of attorneys, would it be possible to assign some State attorneys to deal solely with cases with police defendants, so they'd not give a poo poo about having the police gently caress 'em on their other cases, because they have no other cases. Just one Attorney going after policemen 24/7. Probably some good reasons why it wouldn't work, but I was thinking about stuff in this thread and it was my first knee-jerk idea. Of course, for that to happen there has to be the political will to actually get on that. Hopefully the fact that all these cases of police abuse are getting media attention will lead to politicians willing to clean house a bit. Or at least get the worst cases dealt with. Which is I think why it's worth to raise your voice about your horror for police abuse, even if you have no solution. Because part of the solution is convincing political leaders it gets votes to try to do something about it (whatever that something is) and you convince that by getting others to join you in decrying police abuse. Heck, it doesn't seem like it's this 'impossible'. Wasn't there that article that said that the Oakland PD, after stalling on their reform for forever, finally managed to get the right combination of the right people, and the right amount of threat so the Oakland PD is actually a lot better in all ways?
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:04 |
|
SedanChair posted:The fact that you literally appear not to understand is troubling. This is the ethical blind spot of police, prosecutors and their admirers. Order is more important to you than suffering. Shogeton posted:Probably some good reasons why it wouldn't work, but I was thinking about stuff in this thread and it was my first knee-jerk idea.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:10 |
Rhesus Pieces posted:We're getting two or three of these videos leaked every week now. How many more are going to come out, dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? As usual, I recommend looking at Killed by Police. We're at 368 deaths that can be attributed to police action (along with shootings, this also includes things like negative reactions to a taser or pepper spray or a "death by excited delirium" or "sudden medical condition causes death" during a struggle for arrest) as of yesterday, a rate of about 3.2 per day. Reading the news articles indicates that along with shootings, there's a surprisingly large number of deaths that are attributed by news articles to the person suddenly suffering a vague medical crisis and dying. While obviously that's not out of the question, cases like Eric Garner and Freddie Gray make you wonder how many of the stories of a suspect mysteriously dying of an unnamed medical reason or "excited delirium" were actually directly caused by police abuse and have simply been quietly covered up or just never investigated. Hell, we get so many cases of police abuse and spurious murder that almost any case of them using force that doesn't have solid evidence of it being justified can easily be questioned. How many Michael Browns, Eric Garners, and Freddie Grays are out there? How many identical cases have occurred and simply never gotten the news coverage and protests?
|
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:13 |
|
SedanChair posted:I hate it when you're on my side about anything because even when you say something I think is correct in its conclusion you still manage to be wrong about it.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:22 |
The idea that 3.2 deaths from government employees a day is just something we have to accept since any realistic alternative is impossible (or just too hard legally) to implement as soon as possible is maddening. If 3.2 white, suburban moms were being killed by police a day there would be a public outcry and heads would be rolling but because these people are different combinations of minorities, poor, and mentally instable it's just the price we have to pay as a society to keep things clean. 3.2 deaths a day from the police should be a news headline everyday until the situation is rectified but you only hear about it in the most blatant and egregious cases. That rate is obscene and a black mark on our justice system that we let it continue.
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Apr 24, 2015 |
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:22 |
|
Radish posted:The idea that 3.2 deaths from government employees a day is just something we have to accept since any realistic alternative is impossible (or just too hard legally) to implement as soon as possible is maddening. If 3.2 white, suburban moms were being killed by police a day there would be a public outcry and heads would be rolling but because these people are different combinations of minorities, poor, and mentally instable it's just the price we have to pay as a society to keep things clean. 3.2 deaths a day from the police should be a news headline everyday until the situation is rectified but you only hear about it in the most blatant and egregious cases. That rate is obscene and a black mark on our justice system that we let it continue.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:33 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Their tally also includes people who drew a fake gun on two police officers in front of their station, shot at police pulling them over for having fake tags, or opened fire on deputies responding to a domestic violence call. You're only hearing about the most blatant and egregious cases because no one really gets upset when the police kill someone who started a running gun battle in afternoon traffic.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:49 |
|
It'd be nice if a legally justified killing would not be equated to a necessary killing automatically. It's not like we should these as situations where you just need to take the opportunity to kill now that you can.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 20:52 |
Radish posted:The idea that 3.2 deaths from government employees a day is just something we have to accept since any realistic alternative is impossible (or just too hard legally) to implement as soon as possible is maddening. If 3.2 white, suburban moms were being killed by police a day there would be a public outcry and heads would be rolling but because these people are different combinations of minorities, poor, and mentally instable it's just the price we have to pay as a society to keep things clean. 3.2 deaths a day from the police should be a news headline everyday until the situation is rectified but you only hear about it in the most blatant and egregious cases. That rate is obscene and a black mark on our justice system that we let it continue. We're also the nation that in 2012 incarcerated 716 people out of every 100,000 and has a justice system predominately based around punishment rather than rehabilitation, using prisoners as cheap labor and using gradually increasing fines and fees as a way of gathering income. We also regularly deny rights to ex-cons and vilify them until they're ostracized from society and are thus very likely to return to a life of crime. We're generally kinda really lovely when it comes to criminal justice. Dead Reckoning posted:Their tally also includes people who drew a fake gun on two police officers in front of their station, shot at police pulling them over for having fake tags, or opened fire on deputies responding to a domestic violence call. You're only hearing about the most blatant and egregious cases because no one really gets upset when the police kill someone who started a running gun battle in afternoon traffic. When I get home I'm seriously going to go over every individual March 2015 incident and count how many involved a confirmed weapon usage or fake weapon brandishing (someone holding a cell phone or wallet doesn't count). But as has been said, there seems to be a disturbing trend where any situation that could potentially allow a justified killing results in immediate use of lethal force with little to no consideration of other options. It's a fact that the United States police manage to kill more people in a month than many first world nations have killed in the past century. Either the United States is a war zone, or there's something wrong with our cops. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Apr 24, 2015 |
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:04 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:We're also the nation that in 2012 incarcerated 716 people out of every 100,000 and has a justice system predominately based around punishment rather than rehabilitation, using prisoners as cheap labor and using gradually increasing fines and fees as a way of gathering income. We also regularly deny rights to ex-cons and vilify them until they're ostracized from society and are thus very likely to return to a life of crime. We're generally kinda really lovely when it comes to criminal justice. And then you have a prosecutor coming into the thread and literally mocking the notion of rehabilitation.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:05 |
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:I think they make it perfectly clear that they are recording all police killings and not simply suspicious or criminal ones. It's a useful measure even if it does include perfectly justified killings by police because it helps paint an accurate picture of police/citizen interaction in America. I find it a little strange that I can get statistics for the number of people who died from malignant neoplasm of the ovary, and no one tracks the number of people who are gently assisted into the earth by their local friendly law enforcement officer.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:08 |
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:I think they make it perfectly clear that they are recording all police killings and not simply suspicious or criminal ones. It's a useful measure even if it does include perfectly justified killings by police because it helps paint an accurate picture of police/citizen interaction in America. chitoryu12 posted:When I get home I'm seriously going to go over every individual March 2015 incident and count how many involved a confirmed weapon usage or fake weapon brandishing (someone holding a cell phone or wallet doesn't count). But as has been said, there seems to be a disturbing trend where any situation that could potentially allow a justified killing results in immediate use of lethal force with little to no consideration of other options. 1- Run over by a police cruiser while lying passed out in the road at 4:00 AM 2- Shot while pointing a gun at police despite being told repeatedly to put it down 3- Found non-responsive during a welfare check after being placed in solitary. Injured three police while being booked for battering a woman. Currently being investigated by the GBI. 4- Sheriffs responding to a reported suicide find the victim alive and armed, he refuses to put the gun down. 5- Man threatens police, who retreat, and then taser him, and then shoot him when he continues to advance after being tazed. 6- Aforementoned "drawing a fake gun on the police" 7- Killed while aiming nailgun at police, refusing to drop it. Deceased texted his girlfriend two weeks before the shooting: "Told u I got that fake gun I'm going to make them shoot me." Police cleared of wrongdoing. 8- Aforementioned "shooting at police while driving car with fake tags" 9- Aforementioned "shooting at deputies responding to DV call" 10- Struck by non-police vehicle, then by responding police vehicle while walking along the side of the highway. So, that's two traffic accidents where the fact that a police vehicle was involved is almost incidental, two blatant suicides by cop, two where armed suspects fired first, and two with armed suspects who didn't put the gun down or aimed it at the police. That leaves #3, the death in custody that appears to still be under investigation by the GBI, and #5, which I couldn't find any finished investigation for, but sounds like a textbook escalation of force. Dahn posted:I find it a little strange that I can get statistics for the number of people who died from malignant neoplasm of the ovary, and no one tracks the number of people who are gently assisted into the earth by their local friendly law enforcement officer. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Apr 24, 2015 |
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:19 |
|
Dahn posted:I find it a little strange that I can get statistics for the number of people who died from malignant neoplasm of the ovary, and no one tracks the number of people who are gently assisted into the earth by their local friendly law enforcement officer. chitoryu12 posted:Either the United States is a war zone, or there's something wrong with our cops.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:21 |
|
twodot posted:This is not an unreasonable action for a layperson, but the correct response to "Legal academics is dumb, I'm not going to engage with that" is either an argument that legal academics is not dumb (which I would be interested to see) or a request for why they think legal academics is dumb, and not: I didn't realize "lol pace" was an appropriate response in a discussion. I'll take note of that.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:27 |
|
Lucca Blight posted:I didn't realize "lol pace" was an appropriate response in a discussion. I'll take note of that.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:33 |
|
joeburz posted:And then you have a prosecutor coming into the thread and literally mocking the notion of rehabilitation.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:44 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Jesus christ, no one cares about whatever gotcha you think you're going for here. I do think SedanChair attacked AR for no real reason but the question "do you think this country's drug laws are ethical?" is really clear and if you answer it with something other than "of course not" then there is something seriously wrong with you, the drug laws are absolutely indefensible.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 21:52 |
|
MaxxBot posted:I do think SedanChair attacked AR for no real reason but the question "do you think this country's drug laws are ethical?" is really clear and if you answer it with something other than "of course not" then there is something seriously wrong with you, the drug laws are absolutely indefensible.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:07 |
|
joeburz posted:Laughing at the thought of two lawyers looking down on this guy that disagrees with them because he teaches at a sub-tier school, meanwhile they're shitposting on something awful dot com. Teaching at a sub-tier school should be both a crime and grounds for disbarring.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:22 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:The first problem is that you need to actually be willing to punish the officer who made the mistake. If the prosecution, judge, juries, and DA are all so pro-cop that they're throwing cases or inherently trusting a cop's word or being unwilling to throw the book at an officer simply because he's a cop, you're not going to do anything to stop cover-ups from happening. Technically officers already should be getting in trouble for contributing to cover-ups of police misconduct, but they have even less chance of getting in trouble for it than the officer who just shot an unarmed black guy in the back for not responding in less than half a second to a slurred scream of command after he committed no crime except panicking and running at the sight of a gun being drawn on him for no apparent reason. Yeah, I realize I'm putting the cart miles in front of the horse but it was just a part of the situation that I hadn't seen discussed too much here. I should have said that I meant this as something that would be addressed in addition to and after all the other reforms that have been suggested for holding the cop responsible for what they did.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:24 |
|
twodot posted:I'll go ahead and reveal the gotcha, because the follow up question is "Is enforcement of this country's drug laws ethical?" If you answer "No" to this, then you have to support people running unlicensed businesses because their product happens to be drugs, selling drugs to kids, et cetera, and if you answer "Yes" you're stuck explaining how laws can simultaneously be unethical to exist and ethical to enforce, which is a pretty nuanced position. Or you could argue that the harm of one outweighs the harm of the other, not that either extreme is your preferred outcome.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:27 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:
Primary cause of death comes from direct involvement of Law Enforcement in the execution of their duty. Drug Dealer Doug: Not on list (if he flew out of the car and the cop car hits him...on list) No seat belt guy: Not on list Off duty Joe: If it's his house not on list. If he rushes over to his neighbors house to shoot the guy...on list. Jihadi Jeff: not on list......he goes on the killed by Allah/Karma/Odin list. First hostage Frank: not on list, he was killed by Jeff. Second hostage Sandy: not on list, mark another one up for Jeff. Wheel chair Wendy : not on list .......didn't die. Bean bag Betty: on list, killed by cop. Suicide Susan: not on list...... unless she commits suicide by cop, charging some officers with a fake plastic gun.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:31 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:That redirects to a porn site at the moment so be careful clicking that link. Yay wordpress exploits! Whoa what? I didn't even know that was a thing. It worked completely as expected for me. twodot posted:This is not an unreasonable action for a layperson, but the correct response to "Legal academics is dumb, I'm not going to engage with that" is either an argument that legal academics is not dumb (which I would be interested to see) Right, the main reason I replied to ActusRhesus saying "lol Pace" isn't that I disagreed, it's that elaborating the argument slightly would have saved the trouble of posting four or five more times to explain why Pace sucks and why legal journals are terrible. I'm honestly kind of curious why law schools put their academic imprimatur on publications that are basically bullshit, but I can accept it readily enough. It sounds like something they would do.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 22:38 |
|
Xibanya posted:I'm a little wary of shaken baby syndrome as a crime; I think prosecuting it requires a holistic approach. Apparently there have been a number of people who were found to have been sent to prison needlessly because instead of shaken baby syndrome their baby actually had a different variety of injury (one symptom of SBS is brain swelling and vomiting which can actually be caused by vitamin D deficiency. Some injuries like blood pooling in eyes apparently can be a delayed symptom of an injury sustained during birth.) but juries see red when child abuse is involved. Surprise surprise some of the people recently freed were poor and brown when convicted. As a nurse, we are required to report it any time we suspect abuse. As for doctors, I'm not sure but I do know that research shows that doctors are less likely to prescribe you adequate pain medication if you are a minority.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2015 23:25 |
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/25/us/baltimore-mayor-demands-answers-in-death-of-freddie-gray.htmlquote:The commissioner, Anthony W. Batts, said during a news conference that officers should have called for an ambulance when Mr. Gray, 25, was first arrested, not about 50 minutes later when he was at the police station.
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 00:33 |
|
twodot posted:Making the opposite point sarcastically is dumb as hell. If you have a specific reason why comments like "lol pace" are bad, make your case. I've already made my case why doubling down on an authority is bad. Except in response to "lol pace" I explained that this author has spent their life researching the subject. If you could further explain your position it would be much appreciated because as it is I don't really understand where you are going with this. Edit: Oh, I see. You want me to adhere to your notion of how the conversation should go. And no, I don't have to explain why "lol pace" is bad, because we're adults and should have a basic understanding of how to approach discourse. Lucca Blight fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Apr 25, 2015 |
# ? Apr 25, 2015 03:31 |
|
Excited delirium is contagious. Its too bad cops dont wash their hands between civil rights abuses. http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/video-contradicts-police-claims-about-black-man-who-died-jail-cell-after-arrest quote:Video Contradicts Police Claims About Black Man Who Died in Jail Cell After Arrest For Sagging Pants
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:03 |
FRINGE posted:Excited delirium is contagious. Its too bad cops dont wash their hands between civil rights abuses. "we didn't do nothin'! he dun got the vapors and keelt over"
|
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:10 |
|
AZ Central posted:In a bombshell diversion from his contempt-of-court proceedings, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio testified under oath Thursday that his attorneys had hired a private agent to investigate the wife of the federal judge who ruled that the Sheriff's Office had engaged in racial profiling.
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:39 |
|
tentative8e8op posted:Our sheriff said under oath that he orders investigations into his political enemies, and admitted to a judge that an investigator was sent to scrutinize the judge's wife for anything incriminating. Hasn't he been behaving like that for a decade? Isn't there some mechanism for removing unhinged people like him from office?
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:44 |
|
PostNouveau posted:Hasn't he been behaving like that for a decade? Isn't there some mechanism for removing unhinged people like him from office? Going to prison.
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:48 |
|
PostNouveau posted:Isn't there some mechanism for removing unhinged people like him from office? Yes, there are a few different mechanisms. They've just failed every time they've been attempted. e.g. he has to stand for election, but Maricopa County voters keep electing him. He was also investigated and recommended for prosecution by the FBI, but the Justice Department declined to indict him in 2012, probably for political reasons: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/03/07/records-fbi-urged-charges-in-ariz-abuse-of-power-case/6152807/
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 04:58 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 15:05 |
|
PostNouveau posted:Hasn't he been behaving like that for a decade? Isn't there some mechanism for removing unhinged people like him from office? Its in one of the old CotB threads, I cant find it right now.
|
# ? Apr 25, 2015 12:35 |