|
Agrajag posted:I can see Fox saying some thinly veiled accusations of racial bias. lol you think it will be thinly veiled.
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Radish posted:Anyone that pulls the "well he did something illegal so he bears responsibility for what ended up happening" should have a swastika branded onto their forehead. I like that, because then they'll blame the person doing the branding, and we'll say "well, they wouldn't have branded you but for your comments, so you bear responsibility for what ended up happening."
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Why am I even bothering to read the comments? Look it's not that hard, just don't lean back threateningly with your hands up. You might have another burning Christmas tree on your person, just waiting to hurl it at the cops.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:lol you think it will be thinly veiled. Even their "developing story" about charges being filed online was cribbing all the most cop friendly language possible in that particular story. Including a description of freddie gray standing in the back of the police van that I've never heard anywhere else and the "leaked" version of passenger no. 2's account of the ride.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
ascii genitals posted:That video is incredible. The dog is literally biting him right in the loving face. Hands up, don't eat face. What is happening here? A guy sitting down, with his hands up gets: A dog mauling his face. Cops pile onto him and tase him while the dog continues to bite him on the back. Cops stand about taking pictures of him and then drop a chair on this face. Cop turns up at the hospital to tell him that "wasn't a good way to prove he's a man" This is insane. Also, what's the crime in burning a christmas tree?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
I know people are making fun of the union quotes, but unions are legally required to defend their members up to the point they are proven guilty, in the same way that lawyers are. You're not going to get the union condemning their own members if they're at all a functional union.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I know people are making fun of the union quotes, but unions are legally required to defend their members up to the point they are proven guilty, in the same way that lawyers are. You're not going to get the union condemning their own members if they're at all a functional union. This. This is the whole point of the Union.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I know people are making fun of the union quotes, but unions are legally required to defend their members up to the point they are proven guilty, in the same way that lawyers are. You're not going to get the union condemning their own members if they're at all a functional union. Agree completely but making political threats doesn't really fall within that scope does it?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Also, what's the crime in burning a christmas tree? It's a bylaw violation in most non-rural places to burn trash, even biomass like leaves or poo poo. Now, how you get from "bylaw infraction" to "stormtroopers kick in your door and a dog bites your face off" is, uuh, another matter entirely.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Gropiemon posted:Agree completely but making political threats doesn't really fall within that scope does it?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
can anyone confirm/deny my suspicion that people doing this http://reverbpress.com/news/black-baltimore-protecting-police/ are plain clothes cops or "off duty" cops? I know baltimore has a ban on plain clothes policing but these are extraordinary circumstances.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:This. This is the whole point of the Union. The point of a union is to protect the rights of workers and negotiate for them when interacting with their employers. It is not to protect them from the legal consequences of their actions or to defend lawless behaviour, though some may do that. In my opinion: If it's not a labour issue (and this is not), the union should just stay the gently caress out of it. The correct course of action for a union here, imo, would be pressuring the department to institute procedural and policy changes that would insure no more of their members wind up in a situation where they are risk of breaking the law. Edited: to be more clear. GlyphGryph fucked around with this message at 19:46 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Also, what's the crime in burning a christmas tree? Apparently the police take the War on Christmas very seriously.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:This. This is the whole point of the Union. And now you see the problem of a public union with a monopoly on labor/law enforcement that wields tremendous political power on the local stage...zero accountability and a ongoing problem of cops getting away with murder and lesser crimes. They will use public money to thwart the public/justice.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The point of a union is to protect the rights of workers and negotiate for them when interacting with their employers. This is not true, many unions have a responsibility to ensure that their members are fairly represented during any legal proceedings regardless of how obvious their guilt might be. That said, having been involved in a few unions there are points where the union will put it's hands up and step out of the way.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Arkane posted:And now you see the problem of a public union with a monopoly on labor/law enforcement that wields tremendous political power on the local stage...zero accountability and a ongoing problem of cops getting away with murder and lesser crimes. I don't see the problem with the union. They do what they are supposed to. It's the justice system that needs to pick up their own slack.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Rodnik posted:This is not true, many unions have a responsibility to ensure that their members are fairly represented during any legal proceedings regardless of how obvious their guilt might be. That said, having been involved in a few unions there are points where the union will put it's hands up and step out of the way. I'm not saying Unions don't, I'm saying protecting them from legal consequences of lawbreaking isn't the "point" of them, unless you're seriosuly arguing that this is the core purpose of Unions. I guess I should have done more to separate that from the statement that followed about what I thought they should do. I've edited the post to hopefully be more clear about what I meant.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I know people are making fun of the union quotes, but unions are legally required to defend their members up to the point they are proven guilty, in the same way that lawyers are. You're not going to get the union condemning their own members if they're at all a functional union. Vahakyla posted:This. This is the whole point of the Union. There's defending your members, and then there's declaring facts that you know nothing about. If it was a 'will support them all the way', sure fine. But 'THEY ARE INNOCENT ALL THE WAY' thats just crass blindness.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Holy poo poo I had to stop watching that dog face eating. That's terrible.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
A public defender in Maryland posted her firsthand accounts to Facebook today: https://www.facebook.com/marcitarrantjohnson/posts/10205579123770805:1 The whole thing is worth a read, but some highlights: quote:Normally when you are arrested, you are given a copy of your charging documents and then you must see a commissioner within 24 hours for a bail determination ("prompt presentment") and given a trial date. If you are not released after the commissioner hearing, you will be brought before a judge for quote:Governor Hogan had issued an executive order, extending the time for prompt presentment to 47 hours. We believed that this order was invalid because the governor has no authority to alter the Maryland Rules. As a result, all people who were being detained for more than 24 hours without seeing a commissioner were being held illegally. quote:Not only had these women been held for two days and two nights without any sort of formal booking, BUT ALMOST NONE OF THEM HAD ACTUALLY BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING. They were brought to CBIF via paddy wagons (most without seat belts, btw--a real shocker after all that's happened), and taken to holding cells without ever being charged with an actual crime. No offense reports. No statements of probable cause. A few women had a vague idea what they might be charged with, some because of what they had actually been involved in, and some because of what the officer said, but quite a few had no idea why they were even there. quote:The holding cells are approximately 10x10 (some slightly larger), with one open sink and toilet. The women were instructed that the water was "bad" and that they shouldn't drink it. There are no beds--just a concrete cube. No blankets or pillows. The cells were designed to hold people for a few hours, not a few days. In the one cell which housed 15 women, there wasn't even enough room for them all to lay down at the same time. Three times a day, the guards brought each woman 4 slices of bread, a slice of american cheese and a small bag of cookies. They sometimes got juice, but water was scarce, as the CO's had to wheel a water cooler through every so often (the regular water being "broken".)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Hold on, how is it possible that charges have been filed? Didn't people riot?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Radish posted:Anyone that pulls the "well he did something illegal so he bears responsibility for what ended up happening" should have a swastika branded onto their forehead. I mean, I get that cause and effect is a thing--sure, I guess if he hadn't gone inside the cops wouldn't have gone inside, etc., etc.--but holy gently caress, enough with the victim blaming. You don't order a dog to maul someone who is sitting on their couch with their hands in the air. There is no cause for that. None. The only way he bears responsibility for what happened to him is if we're also going to say, "Well, guess he shouldn't have lived in that neighborhood/city/state/country if he didn't wanna get mauled  "
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:I don't see the problem with the union. They do what they are supposed to. Your own biases are preventing you from looking. Each case by itself you can ascribe to the union sticking up for a member...zoom out and you see a systemic problem. The union acts as a bulwark to shield criminals from prosecution. It uses political clout and money as a cudgel. This is a pervesion of organized labor. It takes a brave local prosecutor or the Feds for justice to be meted out in most cases, and there has to be egregious evidence. Without that type of evidence you can forget about it...the internal investigations always turn up nothing. It is a joke.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Time for something cute and uplifting (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Does Maryland not have a Felony Murder statute (IE if someone dies in commission of a felony, everyone involved in the commission of the felony can get a murder charge)?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Let's hope that that travesty of justice rule is not used here, or anywhere.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
DARPA posted:For a nice change of pace from police murdering people, check out this video of an officer ordering his dog to eat the face off a man sitting on the couch with his hands in the air. Well this is horrible.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
Jalumibnkrayal posted:Does Maryland not have a Felony Murder statute (IE if someone dies in commission of a felony, everyone involved in the commission of the felony can get a murder charge)? While in this case everyone clearly shared responsibility, I think those statutes are pretty dumb. That's how you get someone getting a life sentence for murder because he lent his car to a friend who then, unbeknownst to him, used it to drive to a break-in, wherein another dude shot the homeowner.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Let's hope that that travesty of justice rule is not used here, or anywhere. Agreed. Also, you should start up a thread on the appropriate role of unions at some point because I'd really like to dive into it with you, since we clearly have some rather extensive disagreements. (I'd also like to see one about the comparative value of equality versus privileged desirables, which you also feel rather strongly about)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Jalumibnkrayal posted:Does Maryland not have a Felony Murder statute (IE if someone dies in commission of a felony, everyone involved in the commission of the felony can get a murder charge)? It only applies to a few specific felonies, see here: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmStatutesText.aspx?article=gcr§ion=2-201&ext=html&session=2015RS&tab=subject5 I guess if you wanted to charge kidnapping but good luck with that one.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I'm not saying Unions don't, I'm saying protecting them from legal consequences of lawbreaking isn't the "point" of them, unless you're seriosuly arguing that this is the core purpose of Unions. I guess I should have done more to separate that from the statement that followed about what I thought they should do. Honestly, I'd be pretty pissed off if my union dues, rather than supporting strikes, being used for lobbying, or used for leverage/suits with my employer to ensure fair treatment and better compensation were instead used to defend some piece of poo poo who breaks the rules and kills a person. I haven't been in a union since forever, but that union was quick to defend people for being lazy, missing work, etc, but always immediately washed their hands of anyone who got violent.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
I pray in the rhetorical sense that we're finally at the turning point where police brutality, racial profiling, extorting poor neighborhoods... isn't just "part of the job." But in reality we're taking only the first baby steps on days like today. Just hope people like Mosby keep on it, because god knows other people will just tow the line and do nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Your own biases are preventing you from looking. Each case by itself you can ascribe to the union sticking up for a member...zoom out and you see a systemic problem. The union acts as a bulwark to shield criminals from prosecution. It uses political clout and money as a cudgel. This is a pervesion of organized labor. Oh good, I thought the systemic problem in Baltimore was racism and authoritarianism, turns out it's the right to legal representation and the labor movement that are to blame, what a relief.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
TotalHell posted:Look it's not that hard, just don't lean back threateningly with your hands up. You might have another burning Christmas tree on your person, just waiting to hurl it at the cops. It's clear he should have stood up and lunged at the officers in a friendly manner instead, just follow the rules and the police won't hurt you! When will people learn!
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Spiky Ooze posted:I pray in the rhetorical sense that we're finally at the turning point where police brutality, racial profiling, extorting poor neighborhoods... isn't just "part of the job." But in reality we're taking only the first baby steps on days like today. Just hope people like Mosby keep on it, because god knows other people will just tow the line and do nothing. It's finally starting to get the attention it deserves, and there's no way we'd be seeing any of this if it weren't for the protests and unrest in Ferguson, the protests over Garner in NY, and the protests and unrest in Baltimore. Without that pressure from the public these incidents would be getting zero coverage and no charges would have been filed. Which is why the protests need to continue. Rhesus Pieces fucked around with this message at 20:55 on May 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:It's finally starting to get the attention it deserves, and there's no way we'd be seeing any of this if it weren't for the protests and unrest in Ferguson, the protests over Garner in NY, and the protests and unrest in Baltimore. Without that pressure from the public these incidents would be getting zero coverage and no charges would have been filed. Especially because the DA or whatever straight up said that the indictment was directly caused by the riots.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Oh good, I thought the systemic problem in Baltimore was racism and authoritarianism, turns out it's the right to legal representation and the labor movement that are to blame, what a relief. Is racism actually the major cause of the problems in Baltimore? Or even authoritarianism? I mean, it seems to be more a case of gross irresponsibility and rampant opportunistic incompetence combined with an intentional gutting of the police force on account of the previous mayor in favour of lawlessness that looked good on paper, combined with the gross inequality and poverty. I mean, I don't doubt racism is a huge determinant in who they target, but it seems like things wouldn't be all that different even if everyone in the city was white.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
The Baltimore FOP has tweeted an open letter requesting that the DA bring in a special prosecutor due to potential conflicts of interest for the DA https://twitter.com/FOP3/status/594147983731490820
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Oh good, I thought the systemic problem in Baltimore was racism and authoritarianism, turns out it's the right to legal representation and the labor movement that are to blame, what a relief. Yeah, it can't be both, after all: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20111204/ARTICLE/111209980?p=1&tc=pg quote:Norton acknowledged in his brief that the incident leading to Currie's termination was not his most severe: Currie had gone to an ex-girlfriend's house while she slept, banged on her window until the glass shattered and cursed her and the man she was with. I understand that in some cases unions have legal obligations to defend people, right or wrong, but it's loving shameful that what's supposedly a labor organisation would spend its resources making sure that someone who habitually engages in violence of or relating to a sexual nature keep his badge until he gets so bold that there's no saving him or his victims. An ideal world union would exist to defend against worker abuse and ensure safe conditions, dignified and respectful treatment of workers, and fair compensation/benefits/work schedules. They wouldn't be busy trying to get keep a serial abuser in a position to wield state violence. unrelated: Spiky Ooze posted:I pray in the rhetorical sense this is the funniest turn of phrase ever hahahahaha I want to meet a guy who says "just my luck! ---- oh hi, there, by the way I didn't mean luck literally I do not believe in luck"
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Please don't use police unions to paint all unions as bad (just like one shouldn't use the general concept of unions being good to defend cop unions).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 21:14
|
|
