|
Some more facts have come out about this. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33632894 How a prison can then not put someone on suicide watch who has admitted to attempting suicide in the past is mind boggling.
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:I suspect it was because he found it rude. I also suspect it was because he found it rude to him as an officer of the law who can't be hosed with (I.e. a power trip). Okay. So that, to me, isn't 'reasonable'. Is it to you? The stop was at an end, all he had to do was walk away, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Some more facts have come out about this. Local jails in the US are pretty poorly run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
quote:"Last Tuesday on the 14th was the first time that Anthony had taken me and he had brought me to a remote cabin where he strangled me with a seat belt tied me up in a cabin and left me and then took off for about an hour," Irish said. That's the guy who shot five people, killing two, and burned down the victim's mother's barn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Okay. So that, to me, isn't 'reasonable'. Is it to you? The stop was at an end, all he had to do was walk away, right? it seems clear to me that the cop was trying to find something in bland's behavior to justify a further search. even if we assume the cop wasn't power tripping, they do like to assume there's some other criminal behavior just under the surface that they can unearth with a little digging, and they're going to dig until they find it once they have that hunch i was riding around with a friend of mine one time who had had some bad interactions with the police in the past. we get pulled over and as the driver he's nervous. the cop senses this and asks him why he's so nervous, so he honestly says "i get nervous when i talk to police because they treated me bad in the past" and the officer hears this as "i'm a criminal, please search me" so we both get dragged out the car, searched, he gets cuffed and put in the backseat and eventually gets a ticket for his tag light being burnt out (it was the middle of the day) and failure to maintain lane which is one of those bullshit cop's word versus yours that's just a post-detainment justification for the detainment. they turned that car inside out looking for drugs they were just sure were there because we both looked like stoners, but there was nothing for them to find, and you could see them getting frustrated as the minutes rolled by as they slowly realized that they were wrong and had profiled us, and had nothing else they could charge us with but fake moving violations. gee whiz i wonder why he gets nervous when he talks to cops when at any moment one of them can just pull you over and fine you a couple hundred bucks for no reason at all, just because you drive a beater car and have dark skin
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it seems clear to me that the cop was trying to find something in bland's behavior to justify a further search. even if we assume the cop wasn't power tripping, they do like to assume there's some other criminal behavior just under the surface that they can unearth with a little digging, and they're going to dig until they find it once they have that hunch This is pretty much how every interaction I've had with cops goes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:This is pretty much how every interaction I've had with cops goes. Obviously you're not acting white enough. [/sarcasm]
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:I don't know that those are the consequences for refusing the request. Well he responded to her refusal by ordering her out of the car and arresting her when he was already just going to give her a ticket so obviously that was the consequence for refusal. I don't know what you are trying to accomplish with this bizarre argument that punishing someone out of spite is all part of a friendly polite request.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
'Please step out of the car or I will be forced against my will to drag you out and slam you into the ground. Please. I can't control myself. It's a compulsion. Why did they even let me be a cop?'
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Personally I feel like Bland is guilty of the cop having a case of the Mondays; a charge that warrants the death penalty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well he responded to her refusal by ordering her out of the car and arresting her when he was already just going to give her a ticket so obviously that was the consequence for refusal. His argument is that the request to put out the cigarette was not some grand scheme to throw her on the ground and arrest her. As he then says when she refused to put it out, hr got small man syndrom and went all powertrippy. Don't get so mad at people who generally agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
^^^ I think he (Hot Dog Day) just said that it's possible that he's powertripping but that we can't know for sure. There seems to be the implication that we should assume that the cop wasn't powertripping if we can't prove that he was. Let me know if I'm wrong about this, but it seems like his view is "the cop may have been a powertripping rear end in a top hat, but we can't know for sure so we shouldn't treat him like he was", which is quite different from thinking that what this cop did is definitely wrong. I really think that the core reason for peoples' bad attitude regarding the sort of incidents discussed in this thread is that there is this super prevalent view that (as I mentioned in some earlier post) if someone does something dumb, rude, or unwise that they instantly can't be empathized with and thus deserve almost any potential punishment/consequence for their actions/behavior. Like, even if they were to try, many people literally can't empathize with someone if they see the do something rude/unwise/whatever (or did so at any point in the past). There's this view of "I can't understand why this person would do something that I know to be dumb/wrong" and I think that on some level they enjoy seeing people get their "comeuppance" for doing dumb things, even if that comeuppance is getting shot in the face by a cop. I think part of the reason this is the case is that most people do not like to think of themselves as being dumb/rude/whatever, and as a result they have trouble putting themselves in the shoes of someone who they perceive to have done something bad. Like, there's this view that "I would never do what this person did" and as a result they simply cannot empathize with them at all and sometimes even seem to view them as being subhuman. I think that racism contributes to this in the sense that many people are more likely to view a black person's actions in a negative light, but that the core problem can just as freely be applied against white people. I honestly have no clue how to combat this. It seems like it must be at least partly the result of how a person is raised and whether their parents have instilled in them the importance of understanding and forgiveness towards others. It also takes at least some intelligence and imagination to be able to put yourself into the shoes of someone in very different circumstances from your own. edit: The caveat is that, for some reason, this same standard is rarely applied to the police. If a cop does something dumb or mean these same people don't seem to react in the same "this person is an idiot and I can't empathize with them" way. I guess this is due to authoritarianism or something. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
You're touching on it, but the core, as mentioned earlier, is making them an "other" because it's too scary to think that it could be you. If you focus on what they did wrong or how they are different, then you don't feel like you could be in that situation and you feel safer. People are wired to think of cause and effect, and if the cause is random poo poo, the effect is too scary when it could possibly apply to you. So you always offset the cause to the victim. When race gets involved, this still applies, but it is also safer for -you- if it happens to them, and there's an amount of guilt involved on top of that for knowing you're basically benefiting from their loss, so you double down on the blame. Darko fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Darko posted:You're touching on it, but the core, as mentioned earlier, is making them an "other" because it's too scary to think that it could be you. If you focus on what they did wrong or how they are different, then you don't feel like you could be in that situation and you feel safer. I definitely think that's a big part of it, but I think it goes beyond that. Even if you ignore the "you want to feel safe from being in that same situation" aspect, people still tend to respond with apathy (or, even worse, outright glee) at the prospect of people suffering dire consequences for doing something perceived as stupid/rude/whatever. I think that, at least in some cases, people derive actual pleasure from the act of being callous towards the suffering of those they view as being inferior to them in some way. It's a sort of twisted shadenfreude.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Darko posted:You're touching on it, but the core, as mentioned earlier, is making them an "other" because it's too scary to think that it could be you. If you focus on what they did wrong or how they are different, then you don't feel like you could be in that situation and you feel safer. Humans are racist, but they hate being called racist so they come up with every reason to justify their reaction so that they can prove (to themselves) that they're not racist. Ytlaya posted:I definitely think that's a big part of it, but I think it goes beyond that. Even if you ignore the "you want to feel safe from being in that same situation" aspect, people still tend to respond with apathy (or, even worse, outright glee) at the prospect of people suffering dire consequences for doing something perceived as stupid/rude/whatever. I think that, at least in some cases, people derive actual pleasure from the act of being callous towards the suffering of those they view as being inferior to them in some way. It's a sort of twisted shadenfreude. It's exactly the same thing the officer is feeling when they're abusing their victims, they see them as less than human and enjoy doing it. I wouldn't say it's a calculated thing, it's just human nature and it means some people are monsters. ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
semper wifi posted:
No, see, stop right there. That's the point. You're the cop. You are the one whose job is to keep your cool, have thick skin, and not escalate things. If your tiny dick gets threatened every time a person challenges your authority, get a new job or blow your brains out. We can't waste time coddling you and your bitchmade ways.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
So if I was in legal custody of someone and they told me that they'd had suicidal thoughts before, but I ignore them because I'm lazy, them "not seeming depressed" is enough to absolve me of all liability, criminal or civil, if they then kill themselves after trying to get help while in my custody right? Just asking for some friends....
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So if I was in legal custody of someone and they told me that they'd had suicidal thoughts before, but I ignore them because I'm lazy, them "not seeming depressed" is enough to absolve me of all liability, criminal or civil, if they then kill themselves after trying to get help while in my custody right? Honestly with the state of policing in this country you could probably provide them with the rope, table, and a push and it'd be fine. You'd have a ton of defenders. She should have put that cigarette out after all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
A Fancy Bloke posted:Honestly with the state of policing in this country you could probably provide them with the rope, table, and a push and it'd be fine. You'd have a ton of defenders. She should have put that cigarette out after all. Wouldn't need a defense, prosecutor would explain to the grand jury that it was an unfortunate circumstance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So if I was in legal custody of someone and they told me that they'd had suicidal thoughts before, but I ignore them because I'm lazy, them "not seeming depressed" is enough to absolve me of all liability, criminal or civil, if they then kill themselves after trying to get help while in my custody right? Unless you have a specific responsibility under law, you don't have any obligation to prevent them from killing themselves. You can watch them do it and be totally okay, legally. Jailers do have a specific constitutional responsibility/obligation: they can't act in deliberate indifference to someone in their custody killing themselves. (State law can vary, but can't be looser.) Knowledge of previous suicidal thoughts is generally insufficient to show deliberate indifference on its own, particularly if observation suggests that the person isn't likely to commit suicide at present, but it's a pretty fact-specific determination. If your jail has standard suicide prevention procedures (eg regular observation) that helps, if you say something like "I didn't care" that doesn't help, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I really think that the core reason for peoples' bad attitude regarding the sort of incidents discussed in this thread is that there is this super prevalent view that (as I mentioned in some earlier post) if someone does something dumb, rude, or unwise that they instantly can't be empathized with and thus deserve almost any potential punishment/consequence for their actions/behavior*. I see this anytime there is a story about a lawsuit or conflict as well. If the "victim" isn't perfectly polite and demure and anticipated all *For some reason, lots and lots of folks on the internet assume that if after looking at a situation you strongly favor one side against the other without explicitly outlining the faults of the side you favor mean that "you're acting in a biased manner" and thus your judgement is unworthy of consideration.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
quote:Waller County District Attorney Elton Mathis made the disclosure in a text message to attorney Cannon Lambert, who has called the state's autopsy on the Chicago-area woman defective, Lambert said. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/23/us-usa-texas-death-idUSKCN0PX20G20150723 This case is super bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Unless you have a specific responsibility under law, you don't have any obligation to prevent them from killing themselves. You can watch them do it and be totally okay, legally. Jailers do have a specific constitutional responsibility/obligation: they can't act in deliberate indifference to someone in their custody killing themselves. (State law can vary, but can't be looser.) What if the jail had standard suicide prevention procedures, but had failed to fully train staff on said procedures? If there is no positive evidence the jailers involved had been fully informed of those procedures, would that change things?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
DARPA posted:http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/23/us-usa-texas-death-idUSKCN0PX20G20150723 Not really, they're just throwing everything at the wall. This morning it was DID YOU KNOW THAT SHE WAS ON SEIZURE MEDS to invoke some sort of "hmm, seizure meds... Must have been a woman of poor character if she was on seizure medication" in their readership.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What if the jail had standard suicide prevention procedures, but had failed to fully train staff on said procedures? If there is no positive evidence the jailers involved had been fully informed of those procedures, would that change things? Probably? I mean, it's really fact dependent (like all things 8th Amendment.) Procedures as a defense really only apply if those procedures are followed, so failure to actually do the procedures is enough to remove it as a favorable fact (though it also wouldn't necessarily mean the prison was liable). Doing the procedures without training or proof would likely be enough to avoid liability, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
The Onion plays it straight yet again. [url]http://www.theonion.com/article/ticketed-motorist-pointing-finger-just-green-light-50913utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default[\url]
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:The Onion plays it straight yet again. Fixed URL.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Fixed URL. Thanks, posting from my phone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I see this anytime there is a story about a lawsuit or conflict as well. If the "victim" isn't perfectly polite and demure and anticipated all I think that the "truth in the middle" thing is actually a separate issue from the "can't empathize with 'bad' people and get schadenfreude from them suffering" mindset. The "well, both sides must be equally bad in some way" people at least don't seem to completely side with the police (though in practice their actions end up supporting the status quo), while the sort of people I'm talking about do (because the victim was so stupid and totally deserved to be arrested/shot/whatever). Whether the actions of the cop are good or bad isn't really relevant to the sort of person I'm talking about; these people just think "this person was so loving stupid to insult an officer and totally deserved to get their poo poo kicked in*". The officer doesn't even really have agency from their perspective - he's just a force of nature that the victim was stupid enough to provoke. The viewpoint you describe I think is more common with people who want to think of themselves as being "rational" and "unbiased" but are kind of dumb and don't understand why their reasoning is flawed. While their views are harmful in the sense that they end up supporting the status quo, they don't seem quite as, well, "hosed up" as the people who jack off about stupid/inferior people suffering. I guess the thing that just really surprises and upsets me is how incredibly common this attitude is. Because it's based in a gut feeling, there's no way to using reasoning to combat it. It stems from the basic desire for revenge - to see people who do bad/stupid things suffer for their actions. The only solution is to try and teach people to better empathize with others, but this is difficult to do with adults who are already heavily entrenched in their mindset. *I'm actually using the words of another poster here 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
It really is a problem, I remember people reacting a certain way to that story about that young woman walking into an manhole that had been left open and being really seriously injured. People were ecstatic about it because she was texting and I guess "deserved it". Its the reptile brain, man
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
DARPA posted:http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/23/us-usa-texas-death-idUSKCN0PX20G20150723 Your quote doesn't seem to be in that article anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Your quote doesn't seem to be in that article anymore. More than just that. When I opened the link when the post was new, the marijuana thing was the headline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:More than just that. When I opened the link when the post was new, the marijuana thing was the headline. This is what it's been changed to I guess. quote:The preliminary results also found marijuana in Bland's system, though officials are seeking additional tests to confirm that finding, Waller County Assistant District Attorney Warren Diepraam said. Seems Reuters aren't following the polices message 100%
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Still in the original form on some syndicated sites. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sandra-bland-swallowed-or-smoked-large-quantity-of-marijuana-in-jail-da_55b12ba9e4b08f57d5d3f041 I don't think she was smoking a joint with her jailers, nor do i think there is some wacko murder conspiracy. The handling of everything is just weird. Like the dash cam video being "edited". Do they just tolerate video evidence that sometimes overwrites video? This the first time the DA has ever read an autopsy with marijuana in the toxicology report? Do they normally mess up the intake forms? Everyone just seems so incompetent. Is the system down in Texas really that bad normally, and people just happen to be paying attention?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Either Bland really did somehow consume marijuana in jail, which makes the police hilariously incompetent, or this is a hasty character assassination where the cops didn't stop to think how bad it would make them look along with Bland. What a mess. The cops don't have their poo poo together at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Oh boy. About half my facebook friends are now convinced Sandra Bland was already dead in the mugshot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:Oh boy. About half my facebook friends are now convinced Sandra Bland was already dead in the mugshot. There's a Tumblr post going around where someone who claims to have experience working with dead bodies points out signs of her appearance (like the unusual patches of pale skin on her face) to suggest that her mugshot was a hasty post-mortem picture taken by the police after failing to take a proper one when bringing her in. Honestly, I legitimately would not be surprised if American police officers did something like that by this point. We are at the point where American cops faking a mugshot with a corpse would not be very surprising.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
nm posted:His argument is that the request to put out the cigarette was not some grand scheme to throw her on the ground and arrest her. As he then says when she refused to put it out, hr got small man syndrom and went all powertrippy. Nah, these were not some strange alien beings with arcane and mysterious motives totally disconnected from any actions they are taking, the minds of whom humans can never understand. If I ask you out to dinner, and respond to a refusal by beating the poo poo out of you (or using the authority of my job to punish you in some technically legal way) then an observer is justified in concluding that I wasn't making a polite request, but a command. That's the difference between requests and commands: disobeying a command gets you punished. Ordering her to put out a cigarette at the end of a stop is not a reasonable command. nm posted:Don't get so mad at people who generally agree with you. Haha, you're already resorting to "u mad bro" to win an internet argument.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:Either Bland really did somehow consume marijuana in jail, which makes the police hilariously incompetent, or this is a hasty character assassination where the cops didn't stop to think how bad it would make them look along with Bland. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
I know someone who is dating a guy that wants to be a cop and during a family BBQ last week, their first question (to a friend of mine that works in security and knows a few cops) about being an officer was "do they get to carry their own gun?" This person is currently in the first or second stage of the interview process and they've gotten that far based on nothing more than their military background. He also just bought his first gun because he "loving loves guns" and wants to own "a shitload of them." He's 21. That's my story. I'll go back to lurking the thread now. Senf fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 00:06
|
|
