|
Cole posted:fixed You've been probated 40 times in the last year alone. All of them with variations of the remark "shut up cole". I think calling you a troll is actually accurate, not a symptom of you disagreeing.
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
Raerlynn posted:You've been probated 40 times in the last year alone. All of them with variations of the remark "shut up cole". I think calling you a troll is actually accurate, not a symptom of you disagreeing. 10 more and he gets a set of steak knives. Seriously. Comment on content, not rap sheet. (especially in a thread where people are arguing that using a person's criminal record against them is unfair)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Raerlynn posted:You've been probated 40 times in the last year alone. All of them with variations of the remark "shut up cole". I think calling you a troll is actually accurate, not a symptom of you disagreeing. you should go read gip and see how many of those probations were joke six hour probations. or you can just skim everything and operate under false assumptions, as expected. but it's good to know that if someone has an arbitrary number of internet punishments that they could walk in and say the sky is blue and you would immediately call them a troll. Cole fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/nyregion/suit-could-determine-protections-for-police-department-whistle-blowers.html?_r=0 Since people keep quoting Sedan Chair, defeating the purpose of having him on ignore... let's talk about these links: 1. This article is about whether or not a whistleblower in NY can sue under the first amendment...not about whether or not his lawsuit has merit. However, from the article: quote:The Second Circuit reinstated Officer Matthews’ lawsuit once before, saying that a federal judge had been too hasty in dismissing it. The case is now back before the Second Circuit after a second judge dismissed the suit this year, ruling that Officer Matthews “spoke as an N.Y.P.D. employee, not a citizen.” Officer Matthews declined a request for an interview through his lawyer. Such rulings, officers said in interviews, are likely to reinforce the so-called Blue Wall of Silence, which had recently been showing signs of weakening. A ticket-fixing scandal in the Bronx, for instance, led numerous police union delegates to testify against fellow officers before a grand jury in 2011. And a few officers routinely tape their supervisors at station house roll calls. 2. Also discusses whether or not a lawsuit can go forward...not whether it is meritorious. And again quote:Months before he was killed in the line of duty last year, shot while conducting a traffic stop, Patrick filed a whistleblower suit against the city and its police chief alleging retaliation for reporting two officers he thought stole a picnic bench. 3. Another one where the result of the complaint is not in the article. However, quote:The union is asking that Broberg be reinstated, pay his lost wages and be granted his take-home police vehicle. Lippman, of the union, declined to comment. Broberg couldn't be reached for comment despite a phone call. In his May drafted statement, Chief Katz wrote: "Due to the fact there is no reasonable manner in which we can reassign our department's command staff, nor can we assure that Sgt. Broberg will not be subjected to supervision, evaluation, or discipline for work-related behaviors while this matter is investigated. ... The city felt it best to pay Sgt. Broberg to remain at home until his complaint is investigated." 4. Again...a lawsuit is not proof of an event. quote:Crystal was a key witness in the case against the officers, Anthony Williams and Marinos Gialamas, and while the case was being investigated, a dead rat was found on Crystal's car windshield in November 2012. Publicity about the dead-rat incident prompted BPD Commissioner Anthony Batts in June to appoint outside investigators to look into the matter, but Crystal resigned after finding himself the target of an internal investigation involving a take-home police vehicle. 5 Again...a lawsuit is not proof of en event. quote:The city disputes Hicks’ claims. In the first of the two missed promotions, the city acknowledges that a sergeant ranked second on the eligibility list was promoted to lieutenant in lieu of Hicks, but that the action complied with city policy. According to court documents, candidates “who place onto the top spot of an eligibility list are not guaranteed the next available promotion. Instead, the top three candidates on an eligibility list are considered for promotions or vacant positions.” As for the expired eligibility list, a new one was adopted because “several new qualified candidates were available to participate in the lieutenant testing process, in addition to the fact the City intended ... to adopt a new and improved testing system,” according to the city’s response to the complaint. Once the new testing system was adopted, Hicks “declined to participate,” court documents state. 6. Another pending lawsuit. 7. Another pending lawsuit. 8. Another lawsuit...over a "ticket fixing" issue...and it looks like the police chief was in fact disciplined...so any retaliation appears unsuccessful if it happened. 9. Another lawsuit whaaaaaambulance over...ticket fixing quote:Lt. Edward Zadroga became aware of another Millville officer voiding a valid traffic summons as a favor for a retired officer’s daughter in November 2011, the lawsuit states. 10. City Attorney manages to get a $750,000 settlement from city (which I learned from a subsequent article...not yours...yours just said there was a lawsuit filed)...and the person harassing her was the person she blew the whistle on and his lawyer and POA rep. quote:Kelly O’Haire was “threatened numerous times by Suhr’s attorneys and POA representatives, who all allegedly said Suhr would fire her if he ever became chief.” None of these cases say what you claimed they said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Semi-serious question ActusRhesus, can you arrest a dog (or any animal really) if it was used by the owner in some crime? Can they testify too? Some pages back people were talking about arresting cars so I think my question has merit
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:4. Again...a lawsuit is not proof of an event. I remember that one actually, the one with the dead rat. The cops who beat up the suspect were convicted and one did time. The rat wasn't the only harassment, either. Whistleblower claims his calls for backup would be ignored and he was forced to resign. I'd call that one a solid +1 for SedanChair there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:7. Another pending lawsuit. You dismiss this one but both of the corrupt cops in that case have since been sentenced and did time for extortion and theft. The two whistle-blowers allege, along with at least one supporting witness, that they were threatened with violence by other police officers in retaliation for coming forward. Along with the standard lovely details, no backup all all that jazz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
You went from 4 to 7. Did you skip the others, or was SedanChair wrong about those?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
If the legal system was capable of delivering justice for police officers who have been retaliated against, we wouldn't be having this conversation would we?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Cole posted:You went from 4 to 7. Did you skip the others, or was SedanChair wrong about those? Well number 6 was Adrian Schoolcraft, probably one of the most famous and clearly evidenced examples of police abuse of a whistle-blower, which gets dismissed as just 'another pending lawsuit'. Ever wonder why these police misconduct cases seem to be pending for a long time? You could always, you know, read them yourself. If you felt like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
lfield posted:You could always, you know, read them yourself. If you felt like. So could the guy who posted them originally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
lfield posted:Well number 6 was Adrian Schoolcraft, probably one of the most famous and clearly evidenced examples of police abuse of a whistle-blower, which gets dismissed as just 'another pending lawsuit'. Ever wonder why these police misconduct cases seem to be pending for a long time? which was not apparent from the articles. you link to an article saying so and so is suing. So what? And I'm not denying that there was police misconduct. I'm saying that an alleged whistleblower filing a lawsuit does not prove retaliation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:If the legal system was capable of delivering justice for police officers who have been retaliated against, we wouldn't be having this conversation would we? so now filing a lawsuit = automatic guilt? Does arresting and filing charges against someone work the same way?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:And I'm not denying that there was police misconduct. I'm saying that an alleged whistleblower filing a lawsuit does not prove retaliation. No, the other option is that they're all lying. In two of those cases the whistle-blowers came forward about colleagues who were corrupt, those colleagues were found to be guilty, and then what - they decided to fake a bunch of abuse they're being subjected to? And convince people to stand witness to said fake abuse? Is that more likely than some in the department maybe being upset that they are working alongside people who just sent their friends to prison, and acting on those feelings? There's also the issue that maybe the legal system might not actually be 100% objective in cases that could mean senior officers getting charged with crimes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
In the case of police whistleblower retaliation there is literally no way to determine guilt or innocence. With a few flashy and meaningless exceptions, the legal system has proven itself incapable of controlling the conduct of police departments that operate outside the law. So the accusations are literally all we have, and all we will ever have. What you'll find throughout those links I posted is a pattern, that repeats itself to the point of utter nauseation. Those who do not look to the letter of the law for their entire comprehension of the world will be able to see it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What you'll find throughout those links I posted is a pattern, that repeats itself to the point of utter nauseation. But you only skimmed them, and posted 100 within about ten minutes of eachother, so you're either going on headlines or just guessing. Your pattern is based on headlines, not the actual stories you posted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Cole posted:But you only skimmed them, and posted 100 within about ten minutes of eachother, so you're either going on headlines or just guessing. Your pattern is based on headlines, not the actual stories you posted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
bango skank posted:How would you know? Have you sat down and read the links you asked for yet? I read the first five and found out that what he was posting was based on headlines, so there's really no reason to go further, especially after he admitted to only skimming them. If I had come in here and said "HERE THIS PROVES I'M RIGHT (i only skimmed it though)" how would that go over? Probably not well, I assume. The difference is, SedanChair's rhetoric goes with what you are arguing, so he gets a pass. It's kind of funny how people of the same mindframe will help eachother out.. some would say even cover for eachother.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:which was not apparent from the articles. you link to an article saying so and so is suing. Are you familiar with the story of Adrian Schoolcraft?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Cole posted:I read the first five and found out that what he was posting was based on headlines, so there's really no reason to go further, especially after he admitted to only skimming them. Oh ok. I was just wondering if you'd read the stuff you asked for yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
bango skank posted:Oh ok. I was just wondering if you'd read the stuff you asked for yet. I will when SedanChair reads the stuff he posted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9wSj3vd2ig
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
Was that a cop at the end attacking the person with the camera phone, too? That suspect or felon or whatever he was, he was completely compliant. That brave cop just attacked a person cuffed in the back seat of a car.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:Are you familiar with the story of Adrian Schoolcraft? I never said there are no legitimate cases of whistleblower retaliation. And the concept of whistleblower retaliation is not unique to cops. Hell, I was on the receiving end of it myself when I was in the military. My issue is with sedan chair linking a bunch of poo poo that amounts to uncorroborated allegations and then declaring victory. I mean...poo poo...some of those links were from alex jones level government conspiracy websites. Others were from plaintiff's lawyer blogs. And the legitimate news articles only contained information contained in lawsuit pleadings. Guess what? You can say whatever the hell you want in your pleadings. It doesn't make it true. It's an allegation. Also...here's a fact pattern for you. Officer reports supervisor for making a ticket disappear. six months later officer gets busted for improper use of a government vehicle. officer gets the same level of punishment usually given for that type of offense. Guess what! It's not retaliation. Again...I am not saying retaliation never happens. I am, however, saying that if you want to prove there's an epidemic of it, you need more than links to people filing lawsuits without the actual results of said suit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
There would have to be an epidemic of actual whistleblowers for there to be an epidemic of whistleblower retaliation. This is just a case of a few good apples.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
Woozy posted:There would have to be an epidemic of actual whistleblowers for there to be an epidemic of whistleblower retaliation. This is just a case of a few good apples. I dunno man, SedanChair has probably 1000 headlines you can read. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
I love that we're so through the looking glass that in a discussion about retaliation against police whistleblowers we can instantly dismiss the case of Adrian Schoolcraft because "it's just some lawsuit". Good grief.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:I love that we're so through the looking glass that in a discussion about retaliation against police whistleblowers we can instantly dismiss the case of Adrian Schoolcraft because "it's just some lawsuit". Good grief. I love that we're so through the looking glass that one person does what you said and it immediately becomes a "we" matter. Good grief.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
ozmunkeh posted:I love that we're so through the looking glass that in a discussion about retaliation against police whistleblowers we can instantly dismiss the case of Adrian Schoolcraft because "it's just some lawsuit". Good grief. It is, in fact, a pending lawsuit. Yes, the NYPD engaged in misconduct. But that doesn't necessarily mean subsequent actions against Schoolcraft were retaliation. If the allegations are proven, then yes, the conduct is egregious. But right now that's an *if* Allegations are not facts. Allegations are not evidence. And a number of his claims have already been dismissed. http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/id=1202726096463/Trial-to-Proceed-in-Case-of-Committed-NYPD-Officer?slreturn=20150714221650 (Oh...and wasn't the misconduct in this case misrepresenting the safety of the city...doesn't that cut against this thread's narrative that there isn't a real issue of public safety and we don't actually need cops?)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
lfield posted:You dismiss this one but both of the corrupt cops in that case have since been sentenced and did time for extortion and theft. you are confusing two separate issues. 1. Was there police misconduct? 2. Did the whistelblower get retaliated against BECAUSE of their whistleblowing, and not because of legitimate performance issues. 1 does not automatically result in 2. You can be a whistleblower AND a lovely cop. Say I report someone for a Brady violation...and then I miss three filing deadlines and get disciplined. Is that whistleblower retaliation, or did I gently caress up and get punished appropriately?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Someone not being found guilty of something doesn't mean they didn't do it. Also, nobody here has argued that enforcing laws is unnecessary or that we don't need cops. It has been pointed out that in certain cases, the cops we do have are so lovely and make life so much worse for people that they would be better off without them, which is not exactly a crazy allegation to make. For example, Eric Garner and Walter Scott would probably have been better off with no cops than cops that murder them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:
No? The thread's narrative is that we don't need really bad cops, corrupt legal institutions, all the flavors of bullshit discrimination and indulgent abuse of authority and violence against the public, amongst other things. For a nontrivial portion of society, they fear cops far more than actual criminals. Unfortunately for good reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Someone not being found guilty of something doesn't mean they didn't do it. And someone being accused doesn't mean they did do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Cole posted:And someone being accused doesn't mean they did do it. Yes, but AR said "If the allegations are proven, then yes, the conduct is egregious." Which implies it's only bad if you can prove it, but we come back to a similar problem as the racism point where just because you can't prove the secret intentions behind a person's actions doesn't mean they weren't malicious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Someone not being found guilty of something doesn't mean they didn't do it. a. does that apply to all cases, or just the ones you want it to? b. actually people in this thread have advocated for getting rid of law enforcement. They are batshit crazy, but the position has been raised.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Yes, but AR said "If the allegations are proven, then yes, the conduct is egregious." Which implies it's only bad if you can prove it, but we come back to a similar problem as the racism point where just because you can't prove the secret intentions behind a person's actions doesn't mean they weren't malicious. You do know that AR posts in this thread from a lawyer's perspective, right? What other position do you expect?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Yes, but AR said "If the allegations are proven, then yes, the conduct is egregious." Which implies it's only bad if you can prove it, but we come back to a similar problem as the racism point where just because you can't prove the secret intentions behind a person's actions doesn't mean they weren't malicious. No, I'm saying we don't punish people for poo poo that isn't proven beyond allegation. Standard in a civil trial is low. Preponderance of the evidence. 50.1% If you can't make that then literally, it probably didn't happen. Why is "let's wait until the trial and all the evidence" a controversial position?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Yes, but AR said "If the allegations are proven, then yes, the conduct is egregious." Which implies it's only bad if you can prove it, but we come back to a similar problem as the racism point where just because you can't prove the secret intentions behind a person's actions doesn't mean they weren't malicious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:It is, in fact, a pending lawsuit. Yes, the NYPD engaged in misconduct. But that doesn't necessarily mean subsequent actions against Schoolcraft were retaliation. Lol this is so precious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Bad conduct that can't be proven isn't good, it's just utterly irrelevant to any sort of real world discussion. No, no, it's totally fair to take retaliatory action based on an unproven allegation. As long as the person is really a jerk. ozmunkeh posted:Lol this is so precious. How so? What is "precious" about saying that the fact a lawsuit is filed isn't per se proof of anything? A number of his claims did not survive summary judgment. Do you know how week a claim has to be to fail summary judgment?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:47
|
|