|
FOP Chief: "We've got 'a surprise' waiting for Quentin Tarantinoquote:Pasco wouldn't give details, but promised the union will "be opportunistic" with the surprise some time before the premiere of Tarantino's new film, "The Hateful Eight." Shrecknet fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Nov 6, 2015 |
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:02 |
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:Garrity. I understand that. But if they're working as marshals, they have to act within that capacity. Being a sheriff/policeman doesn't allow them to operate outside the boundaries of the marshal's responsibilities. They're either one or the other at the time they are carrying out official duties.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:Garrity. Accidentally cut off my post when I went to reply to C2C. SCOTUS ruled that the state can't compel or coerce a police officer to self-incriminate in a police report on the grounds of it violates the 5th and 14th Amendment. C2C - 2.0 posted:I understand that. But if they're working as marshals, they have to act within that capacity. Being a sheriff/policeman doesn't allow them to operate outside the boundaries of the marshal's responsibilities. They're either one or the other at the time they are carrying out official duties. It complicates the chain of command.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Everblight posted:FOP Chief: "We've got 'a surprise' waiting for Quentin Tarantino Just saw that, is there any legal recourse that Tarantino could take or is it something like since they didn't make a specific threat nothing can be done?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:It complicates the chain of command. I don't disagree, but I also think it gives any investigators a clear delineation for what they could & couldn't do at the time. I wouldn't be surprised though if the waters get muddied somewhat due to this fact and it causes this thing to take a lot more time than it should.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Everblight posted:FOP Chief: "We've got 'a surprise' waiting for Quentin Tarantino I'm glad this guy talks like a 40s gangster movie villain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
It's always amusing to see that in this era where police activity is scrutinized, the response to implied criticism is to make a vague threat at a prominent director.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:04
|
|
Everblight posted:FOP Chief: "We've got 'a surprise' waiting for Quentin Tarantino I'm curious what he thinks he can actually do?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:I'm curious what he thinks he can actually do? "Pasco said the plan isn't a threat of physical violence. It will aim to hurt Tarantino "in the only way that seems to matter to him, and that's economically," he said." BDS?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
It will be a boycott of Hateful Eight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:07
|
|
Kalman posted:"Pasco said the plan isn't a threat of physical violence. It will aim to hurt Tarantino "in the only way that seems to matter to him, and that's economically," he said." Boycott? I suppose, but I don't see how the police could sanction anyone.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
They're gonna' beef up parking enforcement officers around theaters showing the film and have nearby speed-traps, DUI/insurance checkpoints.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
They're going to film a documentary heist movie where they steal the masters sent out to cinemas. And at the end, when the credits roll it's going to say DIRECTED BY QUENTIN TARANTINO. Bam, box office success.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Phone posted:They're going to film a documentary heist movie where they steal the masters sent out to cinemas. And at the end, when the credits roll it's going to say DIRECTED BY QUENTIN TARANTINO. Bam, box office success. I would watch this movie, if it was actually directed by Quentin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
buttcoinbrony posted:I just get a bit nervous when we start calling for certain classes of people to not get rights that everyone else gets. The police aren't a class of people, they're public servants. Police forces regularly tout their own internal processes and investigations for dealing with officer-related misconduct. So instead of any kind of due process or criminal investigations, they're supposed to be subjecting themselves to their flimsy internal processes, which these officers refuse to cooperate with. And where's the recourse after that? They haven't been arrested, they haven't been charged, and they get to just casually ignore their own internal investigations while their superiors in the department simply shrug their shoulders at reporters. How else can you shoot a child several times to death and avoid all responsibility and inquisition except by being an American cop?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
I wonder if they'll have "problems" getting the dashcam authenticated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:The police aren't a class of people, they're public servants. Police forces regularly tout their own internal processes and investigations for dealing with officer-related misconduct. So instead of any kind of due process or criminal investigations, they're supposed to be subjecting themselves to their flimsy internal processes, which these officers refuse to cooperate with. And where's the recourse after that? They haven't been arrested, they haven't been charged, and they get to just casually ignore their own internal investigations while their superiors in the department simply shrug their shoulders at reporters. E: The bolded statement is...interesting. I'll just leave it at that. Someone smarter than me upthread responded to this. Wikipedia->Garrity Warning posted:You are being asked to provide information as part of an internal and/or administrative investigation. This is a voluntary interview and you do not have to answer questions if your answers would tend to implicate you in a crime. No disciplinary action will be taken against you solely for refusing to answer questions. However, the evidentiary value of your silence may be considered in administrative proceedings as part of the facts surrounding your case. Any statement you do choose to provide may be used as evidence in criminal and/or administrative proceedings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:The police aren't a class of people, they're public servants. Police forces regularly tout their own internal processes and investigations for dealing with officer-related misconduct. So instead of any kind of due process or criminal investigations, they're supposed to be subjecting themselves to their flimsy internal processes, which these officers refuse to cooperate with. And where's the recourse after that? They haven't been arrested, they haven't been charged, and they get to just casually ignore their own internal investigations while their superiors in the department simply shrug their shoulders at reporters. Occupation is a class of people, that's not even a legal term, a class is literally any group of people that have an attribute in common. Hell its even a protected class in New York housing law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
buttcoinbrony posted:E: The bolded statement is...interesting. I'll just leave it at that. I'm just saying that for most employers if there was a workplace investigation and you refused to cooperate, in many workplaces that would instant grounds for termination. Police get a different standard because, well they always do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Of course the police apologizers are going to default to arguing semantics. gently caress off with that. I know what Garrity says; it's bullshit. Despite all the evidence, despite their own processes, despite everything, these cops are walking around getting to do whatever it is they do while if it were any other "class of person" they would be sitting behind bars. That's what it boils down to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Kalman posted:"Pasco said the plan isn't a threat of physical violence. It will aim to hurt Tarantino "in the only way that seems to matter to him, and that's economically," he said." I believe this like I believe donkeys can fly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm just saying that for most employers if there was a workplace investigation and you refused to cooperate, in many workplaces that would instant grounds for termination. Police get a different standard because, well they always do. Most workplaces don't have the power to actually put you in jail. I'm okay with Garrity with that in mind. Chalets the Baka posted:Of course the police apologizers are going to default to arguing semantics. gently caress off with that. When did I apologize for the police's actions? I've been specifically discussing everyone who said that cops shouldn't get the right to remain silent. In fact... buttcoinbrony posted:I hadn't thought about that and you might be right on the report specifically. Don't get me wrong, from what I've seen so far I think this shooting is a gigantic clusterfuck and that most/all of the cops involved deserve jail time or at the very least unemployment. I just get a bit nervous when we start calling for certain classes of people to not get rights that everyone else gets. goatsestretchgoals fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Nov 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Chicago Tribune got ahold of Gliniewicz's personnel records. Frequent drunk driving, numerous reports of groping at parties, extorting sex from a female coworker in exchange for keeping her employed, assault threats to a dispatcher, I can't keep it straight. Proud 30 year veteran of the force! I would say it's like he was actively trying for Worst Cop except that term has no meaning now. http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/news/ct-fox-lake-cop-personnel-records-20151106-story.html rockopete fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Nov 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm just saying that for most employers if there was a workplace investigation and you refused to cooperate, in many workplaces that would instant grounds for termination. Police get a different standard because, well they always do. Employees in union jobs often have greater job protections than employees who are not in union jobs. Are unions bad?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm just saying that for most employers if there was a workplace investigation and you refused to cooperate, in many workplaces that would instant grounds for termination. Police get a different standard because, well they always do. Garrity doesn't apply to termination as far as I know, I absolutely agree they should get fired for refusing to cooperate Chalets the Baka posted:Of course the police apologizers are going to default to arguing semantics. gently caress off with that. The existence of the 5th Amendment is not "semantics" Also its a little premature to say these guys are getting away with anything, especially since it sounds like the local chief of police was already looking for a reason to nail the marshals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Employees in union jobs often have greater job protections than employees who are not in union jobs. Is this some lame bait to attack the concept of unions? Are you that thick?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Employees in union jobs often have greater job protections than employees who are not in union jobs. And yet police get those protections in states without strong unions, it is almost as if it has nothing to do with the union and everything to do with the power they wield. Jarmak posted:Also its a little premature to say these guys are getting away with anything, How often can someone admit to shooting an unarmed child to death and not get arrested?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Chicago Tribune got ahold of Gliniewicz's personnel records. Frequent drunk driving, numerous reports of groping at parties, extorting sex from a female coworker in exchange for keeping her employed, assault threats to a dispatcher, I can't keep it straight. Proud 30 year veteran of the force! I would say it's like he was actively trying for Worst Cop except that term has no meaning now. Blue Lives Matter
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Phone posted:Blue Lives Matter Except for ones raped by other cops apparently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
buttcoinbrony posted:When did I apologize for the police's actions? I've been specifically discussing everyone who said that cops shouldn't get the right to remain silent. In fact... If it makes you feel that much better, I wasn't targeting you. My overarching point is that, despite what the law might say otherwise, the police are treated as if they are above the law and they get certain privileges that most people don't get when they commit murder. That isn't an opinion, that is demonstrated fact with ample direct evidence. If they were in fact treated worse than your average citizen when committing the same acts there would be an argument for that, but it doesn't happen. Jarmak posted:Also its a little premature to say these guys are getting away with anything, especially since it sounds like the local chief of police was already looking for a reason to nail the marshals. I'd consider the amount of leeway they've received so far to be getting away with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:And yet police get those protections in states without strong unions, it is almost as if it has nothing to do with the union and everything to do with the power they wield. Everyone should have the level of protection that police unions do, rather than eliminating the protections that police have.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Devor posted:Everyone should have the level of protection that police unions do, rather than eliminating the protections that police have. I don't understand the value in making it so no one has to cooperate with their employer into investigations and where they can face no repercussions for not cooperating. This is the exact same reason LAPD officers were able to destroy police recording equipment without any punishment, because none of the officers involved snitched and no one could be punished for covering up a crime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Radish posted:Except for ones raped by other cops apparently. Well maybe if she was putting her life on the line like A Real Policeman and hero to the community...
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Is this some lame bait to attack the concept of unions? Are you that thick? The problem isn't unions. The problem is police. e: And yes, I'd be (almost certainly) be fired for refusing to incriminate myself in my workplace.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Is this some lame bait to attack the concept of unions? Are you that thick? Unions are good. The Fifth Amendment is good. People who are police officers should be able to be in a union and should be able to use the Fifth Amendment. Sometimes it is frustrating to see that people who we have decided have done bad things do things like exercise their bargained-for union rights or their inalienable constitutional rights. It's OK to feel that, but it should not follow that unions or Constitutional rights are bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I don't understand the value in making it so no one has to cooperate with their employer into investigations and where they can face no repercussions for not cooperating. Conflating the dynamic police unions have when their officers kill someone with how unions behave in the typical workplace isn't a good idea. It isn't the concept of the union that's the issue, it's the concept of the modern American police force.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:Conflating the dynamic police unions have when their officers kill someone with how unions behave in the typical workplace isn't a good idea. It isn't the concept of the union that's the issue, it's the concept of the modern American police force. Plus everyone is jumping to assuming that these officers are under union negotiated protections and not just common police courtesy. For example, I don't think union rules have anything to do with the officers not getting arrested after admitting to killing an unarmed child.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
rockopete posted:Chicago Tribune got ahold of Gliniewicz's personnel records. Frequent drunk driving, numerous reports of groping at parties, extorting sex from a female coworker in exchange for keeping her employed, assault threats to a dispatcher, I can't keep it straight. Proud 30 year veteran of the force! I would say it's like he was actively trying for Worst Cop except that term has no meaning now. This is somehow simultaneously  and 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Plus everyone is jumping to assuming that these officers are under union negotiated protections and not just common police courtesy. What's the benefit of rushing things? I would hope that the prosecutor would at least take a few days to build a bulletproof indictment. It's not like the police officers are a flight risk, or going to kill more people under color of law while they're suspended. I hope the police officers are punished to the maximum extent possible, but I also recognize that acting hastily is why police officers can be fired 'for cause' and then later reinstated with backpay years later. The cynical part of me says that the Chiefs responsible do it on purpose, to negate consequences for their subordinates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:02 |
|
|
  Thank God this loving psycho is dead. Can they exhume the body to give it a different burial without any honours? pathetic little tramp fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Nov 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 19:35
|
|
