|
I have no idea how anyone can claim to conclusively see small details like that in that blurry as gently caress video.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
joeburz posted:Truly indisputable...
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Tamir Rice was merely exercising his right to open carry under Ohio's laws. I'm very glad that all gun owners who open carry in Ohio will now be shot on sight, as it is nothing more than they deserve.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Tamir Rice was merely exercising his right to open carry under Ohio's laws. I'm very glad that all gun owners who open carry in Ohio will now be shot on sight, as it is nothing more than they deserve. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Shoot first, ask questions later. That's how policing SHOULD work!
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Combined with it 1. not being there before and 2. Garmback kicking it away soon after the shooting, that's pretty convincing, yeah. because a gun falling out of a waistband after you fall to the ground dying of a gunshot wound is outside the realm of possibility. sounds like something perhaps an indictment could clear up in an actual court case?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Weren't you just arguing earlier today that he didnt have it in a holster so he wasn't a True Open Carry Gunguy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Hell, that
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:The DA who spiked his case has already said exactly that, in case you weren't angry enough. What the hell
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:Another part of the police shooting issues right now is that taser usage is on the decline because of a lot of well publicized bad uses of the taser. From my understanding (my old department got them prior to my starting there), it was originally marketed as an alternative to deadly force for some situations (guy with a knife/baseball bat/undrawn gun, etc), and that the usage of the taser would only occur, by policy, as part of a two man unit with a 2nd officer immediately ready to use deadly force if the taser didn't take effect. This was with the big and bulky M26 taser that wasn't carried on the belt, but was carried in a box in the cruiser with a seal on it, and was pretty much never used. It was also marketed as completely harmless, and part of our training was to get shocked with it to be authorized to carry it. To this day I would still rather be tased that pepper sprayed, and I took the ride 3 times, including getting shot with an actual cartridge as part of instructor training. This is a great post. When you retired, what was the force continuum? How would you make it better? A lot of things discussed in this thread are related to officer training. Thanks for the information.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
joeburz posted:So, the DA set out to vindicate an officer blasting a dude without even making an attempt to defuse a situation, or even really say anything, and then blatantly lying on their police report. And because the DA accomplished their goals of doing so, which was the easiest task in the world being that the DA essentially holds the power of indictment in these situations, everything checks out? The prosecutor has the rightful ability to vindicate a suspect, it's not "tainting" the process for him to do that, it's part of their job. Now, as I said it's perfectly valid if people want to claim he's a big rear end in a top hat racist for thinking there was no crime here, but focusing on the grand jury process is missing the forest for the trees.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
Even if Tamir Rice had a fully loaded pistol, the behavior of the officers in this case was inexcusable. You cant just respond to any vague threat (and indeed given the fact that Tamir Rice was nowhere close to the officers I frankly don't see how he could've qualified as such) with overwhelming lethal force. The only way this kind of behavior could possibly be justified is if Tamir Rice had fired upon officers or civilians, and anyone claiming otherwise is in my view morally reprehensible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Tamir Rice was merely exercising his right to open carry under Ohio's laws. I'm very glad that all gun owners who open carry in Ohio will now be shot on sight, as it is nothing more than they deserve. joeburz posted:Weren't you just arguing earlier today that he didnt have it in a holster so he wasn't a True Open Carry Gunguy? joeburz posted:because a gun falling out of a waistband after you fall to the ground dying of a gunshot wound is outside the realm of possibility. sounds like something perhaps an indictment could clear up in an actual court case?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Yeah that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. This isn't the movies where gun shots throw people around like getting hit by a bus. well cops rolling up and blasting a kid before they even leave the vehicle and then lying on their police reports doesn't make a whole lot of sense either but you find no problem taking it hook line and sinker as justification for no wrongdoing
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
joeburz posted:well cops rolling up and blasting a kid before they even leave the vehicle and then lying on their police reports doesn't make a whole lot of sense either but you find no problem taking it hook line and sinker as justification for no wrongdoing
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
My brother once pointed an airsoft gun at me. I'm glad to hear that Waco Panty Raid would have consoled my mother and father at the funeral with "He shouldn't have been pointing it at someone, that's why the police killed him and got away scot-free."
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't think that the cops' file on you should be made public when they fail to convince a GJ that a crime has occurred. You don't have to. I'm talking about essentially the transcript. Did he present the case without bias or did he go out of his way to "We've looked into this and this poor cop is being railroaded" because that's the purpose of a trial, the GJ is only there to decide if the facts warrant charging someone. Making the transcripts public would remove any doubt if he was fair and unbiased or played defense attorney. quote:Why shouldn't a prosecutor hire expert witnesses to testify to a GJ about precedent or complex legal issues? Because that's not their job, that's what the trial is for. It's supposed to be "Here is what happened, here are the facts we know and this is why we think this person is responsible." They aren't there to determine actual guilt, just decide if the facts support the charge. Jarmak posted:Anyone else the DA didn't want to charge he just wouldn't have charged, the entire grand jury song and dance with experts was about attempting to prove to the public that he was right about the fact the cop shouldn't be charged. I know. You and I may disagree on everything but a I think we can both agree that an open judicial system that leaves no murky areas for people to think any shady poo poo went down would give people more trust in the system. People are starting to lose faith in the police, losing faith in the court system and poo poo gets ugly. If it can be shown that Tamirs killer was treated the same way as every other defendant people may not like if he isn't indicted or is found not guilty but an open system would at least remove doubts that he got special favors. That can only help things, can we agree on that? Toasticle fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Dec 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:The prosecutor has the rightful ability to vindicate a suspect, it's not "tainting" the process for him to do that, it's part of their job. So how do we address this? By your own admission the DA is not simply presenting the facts to determine if an indictment was possible in a neutral light, but went out of his way to stack the proceeding within the letter of the law to specifically exonerate a man who were it not for his position would likely have faced an actual trial. This seems to be a really clear cut case of a DA having a conflict of interest and going out of his way to avoid having to put an officer on trial. Jarmak posted:Now, as I said it's perfectly valid if people want to claim he's a big rear end in a top hat racist for thinking there was no crime here, but focusing on the grand jury process is missing the forest for the trees. I suspect actually you are missing the forest here. The issue that raises such a moral outrage here is that the DA has an unreasonably massive impact on the grand jury process that doesn't have any reasonable checks beyond "don't vote for him next election". There's no mechanism for a judge to claim violation of public policy and there's no appeal process. How do you pursue justice within the system when the system itself is trying is hardest to shut you down?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
If you think that Tamir Rice, when he saw the cop car charging at him, concluded that his best move would be to draw his airsoft pistol and point it at them, then you're REALLY loving stupid
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Truly indisputable... I think there is a much bigger story here. Bigfoot is clearly getting out of the other door of the squad car, and there is a second gunman behind the picnic bench.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
i can't believe that a cop literally drives up to a kid and shoots them
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
Change of pace: police are just using attack did indiscriminately e: like text messages planning to just have a dog attack a guy before they even show up WhiskeyJuvenile fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Dec 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Haha, they hosed up doing that to a white person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Change of pace: in the context of everything that's happened lately it looks like farce, but no it's still just tragedy
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:What the hell He later issued a clumsy non-apology that of course Tamir's cynically scheming golddigger of a mother had every right to mourn his tragic-yet-fully-justified murder how could anyone think he'd meant anything else?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Why is  this considered "award winning police dog training"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Why is Look at those earrings, clearly he was a thug that had it coming. His eyes are red, he was probably crazed out on weed. Those pajamas are in gang colors, too. Makes you think...
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
LoL, that's not new poo poo, either. Trust me, I know.drilldo squirt posted:Haha, they hosed up doing that to a white person. lol, k
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Foppery posted:If you think that Tamir Rice, when he saw the cop car charging at him, concluded that his best move would be to draw his airsoft pistol and point it at them, then you're REALLY loving stupid On the other hand, it's not implausible that a twelve-year-old boy, upon seeing two guys in a huge black squad-car charging at him and yelling at him to put the gun down, might reach to grab the toy he's got tucked into his belt so he can put it down on the ground like they're asking. Which might look to a twitchy, paranoid, and totally unqualified cop like he's drawing on them. Stupidity is a possible alternative interpretation to malice here, even if they obviously spiced things up to make themselves look less like total trigger-happy idiots afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:On the other hand, it's not implausible that a twelve-year-old boy, upon seeing two guys in a huge black squad-car charging at him and yelling at him to put the gun down, might reach to grab the toy he's got tucked into his belt so he can put it down on the ground like they're asking. Which might look to a twitchy, paranoid, and totally unqualified cop like he's drawing on them. Stupidity is a possible alternative interpretation to malice here, even if they obviously spiced things up to make themselves look less like total trigger-happy idiots afterwards. I don't think malice was ever really in the cards for our theories with these guys. The driver had complaints and a history of being an abusive rear end in a top hat, but the guy who actually fired his gun was emotionally unstable to the point of breaking down in tears over unrelated drama during firearms training. I don't recall anyone ever thinking that he must have been evil and intentionally out to kill a 12-year-old. What he is is incredibly stupid and definitely not emotionally stable enough to be trusted with a lethal weapon. Especially with the dispatcher forgetting to relay "He's also a small child and probably not holding a real gun", he probably rolled onto the scene expecting a shootout and reacting without thinking or observing the scene in any logical sense. Much like with John Crawford, where the officers were given a greatly exaggerated 911 story of a potential active shooter and showed up mentally ready for an active shooter scenario. Expecting to face a psychopath with a rifle and body armor, they rolled out with AR-15s and started firing as soon as the target came into view like they were Hollywood heroes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Look, yelling contradictory or impossible instructions at people and then murdering them is just a Police tradition. Stop trying to stamp out their heritage ok?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Basically, cops want to imagine that this is the kind of scene they're about to face whenever they knock on a door: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o5znwfBcx0 In reality, none of the Haitians are armed and the cops are acting on a bad tip from a meth dealer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Just occurred to me, does anyone know if the car's sirens or lights were on when Rice was shot? From the video it looks like the lights weren't on, but I can't find any clarification online.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
Why would the police use lights or a siren during a tactical insertion? Does anyone have a press release or news report quoting a police union supporting the labor rights of non-police workers over, say, the last 25 years? For example in Wisconsin, police are the literal boot on labors' throat while personally enjoying specifically carved out exemptions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
As a Clevelander, let me just say that Timothy McGinty is an rear end in a top hat. An embarrassing rear end in a top hat. What a sad, predictable farce. Let the Feds come in and finally start making heads roll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:You don't have to. I'm talking about essentially the transcript. Did he present the case without bias or did he go out of his way to "We've looked into this and this poor cop is being railroaded" because that's the purpose of a trial, the GJ is only there to decide if the facts warrant charging someone. Making the transcripts public would remove any doubt if he was fair and unbiased or played defense attorney.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The prosecutor is notionally supposed to present evidence to the GJ, who decide whether it supports charging the suspect. Unless you redact the prosecutor's testimony beyond readability, it's going to by definition contain the evidence against the accused. How about instead of going back and forth over how it's going to work and boring everyone you just say if you agree there should be some kind of openness to let people see is the DA acting like a DA or is he acting like a defense attorney? Hell I don't even think any information that could identify the accused or the victim should be released, especially in sex related cases (Whuch means I love rape apparently) because the social damage done to the accused and the potential social damage to the accuser if the former is found innocent. So protecting identities and potentially damaging details is fine but seeing how the DA performs his or her job would stop or at least defang accusations of misconduct. Or prove them if it's obvious they were playing defense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:How about instead of going back and forth over how it's going to work and boring everyone you just say if you agree there should be some kind of openness to let people see is the DA acting like a DA or is he acting like a defense attorney?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:On the other hand, it's not implausible that a twelve-year-old boy, upon seeing two guys in a huge black squad-car charging at him and yelling at him to put the gun down, might reach to grab the toy he's got tucked into his belt so he can put it down on the ground like they're asking. Which might look to a twitchy, paranoid, and totally unqualified cop like he's drawing on them. Stupidity is a possible alternative interpretation to malice here, even if they obviously spiced things up to make themselves look less like total trigger-happy idiots afterwards. Those were not the orders of the police account. The shooter, Officer Loehmann, says that he and his partner were both "repeatedly" shouting "show me your hands". His statement to the grand jury is here: http://prosecutor.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_prosecutor/en-US/Tamir%20Rice%20Investigation/Officer%20Loehmann%20Statement.pdf Notably, he keeps saying training phrases, like "hands can kill", "the cruiser is a coffin", and "tap-tap".
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 08:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
Raerlynn posted:So how do we address this? By your own admission the DA is not simply presenting the facts to determine if an indictment was possible in a neutral light, but went out of his way to stack the proceeding within the letter of the law to specifically exonerate a man who were it not for his position would likely have faced an actual trial. This seems to be a really clear cut case of a DA having a conflict of interest and going out of his way to avoid having to put an officer on trial. There's no mechanism for punishing an elected official for acting completely within the bounds of the legitimate discretion of his office because you disagree with his decisions. Just imagine for a second how much worse the justice system would be if DAs were compelled by law to try every single person accused of a crime to their utmost ability even if they thought they were innocent. I just don't understand what's not getting communicated here, the DA is under no obligation to present to the grand jury at all, if he doesn't think charges are warranted he can legitimately just say "nope, no charges". Its not misconduct for him to spike a grand jury, he doesn't even have to let the grand jury get a chance to indict at all. I can definitely see there being a concern if a DA was using the secrecy of grand jury proceedings to hide the fact he's spiking the case, but this guy isn't, he's being completely open with the fact he didn't think charges are warranted and that's within the discretion of his office. Yes the check to elected officials not using the powers of their office the way you like is to not vote for them. Also I'm not sure what you mean by "there's no appeals process", double jeopardy doesn't attach as a result of a grand jury hearing. Toasticle posted:How about instead of going back and forth over how it's going to work and boring everyone you just say if you agree there should be some kind of openness to let people see is the DA acting like a DA or is he acting like a defense attorney? No, I think that's a horrible idea, the entire point the grand jury is protecting people from suffering the social sanction of unwarranted accusations. As of now there's absolutely nothing to gain by removing this protection, every DA who's played soft with the grand jury has owned it and/or gotten transcripts released.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 08:10
|
|