|
Kalman posted:You didn't read DoJ's report on that, did you. I liked the bit where one of the witnesses interviewed by the Feds described Brown as having the stature of the Giant. (Paraphrasing)
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:A good cue is the suggested videos over to the right Aren't most of the suggested videos based on your previous viewing history.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Then you don't think they should be in prison. How is this not obvious? Can you explain your math a bit more.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Dr Pepper posted:How on earth is this legal!? Texas Mutual's charter is public and in the Texas State code. Sec. 2054.455. FUNDING AGREEMENTS FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS. The company may enter into funding agreements with local prosecutors to prosecute offenses against the company.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
My relatively local bomb squad was called out because of a Night Brite.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Is it some sort of specific terminology they have to use? thats the term used to describe the offense in the relevant statutes, so yes.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
The NYPD released a picture of the man who they wanted to arrest instead of James Blake. dude actually lives in Sydney, Australia
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:Fine. But I maintain that in America it's normal to give out full names of arrested suspects before trial, while to my knowledge in Europe that happens only in high-profile cases and the norm is to publish the name only after sentencing, and not at all if the sentenced is a juvenile. I think it's hosed up how the press can ruin a person's life, good luck finding a job if googling your name brings up criminal charges even if they were dropped. It is common place for American police to disclose the names of adult suspects. They are not shielded by juvenile justice laws. It is not particularly common for them to list the names of juveniles, unless it's some sort major felony like murder and will be tried as an adult.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Something seems wrong here: What was the result of the prosecution?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Also wasn't everyone just saying that you're not allowed to bring up crimes that someone wasn't convicted of in trial? Barring that it's a civil action and not a criminal trial for compensation so the rules are going to be different the relevant statute: quote:B. For the purposes of this Section, "factual innocence" means that the applicant did not commit the crime for which he was convicted and incarcerated nor did he commit any crime based upon the same set of facts used in his original conviction. Louisiana was looking to deny him the money because even if he hadn't actually committed the murder, he did receive and try to sell some of the stolen goods from the crime.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Raerlynn posted:
Can a lawyer comment on if this was a prosecutor presenting an affirmative defense or a procedural hurdle regarding indictment
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
A Fancy Bloke posted:So they're following the "same law" in the same way that gay people had the same ability as straights to marry someone of the opposite gender? You're losing me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
A Fancy Bloke posted:No, if I enter my neighbor's house and he enters mine without permission, we'd reasonably both be subject to the same laws and have the same process to find satisfaction. You are aware of the difference between common law and statutory law, right
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
nm posted:There is law that may punish the officers actions. nm, would the fact that 911 did not inform the officers of that it was a fake gun (or even a possibility thereof) weigh heavily on the training and belief aspects
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
khy posted:Has the Devin Guilford incident (headlight arrest turns into fatal shooting) already been discussed to death in here? I wanted to read up on people's discussions over it someplace other than lovely news website comment sections. Just wasn't sure how far back in this thread to look. it was a while ago, it got derailed after whether or not it's legal to flash your headlights and how there's no evidence Guilford charged the officer. It's really not worth the read or effort to find.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Remember, that the 911 caller mentioned they thought the gun might be fake too! That information was never relayed to the officers. It dead ended in the 911 dispatch.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
The student who was arrested for bringing a clock to school has was offered and accepted a full scholarship.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
When I saw a few pages, 8 thought there'd be some discussion over Comey's remarks. Oh well.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:She was 5'2" and sitting down, he was this: a man deadlifting weights?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Yeah, but if it's a kid, it's overwhelmingly more likely that it's just a bb gun or something. It's really not reasonable to just assume that it's a real gun. So they should have waited until they saw the colored safety tip of the gun?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:When was the last time the benevolent federal government came to "the south" and enforced civil rights laws? When was the last time the federal government enforced civil rights laws at all? Particularly vs the largest violators of cilvi rights in the nation, the police. 2012? When was the Danger bridge trial again?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Danger Bridge was a civil rights issue? Seems like strictly negligence to me.  It was Danziger bridge (thanks autocorrect). Note to self: The police rolled up in a U Haul, and shot 6 unarmed civilians with shotguns and rifles, killing 2. This is apparently a textbook case of negligence and not a civil rights issue even if the police were convicted of depriving the victims' civil rights under the color of law. I'm honestly speechless.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Isn't part of being a cop (obviously depending on the jurisdiction) is if you fire your service weapon you give a report as to why you fired? Garrity. C2C - 2.0 posted:These guys weren't "cops" in the traditional sense, btw. They were court marshals, which is kind of a weird police force for the court itself. There were 4 officers, from the last report I read. 2 of them were actual marshals. The other 2 were cops working on the side as marshals.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:That is the crime that was committed. If anyone that wasn't a police officer did this, they would have been arrested immediately and put behind bars; such a person wouldn't get the benefit of roaming free waiting for an investigation to determine if there was a crime. George Zimmerman.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
Devor posted:George Zimmerman. He already refuted that. Zimmerman didn't kill someone in addition to his "attacker".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:
Uh, the article (well the editors note) states that there is such a policy, the SMPD has provided some 19 names with some confusion on who might be involved, and an open investigation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Um, what rationale, if any, was given for the Chicago cops erasing the Burger King surveillance video? Or did they just say "we wanted to review this evidence, and it somehow wound up erased, sorry"? I don't think Chicago PD has ever admitted to deleting the footage, the source on it was the manager from Burger King who let some officers look at the cameras the night of the murder and investigators were missing a 90 minute chunk in the morning.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:It is curious that it almost always seems to work in this direction, though. Graham v Connor
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:How many videos have we seen in this thread of a single individual, armed at most with a knife (usually unarmed), making no threatening motions at all, being approached by multiple officers and winding up dead? If not kissing the curb at the first sight of a blue uniform (or however you want to interpret "whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight" when no arrest has been announced or attempted) is an action punishable by death, then you need to give me a different citation for why. That the standard for an officer violating someone's due process rights has a higher burden to prove than a prosecutor performing procedural violations of due process which would lead to a natural imbalance in the claims (causing it to be "one way")? If that wasn't your point, I'm sorry for misinterpreting it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 11:57 |
|
|
PostNouveau posted:In 2014, for the first time ever, law enforcement officers took more property from American citizens than burglars did. This isn't true in the slightest and that article and the one it's based off of is extremely misleading. The real issues with civil asset forfeiture are local LEO abusing it to prey and seize assets of people who are at best committing minor crimes. The statistics in that article are based off of money fined and seized by the USDOJ, and while technically LEOs in a sense, it really isn't representative of the issue in the slightest. Two thirds of the money comes from the federal government receiving money from some dude named Bernie Madoff to pay off his fraud victims and from fining Toyota for defrauding the public. OJ MIST 2 THE DICK fucked around with this message at 14:11 on Nov 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 13:53
|
|
