Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Randbrick posted:

Practically speaking, you would need a fantastically inept prosecutor to actually endanger a case by speedy trial when it is so much easier to adopt a catch and release policy.

A competent prosecutor doesn't wait until after speedy trial timeframes have elapsed to nolle prosse. When their case is unformed, unprepared, or unresearched, they generally offer a plea on the day of trial, with the threat of continuance or nolle prosse if that plea is rejected. The former will hold a client without bond over for at least 2 weeks, while the latter will result in re-arrest and is actually a tangible threat even to a client who has bond. Of course, this will also typically result in a client losing jail credit for time served prior to incarceration on the "new" charge.

I do not mean to say that the nolle prosse implicates double jeopardy on a de jure level. The problem is that courts do not recognize the de facto harm that defendants face in a system where the prosecution has a largely unfettered ability to skirt the actual protections which the 5th Amendment is supposed to guarantee by pressing a reset button on their litigation.

Are you telling us that District Attorneys are getting around speedy trial protections by...dodge-canceling prosecutions? :stare:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Dead Reckoning posted:

But part of the impunity for police officers has to do with juries favoring law enforcement over minority defendants. The no-bills in the cases of Eric Garner and the SWAT team that burned a toddler is a problem with society that you can't fix by changing policies and procedures. Walter Scott's killer has already been terminated, which is the limit of what can be done as an administrative penalty. Oscar Grant's killer resigned in lieu of being terminated, and again a jury declined to convict him of anything beyond involuntary manslaughter.

I suspect that a much larger part of the impunity has to do with police misconduct being investigated by other police within a culture of tit-for-tat retribution that enforces the thin blue line, and prosecuted by attorneys who need to maintain good working relations with the defendants and their coworkers to do their own jobs. Also with most-to-all statistics on police violence relying on self-reporting and with racist shitheads screaming STATES' RIGHTS :bahgawd: at any suggestion of stronger federal oversight.

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Rent-A-Cop posted:

It isn't just the racist shitheads. Nobody likes having the bureaucracy crawl up their rear end. Especially when "federal oversight" nine times out of ten turns into simply producing reams and reams of reports that nobody will ever read and doing it without any additional funding.

Well. Better federal oversight, rather than just more of it. A metric shitload of additional funding would be a good starting point, especially since "gut federal program's funding to cripple it, proclaim it useless to justify further demolishing it" is a time-honored Republican tactic. I mean, I can't really see how to address the situation without meaningful federal intervention, since authoritarianism, racism, and brutality seem to be "working as intended" for a lot of the shittier boroughs. Maybe some sort of financial assistance for better training and retention of qualified personnel instead of police getting headhunted and brain-drained by other employers?

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Rent-A-Cop posted:

I don't know if that would even be possible legally. Although I support the idea of greater centralization at least at the state level. In my opinion there should be more consistent training for both police officers and police management and a disconnection of local policing from local government revenues if not from local government altogether.

Yeah, stronger state-level control with better federal oversight of those actors would probably be a better idea, since the sheer ridiculous scale of the US makes European-style total centralization much less workable.

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Lemming posted:

The bag is the black man's, sorry about your racism.

Do you have a source on this? I mean, I believe it, but having the evidence to throw in racists' faces for a slam dunk would just make my day.

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

hobotrashcanfires posted:

I wish anyone else in this country had unions that would completely disregard reality in our defense.

Well hey, he's not wrong. If it weren't for the recent massive public outcry against police brutality, this probably would have been swept under the rug as usual.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Thesaurasaurus
Feb 15, 2010

"Send in Boxbot!"

Samurai Sanders posted:

I guess I didn't think of slapstick as real suffering. Suffering would be something like starvation. In the story of the ants and the grasshopper, when the grasshopper had no food completely by his own doing, did the ants laugh at him? No, they invited him to their table, because they are good Christian ants.

Really? The way I heard this fable, the grasshopper was left in the cold to starve and the moral was presented as "don't be a fuckoff or you'll die horribly".

...now I have to wonder if that's how Evangelical kids hear it, too.

  • Locked thread