|
Copchat is the real burden of the gip mod.
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
He should be in jail, tbh.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Professor Bling posted:Well, let me fix that, then. His disability information is not being released to the press because it's a violation of the ADA. You and I are on the same side here, and I think he should be behind bars and definitely not getting a pension. However, the ADA exists for a reason, and employers cannot disclose your medical information related to a disability unless it falls under three enumerated circumstances under the act, none of which allow carte blanche release to the media. Dude straight up murdered a kid so he should not have been acquitted or have a pension, but at the same time his former employer should absolutely not violate his or anyone else's confidential info.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
Professor Bling posted:Which I understand, and is why I said "one reason why" rather than "the reason why" You're probably right.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
Some of the very first things MPs of the various services did in iraq/afghanistan bases was to set up speed limits and start ticketing people for traffic violations.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 12:25
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Do... do the marines have 24 mph zones on their bases? Maybe not 24mph, but I have seen plenty of 15 and 20mph stretches on bases across the nation. These aren't residential areas or anything. Just spots that have sudden speed limit drops without real rhyme or reason.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 12:27
|
|
|
McNally could also give you another 6er to explain that he was wrong on that one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2019 16:18
|
|
|
A White Guy posted:Why is there still no real unified policing agency in most states? This goes back to the origin of police powers and federalism in general. The constitution does not grant police powers to the federal government except over areas of federal jurisdiction. Policing is otherwise left to the states. The criminal code is borne out of the English Common Law (except in Louisiana), and in many places common law crimes are still prosecuted. So you have over 50 police jurisdictions many of which originated a couple hundred years ago. The structure of each state's policing has some similarities because of the common source. Inside each of these states, they have a basic structure and various levels of local control. There have been attempts to standardize things, such as model penal codes, but the US is still basically 50 independent entities when it comes to policing.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2019 15:08
|
|
|
That's because the states delegate the police powers to the local level, further complicating things. Federalism is really dumb in certain situations. Sure it makes sense to have home rule for a lot of things. Policing is not one.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Amber Guyger’s trial started this week. Charged with murder.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:What degree? I like that shes being charged, but if they go for first degree i worry shes going to get off when they have trouble demonstrating intent. I'm not a tx lawyer and haven't looked into all of the details, but it appears that TX does not break murder into degrees. There's murder and capital murder (enhancement to murder if you kill a cop or other protected groups). After that you have manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide. Determining intent is easy. She admitted she shot to kill. She admitted everything to her partner via texts (they were talking about loving) and they both deleted the texts although they were later recovered. If she can show there was "adequate cause" as defined by statute (and certainly expounded in case law), she can get a reduction in sentencing, but not dismissal of the charge. Manslaughter and negligent homicide are lesser included offenses in TX to murder, so the jury instructions will say something like "if she did not have intent to kill but still recklessly caused Jean's death, convict on manslaughter. If she was not reckless and was instead criminally negligent, convict on CNH."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
Afaik the prosecutor’s only fuckup was the press conference, which thankfully did not taint the jury pool and has not resulted in any adverse action from the judge besides the asschewing. I hope the jury convicts. She’s guilty as gently caress. She broke into a man’s house and killed him.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
EBB posted:Why would the judge not at least drop a contempt charge? There was no need for one. The prosecutor shouldn’t have had the press conference, but it was ultimately harmless. If it had caused an actual problem, then the judge might have sanctioned the attorney in sone way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 20:56
|
|
|
If she was going to have a plea agreement, it would have happened well before trial. She will get a jury verdict. Hopefully one of murder.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:i honestly cant believe it It's good to see someone held accountable for once.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Professor Bling posted:I still don't believe she'll see honest punishment but then again I didn't think she'd be found guilty, so hopefully I'm wrong twice and she rots in a cell! They did not mention the degree, so I'm assuming that gets determined later. First degree murder has a sentence range of 5-99 years. Capital murder has life sentence to death penalty. It is possible for the state to pursue capital murder because one of the predicates is committing a murder in the process of a burglary. Based upon my non-texas lawyer reading of the burglary statute, she did indeed commit a capital murder.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
Grem posted:I thought Texas didn't have degrees of murder? They don’t. I meant charged as a first degree felony or capital felony.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Wage theft is not a criminal matter. It’s a civil matter (typically contract law) between parties.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Stravag posted:When's her first parole option? 5 years.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
I saw something this morning: the american criminal justice system is like bleach. Works for whites and fucks up colors.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 12:16
|
|
|
Cops need to get paid a lot more, too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Melthir posted:What did I miss? Nothing of importance. I can give you a recap. Bunch of plainclothes cops from a bunch of units pile up around a corner ready to go after the deli shooter. Cole mentions that it's dumb that they piled up like that and they opened themselves up to a lot of unnecessary risk by doing so. The next few pages of posts are various goons going back and forth attacking cole for saying that the cops shouldn't have responded at all (which he didn't say) and cole making GBS threads back on the people that were making GBS threads on him. It was very tedious and pointless with a lot of people shouting past each other about things the other hadn't really said or meant.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Jesus loving Christ. Crack, generally speaking, has harsher penalties than powder cocaine despite the fact that a gram of crack necessarily has less active drug than a gram of powder. It's entirely so police can continue to arrest black people for next to nothing and throw them into the prison slavery system.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2020 13:31
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:What ruling is this? The most recent case on it is Kisela v. Hughes. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-467_bqm1.pdf The framework goes back a couple of decades and has to deal with qualified immunity. The first case was Harlow v. Fitzgerald in the 80s and the current test was set up by Saucier v. Katz in 01. Not really what I would consider old, personally. Police are agents of the state. The state is immune to tort except in certain circumstances. This is known as sovereign immunity. From that, the state's agents are shielded to an extent with respect to their functions. This is qualified immunity. It only applies to discretionary functions. There is a two part test. First, a constitutional right must be implicated. Second, is there a clearly established right defined at the time of the officer's action. Unless there is something written, either statute, regulation, or caselaw that tells an officer they cannot do something, they will be immune to bad decisions made in the line of duty. This is a garbage standard and allows a lot of lovely things to happen. Cops universally get to violate a right until there's a lawsuit that gets appealed high enough to have precedential value because  at legislators actually restricting police conduct by statute.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2020 14:45
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I was thinking specifically of Heien v North Carolina. I hadn't read that case, and wish I had previously. I got the state to stipulate to a suppression of evidence on an analogous stop. However, they also conceded because part two of my argument was even if the stop was lawful, the followon search because of the smell of marijuana was not after the passenger identified himself as a medical marijuana patient and said the smell was because of him, and they do not want that argument to be ruled on. However, that's not what the other case is based on. Heien isn't about qualified immunity. It's about a reasonable mistake of law during a traffic stop. The fifth circuit case is a qualified immunity case that flows from the cases I listed. QI isn't implicated in Heien. No officer is being sued for wrongdoing. Heien is about suppression of evidence.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2020 15:27
|
|
|
If you'd like to read the opinion, here it is: https://www.5dca.org/content/download/633846/7202085/file/190802_DC03_04152020_114402_i.pdf The tl:dr; breakdown is this: 65 year old retired auto worker and part time security guard lets his niece move in with him. He knows that she's got drug problems and has turned tricks from time to time to support this habit. However, he does nothing to support her habit and tries to keep her clean. On the night of the incident, she was set up in a police sting. Her john and two other undercover police officers show up at the house. When she answers the door, the john reaches into the house, grabs her arm, and yanks her outside. She rightfully struggles with the men on the porch and begins yelling for help. Her uncle comes outside with his lawfully owned weapon and steps onto the porch. The police fall back and fan out in the yard. None of them say that they're police officers. Uncle fires warning shot in the air telling them to get the gently caress off his property. They open fire on the uncle and niece striking both. He returns fire, critically wounds one officer, and misses the other. Gets arrested and charged with three counts of first degree attempted murder of a law enforcement officer. At court raises that he is entitled to immunity Florida's stand your ground statute. The trial court determines that Uncle did not carry his burden and denies. The DCA overrules that saying the state has the burden, and orders the trial court to determine if the state proved by clear and convincing evidence that Uncle was 1. aware that the three assailants were police officers and 2. whether Uncle used his home for criminal activity. The trial court found the state did not prove that they identified themselves as police but held that because he was aware of his niece's prostitution, that his home was used for furthering criminal activity. Thus, once again, he was not immune. The 5th DCA again heard the case and said that mere knowledge that someone has committed some crime doesn't mean you're actively working to further that criminal activity. The state showed nothing more than Uncle's awareness that his Niece had struggled with drugs and had solicited before. They did not show that Uncle helped in any way, made money off of it, or did anything at all to further said criminal activity. Now Uncle is absolutely immune from all criminal or civil suit regarding the circumstances, and he can probably sue the sheriff's office for what they did to him and his niece.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I'm sure FL has a 'malice aforethought can be formed in an instant' case. I haven’t read the dismissed information against him, but this is correct. A second to think about what you’re doing is enough to satisfy the premeditation. For example, a cop shot and killed a man who was with his disabled van following a gig his band had played. The cop did not identify himself. He walked up and said “you ok?” To which the van’s owner said he’s good. The cop yelled it again and the man replied the same. The cop saw he had a gun and started shooting striking the man. The man started to flee and the cop carefully shot at him twice more with only a few seconds between. The cop then called 911 and started yelling “POLICE POLICE DROP YOUR WEAPON” to the man dying on the ground. Had the van’s driver not been on the phone on a recorded line with roadside assistance, the officer would have got away with it. Instead he was convicted of manslaughter (for the initial shooting on approach) and attempted first degree murder for trying and failing to shoot the fleeing man in the back. There was enough time between the different sets of shots to determine that the cop had thought about what happened and knew he had to kill the fleeing victim to save his job.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2020 14:18
|
|
|
Alastor_the_Stylish posted:Guy fired warning shot, armed men shoot him and his niece, he fires back and hits one. I don't know if there's any caselaw on malice aforethought being developed within moments after having been fired upon and shot. Walking out of his house and firing a shot is more than enough to establish that he intended to kill someone. Because that intent was grounded in defense of his home and family, though, he is immune to criminal and civil liability. Crazy enough if FL was not a SYG state he could still be facing charges. This is one of the rare situations and he’s only free to go because none of the three sheriff’s deputies did anything at all to identify themselves as cops.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2020 12:56
|
|
|
PookBear posted:a DA gets to decide what cases to prosecute and thus have actual control Eh, not exactly. The actual appointed or elected prosecutor for an area might, but the majority of prosecutors have to follow whatever rules are set forth by their boss. For example, in Florida the State Attorney for each judicial circuit is elected. That person has dozens to hundreds of assistant state attorneys that are the actual line level prosecutors. While these individuals might have some discretion, it is not unlimited.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:What you feeling right now His head hurts after his horse charged him into a traffic light.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:idgi One of the cops reported to a call from a bloodied up 14 year old vietnamese boy. He and a black teenage girl tried to explain to the officer that he was being abused. Instead, the police ignored the two teenagers and only listened the abuser and turned the boy back over to them. The girl said her aunt and mom would corroborate, but when she returned minutes later with them the police had left. Jeffrey Dahmer would continue to abuse the boy, kill him, and kill others for another two months.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
The patch says US Border Patrol.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2020 21:46
|
|
|
A few months ago TPD killed a mentally unwell black transman in town - Tony McDade. This was after they shot and killed Mychael Johnson and Wilbon Woodard in the two months before. This killing is one of the major driving forces between protests here in Tallahassee because police have refused to release dashcam or bodycam footage. The grand jury is meeting this week. It looks like TPD may not even have the footage anymore if it ever had it at all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2020 13:32
|
|
|
I'm the gun that falls out of the back sliding cop's holster that everyone ignores and leaves sitting on the steps.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
ASAPI posted:They are actually using LRAD on people at these protests now? This is the first I've heard about them being used. Not sure if that is due to poor reporting or I just don't read/follow the correct source. LRADs have been used at a large number of protests. They've brought them out to protests here in Tallahassee where the only violence has either been police or counter-protester initiated.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2020 14:36
|
|
|
Hezzy posted:I'm in a LEO Facebook group consisting mainly of American cops The police force in America is lousy with nazis and white supremacists.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2021 18:19
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:The Capitol Police are the only federal LEOs in the country that answer to the Legislative instead of the Executive. The primary police in DC are actually the MPDC. USCP just (theoretically) protects Congress, so Congress would have to decide who they want guarding the gates, as it were. It can't be a military organization, though, due to Posse Comitatus. Posse Comitatus would not prevent Congress form passing a law saying the Marines are now the capitol police because technically PC doesn't apply to the Navy and USMC, and, more importantly, Congress would have to pass a law specifically effectuate such a change, which is allowed both explicitly by the PCA and because congress can always amend it's own laws.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2021 04:07
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:PC doesn't apply to the Navy and USMC, legislatively, but it does apply to them via 10 USC 275 and DoD directive (which Congress has no control over directly). They don't have to amend the PCA. The PCA itself says Congress can write exceptions. They absolutely could pass something that allows the military to take over the capitol police mission without changing anything about the PCA.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2021 04:25
|
|
|
One of our former cop goons was a good guy that quit being a cop because it was impossible to change the culture. Crabdad went through police academy and specifically called out fellow cadets that were sexist and racist via what was allegedly a private channel. They then publicly read his complaints to everyone and made sure that all cadets knew he was the one who said it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:Didn't martello walk for the murder he did? Yup. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 02:13
|
|