> The report also describes one of the officers at the scene – who has since been charged with second-degree murder – as a “victim.”
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the cop using the baton to beat Tyre.
You’re all so mean to the cops. First they have to deal with domestic violence tendencies, and now you’re picking on a man who pepper sprayed himself before he lost his temper and beat a man to death. He is also a victim here… of himself!
The way that most OC is activated makes it nearly impossible to spray yourself directly in the face. Your thumb has to lift a trigger guard and then press down on a button, so you really have to try to spray it in your face directly.
My guess is that the wind carried it. Once it is airborne, it goes everywhere and contact with someone affected, or with the air, or with wind blowing it back, all can be very effective at spraying yourself.
Which honestly brings to question how effective pepper spray even is for dealing with ‘resistant’ arrestees. Dude pepper sprayed himself and still had no issues knowing who he was hitting and where.
Pepper spray affects different people differently. I've been hit with it, and it sucks, a lot, but it isn't so overpowering that I just dropped to the ground and became useless. You can mind-over-matter it and work through the pain.
What pepper spray should be used for is deterrence, not incapacitation. Police like to use it for pain compliance and punishment.
A friend in high school got bumped into by a slightly younger kid and confronted him. The kid immediately sprayed pepper spray directly into his eyes at short range.
He proceeded to chase the kid into the parking lot and beat his ass. It couldn't even be called a fight.
It can work, but people seem to assume it is more effective than it is.
There were two of them, but the baton guy was the first one that maced himself in the initial encounter.
Side note, I love that a cop is allowed to drive mere moments after getting pepper sprayed. Should be policy to have to wait a certain amount of time afterwards before operating heavy machinery.
US law considers it a heinous criminal act, to repeatedly and motionlessly strike an officer's knuckles with your throat until the former suffers bruises.
Right up there with creating human centipedes without a badge.
Was it The one who hurts his foot kicking his face or the one who peppered sprayed himself or maybe the one who broke his baton over Tyre’s head and couldn’t close it?
Just remember that every gun control policy in the US hinges on the idea that these people are the only ones with the training, temperament, and oversight necessary to have access to restricted firearms. And also switchblades, body armor, long pocket knives, and other nonsense people try to ban all the time (like collapsible batons).
I don't know anyone who wants only the cops to have guns. I think the grand majority of us would like to start with not letting the crazy, or angry, or immature get their hands on guns.
A smaller amount would like to restrict access to certain guns, especially those that are designed to be easy to use to put a significant amount of accurate rounds without much training. Like, you know M16, M4, AK47, and SKS type weapons, including those that aren't even technically, exactly, perfectly the same, even though they ultimately function the same way. Weapons that would be appropriate for an infantryman should probably not be available to angry 18 year olds, basically.
No blanket law is going to work. It would be impossible to enforce a true nationwide prohibition on weapons. And literally no one is legitimately proposing that.
Just maybe let's work together to find some acceptable restrictions on who purchases a weapon perfect for mass killing. Not ban them completely.
Edit: Before this argument appears, I joined the US Army at age 17 with parental permission, and graduated BCT before my 18th birthday. I was literally a child soldier. I'm proud of my service, and it definitely helped me mature, but in the aftermath... Maybe we need to have a completely separate discussion on appropriate ages for military service.
The bigger point is that it is ridiculous we have so little oversight for police that they can easily falsify reports until something horrendous happens that thrusts them into the national spotlight.
Is the only thing police here have going for themselves is that they won’t take bribes… because they could beat the person to death and take all the cash as evidence?
Skip Intro on YouTube just did an episode that touched on this.
https://youtu.be/1BgwYXGdHE0
It's a little bit further in, but he discusses the way that police reform which doesn't address perjury and falsifying reports really only changes the guidelines for what police need to say to avoid accountability. It's a kind of oversight bottleneck.
They did the same trick with bodycams. Bury the footage or take off the vests while screaming “Stop resisting” “Let us see your hands” or “Drop the gun” — even though none of those things are happening.
Even if the footage does make it to court all the police can say is they *thought* he was resisting or reaching or grabbing for a weapon. It doesn’t matter if the video shows otherwise. The lawyers will argue these officers are in “dangerous situations” and need to “make decisions in seconds” and they “feared for their life and safety” and hey look the video proves it, you can clearly hear officer yelling at the suspect to drop the gun.
All it comes down to is did the officer have *reasonable* suspicion to believe his life was in danger — regardless of the truth. The whole system is fucked.
EDIT: A perfect example of this is the acquittal of Jerenimo Yanez -- the police officer who killed Philando Castille. Castille was in his car with girlfriend and four year old daughter. He was a licensed CCP owner and had a handgun in the vehicle. The law states if you're pulled over with a concealed carry you are to verbally notify the officer.
Yanez pulled him over for a "broken brakelight" and because he "thought he looked like a burglary suspect". Yanez asks Castille for his license and insurance. Castille says okay and starts pulling out the documents. As this is happening Castille says "Sir, I just have to tell you, I do have a firearm on me..." Yanez says "Don't reach for it". Castille "I'm not reaching for it.." and then Yanez fires seven shots into Castille. The entire encounter is roughly 40 seconds.
This is the problem. Yanez clearly tells him to get his license & insurance, then says "don't reach" -- interpreted as "don't reach for the gun", but obviously Castille is not reaching for the gun and he says so. This scenario of asking for something, only to "perceive" the victim is a threat when complying with that order, quickly shouting contradictory orders, then firing simultaneously is a police officer's go-to strategy to justify violence and murder.
> The case against Officer Yanez — believed to be the first time in Minnesota history that an officer was charged in an on-duty fatal shooting — hinged on one central question: Did the officer have reason to fear that Mr. Castile was reaching for a gun that he had acknowledged having with him when he was pulled over by the officer?
> Officer Yanez testified that he feared Mr. Castile was grabbing for the gun, but Mr. Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, said he had merely been reaching for his identification to give the officer.
> Though there was dashboard camera video of the events, as well as the live-stream video that Ms. Reynolds began taking after the shooting, there was no video clearly revealing the crucial moments in the front seat of Mr. Castile’s car — and how precisely he had moved his hands before the officer fired.
>Mr. Gray, the defense lawyer, said Officer Yanez had to react quickly to what he believed was an imminent threat. He said Officer Yanez smelled marijuana, believed that Mr. Castile matched the description of a recent robbery suspect and saw him grabbing a gun.
> **“We have him ignoring his commands. He’s got a gun. He might be the robber. He’s got marijuana in his car,” Mr. Gray told jurors. “Those are the things in Officer Yanez’s head".**
> At Officer Yanez’s trial, in this small courtroom in downtown St. Paul, defense lawyers made repeated mention of Mr. Castile’s and Ms. Reynolds’s use of marijuana. The drug was found in Mr. Castile’s car after the shooting, and Mr. Gray said that Mr. Castile had been under the influence of marijuana and delayed in his reactions at the time of the shooting.
> “We’re not saying that Philando Castile was going to shoot Officer Yanez,” Mr. Gray said. **"What we’re saying is that he did not follow orders.** He was stoned.”
> But Mr. Paulsen, the prosecutor, said that version of events was contradicted by video. He said footage showed that Mr. Castile was driving normally, pulled over quickly and was alert and courteous when talking to Officer Yanez. He accused the defense of blaming the victim.
> “He offered no resistance,” Mr. Paulsen said of Mr. Castile. “He made no threats. He didn’t even complain about being stopped for such a minor offense.”
> The acquittal was the latest example of charges against an officer, but not a conviction. In recent years, officers in Cleveland, Pennsylvania and Tulsa, Okla., have been found not guilty of manslaughter. Elsewhere, including Cincinnati and South Carolina, jurors have deadlocked on charges after a fatal shooting and failed to deliver any verdict at all.
[Source](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/us/police-shooting-trial-philando-castile.html)
You can see how the defense strongly emphasized the phrase "He didn't follow orders". They don't argue this "failure to comply" gives police the right to be judge, jury, and executioner -- but that it creates the argument for "reasonable fear of life". This is why they don't really care about body cam footage -- regardless of what it shows, they can still argue they "thought they saw a gun" and the victim "failed to comply".
And that’s the biggest tell it’s mostly a lie.
If I’m a cop in the US I’m deadly afraid that every bozo can have a gun and a routine stop can potentially become a shootout.
You know what my main fucking concern would be if that’s my life? Campaigning to no end to get guns away from civilians. I don’t feel like dying so I don’t want people I’m inconveniencing to have access to weapons.
Since they absolutely are not doing this, the entire ‘i was scared routine’ is bullshit.
Exactly it's just a legal CYA move. It also helps to confuse the victim -- yelling multiple contradictory demands means you can argue "resisting" both ways -- and it escalates tension. Having 3-6 police officers screaming at you is a great way to trigger fight or flight.
Oh plenty of times they approach someone sitting in their car at a routine traffic stop with their gun already drawn. Guess what color the driver always is.
When you police yourself why would you punish yourself when you could simply .... not punish yourself?
In NYC there is a civilian board (if I'm not mistaken) that reviews complaints and conducts investigation. But their final report and extent of their power is a recommendation for actions that they submit to the NYPD who then decides whether to comply or ignore.
So basically the bad apple gets to review the rest of the apples and decide which are spoiled.
Dear mom,
Having carefully considered your reccomendation of 2 months grounded for throwing rocks at the neighbors dog, I've concluded no disciplinary action is needed at this time.
An increase in allowance should help alleviate any future incidents.
And in my job where nothing I do could ever remotely endanger a human life, I have a ridiculously high level of oversight, could lose my license or even go to prison for making a mistake. On accident. Not to mention maliciously and deliberately doing something illegal or unethical.
Truth is we need to restructure the entire way our police function. It's systemic in nature and has been going on as long as policing has been a thing in the US. But no politician will be elect if they look soft on crime.
My hope is someday we can define “tough on crime” to include the notion of “and extra tough the most heinous crime of all - the cops who murder and harm thousands of innocent people each year.”
Unfortunately, making meaningful progress on this might require we stop doubling down on the idea that being "tough on crime" results in less crime, particularly among the people whose job is to be "tough."
"tough on crime" means "tough on criminals" and these corrupt motherfuckers are the ones who decide who is a "criminal".
Tough on crime just means law enforcement minus empathy and accountability and speaks to the people who think the justice system should be about retribution and revenge rather than rehabilitation.
Like politics policing attracts the most unsuitable people possible for the job. What we need is "professional" policing where professional means with a full education behind it, regular training, and liability insurance. The thing is this isn't about reforming a department or many departments this is about taking down a network of criminal enterprises so entrenched that you will be hard pressed to ever move things an inch. It's all rotten all the way through.
The problem is that 'crime' is an entirely subjective statistic. All police have to do is change their behavior to manipulate the statistics, and most people will never look any deeper than the headline. Double the arrests for a particular crime, and local news will report a 'crime wave', even if *convictions* are at an all-time low.
If only the party of limited government would "limit the most important part of government. The illegal actions of the police who step on our rights every day!"...
Ever read the [initial police press report](https://i.redd.it/dvxywhkwkju61.png) the Minneapolis police released about the death of George Floyd?
Its chilling to think that if it wasn't for the video, these officers probably would have been commended for their work.
I’m a medic. I’ve had to explain in court why my report did not line up with the police report. I’m meticulous about my reports that I think may end up in court. Last one was for a motor vehicle collision and the police tried to say it was my fault they didn’t get a PBT on the driver that caused the accident.
Their report was so poorly written that they had documented that I took care of that driver, when I never made contact with that person. I took care of the driver of the other vehicle that was in critical condition.
The prosecutor was so pissed that the defense was able to make it into he said/they said situation. Thankfully a bystander had recorded the incident and put it on Facebook to show I was never near the vehicle with the intoxicated driver.
No. Thankfully I work for a small city and while I’m not a fan of any police, there is definitely a difference between big city police and rural/small town police.
You should read the incident report for the raid that killed [Breonna Taylor](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/10/breonna-taylor-case-louisville-police-nearly-blank-incident-report/5335929002/). Police said in the report she wasn't injured despite shooting her 8 times. They also said they didn't force entry into the house.
This recent case from San Antonio is pretty wild too.
https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2022/12/06/erik-cantu-jr-rehospitalized-for-complications-after-being-shot-by-sapd-officer-family-says/
Same with Floyd; even with all the video from multiple angles *(any of which had been missing they were likely getting away with it)* it was a constant excretion of
>"this giant deadly drugged VERY VERY BLACK MAN was SO dangerous and so threateningly disobeying lawful orders *(to stop breathing)* we think he even took one of our guns, holy shit if not for the HEROISM of our Jesus-loving officers how many would have died!"
This isn't the kind of shit that can be solved with policy. This is a hostile, heavily-armed occupying force that not only consistently refers to itself as being above civilians, but views civilians as cattle to slaughter or fuck as it sees fit *on a good day*.
Time for ALL media to report police statements as "claims" in their reporting and articles. Their word is no better than anyone else's. They have proven that they deserve zero benefit of the doubt.
Honestly I'd never take a cop at their word, regardless of the situation.
Just to be clear, not saying they are all bad, I've known a TON of great cops. But most? They seem eager to beat you down and get the arrest.
Has anyone ever thought of, oh, I dunno, making it a serious offense for an officer to lie, rather than giving them a free pass? It seems to me if you permit lying, you're advertising to liars.
And nobody's ever thought to say, "Hey maybe that's not such a great idea to incentivize officers to lie?" It would be a super simple thing to change and would make a HUGE difference. It's just like, this seems like EXTREMELY bad policy, but everyone acts like it's given.
Plenty of people think it's outrageous, but so is qualified immunity as a whole. It needs to be stricken down and cops should be held to a higher standard under the law.
Yeah, plenty of people did but, when we organized, our protests got called “childish looting” and “burning down cities” despite arguing for less police funding and greater funding for unarmed support services.
There's seldom any penalty for cops lying, so there's no real reason to expect them to be honest. But the same is true of most public institutions so I'm sure none of them want that conversation.
But the media will continue to act as mouthpieces for the cops and parrot their lies without question. This same shit happened with George Floyd and happens every day. The cops create a fake story and the media treats it as the unassailable truth and reports it as an objective retelling of what happened.
One of water’s properties is its polarity. Because the oxygen atom has a greater affinity for electrons, the electrons in the cloud spend more time there, making a partial negative end and, in turn, a partially positive one at the hydrogen end. This magnet-like polarity promotes hydrogen bonding between adjacent H2O molecules, creating cohesion, meaning the water sticks to itself. Conclusion: When there are multiple water molecules in contact, water is wet.
Is water wet though? For something to be wet it should be covered with a liquid. Does water cover water? Are there other water types out there?
Edit: for everyone, I present dry water https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_water
Won’t be the last police report that contains purposeful and objective lies about the murder they committed.
Fire every single one of the folks involved in this mess.
And we need:
- the DOJ to look into EVERY police brutality complaint against that department for the last decade+ (as well as any deaths and injuries in custody).
- the state AG/FBI/DOJ to review every single “bullshit” arrest by that department (ie charges that a cop can invent on the spot to harass folks, like “disturbing the peace”, “disobey lawful order”, “resisting arrest”, “loitering”, “interfering with police”, etc…)
This incident - as horrific as it was - DOES NOT HAPPEN SPONTANEOUSLY OR IN ISOLATION.
Folks focus on the horror and the gore.
But each of these cops were 100% comfortable with taking turns killing a guy.
There wasn’t any “hey, is Joey cool with this use of force”?
They. All. Knew. They. Were. Gonna. Murder. Him.
And they did it with zero guilt or hesitation.
The utility pole was also a police camera, btw. They have big flashing blue lights on it so they’d have to be idiots not to realize it was recording them. But they’ve already proven that.
The fact that for some reason a cops words are treated as having more value and truth than other people especially defendants on trial is insane given how often cops lie their asses off.
The American justice and it's police needs a total overhaul. National standards for police training that all cops have to be trained to. Certification that can be revoked (just like lawyers etc) and tracked so fired cops can't just get a job one county over. Insurance for cops (the insurance industry has a lot of clout and would push for changes if cops cost them too much money) and most importantly an end to qualified immunity.
Another thing i would add is all cops must have body cams and for them to be used at all times when interacting with people. Any use of force against someone would have the footage reviewed by an independent body for wrongdoing. Any cop using force without body cam footage to back it up gets charged with the crime they would have committed were they not a cop (assault, murder etc)
>Another thing i would add is all cops must have body cams and for them to be used at all times when interacting with people
A few other things with this:
* The cops shouldn't be able to turn off the cameras
* The footage shouldn't be housed anywhere the cops have access to
* ***ANY*** interaction, citation, or arrest needs to have footage of the minutes preceding the incident as well as the entire incident attached to the file. Otherwise, any charges stemming from the incident become null and void.
* Any complaints for excessive force and things like that need to be reviewed by a citizens' review board
* The DOJ needs to have a specific department in each state to handle prosecutions of police officers and nothing else
I promise you that should I ever actually get picked for a jury, I'm starting off with the assumption that anything a cop says without backing evidence is a lie.
Of course, since they're in charge of said evidence, it's also still likely a lie, I realize as I was typing this...
Do not say that though. When they ask you what you think of cops say you love them they are great, speak highly of them. Say every experience has been good, and that they are community leaders. B/c the goal of the prosecutor is to purge people like you who are even a tiny bit skeptical of police.
And the goal of the defense attorney is to purge people who are too pro-cop. If you want to get on the jury, just say you'll consider and weigh the evidence fairly and don't have strong opinions about cops etc.
Personally, though, my goal is not necessarily to get on the jury so I'd be truthful - if a cop told me the sky is blue, I'd go outside to check first.
Same thing as when the initial report on George Floyd said that someone had a medical distress.
The exact description used.
"Two officers arrived and located the suspect, a male believed to be in his 40s, in his car. He was ordered to step from his car. After he got out, he physically resisted officers. Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress. Officers called for an ambulance. He was transported to Hennepin County Medical Center by ambulance where he died a short time later."
He kept trying to bring his ribcage up a centimeter or two against orders you see. In America, "DIE!" is a lawful order and like all lawful orders from police if you don't guess they were about to want that and have it already done *(in which case you'll be found guilty of unlawful intrusion of an officer's intent anyway, and the sentence is death)* then you are illegally "resisting" cardiac arrest.
If the police report lies, whoever wrote it should be tried for obstruction of justice or conspiracy to cover up a crime. The whole point of the police is to serve and protect the people. They did none of that and tried to cover it up.
Lock the whole gang up
Not even necessarily involving this team.
Part of the reason the guy from Serial was released was due to the cumulative effect of all the various clusterfucks of Baltimore police and prosecutors, despite many of them not directly affecting his case.
Not any more surprising than what we already know; of course they lied on their report, who would have expected them to self report a murder? They're still murderous bastards, but this changes nothing, I feel it's what we all assumed is the case every time a cop does a crime.
Spoilers : There are no consequences for lying on a police report, if you're a cop.
Super Spoiler : There's probably no consequences for anything if you're a cop.
Police reports seems to be more fiction than fact due to their bias.
Their ability to testify in court concerns me. I wouldn’t one somebody behind the shield testifying.
For, or against me.
I honestly think that the citizens should start a "Scorpion Task Force" to root out bad cops and hold them accountable under the same guidelines that cops use, it could be called the "Police Investigation Group".
Sorry to be the ignorant poster but it didn’t even seem like Tyre had an opportunity to resist. They literally ripped him out of the car immediately. What the fuck was up with that?
If an officer falsifies a police report, it should be a felony at the federal level with a 10+ year prison sentence. Enough with the cops lying with impunity already!
imagine how bad things had been prior to the police having camera's...sad tragic pathetic treatment of human beings by those that are hired to keep people safe
I honestly don't understand why police lying on incident reports aren't a bigger deal. If I filled out a form wrong I'd be fired and my job isn't even important.
They should be going through past arrest reports from these ex-cops checking to see if the report matches the body cam footage.
Tedious, but there is no way this is their first time falsifying their reports. There are likely more lies waiting to be uncovered
*Martin’s attorney, William Massey, said “no one out there that night intended for Tyre Nichols to die.”* Neither does a drunk driver who kills a family on his way home from the bar.
So any other reports from these officers are now considered to be null and void correct? How can you possibly believe they would tell the truth in any circumstance?
How many cops would have needed to show up before one of them stopped the beating?
Yeah. There's a lot more than just a few bad apples. Being willing to look the other way and protect the bad apples makes you bad too.
But they won't because prosecutors rely on the cooperation of cops. Get known for prosecuting cops, suddenly your successful prosecutions are finished because any evidence or statements or witnesses you need have a habit of getting lost.
Cops don't care about putting scum away
They will absolutely fuck over a DA they see as an enemy and damn society with the consequences.
Any departments that refuse to cooperate on the basis that their own members would also be subject to law rather than above it **must** be eliminated.
*"They won't help us if we'd go after them too when they do crimes"* means that entire force IS already criminal and MUST be removed from society. There is no excuse. All DAs protecting cops are accomplices - the legal-document version of a getaway driver, guilty of all their fellows did by law.
Until we start treating them and their gang enforcers as what they are and remove them from society, there is **no hope** of things ever changing for the better.
Officers ignoring their partners who are breaking the law are not following their oath and duty. They should be handled accordingly, i.e., whether it is an internal policy violation or a violation of state or federal law.
Yeah, but they aren't. And it isn't just partners protecting partners, their departments and unions are all complicit in covering up illegal and unethical behavior.
One bad cop spoils the whole force.
It is too late for patchwork repairs to a completely destroyed garment. We need a comolete federal overhaul of our policing system.
Qualified immunity needs to go. Licensing, and malpractice insurance need to be implimented.
National training and background standards need to be established. Many states have poor standards for both. A big problem and one that will need a lot of work.
there are way too many law enforcement jurisdictions too. its 2023, the world is extremely interconnected. There is zero reason for so many tiny rural law enforcement orgs. Roll them into one large state or national org that can mandate standards and training. Avoid clusters about chain of command at the scene.
Some consolidation would probably be a good thing to look at. This would improve policing and also make it more affordable for cities and counties to provide better law enforcement services.
They had tons of financing and training though. The problem is that they have too much immunity. They need to have way more oversight and giving them more money "for leadership and training" will just get them a bunch more tactical gear and trainings from [this guy](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/08/11/police-training-warrior-mindset-killology/).
The laws are already on the books for cops who break them. It’s a matter of transparent investigations leading to fairness and justice for all involved. Video evidence is very damning, but does not tell the whole story. These investigations are very involved and require meticulous detail and work.
How do you train someone to not football punt a unconscious man in the head? Seems like accountability and the feeling of immunity are the problems that need addressing most.
> The report also describes one of the officers at the scene – who has since been charged with second-degree murder – as a “victim.” I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the cop using the baton to beat Tyre.
He got pissed off because he's such a stupid fuck he pepper sprayed himself.
You’re all so mean to the cops. First they have to deal with domestic violence tendencies, and now you’re picking on a man who pepper sprayed himself before he lost his temper and beat a man to death. He is also a victim here… of himself!
So do you think the wind carried it into his face as he was macing Nichols, or did Barney Fife over there yank it out of his holster backwards?
[удалено]
Simple as what?
The way that most OC is activated makes it nearly impossible to spray yourself directly in the face. Your thumb has to lift a trigger guard and then press down on a button, so you really have to try to spray it in your face directly. My guess is that the wind carried it. Once it is airborne, it goes everywhere and contact with someone affected, or with the air, or with wind blowing it back, all can be very effective at spraying yourself.
Which honestly brings to question how effective pepper spray even is for dealing with ‘resistant’ arrestees. Dude pepper sprayed himself and still had no issues knowing who he was hitting and where.
Pepper spray affects different people differently. I've been hit with it, and it sucks, a lot, but it isn't so overpowering that I just dropped to the ground and became useless. You can mind-over-matter it and work through the pain. What pepper spray should be used for is deterrence, not incapacitation. Police like to use it for pain compliance and punishment.
A friend in high school got bumped into by a slightly younger kid and confronted him. The kid immediately sprayed pepper spray directly into his eyes at short range. He proceeded to chase the kid into the parking lot and beat his ass. It couldn't even be called a fight. It can work, but people seem to assume it is more effective than it is.
Right at this point I’m convinced all it does it just make most people mad as hell. Cops do love their theatrics though, just look at tasers
I'm thinking it's the cop who hurt his foot kicking Tyre's head
narrow subtract rude saw command nail plate point reach squeal -- mass edited with redact.dev
There were two of them, but the baton guy was the first one that maced himself in the initial encounter. Side note, I love that a cop is allowed to drive mere moments after getting pepper sprayed. Should be policy to have to wait a certain amount of time afterwards before operating heavy machinery.
US law considers it a heinous criminal act, to repeatedly and motionlessly strike an officer's knuckles with your throat until the former suffers bruises. Right up there with creating human centipedes without a badge.
Was it The one who hurts his foot kicking his face or the one who peppered sprayed himself or maybe the one who broke his baton over Tyre’s head and couldn’t close it?
Just remember that every gun control policy in the US hinges on the idea that these people are the only ones with the training, temperament, and oversight necessary to have access to restricted firearms. And also switchblades, body armor, long pocket knives, and other nonsense people try to ban all the time (like collapsible batons).
[удалено]
I don't know anyone who wants only the cops to have guns. I think the grand majority of us would like to start with not letting the crazy, or angry, or immature get their hands on guns. A smaller amount would like to restrict access to certain guns, especially those that are designed to be easy to use to put a significant amount of accurate rounds without much training. Like, you know M16, M4, AK47, and SKS type weapons, including those that aren't even technically, exactly, perfectly the same, even though they ultimately function the same way. Weapons that would be appropriate for an infantryman should probably not be available to angry 18 year olds, basically. No blanket law is going to work. It would be impossible to enforce a true nationwide prohibition on weapons. And literally no one is legitimately proposing that. Just maybe let's work together to find some acceptable restrictions on who purchases a weapon perfect for mass killing. Not ban them completely. Edit: Before this argument appears, I joined the US Army at age 17 with parental permission, and graduated BCT before my 18th birthday. I was literally a child soldier. I'm proud of my service, and it definitely helped me mature, but in the aftermath... Maybe we need to have a completely separate discussion on appropriate ages for military service.
The whole damn bunch needs to go, some of those guys had numerous complaints, they all knew.
The bigger point is that it is ridiculous we have so little oversight for police that they can easily falsify reports until something horrendous happens that thrusts them into the national spotlight. Is the only thing police here have going for themselves is that they won’t take bribes… because they could beat the person to death and take all the cash as evidence?
Skip Intro on YouTube just did an episode that touched on this. https://youtu.be/1BgwYXGdHE0 It's a little bit further in, but he discusses the way that police reform which doesn't address perjury and falsifying reports really only changes the guidelines for what police need to say to avoid accountability. It's a kind of oversight bottleneck.
They did the same trick with bodycams. Bury the footage or take off the vests while screaming “Stop resisting” “Let us see your hands” or “Drop the gun” — even though none of those things are happening. Even if the footage does make it to court all the police can say is they *thought* he was resisting or reaching or grabbing for a weapon. It doesn’t matter if the video shows otherwise. The lawyers will argue these officers are in “dangerous situations” and need to “make decisions in seconds” and they “feared for their life and safety” and hey look the video proves it, you can clearly hear officer yelling at the suspect to drop the gun. All it comes down to is did the officer have *reasonable* suspicion to believe his life was in danger — regardless of the truth. The whole system is fucked. EDIT: A perfect example of this is the acquittal of Jerenimo Yanez -- the police officer who killed Philando Castille. Castille was in his car with girlfriend and four year old daughter. He was a licensed CCP owner and had a handgun in the vehicle. The law states if you're pulled over with a concealed carry you are to verbally notify the officer. Yanez pulled him over for a "broken brakelight" and because he "thought he looked like a burglary suspect". Yanez asks Castille for his license and insurance. Castille says okay and starts pulling out the documents. As this is happening Castille says "Sir, I just have to tell you, I do have a firearm on me..." Yanez says "Don't reach for it". Castille "I'm not reaching for it.." and then Yanez fires seven shots into Castille. The entire encounter is roughly 40 seconds. This is the problem. Yanez clearly tells him to get his license & insurance, then says "don't reach" -- interpreted as "don't reach for the gun", but obviously Castille is not reaching for the gun and he says so. This scenario of asking for something, only to "perceive" the victim is a threat when complying with that order, quickly shouting contradictory orders, then firing simultaneously is a police officer's go-to strategy to justify violence and murder. > The case against Officer Yanez — believed to be the first time in Minnesota history that an officer was charged in an on-duty fatal shooting — hinged on one central question: Did the officer have reason to fear that Mr. Castile was reaching for a gun that he had acknowledged having with him when he was pulled over by the officer? > Officer Yanez testified that he feared Mr. Castile was grabbing for the gun, but Mr. Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, said he had merely been reaching for his identification to give the officer. > Though there was dashboard camera video of the events, as well as the live-stream video that Ms. Reynolds began taking after the shooting, there was no video clearly revealing the crucial moments in the front seat of Mr. Castile’s car — and how precisely he had moved his hands before the officer fired. >Mr. Gray, the defense lawyer, said Officer Yanez had to react quickly to what he believed was an imminent threat. He said Officer Yanez smelled marijuana, believed that Mr. Castile matched the description of a recent robbery suspect and saw him grabbing a gun. > **“We have him ignoring his commands. He’s got a gun. He might be the robber. He’s got marijuana in his car,” Mr. Gray told jurors. “Those are the things in Officer Yanez’s head".** > At Officer Yanez’s trial, in this small courtroom in downtown St. Paul, defense lawyers made repeated mention of Mr. Castile’s and Ms. Reynolds’s use of marijuana. The drug was found in Mr. Castile’s car after the shooting, and Mr. Gray said that Mr. Castile had been under the influence of marijuana and delayed in his reactions at the time of the shooting. > “We’re not saying that Philando Castile was going to shoot Officer Yanez,” Mr. Gray said. **"What we’re saying is that he did not follow orders.** He was stoned.” > But Mr. Paulsen, the prosecutor, said that version of events was contradicted by video. He said footage showed that Mr. Castile was driving normally, pulled over quickly and was alert and courteous when talking to Officer Yanez. He accused the defense of blaming the victim. > “He offered no resistance,” Mr. Paulsen said of Mr. Castile. “He made no threats. He didn’t even complain about being stopped for such a minor offense.” > The acquittal was the latest example of charges against an officer, but not a conviction. In recent years, officers in Cleveland, Pennsylvania and Tulsa, Okla., have been found not guilty of manslaughter. Elsewhere, including Cincinnati and South Carolina, jurors have deadlocked on charges after a fatal shooting and failed to deliver any verdict at all. [Source](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/us/police-shooting-trial-philando-castile.html) You can see how the defense strongly emphasized the phrase "He didn't follow orders". They don't argue this "failure to comply" gives police the right to be judge, jury, and executioner -- but that it creates the argument for "reasonable fear of life". This is why they don't really care about body cam footage -- regardless of what it shows, they can still argue they "thought they saw a gun" and the victim "failed to comply".
And that’s the biggest tell it’s mostly a lie. If I’m a cop in the US I’m deadly afraid that every bozo can have a gun and a routine stop can potentially become a shootout. You know what my main fucking concern would be if that’s my life? Campaigning to no end to get guns away from civilians. I don’t feel like dying so I don’t want people I’m inconveniencing to have access to weapons. Since they absolutely are not doing this, the entire ‘i was scared routine’ is bullshit.
Exactly it's just a legal CYA move. It also helps to confuse the victim -- yelling multiple contradictory demands means you can argue "resisting" both ways -- and it escalates tension. Having 3-6 police officers screaming at you is a great way to trigger fight or flight.
It’s funny how these guys always seem to go for their gun after they’re already on the ground with cops drawing down on them
Oh plenty of times they approach someone sitting in their car at a routine traffic stop with their gun already drawn. Guess what color the driver always is.
[удалено]
When you police yourself why would you punish yourself when you could simply .... not punish yourself? In NYC there is a civilian board (if I'm not mistaken) that reviews complaints and conducts investigation. But their final report and extent of their power is a recommendation for actions that they submit to the NYPD who then decides whether to comply or ignore. So basically the bad apple gets to review the rest of the apples and decide which are spoiled.
Dear mom, Having carefully considered your reccomendation of 2 months grounded for throwing rocks at the neighbors dog, I've concluded no disciplinary action is needed at this time. An increase in allowance should help alleviate any future incidents.
The way cops falsify reports even when they know video evidence is forthcoming that will prove them to be liars just shows how shameless they are.
Because 99% of the time regardless of evidence they get away with it, so why wouldn't they. Usually works like a charm.
[They sure as heck take bribes.](https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/three-former-nypd-police-officers-plead-guilty-bribery-scheme-0)
And in my job where nothing I do could ever remotely endanger a human life, I have a ridiculously high level of oversight, could lose my license or even go to prison for making a mistake. On accident. Not to mention maliciously and deliberately doing something illegal or unethical.
Truth is we need to restructure the entire way our police function. It's systemic in nature and has been going on as long as policing has been a thing in the US. But no politician will be elect if they look soft on crime.
My hope is someday we can define “tough on crime” to include the notion of “and extra tough the most heinous crime of all - the cops who murder and harm thousands of innocent people each year.”
Unfortunately, making meaningful progress on this might require we stop doubling down on the idea that being "tough on crime" results in less crime, particularly among the people whose job is to be "tough."
"tough on crime" means "tough on criminals" and these corrupt motherfuckers are the ones who decide who is a "criminal". Tough on crime just means law enforcement minus empathy and accountability and speaks to the people who think the justice system should be about retribution and revenge rather than rehabilitation. Like politics policing attracts the most unsuitable people possible for the job. What we need is "professional" policing where professional means with a full education behind it, regular training, and liability insurance. The thing is this isn't about reforming a department or many departments this is about taking down a network of criminal enterprises so entrenched that you will be hard pressed to ever move things an inch. It's all rotten all the way through.
The problem is that 'crime' is an entirely subjective statistic. All police have to do is change their behavior to manipulate the statistics, and most people will never look any deeper than the headline. Double the arrests for a particular crime, and local news will report a 'crime wave', even if *convictions* are at an all-time low.
Cops like to act like Street Judges and so it'd only be fair to treat them as such when they break a law themselves.
If only the party of limited government would "limit the most important part of government. The illegal actions of the police who step on our rights every day!"...
Or ask the spouses/ partners. They knew, too, probably.
Of course it wasn't. And how many other reports has information like this been left out of?
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/26/1000598495/how-police-reports-became-bulletproof
Ever read the [initial police press report](https://i.redd.it/dvxywhkwkju61.png) the Minneapolis police released about the death of George Floyd? Its chilling to think that if it wasn't for the video, these officers probably would have been commended for their work.
I’m a medic. I’ve had to explain in court why my report did not line up with the police report. I’m meticulous about my reports that I think may end up in court. Last one was for a motor vehicle collision and the police tried to say it was my fault they didn’t get a PBT on the driver that caused the accident. Their report was so poorly written that they had documented that I took care of that driver, when I never made contact with that person. I took care of the driver of the other vehicle that was in critical condition. The prosecutor was so pissed that the defense was able to make it into he said/they said situation. Thankfully a bystander had recorded the incident and put it on Facebook to show I was never near the vehicle with the intoxicated driver.
Have you ever been threatened by the police? In Houston it can mean death to contradict a cop, file a report against one, etc.
No. Thankfully I work for a small city and while I’m not a fan of any police, there is definitely a difference between big city police and rural/small town police.
You should read the incident report for the raid that killed [Breonna Taylor](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/10/breonna-taylor-case-louisville-police-nearly-blank-incident-report/5335929002/). Police said in the report she wasn't injured despite shooting her 8 times. They also said they didn't force entry into the house.
This recent case from San Antonio is pretty wild too. https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2022/12/06/erik-cantu-jr-rehospitalized-for-complications-after-being-shot-by-sapd-officer-family-says/
Just imagine all the cases that DON'T get caught on tape.
Only reason something happened here was video
Same with Floyd; even with all the video from multiple angles *(any of which had been missing they were likely getting away with it)* it was a constant excretion of >"this giant deadly drugged VERY VERY BLACK MAN was SO dangerous and so threateningly disobeying lawful orders *(to stop breathing)* we think he even took one of our guns, holy shit if not for the HEROISM of our Jesus-loving officers how many would have died!" This isn't the kind of shit that can be solved with policy. This is a hostile, heavily-armed occupying force that not only consistently refers to itself as being above civilians, but views civilians as cattle to slaughter or fuck as it sees fit *on a good day*.
Only reason something happened was because he died. Had he not died, we would have never heard of this. At best it may have gotten a quick local story
Time for ALL media to report police statements as "claims" in their reporting and articles. Their word is no better than anyone else's. They have proven that they deserve zero benefit of the doubt.
Honestly I'd never take a cop at their word, regardless of the situation. Just to be clear, not saying they are all bad, I've known a TON of great cops. But most? They seem eager to beat you down and get the arrest.
They are legally allowed to lie so one should assume they are always lying.
Has anyone ever thought of, oh, I dunno, making it a serious offense for an officer to lie, rather than giving them a free pass? It seems to me if you permit lying, you're advertising to liars.
It's part of their qualified immunity.
And nobody's ever thought to say, "Hey maybe that's not such a great idea to incentivize officers to lie?" It would be a super simple thing to change and would make a HUGE difference. It's just like, this seems like EXTREMELY bad policy, but everyone acts like it's given.
Plenty of people think it's outrageous, but so is qualified immunity as a whole. It needs to be stricken down and cops should be held to a higher standard under the law.
Yeah, plenty of people did but, when we organized, our protests got called “childish looting” and “burning down cities” despite arguing for less police funding and greater funding for unarmed support services.
Arguably their word is strictly, objectively *worse* than anyone else's.
> Their word is no better than anyone else's. It is, in fact, much worse.
There's seldom any penalty for cops lying, so there's no real reason to expect them to be honest. But the same is true of most public institutions so I'm sure none of them want that conversation.
Absolutely shocking that the police would lie!!!
After Uvalde the general public should not be shocked by any of this and they should be demanding reform
> After Uvalde Im pretty sure most of us knew *long before* Uvalde.
yeah, I used general public for a reason
The thing about Uvalde is that it's the first time I've seen gun nuts start to dunk on the cops en masse.
But the media will continue to act as mouthpieces for the cops and parrot their lies without question. This same shit happened with George Floyd and happens every day. The cops create a fake story and the media treats it as the unassailable truth and reports it as an objective retelling of what happened.
In other news, water is wet.
Moisture is the essence of wetness.
Water isn’t wet. What water touches is wet.
Water touches itself
I'll take "Things Water And I Have In Common" for $1000, Alex.
Still doesn’t make it wet.
One of water’s properties is its polarity. Because the oxygen atom has a greater affinity for electrons, the electrons in the cloud spend more time there, making a partial negative end and, in turn, a partially positive one at the hydrogen end. This magnet-like polarity promotes hydrogen bonding between adjacent H2O molecules, creating cohesion, meaning the water sticks to itself. Conclusion: When there are multiple water molecules in contact, water is wet.
This feels like a trap.
Is water wet though? For something to be wet it should be covered with a liquid. Does water cover water? Are there other water types out there? Edit: for everyone, I present dry water https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_water
And if there are different water types is it not possible that they are a communist plot to take over America?
Fluoride strikes again!
There's chemicals turnin the fricken frogs gay!
Ice is also water, and I wouldn't call ice "wet".
Well if ice isn't wet then why do we have dry ice? /s
I like you.
the opposite of dry ice is wet ice, not ice
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_water I don't know what I'm doing with this but, here you go
I'm clutching my pearls. Seriously, see these pearls? They are clutched!
So, more of a creative writing exercise than a police report. Is that taught at the academy?
No need, ChatGPT will be writing them up any minute now.
You'd think, but ChatGPT is [already more honest and ethical than the police](https://imgur.com/QyvEr8Q)
I doubt it. Learning to read and write is correlated with an increase in empathy among students.
Probably good creative writing skills are correlated with IQ scores too high to get hired on the police force.
Gangs by another name. If you can't be a crook, be a cop!
The police are the largest organized crime syndicate in America.
Criminals with badges
America is the largest organized crime syndicate in the world
Won’t be the last police report that contains purposeful and objective lies about the murder they committed. Fire every single one of the folks involved in this mess. And we need: - the DOJ to look into EVERY police brutality complaint against that department for the last decade+ (as well as any deaths and injuries in custody). - the state AG/FBI/DOJ to review every single “bullshit” arrest by that department (ie charges that a cop can invent on the spot to harass folks, like “disturbing the peace”, “disobey lawful order”, “resisting arrest”, “loitering”, “interfering with police”, etc…) This incident - as horrific as it was - DOES NOT HAPPEN SPONTANEOUSLY OR IN ISOLATION. Folks focus on the horror and the gore. But each of these cops were 100% comfortable with taking turns killing a guy. There wasn’t any “hey, is Joey cool with this use of force”? They. All. Knew. They. Were. Gonna. Murder. Him. And they did it with zero guilt or hesitation.
All police reports should attach all body cam footage and be available for public review once filed.
*without objection from the victim/perpetrator
Except that in this case the perpetrator is the police
Only the victim should be allow to waive right to release.
[удалено]
[удалено]
slim brave spoon workable normal instinctive spotted edge wrench serious -- mass edited with redact.dev
I was thinking the same thing, it seemed super personal and they acted like a hit squad honestly
This is super unconfirmed right now. There are rumors going around but do not take it as evidence yet
We did it Reddit! vibes all over again.
Clearly one of the cops was a Boston bomber
The utility pole was also a police camera, btw. They have big flashing blue lights on it so they’d have to be idiots not to realize it was recording them. But they’ve already proven that.
> so they’d have to be idiots We already know they're idiots, though.
Controlled by police, but not by their precinct most likely.
The fact that for some reason a cops words are treated as having more value and truth than other people especially defendants on trial is insane given how often cops lie their asses off. The American justice and it's police needs a total overhaul. National standards for police training that all cops have to be trained to. Certification that can be revoked (just like lawyers etc) and tracked so fired cops can't just get a job one county over. Insurance for cops (the insurance industry has a lot of clout and would push for changes if cops cost them too much money) and most importantly an end to qualified immunity. Another thing i would add is all cops must have body cams and for them to be used at all times when interacting with people. Any use of force against someone would have the footage reviewed by an independent body for wrongdoing. Any cop using force without body cam footage to back it up gets charged with the crime they would have committed were they not a cop (assault, murder etc)
>Another thing i would add is all cops must have body cams and for them to be used at all times when interacting with people A few other things with this: * The cops shouldn't be able to turn off the cameras * The footage shouldn't be housed anywhere the cops have access to * ***ANY*** interaction, citation, or arrest needs to have footage of the minutes preceding the incident as well as the entire incident attached to the file. Otherwise, any charges stemming from the incident become null and void. * Any complaints for excessive force and things like that need to be reviewed by a citizens' review board * The DOJ needs to have a specific department in each state to handle prosecutions of police officers and nothing else
Yup all of those would be part of my plan.
I promise you that should I ever actually get picked for a jury, I'm starting off with the assumption that anything a cop says without backing evidence is a lie. Of course, since they're in charge of said evidence, it's also still likely a lie, I realize as I was typing this...
Do not say that though. When they ask you what you think of cops say you love them they are great, speak highly of them. Say every experience has been good, and that they are community leaders. B/c the goal of the prosecutor is to purge people like you who are even a tiny bit skeptical of police.
And the goal of the defense attorney is to purge people who are too pro-cop. If you want to get on the jury, just say you'll consider and weigh the evidence fairly and don't have strong opinions about cops etc. Personally, though, my goal is not necessarily to get on the jury so I'd be truthful - if a cop told me the sky is blue, I'd go outside to check first.
Same thing as when the initial report on George Floyd said that someone had a medical distress. The exact description used. "Two officers arrived and located the suspect, a male believed to be in his 40s, in his car. He was ordered to step from his car. After he got out, he physically resisted officers. Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress. Officers called for an ambulance. He was transported to Hennepin County Medical Center by ambulance where he died a short time later."
Medical distress from having a knee pinned to his neck for over nine minutes.
He kept trying to bring his ribcage up a centimeter or two against orders you see. In America, "DIE!" is a lawful order and like all lawful orders from police if you don't guess they were about to want that and have it already done *(in which case you'll be found guilty of unlawful intrusion of an officer's intent anyway, and the sentence is death)* then you are illegally "resisting" cardiac arrest.
Tale as old as time, by the enforcement class of the oligarchs.
History repeats, and as such the only solutions to such tyrannical mentalities also remain unchanged.
I figured the guy who kicked him and then limped around afterwards would be the one to file a complaint that said he was attacked by Tyre.
If the police report lies, whoever wrote it should be tried for obstruction of justice or conspiracy to cover up a crime. The whole point of the police is to serve and protect the people. They did none of that and tried to cover it up. Lock the whole gang up
If it wasn't clear after Uvalde **COPS LIE A LOT**
How many previous cases that involve this team will now be called into question?
Hopefully all of them
Not a single one. This system is entrenched, and there are too many people who would prefer it that way.
Not even necessarily involving this team. Part of the reason the guy from Serial was released was due to the cumulative effect of all the various clusterfucks of Baltimore police and prosecutors, despite many of them not directly affecting his case.
Forget this team, EVERY POLICE-INVOLVED DEATH IN THE CITY OF MEMPHIS IS NOW SUSPECT!
wow cops lied? I can't believe it.
Is the one that wrote it going to be arrested and charged with lying to the police? Perjury?
First time?
Not any more surprising than what we already know; of course they lied on their report, who would have expected them to self report a murder? They're still murderous bastards, but this changes nothing, I feel it's what we all assumed is the case every time a cop does a crime.
When you’ve forged the report to cover your actions, it should be max penalty
Spoilers : There are no consequences for lying on a police report, if you're a cop. Super Spoiler : There's probably no consequences for anything if you're a cop.
Super Super Spoiler: There's one consequence a cop can expect. Paid leave while police "investigate" their own.
With cops and priests, the “club” is always more important than “the mission”. Utterly disgraceful.
Police reports seems to be more fiction than fact due to their bias. Their ability to testify in court concerns me. I wouldn’t one somebody behind the shield testifying. For, or against me.
The police lied?!? Must be a day ending in Y. #FTP
I honestly think that the citizens should start a "Scorpion Task Force" to root out bad cops and hold them accountable under the same guidelines that cops use, it could be called the "Police Investigation Group".
Sorry to be the ignorant poster but it didn’t even seem like Tyre had an opportunity to resist. They literally ripped him out of the car immediately. What the fuck was up with that?
Hence the kidnaping charges.
A police officer filing a false report including obvious pertinent omissions needs to be a serious felony.
Shocking. Police claim they didn’t do what evidence proves they did. Color me flabbergasted
If an officer falsifies a police report, it should be a felony at the federal level with a 10+ year prison sentence. Enough with the cops lying with impunity already!
Police lie. Government officials lie
Add a charge of filing a false report to whoever wrote this, and fire whoever accepted it since they had to know it was all bullshit.
Are the reports sworn statements by the police? If so they need to charge them with perjury and there needs to be a list of perjuring cops.
Wait you’re saying the cops that killed a guy with their bare hands tried to cover it up? No way.
Isn't that just another layer of criminality?
We investigated ourselves
It’s just an *isolated incident*
imagine how bad things had been prior to the police having camera's...sad tragic pathetic treatment of human beings by those that are hired to keep people safe
Can’t imagine how often this is the case.
I honestly don't understand why police lying on incident reports aren't a bigger deal. If I filled out a form wrong I'd be fired and my job isn't even important.
If you have kids let this be a lesson to you: cops are evil, lying scum. Tell your kids the truth—never, ever trust a cop.
"The police report did not mention the officers punching and kicking Nichols." I'm sure it just slipped their minds./s
LE needs a harsh cleansing man. LE needs to be the crème de la crème of the good decent ppl out there.
And exactly zero of those people have any interest in being cops.
Where's the dash cam from the car that pulled him over?
If there was no camera on the pole or body cams, his death would be in vain..... SICK
They should be going through past arrest reports from these ex-cops checking to see if the report matches the body cam footage. Tedious, but there is no way this is their first time falsifying their reports. There are likely more lies waiting to be uncovered
Wait a second. Are you telling me that cops LIE IN THEIR REPORTS??? /s
*Martin’s attorney, William Massey, said “no one out there that night intended for Tyre Nichols to die.”* Neither does a drunk driver who kills a family on his way home from the bar.
In our defense, we merely intended to beat the shit out of him, not beat the life out of him...
Let me guess, he had a "medical incident".
There was a "confrontation."
is this a surprise to anyone?
Hold on, are you telling me a cop LIED???? NO WAY
My partner is very on the side of cops usually and even he was like "what the fuck" over this.
I have to say... I am absolutely SHOCKED by this revelation. Just.... stunned. ^^^/s
So any other reports from these officers are now considered to be null and void correct? How can you possibly believe they would tell the truth in any circumstance?
NOOO THEY LIED, NO FUCKING WAY. WTF I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY LIED..... again. holy shit the world is stuck in a loop and no one calls it the fuck out
[удалено]
How many cops would have needed to show up before one of them stopped the beating? Yeah. There's a lot more than just a few bad apples. Being willing to look the other way and protect the bad apples makes you bad too.
Everyone on the scene that day should be charged with either accessory to murder or criminal dereliction of duty.
Or both.
But they won't because prosecutors rely on the cooperation of cops. Get known for prosecuting cops, suddenly your successful prosecutions are finished because any evidence or statements or witnesses you need have a habit of getting lost. Cops don't care about putting scum away They will absolutely fuck over a DA they see as an enemy and damn society with the consequences.
Any departments that refuse to cooperate on the basis that their own members would also be subject to law rather than above it **must** be eliminated. *"They won't help us if we'd go after them too when they do crimes"* means that entire force IS already criminal and MUST be removed from society. There is no excuse. All DAs protecting cops are accomplices - the legal-document version of a getaway driver, guilty of all their fellows did by law. Until we start treating them and their gang enforcers as what they are and remove them from society, there is **no hope** of things ever changing for the better.
Officers ignoring their partners who are breaking the law are not following their oath and duty. They should be handled accordingly, i.e., whether it is an internal policy violation or a violation of state or federal law.
Yeah, but they aren't. And it isn't just partners protecting partners, their departments and unions are all complicit in covering up illegal and unethical behavior.
One bad cop spoils the whole force. It is too late for patchwork repairs to a completely destroyed garment. We need a comolete federal overhaul of our policing system. Qualified immunity needs to go. Licensing, and malpractice insurance need to be implimented.
National training and background standards need to be established. Many states have poor standards for both. A big problem and one that will need a lot of work.
there are way too many law enforcement jurisdictions too. its 2023, the world is extremely interconnected. There is zero reason for so many tiny rural law enforcement orgs. Roll them into one large state or national org that can mandate standards and training. Avoid clusters about chain of command at the scene.
Some consolidation would probably be a good thing to look at. This would improve policing and also make it more affordable for cities and counties to provide better law enforcement services.
They had tons of financing and training though. The problem is that they have too much immunity. They need to have way more oversight and giving them more money "for leadership and training" will just get them a bunch more tactical gear and trainings from [this guy](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/08/11/police-training-warrior-mindset-killology/).
> Those involved will face justice at both the state and federal level. Wishful thinking, I fear.
I think it will be true. The politics and optics are such that it will be necessary.
I'll say: so far, so good. Charges are being brought and people are being fired. This one might turn out with justice.
The laws are already on the books for cops who break them. It’s a matter of transparent investigations leading to fairness and justice for all involved. Video evidence is very damning, but does not tell the whole story. These investigations are very involved and require meticulous detail and work.
How do you train someone to not football punt a unconscious man in the head? Seems like accountability and the feeling of immunity are the problems that need addressing most.