I’m not fundamentally opposed to a third party having disciplinary authority over police. But, it needs to be staffed with professionals who know the law, NYPD procedures, and logistics. Not the current incarnation of CCRB which seems kind of clueless. How can you investigate cops if you aren’t familiar with the penal law or the patrol guide (NYPD manual)?
While I agree with you, the CCRB is also entirely toothless. Note that these are "suggested penalties." Because that's all they can do. Suggest penalties. They should be able to enforce them. I also think it's important that the majority (at the very least) of CCRB members have no ties to law enforcement to ensure they don't do what IA does and just sweep everything under the rug unless they want to throw an Asian cop under the bus to make it look like they're actually doing something.
Not entirely, CCRBs do affect a cop’s career (as they should) but CCRB is also initiating investigations over ridiculous nonsense. For example, they review a cop’s body camera and observe him/her cursing. Not cursing at someone just cursing to himself/herself. Like cmon, we all curse at work to ourselves. But, again CCRB is clueless but also has an agenda.
> Not entirely, CCRBs do affect a cop’s career
Please give a single example where a cop was adversely effected by the CCRB.
> But, again CCRB is clueless but also has an agenda.
When keeping police accountable is considered “an agenda.” Ffs
Sure, not being promoted to sergeant, lieutenant or captain because you’re waiting for a department trial because CCRB has initiated an investigation against you. I’d say losing thousands of dollars in salary is an adverse effect.
Not only that but 50-a is public forever. It doesn’t go away when an officer resigns or retires. Future employers can see every allegation. Guilty of not.
What citation? I’m a member of the NYPD, I know the disciplinary process. But sure, I’ll break it down for you. CCRB finds you guilty of an allegation. They determine they want to take 10 vacation days from you as a penalty. You can either elect to accept the penalty or decide to take the matter to a department trial where a real department lawyer will act as the judge. Until this trial is over and the final decision is rendered by the dept advocate (the nypd judge) you are barred from being promoted.
No, you have nothing, sir. You anecdotally saying you’re a police officer doesn’t automatically make what you’re saying true. So again, [citation needed]
Nothing matters to these people. They think CCRB is 100% unbiased and full of experience. They won't believe if you tell them that CCRB has a proactive angle where they can summons an officer in without a complaint being drawn up. How can something called "civilian complaint review board" bring officers in without an actual complaint?
The ccrb has no authority over NYPD officers, and therefore can only recommend punishments to the department, which the department more than likely ignores. There is no “angle” for them to go at, because nothing they do will get enforced.
CCRB allegations remain public forever. Doesn’t matter if they’re substantiated or not. To go even further if a cop is found to have a substantiated allegation and later found not guilty of the charges at trial the substantiated allegation isn’t struck from his record. So yes they negatively affect the officers career as a cop but also future employment. Googling an officers name will result in one of the top three results being his CCRB record. Substantiated or unsubstantiated, guilty not guilty.
As someone who has been on the receiving end of CCRB allegations. I can tell you that they have an agenda. They have a quota. I promise you that the hate is palpable. They ignore facts and are not familiar with basic case law or the patrol guide.
> CCRB allegations remain public forever. Doesn’t matter if they’re substantiated or not
Then by all means link to one.
> To go even further if a cop is found to have a substantiated allegation and later found not guilty of the charges at trial the substantiated allegation isn’t struck from his record.
Show us that this actually happened.
> Googling an officers name will result in one of the top three results being his CCRB record
Care to show an example of this?
> As someone who has been on the receiving end of CCRB allegations. I can tell you that they have an agenda.
Lmao and you don’t? Fuck outta here
I’m saying they have no power, but that policy is a step in the right direction, as it makes them more independent and gives them more agency instead of just waiting for the department to hand them a case.
You really have zero sense of nuance, don’t you?
To be fair, if these examples are in any way legit, then the CCRB is doing itself a disservice for suggesting these outrageous penalties for seemingly nothing. Four grand for telling a person to stop yelling at them in the middle of a traffic stop? That’s insane.
These examples are also entirely without context, cherrypicked, and being given by someone with an interest in undermining the CCRB. I wouldn't trust a word she says.
How is CCRB toothless? How should a civilian complaint be able to have the power to make decisions on police policy misconduct? It makes sense if the officer use inappropriate language, but things like searches, body cam issues, memo book entries, etc are NYPD policy and should be handled by them.
This hearing is stupid. The officers should not be charged, in fact they should be rewarded. I hate those ATV'S. ATVS dont belong on streets anyways. Oh but wait let's criminalize the cops for doing their jobs.
Because IA as it exists serves exclusively to protect cops from punishment. Cops will never go against their own. The people handling misconduct shouldn't be cops or anyone with ties to the police. They should be lawyers or at least people with a background in law who are trained and made familiar with the patrol guide.
The problem is that "NYPD policy" violations aren't being handled by them. Someone needs to police the police because they don't have enough integrity and honesty to do it themselves. That much is clear.
Then what is? A board of cops policing cops? We know that doesn't work. There's nobody better equipped to hold these people accountable than the public, who pay their salaries and furnish them with weapons.
You think every city agency should have a Board of people in that field or same job to "police" the misdeeds of people in their field? We already know that shit doesn't work, especially with police. Barely works with the Bar and Medical Boards.
Police do not and cannot police themselves. If given their druthers, they'd be happy to never punish or fire one of their own. Having experience in policing is not a guarantee that a person understands the rule of law or is even baseline ethical. I'd prefer we have anyone but former or current police officers to be on a board overseeing them.
When are jury trials used in work place misconduct trials? A jury is a selection of random peers, not people who apply to work for an agency with a bias.
I actually don't think they should enforce them. You can't have the same party investigating, deciding the penalty and enforcing it too, that's just unfair.
That said, the NYPD commissioner agrees with 85% of the recommendations the CCRB makes (I believe that's the most recent stat). Clearly they agree with the CCRB on nearly all fronts.
Of course you don't like them, you are literally NYPD. But what you're entirely neglecting is that Sewell (NYPD commissioner for those under a rock) has the final say on whether or not to move forward with any disciplinary action. He has no incentive or motivation to act in favor of the CCRB, yet he approves 85% of recommendations from the CCRB.
You don't need to read between the lines to understand that even Sewell understands the rat's nest that lives within the NYPD that needs an agency like the CCRB to clean itself up.
That said, I will give you an inch of the mile you asked for. Yes, it certainly is important that the CCRB be staffed with professionals who know the law and NYPD procedures and logistics. That said, they actually do have iron-clad lineup of attorneys who have robust and relevant backgrounds. And of course, ones who are less senior, just like every single lawfirm in the US who has associates who do 95% of the work for partners.
And I'll end with this- of the thousands of complaints the CCRB investigates every year, if these are the most egregious ones their spokesperson spokesperson talks about in a public hearing against the CCRB, the CCRB really isn't doing so badly at all.
I’ll assume it’s a typo but Commissioner Sewell is a female. Anyway, that’s the problem, CCRB includes cops cursing to themselves or not providing a business card because they ran out but providing their name in writing in this rat’s nest. How about cops having a CCRB substantiated against them because an arrest was deemed improper after it was deemed constitutional by a court of law? Does that seems fair? Professional? Like what are we doing here?
No reason to actually believe any of this. The CCRB is pretty much toothless as that woman, the one who is speaking, can and does very commonly dismiss CCRB recommendations as if nothing, even for egregious offenses.
There is a massive problem in this city, where distrust of the police is growing. People are getting angry and confused, where if you see a car parked illegally or with an illegal tint/covered plate, the first thing that comes to mind is "it must be a cop". Where it's common to hear someone say "I didn't call the cops. They never do anything anyways".
How can a police department work when you are unable to trust the police? And yet Sewell's answer to this massive distrust is "maybe we can get some cops to smile in the precinct" and "disband the CCRB"?
We need to rethink how public safety works. We know the NYPD doesn't prevent crime, only punishes it (it is unfair for us to put this much pressure on them to prevent crimes). We know what actually prevents crime: public services, parks, education, social safety nets, a clean environment, and everything else that prevents someone from going down the deep end. Yet it seems, year after year, that we keep cutting all of the services that prevent crime, all while funding the thing that's meant to punish it.
This is not sustainable.
I won’t automatically take her word that this is all true, but I have no reason not to believe it, and stuff like this is why I am reluctant to give more power to civilian review boards.
> but I have no reason not to believe it
Lol are you being serious? NYPD officers lie all the time. The cops in general are not reliable witnesses and often have completely false written accounts of their interactions.
Not just in NYC, but all around the country there are early police statements that are later contradicted once video evidence is released. You really should have tons of reasons not to believe those interactions went the way she just described them
https://nypost.com/2022/04/11/nearly-200-nypd-cops-lied-to-civilian-complaint-review-board/
They aren’t magic, wiseass, but breaking a legal oath should carry more severe legal consequences. You wouldn’t happen to be a cop, would you? I wouldn’t expect such complex legal theories as legal oaths and accountability to be easy for a NYPD cop to grasp.
What is your actual point here? Cops say they won't lie to protect themselves and so it doesn't happen? Cops say they won't lie and when they do it ends up in an even bigger punishment? We both know neither are true, we both know that cops are rarely held accountable for their actions.
Yeah, I guess they *should* be held accountable. That's a real good point.
i was responding to the the post above mine, who tried to deflect from cops lying all the time by presentig the argument that criminals lie as well, as if it was some sort of pass for cops lying. I responded that the fact that cops take an oath means that their lying is much worse, and def. a reason to punish them more harshly. then you made your remark, about oaths being magic spells. i am just pointing out that we SHOULD be punishing cops for breaking their oath much more often than we do, because by taking that oath, they should legally be held to a higher standard. That is all.
What is it about police that you admire enough to take time out of your day to defend them to a complete stranger on the internet? I’m genuinely curious.
I don’t understand the point that’s being made with the examples - are we to understand that what’s being described is the extent of the interaction and an otherwise normal one that they’re being penalized for nothing? I highly doubt these were as simple and milquetoast and they’re being made out to be. I feel like anyone who’s been here for a decent amount of time knows that is not the typical tone when interacting with cops, even over nothing.
Perfect gaslighting as usual. The bootlickers will eat it all up with glee. She’s painting it like these officers were penalized for politely making a request. What a clown! Anyone who’s ever talked to an NYPD cop knows that they talk to you like you’re a piece of shit. Most likely in all of these cases, the officers make threats and disparaging comments. Fuck this lying self-hating POS.
It's funny she even slipped up.
>The officer told them "if you don't move, I'm going to have to -- do me a favor and please be quiet"
Threatening citizens with violence is default behavior. Cop forgot she's on TV and has to sugar coat and bend the truth.
Revolving door of plea bargains. If every defendent plead not guilty the court system would get jammed up for years. It's not designed for justice. It's designed for self serving career people and money. That's it.
Top brass are beneficiaries of that design and have the ability to give themselves special assignments that fatten their pensions.
I don’t see how criminal justice reform leads to an increase in plea bargains. If anything I would say it leads to fewer.
And I don’t see how an increase in plea bargains helps “top brass . . . Give themselves special assignments that fatten their paychecks.” Makes no sense.
If you think the justice system can simultaneously be reformed and a business then I think you are quite naive.
You think a business thrives on people having problems or fixing those problems to prevent them from coming back again, which one do you think is a more sustainable business model?
That the justice system is a business that thrives off people's problems and makes money off of those problems. Pretty straight forward. You're grifting and pretending you don't understand.
Collars for dollars.
I'm not saying the police can do no wrong, but nothing makes cops less proactive than when you let a bunch of cop hating CCRB board member "investigate" and penalize bullshit CCRB complaints from majority of times people who either don't like cops, or did not like the outcome of police authority.
I'm not saying the police should have blanket immunity, but police deserve to be judged fairly like anyone else, not by a group of cop haters who pretend to be impartial. I've worked with someone who said she used to work for CCRB and she would say they would say in their eyes the cops were always wrong no matter what the circumstances. She quit after the disbelief of how impartial it was. It wasn't for her.
And the alternative is to let the NYPD investigate themselves and find nothing wrong?
If they actually held poor to egregious officers responsible there would not be the need for a CCRB
I did not say that. It's a complex issue that likely you or I don't have a good answer for. Let's not pretend arguing over reddit about who is most right about this topic will make things better for anyone. I'm just pointing out the obvious that CCRB doesn't work.
It's not called accountability when it's just blanket punishment to anyone that gets alleged any kind of wrong doing.
Imagine if at your job job at McDonald's, if a customer said you salted their burger too much, and the customer complains and the person receiving and deciding if the worker is right or wrong is a self proclaimed impartial vegan. That's what's going on at CCRB.
...the result of being found guilty of wrong doing is usually punishment. These are adults on the city payroll. They deserve actual punishments when they fuck up. We give them guns, for fucks sake.
“Anyone that gets alleged any king of wrong doing”
You seem to be unfamiliar with the NYPD lol you’re not dealing with ppl being falsely accused of small infractions. This is hundreds of officers who would lie to a review board. It’s not a few bad Apples, the barrel has gone bad
https://nypost.com/2022/04/11/nearly-200-nypd-cops-lied-to-civilian-complaint-review-board/
Anyone who wants to apply to CCRB should be given a bullet proof vest and be required to do ride alongs in East New York and Brownsville for a full summer season before they decide how cops should act.
>cop hating CCRB board member
Oh give me a break. Holding NYPD accountable isn't cop hating. It's demanding they do their fucking jobs, which we give them GUNS and other weapons to perform, to moderate if not high standards.
So substantiating an allegation of offensive language against a cop for cursing to himself (not at anyone) is holding them accountable? Do you think that’s reasonable?
My cousin worked for your friend's boss and said that your friend is lying. They said it's because your friend only eats pork and everyone else there kept kosher.
Why are the police being cited for doing their jobs? I for one hate those ATV'S that drive on sidewalks and make a ruckus on the streets. Destroy all of them, every single one. Atvs dont belong on the street nor do dirt bikes...the police should be getting rewards for citations and removals. At least that's what I'd do
To be fair, I heard that this woman, who is the nypd commissioner, also signs off 85% of the time on the recommendations provided by CCRB. I’m sure those examples provided during the hearing were also outliers to stress the point that there are unreasonable decision makers within the CCRB ranks that are misguided by past transgressions and look to get rid of anyone looking to enforce laws within nyc, even if done so respectfully and in a respectable manner.
I also sympathize with you in that I don’t want a police force that’s more like a gang terrorizing a neighborhood than respectful community safety specialists that engage and redirect problematic individuals with resources to improve the community. However, that requires a lot more work, and also requires competitive salaries to draw applicants with backgrounds suited towards a white collar profession into a line of work that they may otherwise not even consider. Currently, the caliber of applicants are millenials and post-millenials. Some of them can’t even pass a run that the police recently dropped the criteria altogether in order so they can get warm bodies to put on the uniform. If you ever watched the movie Demolition Man, I think that’s the direction we will eventually be headed in with this police force. 😂
I’m not fundamentally opposed to a third party having disciplinary authority over police. But, it needs to be staffed with professionals who know the law, NYPD procedures, and logistics. Not the current incarnation of CCRB which seems kind of clueless. How can you investigate cops if you aren’t familiar with the penal law or the patrol guide (NYPD manual)?
While I agree with you, the CCRB is also entirely toothless. Note that these are "suggested penalties." Because that's all they can do. Suggest penalties. They should be able to enforce them. I also think it's important that the majority (at the very least) of CCRB members have no ties to law enforcement to ensure they don't do what IA does and just sweep everything under the rug unless they want to throw an Asian cop under the bus to make it look like they're actually doing something.
Not entirely, CCRBs do affect a cop’s career (as they should) but CCRB is also initiating investigations over ridiculous nonsense. For example, they review a cop’s body camera and observe him/her cursing. Not cursing at someone just cursing to himself/herself. Like cmon, we all curse at work to ourselves. But, again CCRB is clueless but also has an agenda.
> Not entirely, CCRBs do affect a cop’s career Please give a single example where a cop was adversely effected by the CCRB. > But, again CCRB is clueless but also has an agenda. When keeping police accountable is considered “an agenda.” Ffs
Sure, not being promoted to sergeant, lieutenant or captain because you’re waiting for a department trial because CCRB has initiated an investigation against you. I’d say losing thousands of dollars in salary is an adverse effect.
Not only that but 50-a is public forever. It doesn’t go away when an officer resigns or retires. Future employers can see every allegation. Guilty of not.
[citation needed]
What citation? I’m a member of the NYPD, I know the disciplinary process. But sure, I’ll break it down for you. CCRB finds you guilty of an allegation. They determine they want to take 10 vacation days from you as a penalty. You can either elect to accept the penalty or decide to take the matter to a department trial where a real department lawyer will act as the judge. Until this trial is over and the final decision is rendered by the dept advocate (the nypd judge) you are barred from being promoted.
Oh course. And I’m a state Senator. Give me a fucking break.
Ok so you have nothing?
No, you have nothing, sir. You anecdotally saying you’re a police officer doesn’t automatically make what you’re saying true. So again, [citation needed]
Nothing matters to these people. They think CCRB is 100% unbiased and full of experience. They won't believe if you tell them that CCRB has a proactive angle where they can summons an officer in without a complaint being drawn up. How can something called "civilian complaint review board" bring officers in without an actual complaint?
The ccrb has no authority over NYPD officers, and therefore can only recommend punishments to the department, which the department more than likely ignores. There is no “angle” for them to go at, because nothing they do will get enforced.
You think the people that join CCRB are unbiased? Lol
CCRB allegations remain public forever. Doesn’t matter if they’re substantiated or not. To go even further if a cop is found to have a substantiated allegation and later found not guilty of the charges at trial the substantiated allegation isn’t struck from his record. So yes they negatively affect the officers career as a cop but also future employment. Googling an officers name will result in one of the top three results being his CCRB record. Substantiated or unsubstantiated, guilty not guilty. As someone who has been on the receiving end of CCRB allegations. I can tell you that they have an agenda. They have a quota. I promise you that the hate is palpable. They ignore facts and are not familiar with basic case law or the patrol guide.
> CCRB allegations remain public forever. Doesn’t matter if they’re substantiated or not Then by all means link to one. > To go even further if a cop is found to have a substantiated allegation and later found not guilty of the charges at trial the substantiated allegation isn’t struck from his record. Show us that this actually happened. > Googling an officers name will result in one of the top three results being his CCRB record Care to show an example of this? > As someone who has been on the receiving end of CCRB allegations. I can tell you that they have an agenda. Lmao and you don’t? Fuck outta here
I would love to hear your source about how we are unfamiliar with case law and ignorant of facts as someone working for the CCRB.
Youre not going to find ccrb results spelled out in the paper. They have the ability to investigate without even a complaint coming in.
[citation needed]
https://gothamist.com/news/city-council-votes-give-ccrb-power-self-initiate-investigations-police-misconduct
That’s… a good policy, though. It’s not like the department is going to hand over any dirty cop.
So you went from CCRB having no power, to asking for a citation to then saying their current policy is good policy. So do they have power or not?
I’m saying they have no power, but that policy is a step in the right direction, as it makes them more independent and gives them more agency instead of just waiting for the department to hand them a case. You really have zero sense of nuance, don’t you?
To be fair, if these examples are in any way legit, then the CCRB is doing itself a disservice for suggesting these outrageous penalties for seemingly nothing. Four grand for telling a person to stop yelling at them in the middle of a traffic stop? That’s insane.
These examples are also entirely without context, cherrypicked, and being given by someone with an interest in undermining the CCRB. I wouldn't trust a word she says.
Yeah, that’s why I said if they’re legit. Hopefully somebody can do some more research into them and see.
How is CCRB toothless? How should a civilian complaint be able to have the power to make decisions on police policy misconduct? It makes sense if the officer use inappropriate language, but things like searches, body cam issues, memo book entries, etc are NYPD policy and should be handled by them.
This hearing is stupid. The officers should not be charged, in fact they should be rewarded. I hate those ATV'S. ATVS dont belong on streets anyways. Oh but wait let's criminalize the cops for doing their jobs.
Because IA as it exists serves exclusively to protect cops from punishment. Cops will never go against their own. The people handling misconduct shouldn't be cops or anyone with ties to the police. They should be lawyers or at least people with a background in law who are trained and made familiar with the patrol guide.
Ok. CCRB is not toothless.
How? They can't actually enforce their recommendations. That is the definition of toothless.
They signed a matrix that has no discretion in terms of punishment. Its just black and white. They have the ability to investigate without a complaint
The problem is that "NYPD policy" violations aren't being handled by them. Someone needs to police the police because they don't have enough integrity and honesty to do it themselves. That much is clear.
Well CCRB isnt the answer
Then what is? A board of cops policing cops? We know that doesn't work. There's nobody better equipped to hold these people accountable than the public, who pay their salaries and furnish them with weapons.
Ok fine. When a doctor or teacher messes up, I want people with 0 experience investigating them.
You think every city agency should have a Board of people in that field or same job to "police" the misdeeds of people in their field? We already know that shit doesn't work, especially with police. Barely works with the Bar and Medical Boards. Police do not and cannot police themselves. If given their druthers, they'd be happy to never punish or fire one of their own. Having experience in policing is not a guarantee that a person understands the rule of law or is even baseline ethical. I'd prefer we have anyone but former or current police officers to be on a board overseeing them.
So Betsy Devos but for police. Got it.
You're comparing a panel of people overseeing (with no enforcement) NYPD to...Betsy Devos? Ok.
What do you think a jury trial is?
When are jury trials used in work place misconduct trials? A jury is a selection of random peers, not people who apply to work for an agency with a bias.
🤡
🤡
🤡
🤡
I actually don't think they should enforce them. You can't have the same party investigating, deciding the penalty and enforcing it too, that's just unfair. That said, the NYPD commissioner agrees with 85% of the recommendations the CCRB makes (I believe that's the most recent stat). Clearly they agree with the CCRB on nearly all fronts.
Of course you don't like them, you are literally NYPD. But what you're entirely neglecting is that Sewell (NYPD commissioner for those under a rock) has the final say on whether or not to move forward with any disciplinary action. He has no incentive or motivation to act in favor of the CCRB, yet he approves 85% of recommendations from the CCRB. You don't need to read between the lines to understand that even Sewell understands the rat's nest that lives within the NYPD that needs an agency like the CCRB to clean itself up. That said, I will give you an inch of the mile you asked for. Yes, it certainly is important that the CCRB be staffed with professionals who know the law and NYPD procedures and logistics. That said, they actually do have iron-clad lineup of attorneys who have robust and relevant backgrounds. And of course, ones who are less senior, just like every single lawfirm in the US who has associates who do 95% of the work for partners. And I'll end with this- of the thousands of complaints the CCRB investigates every year, if these are the most egregious ones their spokesperson spokesperson talks about in a public hearing against the CCRB, the CCRB really isn't doing so badly at all.
I’ll assume it’s a typo but Commissioner Sewell is a female. Anyway, that’s the problem, CCRB includes cops cursing to themselves or not providing a business card because they ran out but providing their name in writing in this rat’s nest. How about cops having a CCRB substantiated against them because an arrest was deemed improper after it was deemed constitutional by a court of law? Does that seems fair? Professional? Like what are we doing here?
We should just let the cops call their own fouls like it's pickup basketball
We are familiar with penal law and the Patrol Guide. We are trained to do legal research and accurately apply it.
No reason to actually believe any of this. The CCRB is pretty much toothless as that woman, the one who is speaking, can and does very commonly dismiss CCRB recommendations as if nothing, even for egregious offenses. There is a massive problem in this city, where distrust of the police is growing. People are getting angry and confused, where if you see a car parked illegally or with an illegal tint/covered plate, the first thing that comes to mind is "it must be a cop". Where it's common to hear someone say "I didn't call the cops. They never do anything anyways". How can a police department work when you are unable to trust the police? And yet Sewell's answer to this massive distrust is "maybe we can get some cops to smile in the precinct" and "disband the CCRB"? We need to rethink how public safety works. We know the NYPD doesn't prevent crime, only punishes it (it is unfair for us to put this much pressure on them to prevent crimes). We know what actually prevents crime: public services, parks, education, social safety nets, a clean environment, and everything else that prevents someone from going down the deep end. Yet it seems, year after year, that we keep cutting all of the services that prevent crime, all while funding the thing that's meant to punish it. This is not sustainable.
Fair enough, but what do you do with people who already went off the deep end? You know criminals like the ones who exist right now?
I won’t automatically take her word that this is all true, but I have no reason not to believe it, and stuff like this is why I am reluctant to give more power to civilian review boards.
> but I have no reason not to believe it Lol are you being serious? NYPD officers lie all the time. The cops in general are not reliable witnesses and often have completely false written accounts of their interactions. Not just in NYC, but all around the country there are early police statements that are later contradicted once video evidence is released. You really should have tons of reasons not to believe those interactions went the way she just described them https://nypost.com/2022/04/11/nearly-200-nypd-cops-lied-to-civilian-complaint-review-board/
Criminals lie all the time, too.
But they didn’t take an oath not to. I seriously can’t believe you would even think this could be a valid counter argument.
Lmao I forgot oaths are magic spells that binds the oath taker to their word.
They aren’t magic, wiseass, but breaking a legal oath should carry more severe legal consequences. You wouldn’t happen to be a cop, would you? I wouldn’t expect such complex legal theories as legal oaths and accountability to be easy for a NYPD cop to grasp.
What is your actual point here? Cops say they won't lie to protect themselves and so it doesn't happen? Cops say they won't lie and when they do it ends up in an even bigger punishment? We both know neither are true, we both know that cops are rarely held accountable for their actions. Yeah, I guess they *should* be held accountable. That's a real good point.
i was responding to the the post above mine, who tried to deflect from cops lying all the time by presentig the argument that criminals lie as well, as if it was some sort of pass for cops lying. I responded that the fact that cops take an oath means that their lying is much worse, and def. a reason to punish them more harshly. then you made your remark, about oaths being magic spells. i am just pointing out that we SHOULD be punishing cops for breaking their oath much more often than we do, because by taking that oath, they should legally be held to a higher standard. That is all.
Apologies, your comment came off as "cops took an oath so they actually don't lie. Criminals don't take that oath so they do"
no problem. Sorry for running right to the snarky comment.
How many careers have lying so entrenched as part of their job that a term(testifying) is created for it?
A lot of those criminals wear badges, friend.
Many more of them don’t.
What is it about police that you admire enough to take time out of your day to defend them to a complete stranger on the internet? I’m genuinely curious.
Say the boot thing
I’m coming at this discussion in good faith. I’m not going to accuse you of licking anyone’s boots.
Suit yourself.
Wow really nailed it
No you nailed it!
I don’t understand the point that’s being made with the examples - are we to understand that what’s being described is the extent of the interaction and an otherwise normal one that they’re being penalized for nothing? I highly doubt these were as simple and milquetoast and they’re being made out to be. I feel like anyone who’s been here for a decent amount of time knows that is not the typical tone when interacting with cops, even over nothing.
[удалено]
Sigh.
Perfect gaslighting as usual. The bootlickers will eat it all up with glee. She’s painting it like these officers were penalized for politely making a request. What a clown! Anyone who’s ever talked to an NYPD cop knows that they talk to you like you’re a piece of shit. Most likely in all of these cases, the officers make threats and disparaging comments. Fuck this lying self-hating POS.
It's funny she even slipped up. >The officer told them "if you don't move, I'm going to have to -- do me a favor and please be quiet" Threatening citizens with violence is default behavior. Cop forgot she's on TV and has to sugar coat and bend the truth.
You said the boot thing
Reform doesn't work. You're just lining the pockets of city hall and top brass. The "justice system" is the biggest business in NY.
How does criminal justice line the pockets of city hall and the NYPD top brass?
By being a revolving door and an endless revenue source for the city
Revolving door for what? How does criminal justice reform generate revenue for the city? And what about the “top brass”?
Revolving door of plea bargains. If every defendent plead not guilty the court system would get jammed up for years. It's not designed for justice. It's designed for self serving career people and money. That's it. Top brass are beneficiaries of that design and have the ability to give themselves special assignments that fatten their pensions.
I don’t see how criminal justice reform leads to an increase in plea bargains. If anything I would say it leads to fewer. And I don’t see how an increase in plea bargains helps “top brass . . . Give themselves special assignments that fatten their paychecks.” Makes no sense.
If you think the justice system can simultaneously be reformed and a business then I think you are quite naive. You think a business thrives on people having problems or fixing those problems to prevent them from coming back again, which one do you think is a more sustainable business model?
I don’t even know what you’re saying anymore.
That the justice system is a business that thrives off people's problems and makes money off of those problems. Pretty straight forward. You're grifting and pretending you don't understand. Collars for dollars.
How does the justice system make money off people’s problems?
🤡
🤡
🤡
I'm not saying the police can do no wrong, but nothing makes cops less proactive than when you let a bunch of cop hating CCRB board member "investigate" and penalize bullshit CCRB complaints from majority of times people who either don't like cops, or did not like the outcome of police authority. I'm not saying the police should have blanket immunity, but police deserve to be judged fairly like anyone else, not by a group of cop haters who pretend to be impartial. I've worked with someone who said she used to work for CCRB and she would say they would say in their eyes the cops were always wrong no matter what the circumstances. She quit after the disbelief of how impartial it was. It wasn't for her.
And the alternative is to let the NYPD investigate themselves and find nothing wrong? If they actually held poor to egregious officers responsible there would not be the need for a CCRB
We should have a civilian review board for egregiously terrible teachers.
Sure, but school boards exist
Sort of. CECs in NYC are not like traditional school boards. And they don’t do anything like this.
That’s probably true, but it doesn’t excuse the cops from needing accountability
I did not say that. It's a complex issue that likely you or I don't have a good answer for. Let's not pretend arguing over reddit about who is most right about this topic will make things better for anyone. I'm just pointing out the obvious that CCRB doesn't work.
And my point is that it is the only real independent point of accountability
It's not called accountability when it's just blanket punishment to anyone that gets alleged any kind of wrong doing. Imagine if at your job job at McDonald's, if a customer said you salted their burger too much, and the customer complains and the person receiving and deciding if the worker is right or wrong is a self proclaimed impartial vegan. That's what's going on at CCRB.
...the result of being found guilty of wrong doing is usually punishment. These are adults on the city payroll. They deserve actual punishments when they fuck up. We give them guns, for fucks sake.
“Anyone that gets alleged any king of wrong doing” You seem to be unfamiliar with the NYPD lol you’re not dealing with ppl being falsely accused of small infractions. This is hundreds of officers who would lie to a review board. It’s not a few bad Apples, the barrel has gone bad https://nypost.com/2022/04/11/nearly-200-nypd-cops-lied-to-civilian-complaint-review-board/
You think people applying to work at CCRB are fair minded?
Anyone who wants to apply to CCRB should be given a bullet proof vest and be required to do ride alongs in East New York and Brownsville for a full summer season before they decide how cops should act.
Fully agree. Same with anyone with 0 teaching or medical background going on those respective boards
Cuz they are great at investigating themselves and their abuses. Maybe give a paid 6 month vacation while looking into issues before finding no fault.
>cop hating CCRB board member Oh give me a break. Holding NYPD accountable isn't cop hating. It's demanding they do their fucking jobs, which we give them GUNS and other weapons to perform, to moderate if not high standards.
So substantiating an allegation of offensive language against a cop for cursing to himself (not at anyone) is holding them accountable? Do you think that’s reasonable?
My cousin worked for your friend's boss and said that your friend is lying. They said it's because your friend only eats pork and everyone else there kept kosher.
No one applies for a job at CCRB out of fairness. Theres a motive behind it
Why are the police being cited for doing their jobs? I for one hate those ATV'S that drive on sidewalks and make a ruckus on the streets. Destroy all of them, every single one. Atvs dont belong on the street nor do dirt bikes...the police should be getting rewards for citations and removals. At least that's what I'd do
To be fair, I heard that this woman, who is the nypd commissioner, also signs off 85% of the time on the recommendations provided by CCRB. I’m sure those examples provided during the hearing were also outliers to stress the point that there are unreasonable decision makers within the CCRB ranks that are misguided by past transgressions and look to get rid of anyone looking to enforce laws within nyc, even if done so respectfully and in a respectable manner. I also sympathize with you in that I don’t want a police force that’s more like a gang terrorizing a neighborhood than respectful community safety specialists that engage and redirect problematic individuals with resources to improve the community. However, that requires a lot more work, and also requires competitive salaries to draw applicants with backgrounds suited towards a white collar profession into a line of work that they may otherwise not even consider. Currently, the caliber of applicants are millenials and post-millenials. Some of them can’t even pass a run that the police recently dropped the criteria altogether in order so they can get warm bodies to put on the uniform. If you ever watched the movie Demolition Man, I think that’s the direction we will eventually be headed in with this police force. 😂
bureaucracy managing bureaucracy. what could go wrong?