Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math???

Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math??? (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 22, 2014, 08:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
I think you are missing my point. I never said there wasn't a 911 call. There was and it was called in by a customer. The million dollar question is why does the police report say either the owner or his employee made the call when they did not? Indeed the store owner does "want to stay as far away from this as possible" ... which is why he publicly refuted the report claiming they made the call.
Because they thought it was the owner or employee who made the call. And?

Indeed they did. Because they knew it would only serve to toss a match onto a tinderbox since there was NO CONNECTION to the shooting. As the owner of the Ferguson Market can surely attest to. Did you notice how the Ferguson Police Chief refused to answer the reporter's question when he asked him point blank why he would release the Incident Report about the robbery and "put local businesses at risk" when there was NO CONNECTION? But the STL County PD still refuses to release the Incident Report about the shooting itself?
Believe it or not, I'll bet they thought this would actually calm matters. That enough people would question the case that it would quell the outcry for a lynching. No one was safe with that mindset and yes, history will likely judge that move as a miscalculation. Though, given the number of those coming in from outside Ferguson to raise the ire, I don't think it would've mattered either way quite frankly, OAW.

Why the differences in which reports were released and which ones weren't? Well for starters, should the fox write the report on the henhouse killing? No? Okay, so it was dumped off to the St Louis office instead. Makes total sense to me and I've already addressed why. The facts of one crime were very simple and visible, the facts of the other are not.

I don't know if I'm not making my point clear or if you are just ignoring it. So I'll roll with the former and try this from another angle. You say they can both be true. Ok so let's roll with that. The reason why I'm saying the story is changing is NOT because he didn't know Mike Brown was a suspect on the initial contact ... but then put 2 and 2 together soon thereafter and that's why he put the car in reverse and stopped them again. What I'm saying is that if Wilson thought Brown might be a suspect because he saw the cigars in his hand after the initial contact and therefore decided to stop them for a second time ... then that would be highly pertinent information to mention to the investigators. If Wilson had told the STL County investigators or the Ferguson Police Chief that he thought Brown was a suspect when he stopped them the second time then they most definitely would have mentioned that on the Aug. 10 press conference! They damned sure would have mentioned that at some point during the TWO Aug. 15 press conferences which occurred a week later! But that's not what happened. Instead, they INSISTED that there was NO CONNECTION to the robbery at all. REPEATEDLY.

Bear in mind the reporters weren't asking the Ferguson Police Chief if there was a connection between the robbery and the reason for the initial contact. They were asking him if there was a connection between the robbery and the shooting of Mike Brown. So the police can't say there's NO CONNECTION for a WEEK ... REPEATEDLY ... and then try to turn around and suggest that Wilson made the second stop because he saw the cigars and thought Brown was a suspect in the robbery. Follow me?
My friend, the robbery DID have NOTHING to do with the shooting. I believe that's what they felt was the germane point in all this; that Michael Brown was not shot for robbing a convenience store. There isn't a single person here who believes Brown should've been executed for stealing cigars. The ONLY reason to bring it up is in an attempt to quell the hunger to riot, loot, and lynch Wilson. Period. I'm not arguing that. What I'm saying is that Brown had JUST been in an aggressive confrontation with a clerk MINUTES EARLIER. Wilson was coming off a call for a sick, 2-month old. C'mon man? Not even a chance? You know I love you too, brother, but you get so mired in minutia that we cannot possibly corroborate or establish at this point, at all.

Not corroborated by any of the eyewitnesses. But ok. He's fleeing.
Are we talking past one another here? Johnson claims they fled.

All this gunplay and Johnson manages to miss them all. He must've been onto something.

Ok. I'll say this again. ALL the eyewitnesses who have come forward said the cop was shooting at Brown while he was running away. ALL OF THEM!!!! But magically that translates into "This we do not know" in your mind. That's a real neat trick. And what does "3 more autopsies" have to do with it? You do realize that not every shot had to hit Brown in order for Wilson to be shooting at him from behind right? One of the eyewitnesses even described how the police had to extract some of the bullets that missed Brown from the walls of nearby residences. So while Brown was HIT 6 times ... Wilson fired even more rounds than that.
How many rounds, OAW? *Hint: if you give a definitive answer to this question, with all due respect you're lying to the both of us.

Ok ebuddy ..... I often say "my friend" in my dialogue with you because I really do like you. I admire your debating skills and the intellect you bring to the forums. So please don't take offense ... but this right here is simply not on your usual level. You're slipping here and I'll tell you why.

You can't on the one hand say "we've got stories running the gamut" ... but then OTOH you turn around in the NEXT SENTENCE and say "We're not going to hear the witnesses going public on Brown's guilt because everyone knows SNITCHES GET STITCHES®." Seriously .... WTF? Now let's set aside the fact that you have yet to cite a single eyewitness account which tells a different story. There's no way you don't see how utterly contradictory that is! If "snitches get stitches" as you claim then you would never have "stories running the gamut". Come on bro!
Woah, you've missed the boat by a mile here. For example, there's a FB page dedicated to Officer Wilson and the woman who authored it wants to remain absolutely anonymous. Shocker? Store owner doesn't want anything to do with any of this and he was robbed and shoved by the throat by this guy. Who on earth, during the frenzy of anger and tensions running near powder-keg proportions, would come forward to claim Brown was thuggin? C'mon, OAW. Seriously. I have little doubt that some of the leaks we're getting through the media involve legitimate, conflicting accounts given to investigators.

But I for one would not be surprised if the grand jury doesn't even indict Wilson. Especially with Bob McCulloch as the STL County Prosecutor. As I said earlier in the thread this guy is notorious around here for his pro-police bias. Not only does he have several family members who are STL County PD. His father who was also STL County PD was killed by an African-American criminal when he was just 12 years old. If it were just that a lot of people around here would just be giving him the "side-eye" and hoping for the best.
You're not putting much faith in Holder who gave a statement on his own maltreatment at the hands of the police and said he was "on the side of the people of Ferguson". You're also not putting much faith in the MO Governor who openly called for a vigorous prosecution. Who, among those who understand the legal system at all, would say this?!? Let that be any other Governor, on any other matter, and the trial would have to be moved out of the friggin' State for a fair hearing. I'm not near as certain as you that this will go for Wilson and I don't think there's any logical reason to insist he would.

But on top of all that back in 2000 there was another very controversial and high profile case where two undercover white cops shot and killed a couple of unarmed black men during a drug sting. This occurred in the parking lot of a Jack in the Box in the municipality of Berkeley, MO which is right next door to Ferguson. When the undercover cops went to arrest ONE of the men who they had previously made some SMALL TIME marijuana and cocaine purchases from (this guy was by no means moving major weight) ... he backed out of a parking space and collided with an SUV driven by a DEA agent. When he turned his wheels to leave the officers moved in front of the car and opened fire killing both men. One of the undercover officers even leapt onto the hood of the car and unloaded on these guys! What was the officer's story? What it ALWAYS is .... they "feared for their lives". This time because they swore on a stack of bibles that the driver tried to get away and drove the car towards them. Which begs the question ... who in their right mind would jump in front of a moving car? Naturally, none of that was true as a subsequent federal investigation revealed. The car was in reverse the entire time! And who was in charge of the STL County Drug Task Force at the time? Tom Jackson, the current Ferguson Police Chief! Bob McCulloch the STL County Prosecutor presented the case to the grand jury which chose not to indict because they believed the officers. McCulloch said he agreed with the decision. But wait it gets worse!!!
20,000 sign petitions seeking special prosecutor in Michael Brown shooting : News

What did Tom Jackson, the current Ferguson Police Chief, do the last time? Everything in his power to protect his officers even though there was plenty of reason to be highly skeptical of the official police story. You have Bob McCulloch, the STL County Prosecutor, straight up busted telling repeated, bald-faced lies to the public about the evidence presented in the secret grand jury proceedings he controlled. So given their behavior in that previous situation ... is there any wonder why many African-Americans around here have little to no confidence that there will be an impartial investigation this time?
Eesh. We're going to dig into all these cases too? So... has he not prosecuted any police? Seems like he calls it as he sees it, regardless of the bottomless pits of conjecture and minutia you're able to dredge up on this matter and that. The Governor could easily pull him. Holder could strongly encourage it. Would I recuse myself if I were in McCullough's shoes? Yes. Not because of my own inability to effectively adjudicate the matter, but because of the optics. That doesn't mean he should. It also doesn't mean anyone else would be more effective. He had the trust of the community through 5 elections. With such a checkered past, you gotta wonder how he managed to continue serving for 23 years.

As you can probably surmise by now I was born and raised in Missouri. And this is the "Show Me State". So you keep saying this but again ... you have yet to produce a single eyewitness account that tells a different story. And some caller into a local radio talk show named "Josie" relaying a third-hand account doesn't quite cut it.
Or that it matches a number of other accounts given to sources "close to the investigation". I don't need them to be public right now; in the interest of fairness, all I have to do at this point is not a prior deny they exist.

I'm not saying Wilson is guilty until proven innocent. I'm saying there is plenty of evidence to warrant Wilson being charged and arrested.
This county at least (and I believe MO in general) sends ALL homicides through grand jury. This is the process and I suspect it has served to let guilty people free, minority and white alike. Either you have proof that someone is a homicidal maniac or you don't. It has to be extensively reviewed.

Nary a complaint on record huh? You mean like how a month ago Wilson encountered a young, black woman at that same QT that got burned down who had been maced. She went inside to wash her eyes out and one of the employees told her to use milk. Some officers come inside and tell her to leave. She complies and goes outside where she runs into Wilson. She tries to pour the milk in her eyes but Wilson tells her if she does she will be arrested. She tells him her eyes were burning because she was maced and he just tells her to "Shut the f*ck up!". Another guy tells her to get in her car and put her face in front the vent so she does. Wilson makes her get out and sit on the sidewalk. So she can continue to suffer with no relief whatsoever. As he's taking her info she's still trying to pour the milk in her eyes because she can't see. But he's still full of "Shut the f*ck up!" and "Sit the f*ck down!" towards a young woman in distress. Again, I know firsthand how "One Time" gets down around here and the blatant disrespect a lot of them show to black residents. So I have no reason whatsoever to doubt her story about Officer Friendly.

Darren Wilson Mace Story | YouTube.com

OAW
Oh look, you found a complaint against Wilson. And it turns out that it's coming to light right there on the news during the Ferguson uprising!

And you're trying to say I'M losing game here? Oh no you di'nt just post a 4-week old encounter from YouTube published 7 days ago.

Shameless man, shameless. At least this explains your bizarre obsession with a report "going public".

     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 01:10 PM
 
Well, at least the protests have managed to get a bad cop or two into the light and hopefully out the door.

Chief: St. Louis County cop on leave after video tirade
St. Louis County Police Officer Dan Page Suspended Following Inflammatory Video
Officer Dan Page gained notoriety last Monday after shoving CNN host Don Lemon during live coverage from Ferguson, Mo., where protests erupted after police fatally shot 18-year-old Michael Brown on Aug. 9.
"Policemen are very cynical. I know I am," Page says from a podium on the video. "I hate everybody. I'm into diversity. I kill everybody."
St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar told USA TODAY in a telephone interview Friday that once he learned of the tape, sought it out and viewed it himself, he immediately placed Page on administrative leave.

"I don't legally have the authority to fire an individual like that," Belmar said. "I will tell you that if he were a probationary officer, he would not (have the latitude of an investigation) and I would have fired him an hour and a half ago."


Also, the McDonalds resident bad-ass cop is back in the news…
Ferguson Police Officer Justin Cosma Hog-Tied And Injured A Young Child, Lawsuit Alleges
A Ferguson police officer who helped detain a journalist in a McDonald's earlier this month is in the midst of a civil rights lawsuit because he allegedly hog-tied a 12-year-old boy who was checking the mail at the end of his driveway.
Then, the officers "became confrontational" and intimidated the child, the lawsuit claims. "Unprovoked and without cause, the deputies grabbed [the boy], choked him around the neck and threw him to the ground," it says. The boy was shirtless at the time, and allegedly "suffered bruising, choke marks, scrapes and cuts across his body."

The 12-year-old was transferred to a medical facility for treatment, but the lawsuit says Cosma and the other officer reported the incident as "assault of a law enforcement officer third degree” and “resisting/interfering with arrest, detention or stop."

Jefferson County prosecutors "refused to issue a juvenile case" against the young child, the suit says.
Eddie Boyd III, an officer who faced allegations of hitting children while serving under the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, quietly resigned and sought employment with the Ferguson Police Department. Boyd faced three complaints of physical abuse against children between 2004 and 2006, two of which were dropped. Internal affairs sustained the third complaint against Boyd, saying there was sufficient evidence to support the allegation that he struck a 12-year-old girl in the head with a pistol, and recommended Boyd be fired. The St. Louis police chose to demote him.

Less than a year later, a teenage boy alleged that Boyd hit him in the nose with a gun, and the officer quietly resigned from his role at the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. His license was not revoked in the ensuing lawsuit. Boyd was hired by the Ferguson Police Department sometime between July 2009 and December 2010.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 01:15 PM
 
Wow. Chronic pistol-whipping isn't one you hear very often.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 01:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Wow. Chronic pistol-whipping isn't one you hear very often.
Guy should go work in Guantanamo.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 01:30 PM
 
@Dakar

I'm curious where you were going with your last post about the cop pointing his gun and threatening the crowd.

I must admit, I found it hard to interpret your last response as other than frustration with the discussion. If that's the case, and you'd like to end it, I'm totally okay with that.

FWIW, I'm not pursuing the discussion out of a need for you to agree with me. I think the question of what should be standard procedure for a cop who sees a weapon in a crowd is an interesting question. That's got to be one of the worst scenarios you can be presented as a cop.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 01:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
@Dakar

I'm curious where you were going with your last post about the cop pointing his gun and threatening the crowd.

I must admit, I found it hard to interpret your last response as other than frustration with the discussion. If that's the case, and you'd like to end it, I'm totally okay with that.

FWIW, I'm not pursuing the discussion out of a need for you to agree with me. I think the question of what should be standard procedure for a cop who sees a weapon in a crowd is an interesting question. That's got to be one of the worst scenarios you can be presented as a cop.
I'm sorry. I think my point was if his verbal conduct was unprofessional, it wouldn't be a stretch for me to believe his physical conduct (i.e., pointing the gun) was unprofessional as well. I'd also point out that with the gear is wearing, a BB gun isn't a big threat to him. The entire protests have been marred by police overreaction. I freely admit assumptions go into this.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 02:04 PM
 
In a situation rife with police overreaction, it's fair to point out this could simply be another example.

The question still remains however, what, in a more general scenario, is a cop supposed to do in this situation? As I said, it's a nightmare scenario.

I honestly don't know what the best procedure is here (which is why I'm pursuing the discussion).

I mean, in a general sense, part of the point could exactly the point you made: namely, any given weapon is less dangerous to the cop wearing a vest. Get the perp to engage you (as the cop) rather than one of the citizens.

I don't know. I'm not stating this as fact, but supposition. It's based on reading that the SOP for a weapon in a crowd is to cover the crowd. Don't know if that's true.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 02:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It's based on reading that the SOP for a weapon in a crowd is to cover the crowd. Don't know if that's true.
Well that's kind of been the thing, hasn't it? When the Ferguson (and local) cops showed up for the night all geared up for Iraq, the question is, who were they trying to protect? At best, people's property. Most likely: Themselves. I think the citizens themselves were somewhere at the bottom of the list, judging from the sound weapons, tear gas in yards, and rubber bullets.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 03:56 PM
 
I apologize if this is a dumb question.

Is there a huge difference between how the FPD came dressed to the party and how riot police would? The only obvious (non-superficial) thing to me is the lack of shields.

One can question all the assault rifles, but as the "I'll ****ing kill you" guy demonstrates, even after the FPD have been axed, and Highway Patrol along with the National Guard have been called, they're still giving Joe patrolman from another suburb an M-16. I think there's a possibility riot police with assault rifles may be the way it's done now.

And, it's not like your typical suburban cop is going to have first hand experience with a riot. Anything they decided to do was probably based in what they read in a book.

I'm not really trying to justify anything. The people in question here are ****ups. What's not sitting right with me is the idea the FPD set out to crush the citizenry with forethought and malice. My gut tells me there was some malice, zero forethought (about pretty much everything, really), and two tons of stupid in a one pound bag.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2014, 05:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Because they thought it was the owner or employee who made the call. And?
To identify an individual as making a 911 call who did not in an official police report seems rather deceptive. Especially since that portion was of the report was included in the supplemental that was written 2 days later AFTER an investigator went back to the Ferguson Market to speak with the personnel and review the security footage. I can understand some confusion about who made the call initially. But this is easily verifiable information during the subsequent investigation.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Believe it or not, I'll bet they thought this would actually calm matters. That enough people would question the case that it would quell the outcry for a lynching. No one was safe with that mindset and yes, history will likely judge that move as a miscalculation. Though, given the number of those coming in from outside Ferguson to raise the ire, I don't think it would've mattered either way quite frankly, OAW.
I agree that it was definitely a miscalculation ... at best.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
My friend, the robbery DID have NOTHING to do with the shooting. I believe that's what they felt was the germane point in all this; that Michael Brown was not shot for robbing a convenience store. There isn't a single person here who believes Brown should've been executed for stealing cigars. The ONLY reason to bring it up is in an attempt to quell the hunger to riot, loot, and lynch Wilson. Period. I'm not arguing that. What I'm saying is that Brown had JUST been in an aggressive confrontation with a clerk MINUTES EARLIER. Wilson was coming off a call for a sick, 2-month old. C'mon man? Not even a chance? You know I love you too, brother, but you get so mired in minutia that we cannot possibly corroborate or establish at this point, at all.
Well I believe the robbery had NOTHING to do with the shooting. And apparently you believe the robbery had NOTHING to do with the shooting. But Ferguson Police Chief Jackson didn't get the memo ....

Michael Brown was identified as a suspect in a strong-arm robbery of a box of cigars moments before he was shot to death by Officer Darren Wilson, police said Friday.

In an afternoon press conference, Ferguson, Mo. Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Wilson did not initially make a connection between the robbery and Brown,whose death spurred violent protests and unrest in the St. Louis suburb over the past week.

Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.


Jackson earlier released Wilson's name along with information that Brown was a suspect in the previous robbery. He said he released surveillance video tape and documents related to the robbery to satisfy freedom of information requests from the public.

His decision to release both bits of information at the same time has come under fire by residents and Brown supporters who said the police were trying to divert attention away from Wilson and justify the shooting by blaming Brown.

Jackson would not say why he released the information when he did the way he did, other than to say he was responding to freedom of information requests from the public about the robbery.
Chief: Officer noticed Brown carrying suspected stolen cigars

Now do you understand the point I'm making? No mention of Officer Wilson "making the connection" during the first press conference on Aug. 10. No mention of Officer Wilson "making the connection" during BOTH press conferences on Aug. 15. In fact, the police explicitly denied any connection with the robbery whatsoever. Repeatedly! But several hours later Chief Jackson tells CNN and NBC that Officer Wilson "made the connection" when he drove past them after the initial stop. This is the problem with the police refusing to release the Incident Report about the shooting itself. It allows more and more information to come out ... witness accounts ... autopsy results .... etc. ... all without Officer Wilson or the police in general committing to narrative. So what we are witnessing was not an attempt to "calm matters". We are witnessing an attempt by the police to construct a narrative to justify Officer Wilson's actions. They have to provide a REASON for Brown to just attack Officer Wilson, push him back in the car, and go for his gun as he alleged. So I say it again, if this were even REMOTELY TRUE you can best believe that the police would have been trumpeting the "Brown was a suspect in a robbery" line from the very beginning. But again, Brown wasn't even identified as a suspect in the robbery until TWO DAYS LATER.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
How many rounds, OAW? *Hint: if you give a definitive answer to this question, with all due respect you're lying to the both of us.
I don't know exactly how many. All I can say is more than 6. Because we know Brown was hit 6 times. And we also have one of the eyewitnesses say they recovered at least one bullet that missed from a nearby residence.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Eesh. We're going to dig into all these cases too? So... has he not prosecuted any police? Seems like he calls it as he sees it, regardless of the bottomless pits of conjecture and minutia you're able to dredge up on this matter and that. The Governor could easily pull him. Holder could strongly encourage it. Would I recuse myself if I were in McCullough's shoes? Yes. Not because of my own inability to effectively adjudicate the matter, but because of the optics. That doesn't mean he should. It also doesn't mean anyone else would be more effective. He had the trust of the community through 5 elections. With such a checkered past, you gotta wonder how he managed to continue serving for 23 years.
So repeatedly lying to the public about grand jury testimony is "calling it like he sees it"? Ok. As for his ability to keep getting re-elected, you have to keep in mind that STL County is 70% white. In one of the most segregated and racially polarized metropolitan areas in the country. The best that can be said is that Mr. McCulloch's troubling history in this regard simply doesn't impact the vast majority of the electorate.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
This county at least (and I believe MO in general) sends ALL homicides through grand jury. This is the process and I suspect it has served to let guilty people free, minority and white alike. Either you have proof that someone is a homicidal maniac or you don't. It has to be extensively reviewed.
This isn't true. I already cited the statement from the attorney who ran against McCulloch in the most recent election where she said he could bring charges based upon evidence alone. A grand jury is not required.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Oh look, you found a complaint against Wilson. And it turns out that it's coming to light right there on the news during the Ferguson uprising!

And you're trying to say I'M losing game here? Oh no you di'nt just post a 4-week old encounter from YouTube published 7 days ago.

Shameless man, shameless. At least this explains your bizarre obsession with a report "going public".

Ok well how about this. I've mentioned before that there are various municipalities in north STL County with majority black residents and lily-white police forces. Which isn't necessarily an issue in and of itself, but it is quite problematic when the officers demonstrate constant disrespect and contempt for the residents they are supposed to "protect and serve". The neighboring municipality of Jennings was notorious for having one of the most racist police departments in the area. It was common knowledge in the local black community that the last place you ever wanted to get pulled over was Jennings. This went back decades because I know firsthand what it's like to get slammed on a car hood because me and a fried missed a turn to get back on the highway and had to circle the block to get back to the right exit from the neighborhood. Or what it's like have them roll up on you with guns drawn as a group of us were sitting outside the police station trying to get help from the police for a friend. In any event, things were so bad in Jennings that the entire police department was disbanded 3 years ago. And guess who was a rookie cop in Jennings for his first two years on the police force?

The small city of Jennings, Mo., had a police department so troubled, and with so much tension between white officers and black residents, that the city council finally decided to disband it. Everyone in the Jennings police department was fired. New officers were brought in to create a credible department from scratch.

That was three years ago. One of the officers who worked in that department, and lost his job along with everyone else, was a young man named Darren Wilson.


Some of the Jennings officers reapplied for their jobs, but Wilson got a job in the police department in the nearby city of Ferguson.
Wilson is under the protection of the Ferguson Police Department, which has chosen from the beginning of this case to opt for obscurity rather than transparency. The department did not reveal Wilson’s identity for nearly a week after the fatal shooting of Brown. By that time, his social media accounts had been suspended.

But everyone leaves a record, and Darren Dean Wilson is no exception.

People who know him describe him as someone who grew up in a home marked by multiple divorces and tangles with the law. His mother died when he was in high school. A friend said a career in law enforcement offered him structure in what had been a chaotic life.

What he found in Jennings, however, was a mainly white department mired in controversy and notorious for its fraught relationship with residents, especially the African American majority. It was not an ideal place to learn how to police. Officials say Wilson kept a clean record without any disciplinary action.
After going through the police academy, Wilson landed a job in 2009 as a rookie officer in Jennings, a small, struggling city of 14,000 where 89 percent of the residents were African American and poverty rates were high. At the time, the 45-employee police unit had one or two black members on the force, said Allan Stichnote, a white Jennings City Council member.

Racial tension was endemic in Jennings, said Rodney Epps, an African American city council member.

“You’re dealing with white cops, and they don’t know how to address black people,” Epps said. “The straw that broke the camel’s back, an officer shot at a female. She was stopped for a traffic violation. She had a child in the back [of the] car and was probably worried about getting locked up. And this officer chased her down Highway 70, past city limits, and took a shot at her. Just ridiculous.”

Police faced a series of lawsuits for using unnecessary force, Stichnote said. One black resident, Cassandra Fuller, sued the department claiming a white Jennings police officer beat her in June 2009 on her own porch after she made a joke. A car had smashed into her van, which was parked in front of her home, and she called police. The responding officer asked her to move the van. “It don’t run. You can take it home with you if you want,” she answered. She said the officer became enraged, threw her off the porch, knocked her to the ground and kicked her in the stomach.

The department paid Fuller a confidential sum to settle the case, she said.

“It’s like a horror story in my mind. I never thought a police officer would pull me off my porch and beat me to the ground, for just laughing,” Fuller said in an interview.
Darren Wilson’s first job was on a troubled police force disbanded by authorities - The Washington Post

Is Wilson named personally in any of this? No. My point is that we have an officer who cut his teeth learning how to be a cop in one of the most notoriously racist police departments in the metro area! It's why I said I have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve Dorian Johnson when he said Wilson just rolled up on them and the first thing out of his mouth was "Get the f*ck on the sidewalk!" It's just not uncommon for white police officers around here to behave disrespectfully to black residents like that. Criminal, civilian, or otherwise. But that's the kind of local insight that comes from personal and/or community experience which I really don't expect you to have. All I'm asking is that you try to understand why that initial encounter between Officer Wilson, Mike Brown, & Dorian Johnson sounds all too familiar to most African-Americans in the STL area.

OAW
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 04:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I apologize if this is a dumb question.

Is there a huge difference between how the FPD came dressed to the party and how riot police would? The only obvious (non-superficial) thing to me is the lack of shields.
Oh yes, big time. This is German riot police in full gear:


They wear clothes with lots of padding (no camouflage), helmets, armed with batons, maybe pepper spray and a pistol. They also use shields at times, but only when necessary. Sometimes German riot police also comes with water cannons:


And they're usually not in full gear for most demonstrations. When push comes to shove, riot police use their batons, pepper spray and, if necessary, water cannons. They don't pull their guns on protestors (except for exceedingly rare occasions). Because if you cause a mass panic, you're done. I have never seen police men with sniper rifles or automatic weapons for crowd control.

This is how I have seen them in action (e. g. for the yearly security conference in Munich, the physics department used to be very close to the outer security ring of the main venue) for the most part:



Less padding, not threatening. Usually they erect barriers to guide the stream of people, too (in case of panic).

Of course, there have been cases where things got out of control and police abused their power (e. g. protestors were beaten up and because riot police are impossible to identify nobody was held accountable). And there have been cases when orders came from high-up to take to gloves off -- often with disastrous consequences.

But normally, the standard mode of operation is de-escalation, and certainly they don't use deadly* weapons. I don't remember seeing riot police with automatic weapons ever. Or in camouflage.

* You can kill or seriously injure someone with a baton or other »non-deadly« weapons, but I'm primarily speaking of guns here.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 09:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Well that's kind of been the thing, hasn't it? When the Ferguson (and local) cops showed up for the night all geared up for Iraq, the question is, who were they trying to protect? At best, people's property. Most likely: Themselves. I think the citizens themselves were somewhere at the bottom of the list, judging from the sound weapons, tear gas in yards, and rubber bullets.
Tear gas and rubber bullets are a far cry from what were used in Iraq. Everybody try to remain calm here.

But then, if it looks like Iraq...


ebuddy
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 10:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Tear gas and rubber bullets are a far cry from what were used in Iraq. Everybody try to remain calm here.
http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...a/#post4287541

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
But then, if it looks like Iraq...


A burnt building looks like Iraq? I guess my home town has looked like Iraq a few times this year.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 11:08 AM
 
More evidence coming out that supports the eyewitness accounts. The witnesses said Officer Wilson was firing at Mike Brown as he was fleeing. Brown then stopped, turned around, and put his hands in the air. Then Wilson approached him and fired more shots. The eyewitnesses said that there was a pause between the volleys of shots. Apparently a local resident inadvertently recorded this while he was Facetiming or Skyping with a girl.

Could a newly released audio provide more clues on what led up to Michael Brown's shooting death?

The FBI has questioned a man who says he recorded audio of gunfire at the time Brown was shot by Ferguson police on August 9, the man's attorney told CNN.

In the recording, a quick series of shots can be heard, followed by a pause and then another quick succession of shots.
Forensic audio expert Paul Ginsberg analyzed the recording and said he detected at least 10 gunshots -- a cluster of six, followed by four.

"I was very concerned about that pause ... because it's not just the number of gunshots, it's how they're fired," the man's attorney, Lopa Blumenthal, told CNN's Don Lemon. "And that has a huge relevance on how this case might finally end up."


The man, who asked that his identity not be revealed, lives near the site of the shooting and was close enough to have heard the gunshots, his attorney said.

He was speaking to a friend on a video chat service and happened to be recording the conversation at the same time Brown was shot, Blumenthal said.


The attorney said she learned of the man's recording late last week from a mutual friend.

"I had to get his consent before I could reach out to the FBI," Blumenthal said.

CNN cannot independently verify the authenticity of the tape and has asked the FBI for confirmation of their interview with the man who made the recording.

It's difficult to prove from the audio why the pause took place or whose narrative it supports.

Attorney Chris Chestnut said he was surprised by the gap in shots.

"It's the pause that gives most concern in a police shooting, especially with an unarmed victim, because at this point Mr. Brown is defenseless -- he has no weapon," said Chestnut, who represented the family of Jonathan Ferrell.

Like Brown, Ferrell was an unarmed African-American man who was shot and killed by a white police officer.

But if the gunfire heard on the audio is indeed from the Brown incident, the pause doesn't automatically suggest wrongful intent by the officer.

"To be fair, there could be other explanations for that pause," said attorney Van Jones, co-host of CNN's Crossfire. "Maybe the officer will say, 'Well I fired, and he kept advancing, so I fired again.'"

Witnesses and a friend of Officer Darren Wilson have given conflicting accounts of what led up to Brown's death.[/B]
Lawyer: Audio shows pause in fire in Ferguson - CNN.com

OAW
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 01:35 PM
 
Move along, nothing to see here. (Black cop, dead white kid)


On the surface, the cases appear nearly identical: Michael Brown and Dillon Taylor, two young, unarmed men with sketchy criminal pasts shot to death by police officers two days apart.

But while the world knows of the highly publicized situation involving 18-year-old Mr. Brown, whose Aug. 9 death in Ferguson, Missouri touched off violence, protests and an angry national debate, most people outside Utah have never heard of 20-year-old Mr. Taylor.



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz3BWM2APHM
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
It looks like they missed a great opportunity to loot and pillage.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 02:20 PM
 
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 02:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It looks like they missed a great opportunity to loot and pillage.
That is an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory thing to say.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 03:00 PM
 
@OreoCookie

I would argue the color and cut of their uniforms fall into the "superficial difference" category. At the least, I question whether the intent behind behind it was to show these citizens "who's boss", or it was something more pedestrian, such as "our normal gear is hot, uncomfortable, and doesn't have load bearing clips to hold all this shit we've been asked to carry".

As for the assault rifles, you'll get no argument from me that one seems like a bad idea in a protest/riot situation. Apart from the point you bring up it could easily get the crowd to stampede, how exactly do you use it without endangering innocent civilians? What scenario could possibly occur which the danger to innocent civilians is bigger from the perp in a crowd compared to shooting a rifle into a crowd?

That said, there's still the example of "I'll ****ing kill you guy". They were still handing them out as of a few days ago. This makes me think it's plausible there is a thought process behind it other than "let's play war... because we can".

All I want is to hear the rationale before I cast my judgment.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 03:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That is an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory thing to say.
Unfortunately that's par for the course with him.

Regarding the rather limited substance of his point. First of all “not a white officer” does not necessarily mean a "black officer". Especially in Utah. Additionally, there is a fundamental difference in the optics of being an unarmed person shot with your hands in the air vs being an unarmed person shot while reaching into your pants. If it was simplistically about Brown being black and Wilson being white ... then when two white officers shot an allegedly mentally unstable black man with 9 bullets ... 2 after he was already on the ground ... a couple of days ago STL would have been up in arms about that too. But of course, that doesn't fit into the trollish narrative so never mind all that.

OAW
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 03:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Unfortunately that's par for the course with him.
I really don't think so. His posts usually don't raise my hackles.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I really don't think so. His posts usually don't raise my hackles.
I wasn't speaking about his posts in general. Those are generally in the "Libs and Dems" category with respect to substance. So I just give them the consideration that they are due. But regarding this particular topic he seems to revel in trolling.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 05:28 PM
 
@OreoCookie

Here's some "Chicago style" riot cops.



That's pretty freakin intimidating.

With me, and maybe this applies only to me, since the military has earned my faith, I actually make positive mental associations with a military uniform.

The association I make with the cops pictured above is they exist purely to bust heads.
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 05:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I would argue the color and cut of their uniforms fall into the "superficial difference" category.
Yes and no. Psychologically, it makes a big difference what gear the police take with them. You see that in some pictures I've linked to the police wear pretty much regular uniforms, and I think it makes a difference if you wear riot gear which looks as if it is zombie resistant or essentially plain police uniforms. Typically, the police should have zero interest to escalate the situation. So policing the traditional Ostermarsch peace demonstrations does not require riot gear while dealing with radical soccer »fans« might.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
As for the assault rifles, you'll get no argument from me that one seems like a bad idea in a protest/riot situation. Apart from the point you bring up it could easily get the crowd to stampede, how exactly do you use it without endangering innocent civilians?
Exceptional armaments require exceptional training. I was quite surprised that some vocal American soldiers of all people seem to know more about crowd control than the entire FPD.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
That's pretty freakin intimidating.
Bingo.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The association I make with the cops pictured above is they exist purely to bust heads.
There may be situations where riot gear may be necessary, but usually it leads to escalation. Certainly, if you want to keep things calm, you wanna do the exact opposite.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 06:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Yes and no. Psychologically, it makes a big difference what gear the police take with them. You see that in some pictures I've linked to the police wear pretty much regular uniforms, and I think it makes a difference if you wear riot gear which looks as if it is zombie resistant or essentially plain police uniforms. Typically, the police should have zero interest to escalate the situation. So policing the traditional Ostermarsch peace demonstrations does not require riot gear while dealing with radical soccer »fans« might.

Exceptional armaments require exceptional training. I was quite surprised that some vocal American soldiers of all people seem to know more about crowd control than the entire FPD.
I agree the cops should never intend to escalate, but the lines between preparation for contingencies and provocation are blurry.

The difference in understanding crowd control doesn't surprise me at all. That was on the menu in Iraq. It's not for a suburban or county cop.

What's baffling to me is St. Louis is filled with cops who have dealt with protests, and yet at no point along the line was it saw fit to ask them for help. I have this hunch there was some bullshit departmental pride which if it hadn't existed would have led to a much different outcome.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 06:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Bingo.
Which led to my original question comparing the intimidation factor of what the FPD and County police were wearing (not counting the automatic weapons).

WRT escalation, I want to know why the FPD and County Police came loaded for bear. I want to know what their thought process was.

It's possible it's as simple as "because we have it", I don't really buy that. Things aren't usually that simple, even in a non-complex situation. This one was very complex.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 26, 2014, 07:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...a/#post4287541

A burnt building looks like Iraq? I guess my home town has looked like Iraq a few times this year.
What am I supposed to get from the above link that I didn't already get from what you've said more recently?

Mine was in response to the ludicrous notion that somehow the cops were more interested in protecting themselves with all this armor when it seems to me they'd much rather be back at the precinct, sipping coffee on a slow night.
ebuddy
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 09:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
What am I supposed to get from the above link that I didn't already get from what you've said more recently?

Mine was in response to the ludicrous notion that somehow the cops were more interested in protecting themselves with all this armor when it seems to me they'd much rather be back at the precinct, sipping coffee on a slow night.
Intimidation.
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 10:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
WRT escalation, I want to know why the FPD and County Police came loaded for bear. I want to know what their thought process was.

It's possible it's as simple as "because we have it", I don't really buy that. Things aren't usually that simple, even in a non-complex situation. This one was very complex.
If I had to guess, I'd say they have had an antagonistic relationship with their community for years and they felt that the public outcry against an action of a police officer was directed against »them« (FPD members) as a whole. And then they wanted to show their colors towards (against) the community of Ferguson. This error was compounded by FPD officers not having the proper training to actually use their equipment and do efficient crowd control.

I think this whole conflict is just an indication of the bad relationship between the police force and the people they are supposed to serve. Just imagine what the relationship on the street is like. And I can tell you that your attitude towards police changes if you get searched time and again just because of your looks. (Happened to my brother for several years.)
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 11:36 AM
 
There's one change I'd make to that scenario, which has pretty vast implications to the conclusion one assumes.

They were probably told things were going to get out of hand by either informants of their own, or by police in other suburbs, who learned from their own informants that numerous agent provocateurs were going to insert themselves into the situation.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 11:51 AM
 
The vast majority of those arrested of late are not from Ferguson. Some are from as far away as LA and NY.

I may have missed it, I take it the local PD doesn't have dash cams etc? In the Dillon Taylor case the South Salt Lake PD says they are going to release the officer's body cam footage. If the Ferguson PD does have dash/body cam footage it could be waiting for the trial to reveal it.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 11:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I take it the local PD doesn't have dash cams etc?
I asked the same thing. Apparently not. I didn't realize they were even considered optional.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 11:59 AM
 
Of course they're optional.

As I said when asked about why the FPD bought a humvee instead of dashcam systems.

A dashcam system isn't cheap. Apart from the outlay for the cams themselves, you need full-time IT people maintaining the system and preserving the chain of evidence.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:10 PM
 
Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US and is still has only one precinct testing body-cams.

Paper on the results so far.
Deploying Officer Body-Worn Cameras in Phoenix
By:
Professor Charles Katz, Director, Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety, Arizona State University & Commander Mike Kurtenbach, Phoenix Police Department
August 8, 2014

In 2010, the Phoenix City Manager’s Office led a task force to address citizen concern about the interaction between the police and the public. The result was the development of 34 recommendations designed to increase communication with, and confidence in, the police. One recommendation called for a pilot program to deploy dash cameras and a small-scale pilot to test the feasibility of using body cameras instead of dash cameras.

The Phoenix Police Department (PPD) applied for and received federal funding through the Bureau of Justice Assistance’s (BJA) Smart Policing Initiative to conduct a large-scale pilot study to understand issues and challenges associated with a department-wide deployment of body cameras.

The project was implemented in the in PPD’s Maryvale Police Precinct. This precinct has 100 patrol officers assigned to one of two squad areas, it is 15 square miles with approximately 115,000 residents and has high rates of both property and violent crime. Half of the officers were assigned body cameras; the other half of the officers served as the comparison group.

Officer training and camera deployment was relatively seamless, while managing the data officers capture is appreciably more challenging. All videos associated with a criminal prosecution must be made available for discovery purposes; it is imperative City and County prosecutors are invited to participate in the establishment of policies and procedures governing the management of video evidence.

Initial analysis of self-reported pre- and post-test data collected from police officers suggested following the deployment of body cameras, officers were significantly more likely to believe the body camera equipment was comfortable to wear and easy to use. However, a high proportion of officers indicated they did not believe that body cameras should be adopted by other police agencies and had concern about their potential negative impact on police officers.

Officers believed the cameras would be used as a tool to identify misconduct not associated with a citizen complaint. Officers believed supervisors would go on “fishing expeditions” to identify minor policy violations that would not have come to light if video did not exist.

Despite the officers’ concerns, an analysis of arrest data indicated officer productivity increased dramatically after officers were assigned body cameras, compared to the comparison group. Following the deployment of body cameras, the average daily number of arrests increased approximately 16 percent.

Over that same period of time, complaints against officers who wore a camera declined significantly compared to those who did not. The data showed complaints declined by about 44 percent. A similar trend was observed in self-reported data with officers who wore a camera self-reporting 60 percent fewer complaints during a 30-day period.

PPD continues to use officer body-worn cameras in the Maryvale Precinct and has plans to expand their use in the precinct in the upcoming year.

For more information about PPD’s use of officer body-worn cameras, visit Phoenix, Arizona | Smart Policing.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014 - 11:30
Initial article on the test

Police interactions are increasingly recorded, not only on cellphones, but by officers.

Cameras have been on the dashboards of police cruisers for years. Most Goodyear police and Arizona Department of Public Safety vehicles have them. Glendale is the latest Valley city adding cameras to its patrol fleet.

The next innovation places the cameras on officers themselves, either on shirt collars or, like Bluetooth devices, over the ear.

Lake Havasu City's police force recently became the first in Arizona to purchase a handful of Scottsdale-based Taser International's Axon cameras.

Police in Phoenix and Mesa are testing the on-person cameras.

Costs are sure to be a factor: Each camera costs $1,700, plus an annual $1,200 each to store the footage.

But the devices could lead to changes in police investigations and prosecutions.

Dashboard cameras capture only what occurs near a police cruiser, but officers' cameras provide video of whatever they see.

Footage of reported crimes could mean that fewer cases go to trial. Investigations of officer-involved shootings could be concluded more quickly. A complaint that an officer has been rude could almost instantly be verified or dismissed. When cases do go to trial, the cameras could provide critical evidence.



Read more: Officers wearing video cameras
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Of course they're optional.
They can't farm it out to the county IT or something?
I mean, seriously, the reason for dash cams isn't that they're economical, its that they serve as a objective witness for both sides, which is rare and valuable.

We're entering an age where we're going to start seeing body cameras integrated into the police. Not having a dash-cam feels like not having a seat-belt in an age of airbags.

(I'd like to know the % of police department with dash-cams, but my google-f has failed thus far)
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US and is still has only one precinct testing body-cams.
Body-cams are not dash-cams.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
They can't farm it out to the county IT or something?
I mean, seriously, the reason for dash cams isn't that they're economical, its that they serve as a objective witness for both sides, which is rare and valuable.

We're entering an age where we're going to start seeing body cameras integrated into the police. Not having a dash-cam feels like not having a seat-belt in an age of airbags.

(I'd like to know the % of police department with dash-cams, but my google-f has failed thus far)
There are two separate issues here.

Should cops have dash/body cams?

What are the practical issues of implementation.


WRT the first, you'll get no argument from me cops should have them. Especially considering how many cops seem to lack a basic understanding of the Constitution.

When it comes to the second, there's a legit question to where the money is going to come from. Most PDs have budget issues. If I was the county, and you wanted to foist dealing with your dashcams, I'd say "pay me".
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
There are two separate issues here.

Should cops have dash/body cams?

What are the practical issues of implementation.


WRT the first, you'll get no argument from me cops should have them. Especially considering how many cops seem to lack a basic understanding of the Constitution.

When it comes to the second, there's a legit question to where the money is going to come from. Most PDs have budget issues. If I was the county, and you wanted to foist dealing with your dashcams, I'd say "pay me".
I know this is a fairly agreeable statement but I have to say it – money we're spending to combat terrorism (TSA, Homeland Security, etc.) would be better spent teching up our police departments, have more tangible results, and would likely help restore some civil liberties.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:43 PM
 
I'll add there is no question there's going to be a "certain segment" of the police who are going to fight against cams.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:45 PM
 
And I'd like to add drug interdiction to the list of things we're wasting our time and money on.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
And I'd like to add drug interdiction to the list of things we're wasting our time and money on.
Which is part of the reason for the militarization of the police. Win-win.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 12:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'll add there is no question there's going to be a "certain segment" of the police who are going to fight against cams.
…and I'm sympathetic to that to a certain degree. There are details to worry about, etc.

And then you realize that your company reads every email you send and sees every site you browse to, etc. and you have to come to terms with the fact that life isn't as private as you think it is.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I think this whole conflict is just an indication of the bad relationship between the police force and the people they are supposed to serve. Just imagine what the relationship on the street is like. And I can tell you that your attitude towards police changes if you get searched time and again just because of your looks. (Happened to my brother for several years.)
I wish I could express to you just how much of an understatement this is when it comes to this area.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:09 PM
 
You could legalize drugs and ****in end that almost overnight.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
…and I'm sympathetic to that to a certain degree. There are details to worry about, etc.

And then you realize that your company reads every email you send and sees every site you browse to, etc. and you have to come to terms with the fact that life isn't as private as you think it is.
At least with an employer you've willingly entered into a contract, and have the right to terminate it.

I don't remember the NSA asking me to sign shit.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I don't remember the NSA asking me to sign shit.
It's fine print in invisible ink on your tax forms.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
You could legalize drugs and ****in end that almost overnight.
Ain't that the damned truth. Every time I could have busted someone on a simple pot charge, I've made them dump it out on the ground, but just in the normal course of events, I'm sure I could have made at least 20 arrests by now.

"You going to arrest me?"
"Do you want me to?"
"No sir!"
"Then empty that out on the ground and go home."
*look of shock and disbelief*
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
It's fine print in invisible ink on your tax forms.
And the funny part is it only has to mention the relevant clause is in your iTunes terms of service.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 01:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
Ain't that the damned truth. Every time I could have busted someone on a simple pot charge, I've made them dump it out on the ground, but just in the normal course of events, I'm sure I could have made at least 20 arrests by now.

"You going to arrest me?"
"Do you want me to?"
"No sir!"
"Then empty that out on the ground and go home."
*look of shock and disbelief*
The sad thing is I'm pretty sure you're breaking the law by doing that.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2014, 02:02 PM
 
The DA told us to use our own discretion in those situations, when there are no other factors, the backlog is an unholy nightmare. But really, I was doing that before he said anything. F*ck it, I have more important things to do than run in a kid with half a gram of weed in his pocket.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:13 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2