Baltimore Police DOJ Report

[Landlord]

After Ferguson, after Baltimore, after others, I've personally heard a lot of dismissing of the perceived slights by the protestors, how protesting doesn't do anything, is misguided, etc.

 

But then, the DOJ investigates Ferguson and finds a nasty, sh**ty culture of racism prevalent.

 

Then, the DOJ investigates Boston and finds this:

 

 

 

 

A Justice Department investigation found that the Baltimore Police Department engages in unconstitutional practices that lead to disproportionate rates of stops, searches and arrests of African-Americans, and excessive use of force against juveniles and people with mental health disabilities.

The Department of Justice monitored the department's policing methods for more than a year at the request of the Baltimore Police Department, after the 2015 death of Freddie Gray, who suffered a fatal injury while in police custody.

The long-awaited report, which covered data from 2010 to 2016, attributed the practices to "systemic deficiencies" in training, policies, and accountability structures that "fail to equip officers with the tools they need to police effectively."

Gray's death touched off protests and riots in Baltimore and beyond, fueling ongoing debate over racial bias in policing that has drawn the Justice Department's attention. Though the report does not directly reference the actions of officers in the Gray case, it notes that "recent events" underscored the importance of mutual trust between law enforcement and the people they serve, a recurring theme in DOJ investigations of police departments following police-involved deaths of African-Americans.

A DOJ investigation of the Ferguson, Missouri, Police Department after the shooting death of Michael Brown reached a similar conclusion: a "pattern and practice" of discrimination against African-Americans that targeted them disproportionately for traffic stops, use of force, and jail sentences. So did the investigation after the shooting death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, concluding that Cleveland police have a pattern of excessive force.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/us/baltimore-justice-department-report/

 

 

 

Baltimore police regularly performed unconstitutional stops, frisks and arrests ― which disproportionately targeted black residents ― and held an “us-versus-them” mentality, the report says. The Justice Department also found that officers retaliated against citizens, took a lax approach to sexual assault cases, employed excessive force too freely and used slurs against LGBT people.

Here are some of the most damning findings in the report.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/baltimore-police-doj-report_us_57ab4624e4b0db3be07c7e8a

[JJ Husker]

I know you probably won't like this question but it is of genuine curiosity and not some veiled effort to discredit the DOJ. Do you know if any other impartial, un-biased parties have also conducted investigations into any of these police departments?

 

I'm not necessarily saying I don't believe the DOJ findings but it would be nice to have them verified by another source that wasn't, how shall we say, perceived to be in bed with Obama and the Clintons as Loretta Lynch may appear to be. Considering it is Baltimore, Boston and Ferguson we're talking about here, my gut feeling is the findings are probably correct but it sure would be reassuring to see it verified by another source that is not questionably politically involved.

[knapplc]

You're basically saying that the entire Department of Justice is rigged, and you don't buy their explanation.

 

Which is no different than Black Lives Matters saying the system is rigged against them.

 

Funny how that works.

[Landlord]

You're basically saying that the entire Department of Justice is rigged, and you don't buy their explanation.

 

Which is no different than Black Lives Matters saying the system is rigged against them.

 

Funny how that works.

 

 

Also funny how revealing it is when (not saying this is you, JJ) someone is so quick to dismiss BLM while also being so quick to give the benefit of the doubt to the police department, the DOJ, or whoever.

 

 

 

As to your question JJ, there probably isn't any comprehensive unbiased findings on the exact same issue, but the amount of data and evidence conducted by researches, sociologists, economists, and so on that point towards racial inequalities built into the systems of America is....overwhelming.

[knapplc]

The CDC would be a really good source for data like that. It's too bad they've been prevented from doing any research along those lines.

[JJ Husker]

The CDC would be a really good source for data like that. It's too bad they've been prevented from doing any research along those lines.

I agree. It is ridiculous that they haven't been allowed to do studies on things like this or gun violence.

 

I'm not saying I don't buy the DOJ findings but rather that I don't necessarily trust them to be unbiased. And yes, that is very similar to BLM or blacks generally not trusting law enforcement. We both have legitimate reasons to be skeptical.

 

IMO, too many of the institutions surrounding Washington are unnecessarily politicized, mostly due to Presidential appointments. Would be nice if they were more independent and not suspiciously beholden to the person or party that put them in power. It would be another desirable check and balance in our system.

[knapplc]

What legitimate reason do we, the citizens, have to believe that the Department of Justice is unduly influenced by Obama and/or Clinton? How have they influenced the DOJ or Loretta Lynch?

[JJ Husker]

I would call it more of a general suspicion of politicians, political appointees, and the way things seem to work in Washington. So legitimate?......nothing substantiated.

 

But a couple things I've noticed or have heard about in the press.

Bill Clinton had a private meeting with Lynch on an airport tarmac as the DOJ was involved in the investigation of Hillary's email fiasco. Of course they only talked about grandkids and so forth... even though Lynch has apologized for the inappropriateness of the meeting. You probably heard about this one.

 

Also I've noticed that the talking points out of the DOJ and the White House and the Clinton campaign as regards the whole BLM and police matters seem to mirror each other. It seems like more of a concerted effort than independent coincidence.

 

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

Do you blindly trust that the AG is not influenced by the person or political party that appointed them? That such an influence could not extend throughout the DOJ? I may just be more suspicious of politicians....are there any good reasons to trust them? Any?

[NM11046]

Ok, so let's say they're biased (I don't agree with that, but I'll play along) do you think that they'd push the numbers as high as they were in this Baltimore report? Wouldn't that be just a tad flagrant?

[JJ Husker]

Ok, so let's say they're biased (I don't agree with that, but I'll play along) do you think that they'd push the numbers as high as they were in this Baltimore report? Wouldn't that be just a tad flagrant?

I don't believe I've said that I don't believe their findings. Just that I am a but suspicious. In my first post I said that my gut feeling was they were correct about Baltimore, Boston and Ferguson. I was simply trying to raise the point that the DOJ or any government agency that is controlled by political appointees may not be the most unbiased source. That is why I asked if any independent outfits may have done similar studies. I don't regularly wear a tinfoil hat but I do not blindly trust the government either. Everything is too politicized these days. I wish that weren't the case but I think it is. I won't argue the point with anyone who doesn't feel that way.

[NM11046]

 

Ok, so let's say they're biased (I don't agree with that, but I'll play along) do you think that they'd push the numbers as high as they were in this Baltimore report? Wouldn't that be just a tad flagrant?

I don't believe I've said that I don't believe their findings. Just that I am a but suspicious. In my first post I said that my gut feeling was they were correct about Baltimore, Boston and Ferguson. I was simply trying to raise the point that the DOJ or any government agency that is controlled by political appointees may not be the most unbiased source. That is why I asked if any independent outfits may have done similar studies. I don't regularly wear a tinfoil hat but I do not blindly trust the government either. Everything is too politicized these days. I wish that weren't the case but I think it is. I won't argue the point with anyone who doesn't feel that way.

 

Fair enough JJ. I've been told by many (family and colleagues) that I'm naive and because I believe that people as a general rule follow the law and do the right thing I sometimes miss the boat on the apparent gray area stuff. Just isn't good for my headspace to linger in the negative. Yes, my bubble is very nice and comfy inside.