Jump to content

Police Reform


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

Qualified immunity DOES give cops a blanket way to violate people's rights...no need to lie about it at all:

 

Example:

 

I bring a camera to the federal building and I take photos.  I'm approached by a police officer on a public sidewalk who asks what I'm doing.  I tell him I'm taking photos of the federal building.  He tells me this is something I am not allowed to do.

 

This is a false statement.  I'm in public.  The 1st amendment grants me the ability to photograph anything in public I can see.  I tell the officer that photography is not a crime and that I am in public on a public sidewalk.  I am then asked for my identification.  I ask the officer what crime he thinks I have committed...he says "I don't know yet".

 

I respectfully decline saying "I do not wish to be identified at this time and since I have not committed a crime nor violated any laws, you do not have the right to identify me"

 

The police officer then says "place your hands behind your back, you are under arrest"

 

I ask "what crime have I committed?"

 

He states "failure to identify"

 

4th amendment:

 

He has no probable cause to arrest me or ask for an ID (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes).  Yet, here he is doing it.  He twists my arm and wrenches my wrist behind my back...my shoulder pops...I accidentally drop my camera...it shatters on the sidewalk.  So much for my new DSLR.

 

He grabs my ID out of my pocket and calls for backup.  5 other police officers arrive.  6 police officers for a photographer taking pictures.

 

I'm placed sitting on the ground.  30 minutes pass...he's identified me now.  They uncuff me and say "we're not going to charge you with anything, you're free to go about your business but when a police officer asks you for an ID, you must comply".

 

This is NOT true, these cops violated my rights and broke my property...seized it, deleted all the photos I took and then didn't charge me with anything.  I'm left with a broken 4 thousand dollar (with attachments) DSLR camera, a partially torn rotator cuff in my shoulder...and no recourse to fix either.

 

I can sue, but it will cost money and I most likely won't win because of qualified immunity.

I can file a formal complaint (and did, but nothing happened)

 

Different levels of this same situation have played out numerous times for me in numerous cities around this country.

 

This is how rights are violated without repercussion and without correction.  This is how police feel they can continue to do so.  It starts with small things like 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment violations...and then it escalates from there. 

 

I disagree as there's ALOT more to it than that that you simply don't know about. And your example is your example so it's going to fit your argument, nothing more nothing less. IMO In your example the cop wasn't right from the beginning, there's no case law that I'm aware of for qualified immunity to be used, it's the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. 

 

Qualified immunity doesn't just apply to laws and case law, it also applies to protect officers from poor policies written by administrators and approved by city and county attorneys that simply don't know what they're doing. Without qualified immunity officers would be hung out to dry and take on all the liability for policies written by morons and the administrators and entities these officers work for would be liable for nothing. 

 

 

  • Plus1 2
Link to post

  • Replies 896
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've always felt the police should be held to a higher standard of obeying the law, compared to the rest of the citizenry.   When in reality they're held to a much lower standard.

@Husker_Bohunk I would never answer if someone talked to me the way you’re talking to BRI. I’d find they aren’t worth talking to. You didn’t even attempt to approach this neutrally.

Posted Images

De-escalation Keeps Protesters And Police Safer. Departments Respond With Force Anyway.

Quote

Three federal commissions concluded that when police escalate force those efforts can often go wrong, creating the very violence that force was meant to prevent.

Quote

 

Researchers have spent 50 years studying the way crowds of protesters and crowds of police behave — and what happens when the two interact. One thing they will tell you is that when the police respond by escalating force — wearing riot gear from the start, or using tear gas on protesters — it doesn’t work. In fact, disproportionate police force is one of the things that can make a peaceful protest not so peaceful. But if we know that (and have known that for decades), why are police still doing it?

 

“There’s this failed mindset of ‘if we show force, immediately we will deter criminal activity or unruly activity’ and show me where that has worked,” said Scott Thomson, the former chief of police in Camden, New Jersey.

 

“That’s the primal response,” he said. “The adrenaline starts to pump, the temperature in the room is rising, and you want to go one step higher. But what we need to know as professionals is that there are times, if we go one step higher, we are forcing them to go one step higher.”

 

 

Link to post

Well I'm a supervisor and don't have a police union to protect me soooooo I guess **** me right?! <_< Now I'm not a kind human being because I have an opinion on the matter from a different perspective than yours?! Cool...... you have your opinion then. I'll have mine in the end as well. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to post

8 hours ago, BIGREDIOWAN said:

Qualified immunity doesn't just apply to laws and case law, it also applies to protect officers from poor policies written by administrators and approved by city and county attorneys that simply don't know what they're doing. Without qualified immunity officers would be hung out to dry and take on all the liability for policies written by morons and the administrators and entities these officers work for would be liable for nothing. 

 

 

This is the biggest issue. There has to be a better middle ground than currently exists. We don't want police to be living in fear while on duty because they think they might get sued, and then get hurt because of it. We also don't want the wrong people to become police because they see that police officers get away with crimes.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

This is the biggest issue. There has to be a better middle ground than currently exists. We don't want police to be living in fear while on duty because they think they might get sued, and then get hurt because of it. We also don't want the wrong people to become police because they see that police officers get away with crimes.

Just wanted to say thank you and I agree with you! :thumbs

  • Plus1 5
Link to post

Ugh.

 

 

2/ Here's active duty Mount Vernon Officer Joseph Campo. He said his narcotics unit colleagues planted drugs, falsified search warrants, and got undercover officers to identify the wrong suspects. He asked the whistleblower not to tell anyone:
3/ In another call, the officer specifically says how he witnessed his colleague Detective Camilo Antonini frame people for drug sales "on numerous occasions." The detective and his teammates have been accused of corruption and brutality by civilians for years. He's still active:
4/ In another call, Officer Avion Lee describes how her colleague brutally beat up a man in Mount Vernon. She said her supervisor told them to concoct a story about a drug deal to justify the encounter. Listen to the recording of her here:
wnyc.org/story/mount-ve…
6/ Last year he went to the DA with his secret recordings. But, he says, a DA investigator confirmed to him that they didn't act on the tapes for 9 months. The DA's office wouldn't comment. In the meantime, several people went to prison as prosecutors sat on what they knew.
7/ Defense attorneys + some former prosecutors argue the DA's office committed major constitutional violations by failing to mention the allegations. Other prosecutors argue they should have at least delayed or dropped cases until they could figure out what was going on.
8/ Instead, the DA's office argued, people who now know about these allegations (because of our reporting) can ask for their convictions to be reviewed, or if their investigation ever substantiates anything they'll do a review themselves.
9/ @AlvinBraggNYC a former federal prosecutor in Westchester said this wait-and-see approach discounts the lives of people shipped off to prison. (Disclaimer: Bragg supports the DA’s primary candidate Mimi Rocah) EZlo__cXkAAwr8X.jpg
10/ Damon Jones of @BlkWestchesterM argues prosecutors would not have done this to defendants from majority white communities. Mount Vernon is one of the county’s few black majority cities: EZlpS_pXkAU96Z_.jpg
11/ We chronicled the story of Henderson Clarke, one of the few defendants we found who was willing to fight his case. He had evidence that he was in a different state at the time of an alleged drug sale. He was incensed when we told him about the recordings. EZlp536XQAUkL86.jpg
13/ Mount Vernon @MayorSPH was elected this year promising change. Her city’s statement to us says they’ll investigate. On the other hand, they seem to be skeptical of the evidence brought by the whistleblower. EZlr-dzWkAECL-u.jpg
Link to post
Quote

“I don’t think so,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said, asked if he thought Congress would pass reform legislation. “I highly suspect it would be political.” 

 

Does this moron know what his job is?

 

Like I've been saying, I don't know what the Democrats are doing for reform, but at least they don't try to shut down any and all talk about it.

 

 

Quote

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said that he was urging the Justice Department to reinstitute a pattern and practice review of local police departments, which he noted would be easier than getting legislation passed in the Capitol. 

 

“I think it’s pretty hard to come up with national police reform measures,” Blunt said, “which is why I think it’s better that the Justice Department work with individual police departments ... to help them determine what they could be doing better.” 

 

At least this dude has an explanation. But Trump's DOJ isn't going to do s#!t.

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/500809-calls-for-police-reform-sparks-divisions-in-congress

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...