Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 30, 2015, 07:50:17 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
86374 Posts in 2276 Topics by 1069 Members
Latest Member: ctelerant
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  DBMA Martial Arts Forum
| |-+  Martial Arts Topics
| | |-+  Law Enforcement issues and LE in action
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] Print
Author Topic: Law Enforcement issues and LE in action  (Read 139163 times)
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #550 on: November 25, 2014, 10:18:00 AM »

Attack a police officer and bad things will happen to you.

Meanwhile, the racial industrial complex ignores theblack on black homicide rate.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #551 on: November 25, 2014, 12:00:58 PM »

Apparently there were 1-2 shots inside the patrol car, which is where MB's hand was shot and blood splatter shows that he moved away and then turned and came back towards the officer for more than 20 feet.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #552 on: November 25, 2014, 03:22:32 PM »

Plenty of evidence that corroborates the witness statements that this was a lawful use of force.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6485


« Reply #553 on: November 25, 2014, 06:37:03 PM »

"Attack a police officer and bad things will happen to you."

  - Agree. Attacking an armed cop is beyond stupid in so many ways.

"Plenty of evidence that corroborates the witness statements that this was a lawful use of force."

  - I agree.  It was a very credible statement that the officer believed if he took another hit he could be knocked out or killed. 

My question, if we had the film of this and watched and studied it and were assigned to train a group of officers tomorrow how to handle the same set of circumstances next time, is there anything we would ask an officer to do differently?


Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #554 on: November 25, 2014, 06:54:46 PM »

Well, distance is your friend. You don't want to pinned in your vehicle as a larger, stronger assailant goes for your sidearm.

The hard truth is that an officer can do everything perfectly and still end up in a flag draped coffin.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #555 on: November 25, 2014, 10:27:26 PM »

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/11/trayvon-and-mike.php
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #556 on: November 25, 2014, 10:42:12 PM »

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/11/ferguson-grand-jury-police-officers-account-of-shooting/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #557 on: November 26, 2014, 10:10:47 AM »

Rudy Giuliani recommends the testimony of Witness #10.  Can you find it for us?
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #558 on: November 26, 2014, 11:07:52 AM »

Rudy Giuliani recommends the testimony of Witness #10.  Can you find it for us?


I'll look.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #559 on: November 26, 2014, 08:18:33 PM »

Somewhere in here? 

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370840-14-43984-care-main.html

Apparently there is no search function.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #560 on: November 27, 2014, 01:24:58 AM »

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/11/25/documents-read-grand-jury-witness-testimony/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #561 on: November 28, 2014, 09:41:55 AM »

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/11/officer-david-smith-never-lived-to-tell-about-enraged-perp-who-stole-his-service-gun/

Unknown if the killer of Officer Smith was also a gentle giant.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #562 on: November 28, 2014, 12:06:39 PM »

Thanks for the testimony URL.  I found Witness #10-- very compelling.

Nice find on the Officer Smith tragedy.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #563 on: December 02, 2014, 09:45:45 PM »



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaS5eJaJYpE&feature=player_detailpage
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #564 on: December 03, 2014, 10:57:33 AM »



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/us/politics/race-relations-not-a-new-issue-for-loretta-lynch-attorney-general-nominee.html?emc=edit_th_20141203&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193&_r=0
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #565 on: December 04, 2014, 10:36:06 AM »

Here's the facts as I currently understand them to be:

Local merchants (all or most black?) went to the police station to complain about 6'3" 350 pound Garner (31 arrests to his credit) causing problems in front of their stores and driving away business.   The squad sent was led by a black female sergeant sent by a black precinct commander.

In the footage we have all seen repeatedly I am not seeing ANY "chokehold" at all.  I see a basic "over/under" as part of a team takedown.  

As far as the numerous times Garner says "I can't breathe" goes, a) people being arrested say excrement all the time (You're breaking my arm!  You're killing me! etc) b) if he can't breathe, he can't talk.  Bottom line, readily understandable that the cops blew this off.

Coroner's report shows he was seriously overweight, diabetic, and asmatic.

For me an easy call that the police acted correctly and that the racial pandering has begun.   AG Holder has announced an investigation and the President has already blathered about uneuqal justice.  Somehow this goes unnoticed

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/12/new-black-panthers-plot-to-blow-up-st-louis-arch-holder-indicts-leaders-on-minor-gun-charges/

« Last Edit: December 04, 2014, 10:39:30 AM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6485


« Reply #566 on: December 04, 2014, 05:42:20 PM »

Here's the facts as I currently understand them to be:

Local merchants (all or most black?) went to the police station to complain about 6'3" 350 pound Garner (31 arrests to his credit) causing problems in front of their stores and driving away business.   The squad sent was led by a black female sergeant sent by a black precinct commander.

In the footage we have all seen repeatedly I am not seeing ANY "chokehold" at all.  I see a basic "over/under" as part of a team takedown.  

As far as the numerous times Garner says "I can't breathe" goes, a) people being arrested say excrement all the time (You're breaking my arm!  You're killing me! etc) b) if he can't breathe, he can't talk.  Bottom line, readily understandable that the cops blew this off.

Coroner's report shows he was seriously overweight, diabetic, and asmatic.

For me an easy call that the police acted correctly and that the racial pandering has begun.   AG Holder has announced an investigation and the President has already blathered about uneuqal justice.  Somehow this goes unnoticed

I like Crafty's take on this.  I was disturbed to see Charles Krauthammer call the Grand Jury verdict incomprehensible.  http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/225948-krauthammer-staten-island-grand-jury-decision-totally-incomprehensible  I have not viewed the video.  Good point that if you can hear him on audio/video saying he can't breathe, then he is breathing.  The law against selling untaxed, loose cigarettes is a whole, other issue.  I have pointed out many times that no one knows how many laws a simple lemonade stand is breaking.  This takedown was because of resisting arrest.  They could have used mace, stun gun,or  taken him down in other ways that also could have resulted in death, if it was because of his condition,  A black captain ordered a black sergeant to arrest him.  Blacxk store owners too?  This isn't racial.  You simply don't resist arrest.  When a cop is wrong, we have a system for that.  When a law is wrong, we have a system for that.  In a libertarian state, if it was legal to sell an untaxed product, it still would not be legal to block public access to someone else's business to do that.  That was the complaint that started this, as I understand it.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #567 on: December 04, 2014, 07:46:16 PM »

Thanks for the support.

I learned today that apparently he was left face down and cuffed for quite some time and was "out" by the time he was taken away.    This sort of thing is a well known danger to big fat people and if true the police were seriously out of line.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #568 on: December 05, 2014, 10:48:04 PM »

BODY CAMERAS: Information from the Force Science Institute

Editor's note: In light of recent high profile use-of-force news, increasing pressure for departments to adopt body cameras and a noticeable increase in requests for additional copies of the following Force Science Institute report, we are retransmitting this piece. It is important to note that we are not taking a position against body cameras. We feel that they can provide information that can be helpful to investigators. However, they can be fraught with limitations that MUST be understood in order to ensure fair, accurate and thorough investigations.

[Feel free to widely disseminate the following article, originally transmitted 09-23-14]

10 limitations of body cams you need to know for your protection
A special report from the Force Science Institute

The idea is building that once every cop is equipped with a body camera, the controversy will be taken out of police shootings and other uses of force because "what really happened" will be captured on video for all to see.

Well, to borrow the title from an old Gershwin tune, "It Ain't Necessarily So."

There's no doubt that body cameras--like dash cams, cell phone cams, and surveillance cams--can provide a unique perspective on police encounters and, in most cases, are likely to help officers. But like those other devices, a camera mounted on your uniform or on your head has limitations that need to be understood and considered when evaluating the images they record.

"Rushing to condemn an officer for inappropriate behavior based solely on body-camera evidence can be a dicey proposition," cautions Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Institute. "Certainly, a camera can provide more information about what happened on the street. But it can't necessarily provide all the information needed to make a fair and impartial final judgment. There still may be influential human factors involved, apart from what the camera sees."

In a recent conversation with Force Science News, Lewinski enumerated 10 limitations that are important to keep in mind regarding body-camera evidence (and, for the most part, recordings from other cameras as well) if you are an investigator, a police attorney, a force reviewer, or an involved officer. This information may also be helpful in efforts to educate your community.

1. A camera doesn't follow your eyes or see as they see.

At the current level of development, a body camera is not an eye-tracker like FSI has used in some of its studies of officer attention. That complex apparatus can follow the movement of your eyes and superimpose on video small red circles that mark precisely where you are looking from one microsecond to the next.

"A body camera photographs a broad scene but it can't document where within that scene you are looking at any given instant," Lewinski says. "If you glance away from where the camera is concentrating, you may not see action within the camera frame that appears to be occurring 'right before your eyes.' Likewise, the camera can't acknowledge physiological and psychological phenomena that you may experience under high stress. As a survival mechanism, your brain may suppress some incoming visual images that seem unimportant in a life-threatening situation so you can completely focus very narrowly on the threat. You won't be aware of what your brain is screening out. Your brain may also play visual tricks on you that the camera can't match. If a suspect is driving a vehicle toward you, for example, it will seem to be closer, larger, and faster than it really is because of a phenomenon called 'looming.' Camera footage may not convey the same sense of threat that you experienced.
 
"In short, there can be a huge disconnect between your field of view and your visual perception and the camera's. Later, someone reviewing what's caught on camera and judging your actions could have a profoundly different sense of what happened than you had at the time it was occurring."

2. Some important danger cues can't be recorded.

"Tactile cues that are often important to officers in deciding to use force are difficult for cameras to capture," Lewinski says. "Resistive tension is a prime example.
"You can usually tell when you touch a suspect whether he or she is going to resist. You may quickly apply force as a preemptive measure, but on camera it may look like you made an unprovoked attack, because the sensory cue you felt doesn't record visually."

And, of course, the camera can't record the history and experience you bring to an encounter. "Suspect behavior that may appear innocuous on film to a naive civilian can convey the risk of mortal danger to you as a streetwise officer," Lewinski says. "For instance, an assaultive subject who brings his hands up may look to a civilian like he's surrendering, but to you, based on past experience, that can be a very intimidating and combative movement, signaling his preparation for a fighting attack. The camera just captures the action, not your interpretation."

3. Camera speed differs from the speed of life.

Because body cameras record at much higher speeds than typical convenience store or correctional facility security cameras, it's less likely that important details will be lost in the millisecond gaps between frames, as sometimes happens with those cruder devices.

"But it's still theoretically possible that something as brief as a muzzle flash or the glint of a knife blade that may become a factor in a use-of-force case could still fail to be recorded," Lewinski says.

Of greater consequence, he believes, is the body camera's depiction of action and reaction times.

"Because of the reactionary curve, an officer can be half a second or more behind the action as it unfolds on the screen," Lewinski explains. "Whether he's shooting or stopping shooting, his recognition, decision-making, and physical activation all take time--but obviously can't be shown on camera.

"People who don't understand this reactionary process won't factor it in when viewing the footage. They'll think the officer is keeping pace with the speed of the action as the camera records it. So without knowledgeable input, they aren't likely to understand how an officer can unintentionally end up placing rounds in a suspect's back or firing additional shots after a threat has ended."

4. A camera may see better than you do in low light.

"The high-tech imaging of body cameras allows them to record with clarity in many low-light settings," Lewinski says. "When footage is screened later, it may actually be possible to see elements of the scene in sharper detail than you could at the time the camera was activated.

"If you are receiving less visual information than the camera is recording under time-pressured circumstances, you are going to be more dependent on context and movement in assessing and reacting to potential threats. In dim light, a suspect's posturing will likely mean more to you immediately than some object he's holding. When footage is reviewed later, it may be evident that the object in his hand was a cell phone, say, rather than a gun. If you're expected to have seen that as clearly as the camera did, your reaction might seem highly inappropriate."

On the other hand, he notes, cameras do not always deal well with lighting transitions. "Going suddenly from bright to dim light or vice versa, a camera may briefly blank out images altogether," he says.

5. Your body may block the view.

"How much of a scene a camera captures is highly dependent on where it's positioned and where the action takes place," Lewinski notes. "Depending on location and angle, a picture may be blocked by your own body parts, from your nose to your hands.

"If you're firing a gun or a Taser, for example, a camera on your chest may not record much more than your extended arms and hands. Or just blading your stance may obscure the camera's view. Critical moments within a scenario that you can see may be missed entirely by your body cam because of these dynamics, ultimately masking what a reviewer may need to see to make a fair judgment."

6. A camera only records in 2-D.

Because cameras don't record depth of field--the third dimension that's perceived by the human eye--accurately judging distances on their footage can be difficult.

"Depending on the lens involved, cameras may compress distances between objects or make them appear closer than they really are," Lewinski says. "Without a proper sense of distance, a reviewer may misinterpret the level of threat an officer was facing."

In the Force Science Certification Course, he critiques several camera images in which distance distortion became problematic. In one, an officer's use of force seemed inappropriate because the suspect appears to be too far away to pose an immediate threat. In another, an officer appears to strike a suspect's head with a flashlight when, in fact, the blow was directed at a hand and never touched the head.

"There are technical means for determining distances on 2-D recordings," Lewinski says, "but these are not commonly known or accessed by most investigators."

7. The absence of sophisticated time-stamping may prove critical.

The time-stamping that is automatically imposed on camera footage is a gross number, generally measuring the action minute by minute. "In some high-profile, controversial shooting cases that is not sophisticated enough," Lewinski says. "To fully analyze and explain an officer's perceptions, reaction time, judgment, and decision-making it may be critical to break the action down to units of one-hundredths of a second or even less.

"There are post-production computer programs that can electronically encode footage to those specifications, and the Force Science Institute strongly recommends that these be employed. When reviewers see precisely how quickly suspects can move and how fast the various elements of a use-of-force event unfold, it can radically change their perception of what happened and the pressure involved officers were under to act."

8. One camera may not be enough.

"The more cameras there are recording a force event, the more opportunities there are likely to be to clarify uncertainties," Lewinski says. "The angle, the ambient lighting, and other elements will almost certainly vary from one officer's perspective to another's, and syncing the footage up will provide broader information for understanding the dynamics of what happened. What looks like an egregious action from one angle may seem perfectly justified from another.

"Think of the analysis of plays in a football game. In resolving close calls, referees want to view the action from as many cameras as possible to fully understand what they're seeing. Ideally, officers deserve the same consideration. The problem is that many times there is only one camera involved, compared to a dozen that may be consulted in a sporting event, and in that case the limitations must be kept even firmer in mind.

9. A camera encourages second-guessing.

"According to the U. S. Supreme Court in Graham v. Connor, an officer's decisions in tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving situations are not to be judged with the '20/20 vision of hindsight,' " Lewinski notes. "But in the real-world aftermath of a shooting, camera footage provides an almost irresistible temptation for reviewers to play the coulda-shoulda game.

"Under calm and comfortable conditions, they can infinitely replay the action, scrutinize it for hard-to-see detail, slow it down, freeze it. The officer had to assess what he was experiencing while it was happening and under the stress of his life potentially being on the line. That disparity can lead to far different conclusions.

"As part of the incident investigation, we recommend that an officer be permitted to see what his body camera and other cameras recorded. He should be cautioned, however, to regard the footage only as informational. He should not allow it to supplant his first-hand memory of the incident. Justification for a shooting or other use of force will come from what an officer reasonably perceived, not necessarily from what a camera saw."

[For more details about FSI's position on whether officers should be allowed to view video of their incidents, see Force Science News #114 (1/17/09). You will find online it at: www.forcescience.org/fsnews/114.html]

10. A camera can never replace a thorough investigation.

When officers oppose wearing cameras, civilians sometimes assume they fear "transparency." But more often, Lewinski believes, they are concerned that camera recordings will be given undue, if not exclusive, weight in judging their actions.

"A camera's recording should never be regarded solely as the Truth about a controversial incident," Lewinski declares. "It needs to be weighed and tested against witness testimony, forensics, the involved officer's statement, and other elements of a fair, thorough, and impartial investigation that takes human factors into consideration.

"This is in no way intended to belittle the merits of body cameras. Early testing has shown that they tend to reduce the frequency of force encounters as well as complaints against officers. But a well-known police defense attorney is not far wrong when he calls cameras 'the best evidence and the worst evidence.' The limitations of body cams and others need to be fully understood and evaluated to maximize their effectiveness and to assure that they are not regarded as infallible 'magic bullets' by people who do not fully grasp the realities of force dynamics."

Our thanks to Parris Ward, director and litigation graphics consultant with Biodynamics Engineering, Inc., for his help in facilitating this report.
Logged
prentice crawford
Guest
« Reply #569 on: December 09, 2014, 12:44:39 PM »

Cop shoots knife wielding man after stabbing at a NYC Synagogue. GRAPHIC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4ntAF9c_uI

             P.C.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2014, 01:51:40 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #570 on: December 25, 2014, 04:47:44 PM »



KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Dennis Shireff, a nearly 30-year police veteran, has never been shy about speaking out against what he saw as brutality and racism among his peers. While serving with the St. Louis police, he was even suspended for saying that the department recruited too many “Billy Bob, tobacco-chewing white police officers.”

So after the high-profile killings of unarmed black men by white police officers in Ferguson, Mo.; New York; and elsewhere, Officer Shireff, who now works for a small department outside St. Louis, feels the tug of conflicting loyalties: to black people who feel unfairly targeted by the police, and to his fellow police officers, white and black, who routinely face dangerous situations requiring split-second life-or-death decisions.


Now, with the recent murders of two New York City police officers by a man who claimed to be taking vengeance for the police killings of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner on Staten Island, his allegiances feel more divided than ever.
Photo
Sgt. Dilworth with a panhandler in October. He is one of four black officers on the 53-member force in Ferguson. Credit Christian Gooden/St. Louis Post-Dispatch, via Polaris

“With us being black officers, we get a double punishment because we feel the brunt of what happens to a police officer,” Officer Shireff, 52, said. “At the same time, it’s equally hard for us when we see a young African-American is killed at the hands of a policeman.”

At times they find themselves defending police procedures to fellow blacks who see them as foot soldiers from an oppressive force. At other times, they find themselves serving as the voice of black people in their station houses, trying to explain to white colleagues the animosity many blacks feel toward law enforcement. Life for black officers, many say, has long been a delicate balancing act.

But in departments across the country, black officers say that act has become much harder after a season of intense protests against police shootings, followed by the killing of the New York officers. What are black officers who support the sentiments of antibrutality protests supposed to say to colleagues who blame the deaths of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos in New York on those very same protests?

“Everyone’s almost pretty much walking on eggshells,” said Sgt. Darren R. Wilson, who is the president of a union that represents mostly black officers in St. Louis, and who shares the name of the white officer who shot Mr. Brown in Ferguson. “What’s going on in the community today? How are we going to act and respond to it? What’s proper? What’s improper?”

Nowhere is that tension more palpable for black officers than in New York. Detective Yuseff Hamm, who wanted to be a police officer since he was a child in Harlem, said he initially could sympathize with people protesting the killing of Mr. Garner, who died after an officer placed him in a chokehold in July.

But the ambush killing of the two officers on Saturday changed his view. “In the beginning you could understand it,” said the detective, who is also president of the Guardians, a fraternal organization of black New York City officers. “But now, actively threatening to hurt a law enforcement officer and actually carrying it out — we’re in a difficult time right now.”
Continue reading the main story

Detective Hamm said the members of his group are often viewed as “troublemakers.” But since the killings, he said he has felt greater solidarity with fellow officers of all colors. “Every police officer looked at that and said, ‘That could have been me,’ ” he said.

And since Saturday, the protests against the police have taken on a more menacing cast in his mind. “Are they protesting for change, or is it just an opportunity to harm another police officer?” he said. “It’s really getting out of hand.”

Many police departments say their efforts to recruit black officers have been hampered by hostility toward law enforcement. The New York Police Department, for instance, despite being one of the most diverse in the world, has seen the proportion of black recruits in its police academy classes fall amid growing attention to aggressive tactics in minority neighborhoods: to 13 percent in July, from 18 percent in 2003.

In St. Louis, black officers have complained that they have not been afforded the same opportunities for promotion as their white counterparts, and six black sergeants filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Wednesday, saying the promotions test was unfair by relying mostly on subjective criteria.

Sgt. Harry Dilworth, one of just four black officers on the 53-member Ferguson force, said he has been surprised by the level of vitriol he has faced from black people after the shooting of Mr. Brown in August.

On one occasion, when one protester asked him, “Why are you killing us?” Sergeant Dilworth, 45, responded by listing three names. He asked the demonstrator if he knew those people. The protester did not. So Sergeant Dilworth explained that they were the names of black men who had recently been killed in St. Louis by other blacks.

“We’re not killing you; you’re killing yourselves,” Sergeant Dilworth said he told the man.

At the same time, being black has also helped him to command more respect among protesters than some of his white colleagues, Sergeant Dilworth said.

During one demonstration, protesters were upset that the officers were standing before them at an angle, as if they were preparing to draw their weapons. That was a stance that officers had been trained to take, Sergeant Dilworth said, but he told them not to do it because it seemed overly aggressive to the protesters.

Debates over the tensions often follow black officers home. One officer from Brooklyn said that talking about her job with her mother and sister had led to arguments. “They think they murdered him,” she said, speaking of the officers involved in the death of Mr. Garner. She has mostly stopped discussing her work with her family, she said.

A 39-year-old black officer who grew up in Harlem said his background helped him differentiate between criminal and noncriminal behavior in minority communities better than colleagues raised in white suburbs.
Continue reading the main story
Graphic
What Happened in Ferguson?

Here’s what you need to know about the situation in Missouri, including information about how the grand jury made its decision.
OPEN Graphic

But his police work has also given him a perspective that is not necessarily popular among his black family and friends. For instance, he sides with the officers who were trying to arrest Mr. Garner when he died.
Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story

“Why don’t you just put your hands behind your back,” he said, referring to Mr. Garner. “You know the drill.” He added, “You get in fights with friends, for sure.”

Both New York officers requested anonymity to avoid possible repercussions, either at home or at work.

Over Thanksgiving, Sgt. Damon Hayes of the Kansas City Police Department said his mother became very emotional when the conversation turned to recent police killings. How could a police officer be scared of an 18-year-old, she asked?

“They’re all murderers,” she said, according to Sergeant Hayes, 50.

He tried to calm her down, explaining, “We don’t wake up in the morning hoping to murder somebody.” But, he added: “She was not hearing anything that I said. She was angry at that point.”

Yet he has also found himself looking for ways to help white officers understand the communities they patrol.

As demonstrations in Ferguson gave way to looting and rioting, one white colleague asked him what he thought about the violence.

“I think it’s really sad that business owners are losing their businesses and people feel so hopeless that they think the answer is to vent their anger, and it turns to wrath and they burn and steal,” Sergeant Hayes said he told the officer.

When the officer followed up by asking if all black people felt angry that a grand jury did not indict Darren Wilson, the white officer who killed Mr. Brown, Sergeant Hayes’s response surprised him.

“Well, the black part of me doesn’t,” Sergeant Hayes said he responded. He said he did not feel the evidence warranted an indictment.

Yet black officers say they are sometimes at a loss to navigate the racial divides inside their own station houses.

A few days after the announcement of the grand jury’s decision in the Brown case, Sergeant Darren R. Wilson said he was getting ready with other officers to begin their patrols in St. Louis when an unexpected visitor arrived.

It was Jeff Roorda, the head of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, a group that Sergeant Wilson has not always agreed with. Sergeant Wilson is the president of the Ethical Society of Police, a separate labor organization made up mostly of black officers.

Mr. Roorda told the group that the white Officer Wilson wanted to thank them for their support during the investigation of the Michael Brown shooting.

Sergeant Wilson stood silent and slack-jawed. Mr. Roorda spoke as if we were working for Officer Wilson, the sergeant said. “We were working to keep the community safe.”

Other black officers in the room had similar blank expressions, Sergeant Wilson recalled, and stared at him. He felt as though they were asking him, “How are you going to respond?” Sergeant Wilson said.

“Are you going to just let this character stand up and humiliate us like this?” he said. “I felt helpless.”
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #571 on: December 26, 2014, 08:27:21 AM »

Funny enough, when a black police officer shot a unarmed young white male in Salt Lake City, whites failed to loot and burn anything down.
Why?
Logged
c - Shadow Dog
Power User
***
Posts: 109


« Reply #572 on: December 26, 2014, 12:42:20 PM »

I think no one looted in Salt lake because they probably figured he was a criminal and the shooting was probably while unfortunate still justified.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #573 on: December 26, 2014, 05:48:17 PM »

There have been angry protests, yet nothing burned or looted and not a national story. Why?

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58304981-78/police-taylor-lake-salt.html.csp
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #574 on: December 29, 2014, 07:23:38 AM »

http://time.com/3643286/howard-safir-nypd-shooting/
Logged
prentice crawford
Guest
« Reply #575 on: January 25, 2015, 09:01:26 AM »

Warning graphic: police shooting caught on officer's body camera. To witnesses it appeared that the officer shot an unarmed man running away from him. Turns out they were wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDgmjPAsnFA#t=23

             P.C.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 06:38:08 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #576 on: January 25, 2015, 06:40:14 PM »

Very compelling footage.  In such a moment the pastor must have been very stressful for him.  There were moments there where to my eye if the BG still had one more exertion in him, he might have had a free shot.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #577 on: January 25, 2015, 11:04:15 PM »

Very compelling footage.  In such a moment the pastor must have been very stressful for him.  There were moments there where to my eye if the BG still had one more exertion in him, he might have had a free shot.

I hope the pastor gets charged for obstructing or whatever the charge is called in Oklahoma.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #578 on: February 27, 2015, 09:34:22 AM »



http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/02/25/grandma-takes-cupcakes-to-grandkids-gets-maced-and-brutalized-by-cop-video/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #579 on: March 01, 2015, 07:00:05 AM »


Somehow I expert there is more to the story and the complaitant here isn't the angelic figure being portrayed.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #580 on: March 01, 2015, 06:50:04 PM »

Wouldn't be the first time  cheesy but FWIW it was brought to my attention by a retired LEO.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #581 on: March 02, 2015, 05:09:03 AM »

No doubt the officer was just lurking about, awaiting the opportunity to deliver a vicious beat down on a grandmother bearing baked goods. Just another case of the day to day oppression elderly white women suffer through.

#grandmaslivesmatter
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #582 on: March 02, 2015, 11:23:08 AM »

You crack me up  cheesy
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #583 on: May 08, 2015, 12:09:46 PM »

Who's Up for Federalizing Police?
By Allyne Caan
 

If you like the federal government picking your insurance plan, targeting your free speech via the IRS, feeling you up at the airport and planning your kids’ lunch menu, you’ll love its taking over your local police department.

The "Reverend" Al Sharpton recently called for such a takeover, saying in reference to the Baltimore riots, “We need the Justice Department to step in and take over policing in this country. In the 20th century, they had to fight states’ rights to get the right to vote. We’re going to have to fight states’ rights in terms of closing down police cases. Police must be held accountable. I don’t think all police are bad; I don’t even think most are bad. But those that are need to be held accountable.”
And, naturally, Sharpton thinks the best way to “hold accountable” the small minority of police who abuse power is to federalize all police. The federal government has already been arming local PDs with decommissioned military equipment, so why not finish the job?

Sharpton’s idea, as frightening as it is, is hardly original. Back in 2008, then-candidate Barack Obama, who was spouting out campaign promises faster than Hillary Clinton can wipe her hard drive, floated an idea for a national civilian police force, saying, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."
He eventually seemed to drop the idea, but maybe he just had to wait for a more opportune crisis.

And what better way to push a federal police force than to capitalize on Baltimore, Ferguson and New York as justification for Big Brother to step in and save the day? Indeed, less than a month after the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, the Justice Department announced an investigation of the Ferguson PD. In December, the DOJ announced an investigation into the death of Eric Garner in New York. And Wednesday, Baltimore Democrat Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake asked the Justice Department to launch a civil rights investigation into her city’s police department following the death of Freddie Gray — a request the Department is “actively considering” and no doubt will jump on.

The guise may be accountability, but the solution is laughable. As University of Tennessee Law Professor Glenn Reynolds points out, federal agencies hardly have a stellar record when it comes to law enforcement. There’s the Secret Service engaging in extracurricular entertainment of the whorish sort; the Drug Enforcement Agency allegedly attending sex parties — with prostitutes funded by drug cartels, no less; and the Capitol Police leaving loaded firearms unattended, including one in a bathroom found by a child. And remember that little scandal called Fast and Furious? Imagine if your local police force smuggled firearms to known drug rings in town. Yeah, that would go over well.

Yet this is just the kind of oversight and "accountability" that federalizing police would bring. Oh, and there's the minor detail that it’s unconstitutional. The Tenth Amendment clearly states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” A federal police force is not one of the delegated powers. And we doubt this was an oversight on the part of our Founders. Of course, given Obama's view of the Constitution as little more than an inconvenient pamphlet, this would hardly deter him.

Be prepared for the Left to issue more calls for a police takeover, using anything from isolated incidents to larger terror threats to justify it. But unless America wants its police force attaining the same stellar reputation for accountability and justice as the IRS, the NSA and the VA, we’d better be prepared to reject any attempts at a federal takeover.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #584 on: May 08, 2015, 08:52:35 PM »

It is a terrible idea.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #585 on: May 08, 2015, 10:09:20 PM »

AMEN!!!
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #586 on: May 18, 2015, 11:06:35 AM »

Obama Calls for Restricting Military Gear to Local Police
In effort to improve relations between police and communities, White House has announced new standards for federal programs in the aftermath of the Ferguson protests
By Colleen McCain Nelson
May 18, 2015 6:03 a.m. ET
WSJ:

The White House on Monday announced stricter standards for federal programs that equip local law-enforcement agencies with military gear and released a blueprint aimed at building trust between police and communities, as part of an array of prescriptions to improve policing.

The new reports, which lay out dozens of recommendations from a presidential task force on policing and call for halting the transfer of certain military gear to law-enforcement agencies, represent the White House’s most robust response yet to recent police killings of unarmed people. Mr. Obama will highlight his administration’s efforts Monday when he travels to Camden, N.J., a city that has struggled with violent crime and poverty but now has overhauled its police department, improved schools and jump-started economic development initiatives.
Related

    Percentage of African-Americans in U.S. Police Departments Remains Flat Since 2007
    Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson Resigns
    U.S. Split Along Racial Lines on Backlash Against Police, Poll Finds

As controversial deaths at the hands of police officers have sparked outrage across the country, Mr. Obama has pledged to address the distrust between many police departments and minority communities and to tackle opportunity gaps that compound over time and can give rise to violence and civil unrest.

After protests last year in Ferguson, Mo., spurred criticism of federal programs that outfit local police departments with military gear, the president said his administration would develop new rules and improve oversight. A monthslong review found a lack of coordination among federal agencies and no consistent standards for police departments seeking the equipment.

The report that will be released Monday calls for a prohibition on federal programs providing certain types of equipment to law-enforcement agencies, citing a substantial risk of misuse. The list of prohibited gear includes tracked armored vehicles, weaponized aircraft, large-caliber firearms, grenade launchers and some camouflage uniforms.

Such equipment, which is seen as militaristic in nature, “could significantly undermine community trust and may encourage tactics and behaviors that are inconsistent with the premise of civilian law enforcement,” the report says.

More stringent controls for other types of equipment should be implemented, the report says. And law-enforcement agencies requesting certain gear will be required to seek the consent of local government and submit detailed justification explaining their need for equipment such as unmanned aerial vehicles and wheeled tactical vehicles.

Mr. Obama’s response to last year’s fatal shooting of an unarmed teenager in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson also included the creation of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing. The group’s final report includes a call for expanded efforts to connect officers with neighborhoods and outlines strategies for increasing the use of body cameras and other technology. The task force, which emphasized the value of bolstering community policing, also offered recommendations for improving policies and oversight, strengthening training and education for law enforcement and promoting the wellness and safety of officers.

Ron Davis, director of the Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services Office, said the report details reasonable and attainable recommendations to enhance public trust in the police.

“It is clear that this report will not sit on a shelf,” Mr. Davis said. “In fact, I believe it will be the transformational document that will help guide the over 16,000 police agencies to advance policing in the 21st century.”

Most of the proposals aren’t expected to be controversial, and some have been discussed by law enforcement for years.

On Monday, the administration plans to announce a grant program that will provide funds to some local law-enforcement agencies that commit to implementing the task force’s recommendations.

In Camden, Mr. Obama also will shine a spotlight on a transformed police force that has bolstered its ranks and brought down crime rates while focusing on community policing. The city, which has one of the highest poverty rates in the country, has been designated by the Obama administration as a “Promise Zone,” which allows local leaders to partner with the federal government on revitalization initiatives.

Administration officials have hailed Camden’s efforts to build trust between the police and the community, reduce violent crime, create jobs, and address opportunity gaps for minority boys and young men.

“From our perspective, Camden is an example of a community that is on the right track,” said White House spokesman Eric Schultz.

The overhaul of Camden’s police department has been controversial, though, spurring complaints from civil-liberties groups that police have used excessive force and have been too aggressive in issuing summons for minor infractions. The decision to dissolve the city’s unionized police force and create a county-led division also has been criticized as union busting.

Write to Colleen McCain Nelson at colleen.nelson@wsj.com
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12454


« Reply #587 on: May 20, 2015, 08:45:03 PM »

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/18/federalization-of-law-enforcement-would-remove-bulwark-for-second-amendment/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #588 on: May 23, 2015, 11:37:19 AM »

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Demilitarizing-the-cops-Wash-state-retools-police-training-304713651.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33354


« Reply #589 on: May 29, 2015, 09:26:27 PM »

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/29/1388819/-Judge-disqualifies-all-250-prosecutors-in-Orange-County-CA-because-of-widespread-corruption?detail=facebook_sf
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!