In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting in the back and killing an apparently unarmed black man while the man ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, said he had feared for his life because the man had taken his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man, Walter L. Scott, 50, fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
The shooting came on the heels of high-profile instances of police officers’ using lethal force in New York, Cleveland, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. The deaths have set off a national debate over whether the police are too quick to use force, particularly in cases involving black men.
Law enforcement in this country requires immediate, radical and comprehensive reform. An unnecessary loss of life committed by a man sworn to protect and serve.
Not only that but he tried to plant evidence and the department tried to help him cover it up. Had some civilian not been brave enough to film the murder, charges wouldn't have even been brought, even though it's totally clear it was a murder. The lack of expressions of outrage here doesn't surprise me though. I'm particularly not surprised that the biggest freedom advocates here have been silent on the systemic denial of constitutional rights (Ferguson) and on specific incidences such as this.
People wasted all their outrage on Michael Brown, and now there's none left for a much clearer instance of police brutality.
It also helps that it didn't happen a racist wasteland like Ferguson and the officer was charged instantly.
Charges weren't going to be brought until after the video was released. It was well on it's way to being a 'justified use of force' before that. The department was already covering for him.
Charges were filed and there will likely be more charges and jobs lost. I am sure people will investigate who covered up what, but this all happened yesterday. I am not sure how much "outrage" is necessary since the news is 24 hours old.
People are planning to protest and demand full investigations, if that is what you are looking for.
He shot the guy on Saturday... It's just getting in motion now because the video surfaced more recently. Like has been said multiple time (even by the mayor) the video was critical to bringing charges, the facts were simply not enough on their own...
The same people that have been outraged about stuff like this will still be outraged. My comment on the lack of outrage is about the people spending several posts defending/expressing concern about the constitutional rights of bakers to not go to gay weddings but had practically nothing to say about the systemic denial of constitutional rights in places like Ferguson or incidents like this. It's transparent as all hell.
Its the internet and the debate over religious freedom has some nuance and debatable issues on punishment and how it should be handled. There really isn't a lot to debate here. Its pretty much the guy needs to be charged and anyone who assisted in the cover up needs to be investigated. The whole event is less than a week old.
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting in the back and killing an apparently unarmed black man while the man ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, said he had feared for his life because the man had taken his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man, Walter L. Scott, 50, fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
The shooting came on the heels of high-profile instances of police officers’ using lethal force in New York, Cleveland, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. The deaths have set off a national debate over whether the police are too quick to use force, particularly in cases involving black men.
Law enforcement in this country requires immediate, radical and comprehensive reform. An unnecessary loss of life committed by a man sworn to protect and serve.
Not only that but he tried to plant evidence and the department tried to help him cover it up. Had some civilian not been brave enough to film the murder, charges wouldn't have even been brought, even though it's totally clear it was a murder. The lack of expressions of outrage here doesn't surprise me though. I'm particularly not surprised that the biggest freedom advocates here have been silent on the systemic denial of constitutional rights (Ferguson) and on specific incidences such as this.
People wasted all their outrage on Michael Brown, and now there's none left for a much clearer instance of police brutality.
It also helps that it didn't happen a racist wasteland like Ferguson and the officer was charged instantly.
Charges weren't going to be brought until after the video was released. It was well on it's way to being a 'justified use of force' before that. The department was already covering for him.
Charges were filed and there will likely be more charges and jobs lost. I am sure people will investigate who covered up what, but this all happened yesterday. I am not sure how much "outrage" is necessary since the news is 24 hours old.
People are planning to protest and demand full investigations, if that is what you are looking for.
He shot the guy on Saturday... It's just getting in motion now because the video surfaced more recently. Like has been said multiple time (even by the mayor) the video was critical to bringing charges, the facts were simply not enough on their own...
The same people that have been outraged about stuff like this will still be outraged. My comment on the lack of outrage is about the people spending several posts defending/expressing concern about the constitutional rights of bakers to not go to gay weddings but had practically nothing to say about the systemic denial of constitutional rights in places like Ferguson or incidents like this. It's transparent as all hell.
Well, it's not really a topic with much discussion room either. Seems more like a "that's bad" comment thread than a conversation.
There's a conversation to be had as to whether or not recent events constitute sufficient motivation for making police reform a topic one can speak about without committing political suicide. I'm not sure if GH's play at whataboutism is the best way to do that lol.
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting in the back and killing an apparently unarmed black man while the man ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, said he had feared for his life because the man had taken his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man, Walter L. Scott, 50, fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
The shooting came on the heels of high-profile instances of police officers’ using lethal force in New York, Cleveland, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. The deaths have set off a national debate over whether the police are too quick to use force, particularly in cases involving black men.
Law enforcement in this country requires immediate, radical and comprehensive reform. An unnecessary loss of life committed by a man sworn to protect and serve.
Not only that but he tried to plant evidence and the department tried to help him cover it up. Had some civilian not been brave enough to film the murder, charges wouldn't have even been brought, even though it's totally clear it was a murder. The lack of expressions of outrage here doesn't surprise me though. I'm particularly not surprised that the biggest freedom advocates here have been silent on the systemic denial of constitutional rights (Ferguson) and on specific incidences such as this.
People wasted all their outrage on Michael Brown, and now there's none left for a much clearer instance of police brutality.
It also helps that it didn't happen a racist wasteland like Ferguson and the officer was charged instantly.
Charges weren't going to be brought until after the video was released. It was well on it's way to being a 'justified use of force' before that. The department was already covering for him.
Charges were filed and there will likely be more charges and jobs lost. I am sure people will investigate who covered up what, but this all happened yesterday. I am not sure how much "outrage" is necessary since the news is 24 hours old.
People are planning to protest and demand full investigations, if that is what you are looking for.
He shot the guy on Saturday... It's just getting in motion now because the video surfaced more recently. Like has been said multiple time (even by the mayor) the video was critical to bringing charges, the facts were simply not enough on their own...
The same people that have been outraged about stuff like this will still be outraged. My comment on the lack of outrage is about the people spending several posts defending/expressing concern about the constitutional rights of bakers to not go to gay weddings but had practically nothing to say about the systemic denial of constitutional rights in places like Ferguson or incidents like this. It's transparent as all hell.
Well, it's not really a topic with much discussion room either. Seems more like a "that's bad" comment thread than a conversation.
Basically this. The shooting is completely indefensible. And GH is right, there's probably at least dozens of similarly indefensible shootings that simply get covered up because there's no person with a camera there. There really isn't much else to say.
Most tasers today shoot out a cloud of confetti. If the cop moved the taser after the altercation.... (taser wasn't near the confetti cloud)...that would have caught him in a lie.
Shell casings and taser confetti are on top of each other....but the spent taser...He (the victim) ran off with?
I think he(the cop) would have been trapped that way.
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting in the back and killing an apparently unarmed black man while the man ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, said he had feared for his life because the man had taken his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man, Walter L. Scott, 50, fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
The shooting came on the heels of high-profile instances of police officers’ using lethal force in New York, Cleveland, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. The deaths have set off a national debate over whether the police are too quick to use force, particularly in cases involving black men.
Law enforcement in this country requires immediate, radical and comprehensive reform. An unnecessary loss of life committed by a man sworn to protect and serve.
Not only that but he tried to plant evidence and the department tried to help him cover it up. Had some civilian not been brave enough to film the murder, charges wouldn't have even been brought, even though it's totally clear it was a murder. The lack of expressions of outrage here doesn't surprise me though. I'm particularly not surprised that the biggest freedom advocates here have been silent on the systemic denial of constitutional rights (Ferguson) and on specific incidences such as this.
People wasted all their outrage on Michael Brown, and now there's none left for a much clearer instance of police brutality.
It also helps that it didn't happen a racist wasteland like Ferguson and the officer was charged instantly.
Charges weren't going to be brought until after the video was released. It was well on it's way to being a 'justified use of force' before that. The department was already covering for him.
Charges were filed and there will likely be more charges and jobs lost. I am sure people will investigate who covered up what, but this all happened yesterday. I am not sure how much "outrage" is necessary since the news is 24 hours old.
People are planning to protest and demand full investigations, if that is what you are looking for.
He shot the guy on Saturday... It's just getting in motion now because the video surfaced more recently. Like has been said multiple time (even by the mayor) the video was critical to bringing charges, the facts were simply not enough on their own...
The same people that have been outraged about stuff like this will still be outraged. My comment on the lack of outrage is about the people spending several posts defending/expressing concern about the constitutional rights of bakers to not go to gay weddings but had practically nothing to say about the systemic denial of constitutional rights in places like Ferguson or incidents like this. It's transparent as all hell.
Well, it's not really a topic with much discussion room either. Seems more like a "that's bad" comment thread than a conversation.
The conversation is about a total overhaul of police departments. Investigating departments to uncover stuff like this before it becomes a national story and people are killed, it's about taking an honest look at prejudice (intentional or not) and how it impacts law enforcement, etc...
For instance a couple videos that might help explain why the crime rate is so disproportionate. (Hint: It's not just that black people commit more crime)
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting in the back and killing an apparently unarmed black man while the man ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, said he had feared for his life because the man had taken his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man, Walter L. Scott, 50, fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
The shooting came on the heels of high-profile instances of police officers’ using lethal force in New York, Cleveland, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere. The deaths have set off a national debate over whether the police are too quick to use force, particularly in cases involving black men.
Law enforcement in this country requires immediate, radical and comprehensive reform. An unnecessary loss of life committed by a man sworn to protect and serve.
Not only that but he tried to plant evidence and the department tried to help him cover it up. Had some civilian not been brave enough to film the murder, charges wouldn't have even been brought, even though it's totally clear it was a murder. The lack of expressions of outrage here doesn't surprise me though. I'm particularly not surprised that the biggest freedom advocates here have been silent on the systemic denial of constitutional rights (Ferguson) and on specific incidences such as this.
People wasted all their outrage on Michael Brown, and now there's none left for a much clearer instance of police brutality.
It also helps that it didn't happen a racist wasteland like Ferguson and the officer was charged instantly.
Charges weren't going to be brought until after the video was released. It was well on it's way to being a 'justified use of force' before that. The department was already covering for him.
Charges were filed and there will likely be more charges and jobs lost. I am sure people will investigate who covered up what, but this all happened yesterday. I am not sure how much "outrage" is necessary since the news is 24 hours old.
People are planning to protest and demand full investigations, if that is what you are looking for.
He shot the guy on Saturday... It's just getting in motion now because the video surfaced more recently. Like has been said multiple time (even by the mayor) the video was critical to bringing charges, the facts were simply not enough on their own...
The same people that have been outraged about stuff like this will still be outraged. My comment on the lack of outrage is about the people spending several posts defending/expressing concern about the constitutional rights of bakers to not go to gay weddings but had practically nothing to say about the systemic denial of constitutional rights in places like Ferguson or incidents like this. It's transparent as all hell.
Well, it's not really a topic with much discussion room either. Seems more like a "that's bad" comment thread than a conversation.
Basically this. The shooting is completely indefensible. And GH is right, there's probably at least dozens of similarly indefensible shootings that simply get covered up because there's no person with a camera there. There really isn't much else to say.
The fact that many police departments are not required to release any information how often they employ deadly force is a huge part of the problem. This includes the department related to the current shooting. And the fact that there is such resistance to that any level of transparency when it comes to deadly force is equally alarming.
Zero accountability to anyone outside themselves leads to a culture cover ups and abuse of power.
GH is right to suspect more widespread 'abuse' like this slipping from the reach of investigation. it is interesting to observe the reactions tho so i did t comment on that particular video
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
The department knew they didn't know what happened, if they wanted to parrot the officer's narrative than they should of just said it was his account, not present it like it was what happened.
Do you deny that there were rather routine violations of the constitution in places like Ferguson? Otherwise, it's not an 'internal narrative', it's just facts.
We don't know that the officer didn't tell the department what he saw, or that the reason he didn't report what he saw wasn't because he was confident the officer wouldn't be charged and it would just cost him his already tenuously positioned career (one of few black officers on a mostly white force). So it's not clear whether he should be charged or the department head.
That's why these departments need to be investigated, as was the case with Wilson and Ferguson. Whether Wilson was just some innocent guy going from one racist department to the next or whether the departments encouraged racist policing became at least a bit more clear after investigating the department itself. It's part of why the chief got caught blatantly lying to the press, it's why the racist court clerk was fired, why the racist judge stepped down, etc... It's obviously not an isolated problem, and it's clear that the police departments can't be taken at their word. Any suspicious department needs to be investigated and corrected.
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
The department knew they didn't know what happened if they wanted to parrot the officer's narrative than they should of just said it was his account, not present it like it was what happened.
Do you deny that there were rather routine violations of the constitution in places like Ferguson? Otherwise, it's not an 'internal narrative', it's just facts.
We don't know that the officer didn't tell the department what he saw, or that the reason he didn't report what he saw wasn't because he was confident the officer wouldn't be charged and it would just cost him his already tenuously positioned career (one of few black officers on a mostly white force). So it's not clear whether he should be charged or the department head.
That's why these departments need to be investigated, as was the case with Wilson and Ferguson. Whether Wilson was just some innocent guy going from one racist department to the next or whether the departments encouraged racist policing became at least a bit more clear after investigating the department itself. It's part of why the chief got caught blatantly lying to the press, it's why the racist court clerk was fired, why the racist judge stepped down, etc... It's obviously not an isolated problem, and it's clear that the police departments can't be taken at their word. Any suspicious department needs to be investigated and corrected.
i dont know what the statement said because i cant find it. i was taking your word for it. so, the only basis you have for a cover up is that they issued a statement and didnt say "according to the officer?" because that is the weakest evidence of a coverup i have ever seen.
funny, the NAACP is somewhat supporting the police investigation:
The rapid response by law enforcement in this matter does bring some level of comfort to the community in the hopes that the judicial process will render an adequate measure of justice for the victim. We will continue to monitor the investigation and resulting litigation as it moves through the Courts.
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
The department knew they didn't know what happened if they wanted to parrot the officer's narrative than they should of just said it was his account, not present it like it was what happened.
Do you deny that there were rather routine violations of the constitution in places like Ferguson? Otherwise, it's not an 'internal narrative', it's just facts.
We don't know that the officer didn't tell the department what he saw, or that the reason he didn't report what he saw wasn't because he was confident the officer wouldn't be charged and it would just cost him his already tenuously positioned career (one of few black officers on a mostly white force). So it's not clear whether he should be charged or the department head.
That's why these departments need to be investigated, as was the case with Wilson and Ferguson. Whether Wilson was just some innocent guy going from one racist department to the next or whether the departments encouraged racist policing became at least a bit more clear after investigating the department itself. It's part of why the chief got caught blatantly lying to the press, it's why the racist court clerk was fired, why the racist judge stepped down, etc... It's obviously not an isolated problem, and it's clear that the police departments can't be taken at their word. Any suspicious department needs to be investigated and corrected.
i dont know what the statement said because i cant find it. i was taking your word for it. so, the only basis you have for a cover up is that they issued a statement and didnt say "according to the officer?" because that is the weakest evidence of a coverup i have ever seen.
Good for you? The rhetoric is clear for people who follow this kind of stuff. The department was already crafting a self defense narrative when it was obvious the guy was shot in the back. Call it what you want, doesn't really matter to me, the implications are clear.
On April 09 2015 05:41 dAPhREAk wrote: funny, the NAACP is somewhat supporting the police investigation:
The rapid response by law enforcement in this matter does bring some level of comfort to the community in the hopes that the judicial process will render an adequate measure of justice for the victim. We will continue to monitor the investigation and resulting litigation as it moves through the Courts.
Also why should cops have a duty to report misconduct, but you think lawyers shouldn't or rather that you don't think the lack of that duty is a problem?
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
The department knew they didn't know what happened if they wanted to parrot the officer's narrative than they should of just said it was his account, not present it like it was what happened.
Do you deny that there were rather routine violations of the constitution in places like Ferguson? Otherwise, it's not an 'internal narrative', it's just facts.
We don't know that the officer didn't tell the department what he saw, or that the reason he didn't report what he saw wasn't because he was confident the officer wouldn't be charged and it would just cost him his already tenuously positioned career (one of few black officers on a mostly white force). So it's not clear whether he should be charged or the department head.
That's why these departments need to be investigated, as was the case with Wilson and Ferguson. Whether Wilson was just some innocent guy going from one racist department to the next or whether the departments encouraged racist policing became at least a bit more clear after investigating the department itself. It's part of why the chief got caught blatantly lying to the press, it's why the racist court clerk was fired, why the racist judge stepped down, etc... It's obviously not an isolated problem, and it's clear that the police departments can't be taken at their word. Any suspicious department needs to be investigated and corrected.
i dont know what the statement said because i cant find it. i was taking your word for it. so, the only basis you have for a cover up is that they issued a statement and didnt say "according to the officer?" because that is the weakest evidence of a coverup i have ever seen.
Good for you? The rhetoric is clear for people who follow this kind of stuff. The department was already crafting a self defense narrative when it was obvious the guy was shot in the back. Call it what you want, doesn't really matter to me, the implications are clear.
On April 09 2015 05:41 dAPhREAk wrote: funny, the NAACP is somewhat supporting the police investigation:
The rapid response by law enforcement in this matter does bring some level of comfort to the community in the hopes that the judicial process will render an adequate measure of justice for the victim. We will continue to monitor the investigation and resulting litigation as it moves through the Courts.
Also why should cops have a duty to report misconduct, but you think lawyers shouldn't or rather that you don't think the lack of that duty is a problem?
Explain how the police department had the ability to report misconduct when the officer and his partner straight up lied to them?
At least one officer knew he was lying as he saw him grab the taser and bring it to the dying man. They also made claims about trying to perform CPR and saving his life which the video shows clearly didn't happen from any of the first few people who show up. If they just wanted to parrot what he told them they should not say its from 'the department' they should say "according to officer..." It's kind of like when they blatantly lied about why they released the video of Brown in the store. It's to create a narrative.
Although I guess it's clear why you would think the officer who didn't snitch on his fellow officer for planting evidence or the department helping reinforce a bullshit narrative is 'not a problem'...
i have yet to see anything from you showing that the department knew and was covering something up, which was your claim. it appears the officers were liars and the department was reporting on what they were told by the officers. officer is a dipshit and deserves to be charged, but you are dragging the department in this with nothing of substance--just because it fits your internal narrative about "unconstitutional violations." also, do you ahve a link to the PR statement, i cant find it.
finally, you are really stupid for bringing up the "not a problem" thing. its like you have a mental block to context. i do have a problem with this whole situation, including the officer seeing his fellow officer plant a gun. i think the second officer should be charged as well as an accessory.
The department knew they didn't know what happened if they wanted to parrot the officer's narrative than they should of just said it was his account, not present it like it was what happened.
Do you deny that there were rather routine violations of the constitution in places like Ferguson? Otherwise, it's not an 'internal narrative', it's just facts.
We don't know that the officer didn't tell the department what he saw, or that the reason he didn't report what he saw wasn't because he was confident the officer wouldn't be charged and it would just cost him his already tenuously positioned career (one of few black officers on a mostly white force). So it's not clear whether he should be charged or the department head.
That's why these departments need to be investigated, as was the case with Wilson and Ferguson. Whether Wilson was just some innocent guy going from one racist department to the next or whether the departments encouraged racist policing became at least a bit more clear after investigating the department itself. It's part of why the chief got caught blatantly lying to the press, it's why the racist court clerk was fired, why the racist judge stepped down, etc... It's obviously not an isolated problem, and it's clear that the police departments can't be taken at their word. Any suspicious department needs to be investigated and corrected.
i dont know what the statement said because i cant find it. i was taking your word for it. so, the only basis you have for a cover up is that they issued a statement and didnt say "according to the officer?" because that is the weakest evidence of a coverup i have ever seen.
Good for you? The rhetoric is clear for people who follow this kind of stuff. The department was already crafting a self defense narrative when it was obvious the guy was shot in the back. Call it what you want, doesn't really matter to me, the implications are clear.
On April 09 2015 05:41 dAPhREAk wrote: funny, the NAACP is somewhat supporting the police investigation:
The rapid response by law enforcement in this matter does bring some level of comfort to the community in the hopes that the judicial process will render an adequate measure of justice for the victim. We will continue to monitor the investigation and resulting litigation as it moves through the Courts.
Also why should cops have a duty to report misconduct, but you think lawyers shouldn't or rather that you don't think the lack of that duty is a problem
i find it amusing you are calling for the department's head and the NAACP is slapping them on the back for their good investigation.
assuming the partner witnessed the shooting and planting of evidence, and later reported something false to the department when they internally investigated the shooting, i believe that is grounds for a charge of accessory after the fact, at least. this is unrelated to a duty to report, it is a duty not to lie. this does not relate to lawyers, which is entirely separate context.
has anybody found the police statement? i swear i cant find it....it just pulls up news articles referencing it, but not sourcing it.
edit: in retrospect, i do not think this is a left vs. right issue so i withdraw that.
I would hazard a guess that one reason less 'outrage' is brought up here is because there are certain posters that are always involved. These posters that are just generally unpleasant to deal with on these topics.
To frame it as just not caring about some people's civil rights is unfair and/or useless. The same charge could be made, but in the opposite direction.
It wasn't anyone on the right who found a random pizzeria owner and spread what they said everywhere for a hungry media.
a politician should use this kind of thing as a platform for campaigning in america. 2016 / winter is coming. there's a lot of good publicity to be had if they can get success off the "shooting innocents" idea.
id be interested if a black politician could leverage the race card by doing this - they might be untouchable cuz no one will want to deny that there is ANY kind of racism which would be hyperbole, but there is definitely a problem.
On April 09 2015 06:12 tshi wrote: a politician should use this kind of thing as a platform for campaigning in america. 2016 / winter is coming. there's a lot of good publicity to be had if they can get success off the "shooting innocents" idea.
id be interested if a black politician could leverage the race card by doing this - they might be untouchable cuz no one will want to deny that there is ANY kind of racism which would be hyperbole, but there is definitely a problem.
On April 09 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote: I would hazard to guess that one reason less 'outrage' is brought up here is because there are certain posters that are always involved. These posters that are just generally unpleasant to deal with on these topics.
To frame it as just not caring about some people's civil rights is unfair and/or useless. The same charge could be made, but in the opposite direction.
Shocking the only black poster would consistently post about stuff relevant to black peoples rights...And how they are treated differently than white peoples rights...
Except that charge/framing is regularly made... That people are denying/disregarding rights of businesses or don't care about their rights when it comes to gay weddings... Who of those people stood up for the citizens of Ferguson and expressed outrage about their rights being disregarded?
I don't know what you want exactly? Isn't the incident that happened exactly what's supposed to happen when shit like this goes down? It got investigated and the police officer was charged?
EPT
