Ongoing U.S Police Brutality and Corruption Discussion Thread

Seriously. Adrenaline rushes are weird and normal, and inappropriate laughter happens. I hope his adrenaline comedown was a nasty, unpleasant hellride,

the reservist who accidentally Eric Harris charged with second-degree manslaughter

http://news.yahoo.com/deputy-charged-manslaughter-shooting-death-061439114.html

*shot

that seems about right

i have so little hope at this point that any of these assholes will be convicted of anything, though.

i mean ever since the rodney king verdict it's been clear that even incontrovertible video evidence is often not enough to convict a cop (or in this case, a cop-wannabe) of heinous shit.

relevant: http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150414/downtown/rahm-agrees-55-million-reparations-for-burge-torture-victims

http://www.wset.com/story/28792211/judge-finds-lynchburg-middle-schooler-with-autism-guilty-on-criminal-charges

11 year old autistic kid convicted with felony

What the fuck

i've mentioned this on the board before but my gf teaches music predominantly in schools with heavily autistic populations and she's told me that the principals and teachers will visit the local NYPD precincts to explain at length to NEVER send people to deal with disturbances as some of the kids lash out violently with no provocation and it's completely outside of their control... cops are always assigned to work schools though so the staff has to decide just how bad things have to get before they involve the on-site police and the general take by everyone working there is "never", specifically to avoid that kind of situation. it's just the most fucked up thing and really heartbreaking.

i am currently working at a state psychiatric hospital (one of the good ones) and have to say, even though it chafes some of my preconceptions w/r/t the police apparatus, that the cops there (who are there every day) are really quite good at responding to emergencies on the unit. i wish we could replicate them and get them on the street

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/20/us/baltimore-freddie-gray-death/index.html

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20150420/north-lawndale/chicago-police-officer-who-shot-rekia-boyd-on-trial-monday

COOK COUNTY CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE — The Chicago Police detective who fatally shot 22-year-old Rekia Boyd in 2012 was found not guilty on all charges Monday.

I want to say something, but mostly I just feel numb

In an unusual move, Judge Dennis Porter granted a defense motion for a directed verdict, meaning he found police officer Dante Servin not guilty without Servin even having to put on a defense.

Servin had been charged with involuntary manslaughter, reckless conduct and reckless discharge of a firearm — but Porter, in issuing his verdict, said Servin’s conduct was “beyond reckless” in the March 2012 shooting of Rekia Boyd. Therefore, “it would be improper to allow the trial to continue given the total failure” to prove recklessness, which was key to all three charges. “The evidence does not support the charges on which the defendant is being tried.”

The officer’s decision to discharge his firearm, Porter said, “was an intentional act.”

Based on the defense attorney's statement at the end of the article it seems like it's an open question whether this means prosecutors are barred by double jeopardy from bringing new charges alleging voluntary manslaughter or some other crime requiring intent, I'm not sure the reckless-level crimes he was charged with count as lesser included offenses.

holy shit that verdict is the worst. that seems like some bullshit made-up law like a seven year old would invoke when trading school lunches.

I mean that seems to really go against the spirit of the law based on being overtly pedantic but far from a legal expert (tho noted the ones quoted didn't exactly say the judge was correct).

Prosecutors (in general, at least as dreadful scumbags as cops, but they skate by because they're not working class) often deliberately indict we'll-get-you-out-of-this-ok defendants at the last possible moment in order to eliminate re-charging even if double jeopardy isn't an issue. This judge knew entirely what he was doing, and what he was doing is what the prosecutors wanted him to do.

Sorry I don't quite get that?

Which part? Late indictment or the judge winking?

did you watch the readout of the sentence? that was not the body language of a man who was winking at the prosecutor--clearly disgusted at the whole sham he's feeling obligated to perpetuate

er not sentence but dismissal obv

I did not, and will take your word for it. Ugh.

i don't have the slightest idea what to make of this
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2010/12/30/suit-police-removed-clothes-of-deceased-victim-took-photos/

the verdict makes total sense, the judge can't find him guilty of intentionally killing someone if he's only charged with unintentional killing. not really the judge's fault.

I think he's wrong," said Timothy P. O'Neill, a law professor at the John Marshall School of Law and an expert in criminal law.
"I see where Porter is coming from," O'Neill said after reading the judge's written opinion. "But I don't think it was legally impossible for this to be involuntary manslaughter. To throw the case out - I respect his decision, but I don't think he needed to do that."

"If I were the judge, I don't see why it's so difficult to say Servin intentionally fired the shot, but the result was in killing someone he didn't intend to hurt. That's a reckless result," O'Neill said.

i don't have the slightest idea what to make of this
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2010/12/30/suit-police-removed-clothes-of-deceased-victim-took-photos/

― Premise ridiculous. Who have two potato? (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, April 21, 2015 6:30 PM (55 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The only response I can muster is a startled "..."

you can always find a lawyer to say they disagree with something i'm just saying it's not completely absurd. prosecutor could have charged it better.

i get that, I wasn't suggesting that the lawyer's opinion was definitive or anything, but it does seem weird that the judge insinuated his hands were effectively tied (and his body language/frustration suggested he truly believed that) where others have suggested he was interpreting the law too literally. It seems clear that the judge was not happy about the ruling so that he truly believed his hands were tied.

I'm out of my element here (so will look to the legal experts of ILX), but what do y'all think of this article? http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/04/21/3649043/judge-lets-cop-walk-deadly-shooting-thought-charges-werent-severe-enough/

Obviously it's ThinkProgress so it carries a liberal slant going in (but seems fairly well sourced). I'm just wondering why he didn't let the trial continue, I mean if he had been found guilty he could have appealed and had the conviction overturned, but once the case was thrown out, Servin was a free man. However I realize it's probably not that simple so willing to hear more of the specifics/nuts/bolts etc.

idk i'm tired but judges just suck and the law sucks. literally every day i'm lawyering i think i'm just helping them destroy.

sorry, if there's a better thread for US officer invovled shootings thread, but this is interesting: http://hiddentao.github.io/ois-incidents-map/

http://gawker.com/dashcam-video-shows-cops-repeatedly-shot-unarmed-man-l-1699953156

while I have some qualms about how this stuff is covered in the mainstream media (primarily TV news) it seems like some sort of turning point has been reached where cops' unjustified shooting of black people has developed into a much larger media narrative, one that is becoming dominant and persistent enough that at some point it's going to require political figures and institutions to address it. It's not realistic for anyone to dismiss this pattern as a series of isolated incidents. And it doesn't seem entirely unrealistic to expect this to pop up during the presidential election at some point, for example. Getting this on the national stage like that is good, even if this should have happened decades ago and it took the technological combination of cameras recording everything everywhere and social media making footage available everywhere has pushed things to this point.

I would agree with that take if it didn't feel like all of these killings were new media versions of public lynchings, consumed like horror movie entertainment.

yeah there is a ghoulish/exploitation factor to news outlet coverage. at least with internet links I can choose whether to actually watch the footage or not (and at this point that's usually "not") but with TV news they're just like "yeah let's run this on a loop in the background", which is o_0

going from "random late afternoon talk show" to "here's a black man getting shot/beaten multiple times shown on a loop" to "WHEEL! OF! FORTUNE!" tells you how much gravitas/weight these deaths are being given

well you could say that about any serious issue, that's just the flattening effect of our shitty media landscape

oh all right, if they're doing it to everything I guess that's okay

EQUALITY ACHIEVED

lol well uh I didn't mean to imply that it's a *good* thing

i think DJP is pointing out that this *is* qualitatively different, though, because of a history of lynchings as public spectacle

ok sure

yep, exactly

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/24/1379966/-Smoking-Gun-Prosecutor-Anita-Alvarez-deliberately-undercharged-officer-who-killed-Rekia-Boyd

Shaun King making the case that the Dante Servin directed verdict acquittal was down to the prosecution colluding to intentionally undercharge

cops that fatally shot Jason Harris (a mentally ill man who had a screwdriver) facing no charges, thanks to a Dallas grand jury. (I'm not linking the story cuz the photo at the top is just fucked up)

we'll see if this goes anywhere: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Lawsuit-says-S-F-police-killed-Mission-man-as-he-6222579.php

I have zero faith in the SFPD so you can guess which account I'm inclined to believe

DJP, your concern about whether this is all too distasteful to contemplate or whether it is being exploited by the media..... should rank about 147th on a scale of relative importance.

Only repeated exposure of this violence to the public at large will have even the slightest chance of changing anything. Sorry it upsets you but, like, not as sorry as that it's happening and that this is the ONLY way anything might ever get done about it.

I'd note that lynching photos were consumed enthusiastically, guilt-free, by the groups that perpetuated them, yet....they also created a revulsion amongst people who wanted to do something about it, who would have been more than happy to believe that such things were exaggerations. Same thing with documenting of police violence: all sorts of regular folks, well-meaning, think first of the cop point of view and only with the most explicit evidence presented to them would think anything else.

Think Vietnam would have ended without those photos, the little girl on fire, the dead bodies, etc? Get real.

the vietnam war ended because your country lost but i'm sure djp will be glad for the rest of your insight

xp FP

Don't think it's too out of bounds to call out the tasteless and disrespectful practices of media.

not on board with that whatsoever vic perry, especially the "ONLY way" bit. really? like even if i bought your vietnam argument, would this particular way of framing, presenting and mediating these images be the ONLY possible way?

but tbh your "regular folks" come really fucking loaded. just guessing here but i'm pretty sure regular black folks do not need convincing, so who are we talking about again? who gets to be "regular"? why does it seem like the qualification for regularity is specifically still neding, somehow, at this date, more horrifying visuals to be convinced that there's even a problem? i do not personally identify with people who would "think first of the cop point of view," and basically fuck the idea that a person could be in that position, could still require "the most explicit evidence presented to them" and still be innocently described as "well meaning." i am trying to picture such a person, and seriously all i can come up with is climate-change-denial level of tendentious "Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I Just don't know.... maybe if I see some more evidence :)" bullshit.