The LEO thread

[Vrede too]

Father whose son was roughed up by armed off-duty cop: ‘This is not right’

Get off my grass or I'll shoot you, because I'm a cop and I can.

Tell the DA: Indict the LAPD cop who shot at a 13-yr-old boy

[Vrede too]

French police sniper shoots two in error at Hollande speech

Opps.

[Boatrocker]

French police sniper shoots two in error at Hollande speech

Opps.

Opps. That will go in his Récord Permanent.

[Vrede too]

It may be the last entry.

[O Really]

It may be the last entry.

Maybe, since they were in France. If they'd been in some states in the US they could just use the "I wuz skeered" defense and get back to work.

[rstrong]

Given that the rifle was discharged accidentally, perhaps the sniper will use the "I sneezed" defense.

[Vrede too]

Dick Cheney sent her/him a congratulatory note.

[Vrede too]

Seven Baltimore police officers arrested on racketeering charges

... A grand jury last week indicted six detectives and a sergeant on charges of extorting money and robbing residents, filing false court paperwork and making false overtime claims, the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maryland said. The indictment was unsealed on Wednesday.

"These are really simply robberies by people wearing police uniforms," U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein told a news conference.

The officers, all members in 2015 and 2016 of a gun-crime investigation unit, stole firearms, drugs and cash ranging from $200 to $200,000 from victims, some of whom had not committed crimes, Rosenstein's office said in a statement....

[Vrede too]

Preventing Violence Against Police or Silencing Dissent?

[Vrede too]

Black People Are More Likely to Go to Prison for Crimes They Didn’t Commit
A new study details the role of racism in convictions.

... They found that while African Americans comprise only 13 percent of the population, they comprise 47 percent of those who were exonerated. This disparity cuts across all major crimes committed, but the report focuses on the three categories where exonerations are most frequent: murder, sexual assault, and drug crimes....

Black people are seven times more likely than white people to be wrongfully convicted of murder, and cases where black people were exonerated were 22 percent more likely to involve police misconduct than cases involving white people.

... According to the report, a black person serving time for sexual assault is 3.5 times more likely to be innocent than a white person serving time for the same crime. Black men were responsible for 13 percent of sexual assault cases involving white victims, but 57 percent of sexual assault exonerees involving a white victim were black. The reason? Mistaken eyewitness identification: White people are more likely to mistake one black person for another than they are to misidentify members of their own race....

Although the rate of drug use by white and black Americans is similar, black people are five times as likely to go to prison for drug crimes than their white counterparts. This disparity carries over to wrongful convictions as well. Innocent black people are 12 times as likely to be convicted of a drug crime as innocent white people. But because efforts to exonerate innocent people are focused on convictions where the stakes are higher, such as rape or murder, many innocent defendants convicted of low-level drug crimes are never exonerated.

In addition to the 2,000 exonerations that have occurred since 1989, an additional 1,800 people have been vindicated through "group exonerations." These exonerations came after major police scandals, where cops who systematically framed innocent black people were exposed. In 2016, in East Cleveland, Ohio, more than 40 defendants' convictions were overturned after three police officers were imprisoned for planting drugs, stealing money, and filing false search warrants. Unfortunately, most wrongful convictions are never discovered.

"Increasingly, police, prosecutors and judges recognize this problem," O'Brien noted in the press release. "But will we do enough to actually address it? That remains to be seen."

[Vrede too]

To: Chuck.Edwards@ncleg.net, Chuck.McGrady@ncleg.net
Cc: publicschoolsfirstnc@gmail.com

Hi,

I support House Bill 280, the Juvenile Justice Reinvestment Act. Raising the age at which juvenile offenders will be tried as adults will bring NC in line with most of the nation in rational, cost-effective and compassionate juvenile justice reform. Thank you for being a primary sponsor, Rep. McGrady.

cc: Gov. Cooper

Sincerely,
(Vrede too)

Five myths of the private prison industry
The incarceration industry presents themselves as a cost-effective solution to prison overcrowding. But is that true?

America has been fighting an ongoing battle against prison overcrowding for decades now, and the preferred method of treatment has been more prisons. Such a wide reaching problem has always been difficult to tackle, and the symbolic function of punishment repeatedly runs up against its practical elements.

Bernie Sanders recently made private prisons a national political issue when he introduced the Justice Is Not For Sale Act into the Senate, but for-profit incarceration, just like America’s inflated prison population, is no new beast. However, it is one with a fine public relations team and a corner of the market seemingly small enough to discount their impact. Or so you’d be led to believe.

Let’s take a look at the most common myths and misconceptions surrounding the incarceration industry.

5. They’re a reaction to, not a cause of, prison crowding....

4. They’re a relatively small part of the problem without much influence on the system as a whole....

3. They work for the government, so even though they’re not open to public inspection, the courts and the oversight committees keep them in check....

2. They don’t profit off of the inmates themselves....

1. They save money....

[Vrede too]

Violent police takedown caught on camera, sparking outrage (article)



We've all seen the video of Michael Brown "robbing" a store shortly before he was killed by a cop in Ferguson, Missouri. Now, 2 1/2 years (!) later:

New video of events before fatal Ferguson shooting in film (article)


New footage released of Michael Brown in Ferguson ‘Stranger Fruit’ Clip

As the article describes, there are different claims as to the meaning of the events in the new video. However, there is no doubt that the Ferguson authorities released only the video that fit their narrative and not other video that calls it into question. Lying bastards!

[Mr.B]

"Mike did not rob the store --- it was a misunderstanding"

Where's the video of 'Mike' holding a store owner by the neck ... ?

[Vrede too]

Damn, you're stupid. The new video suggests that the property belonged to Michael Brown. Just because you would be a pansy when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property doesn't mean that normal people are that way.

[Mr.B]

"Damn, you're stupid. The new video suggests that the property belonged to Michael Brown."
Suggests. That means the store clerk stole the Cigarillos to exchange for the pot; so in reality it was still stolen property.
Damn your even more stupid.

"Just because you would be a pansy when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property doesn't mean that normal people are that way."
Huh? Not much thought put in that reply, huh?

[Mr.B]

"Just because you would be a pansy when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property doesn't mean that normal people are that way."

I'm still trying to decipher what your nonsensical babbling means, so I'll attempt to break it down ...

"Just because you would be a pansy" ---- Unintelligible babbling, but I assume you mean I wouldn't have tried to stop "dear 'ol Mikey" from leaving the store. Given the size of this street bully in comparison to the store owner, I think I'd win a week's pay in a bet that you wouldn't have tried to stop him either. You're wussy like that. But, yes, I would have attempted to retrieved my merchandise. If the contents of that bag was a legitimate purchase, why would "dear little Mikey" grab the store owner? Why not show a receipt? Because he was a bully; plain & simple.

"when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property" .... OK, so you've acknowledged that the store owner suspected with good reason, that although the Cigarillos were bagged, there would not be a receipt in the bag showing proof of purchase, and therefore, was STILL HIS PROPERTY.

"doesn't mean that normal people are that way" ... Another nonsensical reply. "Normal" people wouldn't try to stop this thief? Given the size of this street bully in comparison to the store owner, you're probably right.

[billy.pilgrim]

"Just because you would be a pansy when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property doesn't mean that normal people are that way."

I'm still trying to decipher what your nonsensical babbling means, so I'll attempt to break it down ...

"Just because you would be a pansy" ---- Unintelligible babbling, but I assume you mean I wouldn't have tried to stop "dear 'ol Mikey" from leaving the store. Given the size of this street bully in comparison to the store owner, I think I'd win a week's pay in a bet that you wouldn't have tried to stop him either. You're wussy like that. But, yes, I would have attempted to retrieved my merchandise. If the contents of that bag was a legitimate purchase, why would "dear little Mikey" grab the store owner? Why not show a receipt? Because he was a bully; plain & simple.

"when someone tries to prevent you from leaving with your property" .... OK, so you've acknowledged that the store owner suspected with good reason, that although the Cigarillos were bagged, there would not be a receipt in the bag showing proof of purchase, and therefore, was STILL HIS PROPERTY.

"doesn't mean that normal people are that way" ... Another nonsensical reply. "Normal" people wouldn't try to stop this thief? Given the size of this street bully in comparison to the store owner, you're probably right.

not sure the clerk would give a receipt for his pot/cigarillo exchange

this video is at least relevant - not sure why the cops would hide it



new bumper sticker seen fairly frequently in my area

Blue Lives are the Only Ones that Matter

[Vrede too]

Sheesh, what a dufus! The whole point - as described in the article, video and my posts - is that the second video strongly suggests that the Cigarillos belonged to Michael Brown. Of course there's no receipt, goofball, it looks like a trade for pot. Now, as I've made clear, I don't know if this is the case but with this new evidence it's at least a strong possibility and only a racist like you would continue to pigheadedly call Michael Brown a "thief". It wasn't his place to determine if the clerks stole the Cigarillos from the owner or not, idiot. Find some semi-literate middle school kid to explain it all to you.

Of course, Mr.B runs screeching from my central point, as usual, that the Ferguson authorities concealed this new video from the public for 2 1/2 years while immediately releasing the one that put Michael Brown in the worst possible light. That's how it is with racist, ovine fools that think cops are Jesus.

[Mr.B]

"not sure the clerk would give a receipt for his pot/cigarillo exchange"
He wouldn't if they they had been stolen.

"this video is at least relevant - not sure why the cops would hide it"
Good question; but I assuming they figured out the Cigarillos was stolen from the store owner; but failed to point out that Brown wasn't the initial thief.

"Sheesh, what a dufus! The whole point - as described in the article, video and my posts - is that the second video strongly suggests that the Cigarillos belonged to Michael Brown."
Even thought hey weren't paid for to begin with? Got it. Sheesh, what a dufus!

"Of course there's no receipt, goofball, it looks like a trade for pot."
Which means the Cigarillos were STILL not his property.

"Now, as I've made clear, I don't know if this is the case but with this new evidence it's at least a strong possibility and only a racist like you would continue to pigheadedly call Michael Brown a "thief"."
I don't care what color his skin is, I never made mention of that; that's your interjection in this argument; he could have been blue for all I care. He knew the merchandise wasn't paid for, as did the store owner. That's why the street punk roughed up the store owner. Plain and simple, he was just as much a thief as was the dufus he made the trade with.

"It wasn't his place to determine if the clerks stole the Cigarillos from the owner or not, idiot."
If stupidity was a game show, you'd already be on the bonus round.

"Find some semi-literate middle school kid to explain it all to you."
I did. I'll give you credit for trying. You failed.

"Of course, Mr.B runs screeching® from my central point, as usual, that the Ferguson authorities concealed this new video from the public
for 2 1/2 (2½) years while immediately releasing the one that put Michael Brown in the worst possible light."
You gonna post a petition? Maybe write Dear Abby? Perhaps you'd prefer street punks be put on a pedestal?

"That's how it is with racist, ovine fools that think cops are Jesus."
Again, you introduced racism into this spiel, I said nothing of his race. How could a cop think he was something you don't even believe exists? Duh.

[rstrong]

Everything You Think You Know About the Death of Mike Brown Is Wrong, and the Man Who Killed Him Admits It

The original story:

Michael Brown walked into a convenience store; committed a strong-arm robbery, escaping with the invaluable loot of a pack of cigarillos; and while he was walking home, Darren Wilson, a brave cop responding to the robbery, stopped him.

When Wilson tried to detain Brown, Brown reached for the cop’s gun and the policeman shot him. But Brown wouldn’t quit, and the officer thought that Brown might have a weapon, so Wilson shot a few more times to stop Brown from harming him.

What we now KNOW, thanks to the video and Officer Wilson's own admissions:

- The robbery didn't happen.
- Officer Wilson had a history of racial discrimination and excessive force.
- Brown never tried to take the officer Wilson’s gun.
- Brown never struck the officer.
- Brown did not initiate any contact with Officer Wilson.
- Officer Wilson used racial slurs, cursed at Brown, and grabbed him without provocation.
- Than, instead of reaching for his pepper spray, baton or Taser—Wilson pulled out his gun and admits to shooting Brown, even though Brown had not reached for his weapon or struck him.
- He shot 10 times. After shooting Brown in the face, Wilson kept firing, shooting him again in the top of the head.

And just a reminder about how credible the police investigation was:

“Professor” who assisted in Mike Brown autopsy revealed as “fraud, con artist”

Just when you thought the investigation into Ferguson cop Darren Wilson's shooting of an unarmed black teen couldn't get any more fucked up, it gets even more fucked up....