Point of clarification: In general do you like/dislike cops? Also, in any given situation are you inclined to give/not give cops the benefit of the doubt?
Hmmm... Seems like a personal question, but I like cops, some of my best friends are cops. I'm happy to congraduate the police on a job well done:
Good work by Cumberland County!
Also, see my threads:
Police "good work" department
Police "good shooting" department.
I don't like cops being abusive and bullying, though.
Tom C -
Understood. Thank you.
But a tearful Mr Newman's grandson, Nick, has spoken out to defend his grandfather to ABC News, saying: 'I only got one game and people were trying to take it away from me and put it under his shirt so no one would take it'
The ordeal terrified Nick, who sobbed as he talked about it nearly two days later.
'Never go there on black friday, cuz if you go, you will get hurt,' the boy said about his local Walmart
Greedy or protecting his grandson from the mob? Story of the body-slammed grandfather who is face of Black Friday chaos as nation searches its soul
David Chadd, a CNN iReporter from Las Vegas, was among the crowd shopping for video games set up in the Walmart's grocery section. He said Newman "was not resisting" arrest as he was led away from the crowd by a police officer.
Arizona police vow probe into bloody arrest of grandfather at Walmart
Fuggedaboudit, pal. The Assistant Cheif has already said the guy was resisting arrest, and it's his own fault.
The department will conduct an investigation to assess if the actions of the police officer involved in the arrest were "within reason," based on "our policy and also the law." He said that probe would happen soon, adding it was "days away."
lol. Now, all they need to do is gin up an "investigation" to show the cop was "just doing his job."
Any doubt what result the POLICE DEPARTMENT is going to come up with in their investigation?
Every inch of a walmart store is covered by security cameras. So where is the in-store tape of this incident? Thats what I want to see.
According to the police - IT'S GONE!
Interestingly, while the shoppers were rioting and the man's grandson was getting mauled, the police just stood by. However, when they apparently mistakenly tried to arrest him for shoplifting, they were "just doing their job."
Watch citizens get mauled, then make a false arrest. Gosh, stay home, if that's your idea of "doing your job."
The chaotic shopping scene spun out control when a man waiting in line for discounted cellphones fell into a display, which incited off-duty police officers to fire pepper spray into the crowd.
Police Blast Pepper Spray At Unruly Black Friday Shoppers Inside North Carolina Wal-Mart
That's the spirit! If there's not a problem - then make one!
The SWAT team arrived at her home at 5:30 a.m., disturbing the attorney and her family members, including an 80-year-old relative, Arnwine said. They also did not seem to have a warrant and asked for the name of the homeowner and how to spell that name.
Barbara Arnwine, Civil Rights Lawyer, Has Home Raided By Police
Prince George’s County Police Department was “taken aback” when she informed them she was an attorney and of basic fourth 4th Amendment rights. Arnwine claims the officer responded that “the fourth Amendment doesn’t apply here.” She also said they didn’t believe she was an attorney and asked what school she attended and what year she graduated.
PG County Cops Raid Home of Prominent Civil Rights Lawyer
Supposedly her nephew was staying there who was a suspect in a robbery.
But you'll get raided even if your eveil resident isn't actually there:
SWAT officers searching an Akron residence Tuesday morning for a home invasion suspect shot and killed a family’s dog.
Deputies say Congrove’s son and another man are a suspect in the aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary of a Green woman’s home last month
Congrove said he does not know the whereabouts of his son. He said SWAT officers caused about $8,000 in damage to his home, including a bullet hole to a bedroom wall.
SWAT team looking for home invasion suspect shoots pit bull
Neighbors say SWAT teams tear-gassed [the suspect's parent's home] home, where Parker's ex-boyfriend stays, and went inside.
Police only said they are searching for "a piece of the puzzle" on where they might find her
"They had reason to search the house. They searched the house, they didn't come up with what they were looking for," Erickson said. "The SWAT team was there, They had dogs there and they didn't come up with nothing."
SWAT team raids home in search for Michelle Parker
(missing victim's mother) Yvonne said during the news conference, “If you could have avoided this Dale, if you had cooperated with the police and took a polygraph test when they asked you, you could have avoided a lot of stress. So unfortunately,” she said, “you brought this on yourself.
Swat team swarms exes home names him a suspect
Now you're getting the hang of it! By invoking the 5th amendment, you throw out the fourth! You BROUGHT IT ON YOURSELF!
Anyway, now p[olice have carde blanche to do no-knock raid on the houses of relatives of suspects.
They brought it upon themselves! They, er, umm... well, never mind. The police have the LEGAL RIGHT to do it!
So, if you're upset about that, get some medication and relax!
Earlier this year, a Stockton student was handcuffed with zip ties on his hands and feet, forced to go to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and was charged with battery on a police officer. That student was 5 years old.
5-Year-Old Handcuffed, Charged With Battery On Officer
When the only tool you have is a hammer - everything looks like a nail!
I wonder if they read the kid his Miranda rights?
Tom, you posted:
Barbara Arnwine, Civil Rights Lawyer, Has Home Raided By Police
I personally found that pretty interesting. You'd think a SWAT team would want a warrant before unconsented entry into the home of a prominent civil rights lawyer.
They had one. Here it is.
That's the problem with relying on news reports quoting the "aggrieved person", or "family of the deceased".
I posted exactly what the story said.
You did post just what the story said -- indicating a problem with the story.
The story DIDN'T say they DIDN'T have a warrant. You haven't shown the story to be wrong.
Nor did I say the article was "wrong". "Biased", "poorly researched", and "misleading" would be good descriptors. Given that the (attempted) point of the article was the (incorrect) willingness of police to search a home without a warrant, I'd add "useless".
No, the point is that the homeowner didn't seem to know they had a warrant. She was a lawyer, how did THAT happen?
Again, you rely on the citizen to read the minds of the police.
Even the Catholics are disgusted with police arrogance:
This incident beckons us to look at the relationship between the police and the public, which has been deteriorating for the past 15 years or so. The police are increasingly confronting average citizens as they go about their daily lives. These confrontations are often initiated without a reasonable suspicion or a factual or legal basis. Furthermore, many of these confrontations involve excessive force and violence.
This is what happened to Newman.
What happened to Newman was not unusual. It could easily happen to any one of us anywhere at any time.
Catholic Online: A Thanksgiving Day Marred by Police Brutality Reveals Another Aspect of the Culture of Death
"Again, you rely on the citizen to read the minds of the police."
Nope. I rely on police to follow the law, which in the case above, they did.
I do not rely on the media to accurately report the truth, though I am pleased when they do.
I do not rely on other lawyers to know what the law is (though the issuance of a warrant is a FACT, not a law). I look it up myself.
Because I do not rely on the media to report the truth, I wouldn't be surprised if the lawyer knew there was a warrant, or was informed that there was one but it wasn't shown to her. The reporter pretty clearly wanted to create the impression that police had made a warrantless search of the home of a prominent civil rights lawyer, ultimately to sell ad space.
How can the citizen know there is a warrant unless the police show it to them?
Jose Guerena is critized for NOT LETTING POLICEMEN IN WHEN THEY HAD A WARRENT.
Storie on the other hand said, "This was all about a man who made bad choices and when you make bad choices to men who are armed, uniformed, and there for a lawful reason, bad things are going to happen."
I guess the citizen has to READ THE POLICEMAN'S MIND.
"Jose Guerena is critized for NOT LETTING POLICEMEN IN WHEN THEY HAD A WARRENT"
Criticize? In light of the bullet strikes on the AR-15, it appears he was shot for and while pointing a firearm at the officers. If all he did was "not let them in", he'd probably be fine today. If they found no evidence, he probably wouldn't have even been arrested. I don't "criticize" him, though some might. I believe the sad ending is way beyond "criticism".
Will that fact be important, now that the FEDS will have potentially, though 1032 DOD appropriations, assigned some Americans as enemy combatants
Some americans ARE enemy combatants. That's been true in a lot of wars, most notably WW1 and 2. Unk Sugar has shown a disposition toward dealing with Americans by declaration, not adjudication and evidence == most notably the Japanese..
Pressure via the judicial branch was why they finally tried Jose Padilla. The plan had been "hold him forever". Now, it is 17 years as a result of a conviction.
The DOD appropriation bill will not change the constitution. It will create a useful list of badguys to be voted out of office. If any official tries to enforce it DESPITE the SCOTUS opinion in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, they might run into some personal liability in light of the "settled law" doctrine in section 1983 cases.
I don't like the idea of making anybody an "enemy combatant" by declaration, without an ability to challenge that. To date, the Judicial Branch has been the most steadfast protector of rights of citizens against the assaults of the Exec. and Legislative branches.
So here's my short answer. If the bill gets passed, the application to citizens will be challenged in the courts. If they try to do to anybody what they did to Hamdi, they will lose. If (a smarter move) they actually hold a "Hamdi hearing" before a federal judge in every case of a citizen or legal alien, the bill might be constitutional "as applied".
In the meantime, we should vote against anybody who wants to lock up Americans indefinitely without due process.
it appears he was shot for and while pointing a firearm at the officers.
No, the officers stated they opened fire BECAUSE they thought they were fired upon.
Oddly enough, even though it's being used as the primary excuse for the killing, the fact that the gun was pointed at in the direction of the home invasion is incidental.
One might even wonder whether someone coming infrom the bright Arizona sun, possibly wearing sunglasses, looking down a long hallway would be able to clearly make out just what the figure lying down at the end of the hallway was doing. But then, no matter, the officers stated they opened fire because they thought they were fired upon.
Another BAD CHOICE!
Here's a question. If the police make their own policies designed primarily to protect themselves - even with the possibility that there may be some "collateral damage", as might be the case here, should that policy contemplate some renumeration for the families of innocent citizens slain in the exectution of said policy?
Or, instead, if an innocent citizen is killed, should the police do everything they can to deny responsibility, blame the victim instead, slur, lie and slander the murdered fellow, and steadfastly refuse any compensation for the innocent victim's family?
What do you think?
Caught in the line of fire. Merced police admit they accidentally shot the wrong man. They blame the man they were trying to take down.
Merced Police Shoot Wrong Man
Was there a gun? Was it pointed at police officers? And did the officers announce themselves before discharging about half a dozen rounds into a crowd of people, killing one and wounding two others?
An official statement from the Merced Police Department says yes.
Witnesses dispute police claims in fatal shooting
Stupid eyewitnesses! What do they know?
Well, I hope there is a good recording of this incident. I'd like to have a good recording of all of these incidents, the missing or unusable recording excuse is getting old.
When he noticed the officers approaching the house, Xiong fled the scene, but at one point he turned toward the officers with that gun in hand.
Well, they say he was running away, and we haven't heard "pointed the gun at the officers." I guess they were just "protecting the public" when they shot the bystander.
Buckeye police were hoping Wal-Mart surveillance cameras captured the arrest of shoplifting suspect Jerald Newman, during a Black Friday sale Thanksgiving night.
But a review of those tapes only show Newman being escorted from the immediate area of the video game display where he was accused of shoplifting.
Surveillance cameras miss Bloody Black Friday
Hmmm... so the super Wal-Mart security system missed BOTH the alleged shoplifting incident AND the police takedown.
Here's a classic case where an INNOCENT man PROTECTING HIMSELF is killed by the police, who can claim they "did nothing wrong".
"I still dream about this little girl, because I think about his family and what he went through," Harrell said. "And not that I did anything wrong, because I know I did not, but it is something that I hope to never have to do again. Because whether you are right or wrong, it sticks with you. It is a hard thing to do
Tampa could pay $30,000 to settle suit over fatal police shooting of Ybor club worker
Well, except you killed an innocent man.
The settlement is an outrage - $30,000. And:
Of the $30,000 settlement, $15,150 will cover attorneys' fees and costs.
Well, the system is working fine for SOMEBODY.
Are you suggesting that the police are in cahoots with Wal Mart? I'd say, offhand, that's doubtful (assuming for the moment the accuracy of the story):
Rorke and witnesses say Newman became uncooperative and tried to pull away and twist away from Rorke. That's when Rorke says he did a feet sweep on Newman taking him to the ground to finish cuffing him.
-- more of those pesky witnesses. Wouldn't it be nice if there was surveillance video to verify what the WITNESSES said -- but it was -- what? Unavailable? Not showing that area? Erased?
I'm going to wait for the investigation. It'd be a real smoking gun if the cop had control of the video of the USA's (largest ?) retailer.
Witnesses also say that DIDN'T happen. Gee, sure would be nice to have a video!
If this fellow found himself being arrested when he wasn't trying to shoplift, it would be NATURAL AND REASONABLE for him to protest. The Assistant Chief, when happiliy trying to lay the blame on the victim, STATED that the victim should have tried to explain himself.
Doesn't look like he got the chance.
Are you suggesting that the police are in cahoots with Wal Mart?
Hey, here's a question for you. Just who was paying for the police when this incident happened?
An officer was heading to the alley and spotted the man on the store's north side. The man pulled out a knife and didn't put it down despite the officer telling him to do so repeatedly
But Moore said he doubted his friend could have stood and lunged at an officer. "I don't see how he could have. He was crippled. Going to the bathroom, he would fall over.
Friend: Man fatally shot by Visalia police may have been suicidal
Cripple in a wheelchair stands up and waves a knife. Hey, here's a idea - Run Away.
"I encountered the subject, and he had a knife. Since there were no public in the area, and no one was in danger, I thought it best to run away."
Well, I guess that wouldn't be macho enough. He be the laughing stock of the squad room.
We need a new term, how about "tactical retreat"?
Or even better - "Strategic Repositioning"!
Teach it at the police trainings!
"The officers responded to the call from the subject's relatives expressing concern for the subject's safty. When they arrived on the scene, the appearance of the officers agitated the subject and he waived a tire iron at them. Quickly assessing the stiutation, the police executed a textbook strategic repositioning outside of the subject house and secured the perimeter."
Now THAT'S a tough cop!
"And there are questions of whether the "Jason Sweet" name he gave his friends is real or if he might be the Robert Leon Sweet with the same Feb. 20 birthday as the man Burkdoll knew — convicted last month after pleading no contest in Tulare County Superior Court to charges of burglary, theft and carrying a concealed dirk or dagger ."
I'm not sure why we have police if dirk-armed burglars serve only as a nexus for the beginning of a track meet by the police. "Run away" does not seem like an optimal way to serve and protect "everyone that didn't do it". If the go-to strategy for the police is "run away" upon display of resistance or offer of violence, there will be damned few arrests, and a huge amount of violence.
197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
198. A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it. But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence of such fears alone.
If officers refused to apprehend (approach) every person who MIGHT be armed, all clothed people would never be arrested. If an officer is close enough to affix restraints, he's close enough to be gutted. If he's close enough to be gutted, armed resistance to gutting is a reasonable response. One can move a gun hand much quicker than one can move one's entire body. If I am a chief of police, and one of my officers refuses to approach a person in a wheelchair to arrest him because he "might be armed", there will likely be another kind of investigation.
Was he close enough to be gutted? Nobody has ventured that opinion. An investigation might disclose some information relevant to that issue.