I LOL'd at "Professional Courtesy."
Printable View
I LOL'd at "Professional Courtesy."
They're cracking down on crime in NYC;
Don't be caught without ID in a public park after it's been closed, because you might face 36 hours in police custody.
And don't dare commit the heinous crime of getting shot by a stray bullet, for which one woman spent five days in a police station cell.
CR
Is this the right place for that Judge Adams story?
And do you Texans have any idea what this is about?
Sometimes, a man is so far ahead of his time that it is hard for his contemporaries to understand him. Judge Adams is such a man. As a judge, he is light years ahead of his time.
His genius may not be understood for many years. It may not be apparent to us mere mortals. His work will be the subject of scholarly legal articles and study for many years.
Some of his pearls of judicial wisdom follow:
1) Family law often concerns itself with the amorphous concept of "best interests of the child." Some have complained that this term is too undefined to provide reasonable guidance in judicial proceedings. Well, Judge William Adams has come to the rescue. We still do not know all the contours of the best interests of the child but we do know thanks to Judge William Adams the mental health of the primary child care provider is not relevant to "best interests." Thus, it doesn't matter with respect to the best interests of the child, if the child care provider is homicidal, psychotic, suicidal, and hullucinatory, among other things. In other words, a homicidal, hullucinatory, psychotic psychotic is just as good as someone who is not.
2) Naturally, from principle no. 1, it therefor follows that any discovery into the mental health history of a primary health care provider is irrelevant and should not be allowed.
3) Children should never be believed. This includes a child who everybody describes as bright and honest. If a child says he was abused, he should be ignored. If a parent doesn't ignore the child, the parent should be sanctioned (and her lawyer).
4) Similarly, if child says he has been abused, the alleged abuser should be asked whether he abused the child. If the alleged abuser denies the abuse, the issue should be dropped.
5) If the child says various people were present during the abuse, then those people have no relevance as witnesses. If the child's parents attempts to question them, she should be sanctioned (and her lawyer also).
6) If the child says he was abused at a restaurant, but people who abused the child deny having been at the restaurant at the relevant time, it is irrelevant that two waiters at the restaurant say they were there.
7) All children are fantasizers all the time; thus, anyone, who believes a child is frivolous and must be sanctioned.
8) If there is no videotape of something, it should not be presented in Court. No videotape, then it didn't happen.
9) Written communication don't count; only phone calls.
10) If a witness he doesn't have a clue what the charts he present mean or how they were created, then this means the charts are conclusive proof.
These are just a few "Judge William Adams" pearls of judicial wisdom. His wisdom is too vast to be learned in just one lesson.
-It sure is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
-I'm guessing he's a good ole boy judge.
LA County, where they beat on the mentally disabled;
Quote:
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Records show a rookie Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy quit after only three weeks on the job after a supervisor forced him to beat up a mentally ill jail inmate.
The Los Angeles Times reported Thursday that 23-year-old Joshua Sathers, who graduated at the top of his class, was so disturbed after the March incident and subsequent cover-up at the Twin Towers jail that he resigned and moved to Colorado.
The incident was investigated by the sheriff’s department, which determined that no misconduct had occurred although an uncooperative inmate had been subdued.
The head of the Miami Fraternal Order of Police defends a man who was driving 122 mph and got a ticket for reckless driving - because he was a cop, of course. Do I even need to mention the last bit?
Note the Miami cop is preemptively warning his fellow cops not to retaliate against the state trooper who pulled over the Miami cop shattering the speed limit. Because they have to be warned against such corrupt behavior, because otherwise they'd do it.Quote:
First came the controversial traffic stop, cop vs. cop on Florida's Turnpike, recorded on dash-cam video that went viral showing a state trooper pursuing, cuffing and detaining a hyper-speeding Miami police officer at gunpoint.
Now comes the aftermath: Some Miami police officers are not only defending their compatriot, they are threatening and insulting the Florida Highway Patrol trooper who had the nerve to write him a ticket for reckless driving.
If professional courtesy is a two-way street, it looks like the encounter between Miami Officer Fausto Lopez and Trooper Donna Jane Watts has dropped a massive roadblock between factions in their two agencies.
The grudge match has been playing out in hundreds of tit-for-tat postings on a law enforcement blog.
In this corner, Miami: "I would have loved for Watts to try and pull me over in my marked unit and draw her gun on me! She would have a very rude awakening,'' an anonymous writer posted Monday. "I would wait til I got to my district, called all my boys, and then you Miss Watts will be very SORRY!!'
On the other side, FHP: "The dumb ass shouldn't be doing 122 miles per hour that is RECKLESS,'' posted another writer. "What if it's your family that idiot rear-ends and kills, will you still want FHP to be so lenient?''
The growing tension was heightened Sunday when Sgt. Javier Ortiz, vice president of Miami's Fraternal Order of Police, which represents the city's 1,000-plus officers, attacked Watts and defended Lopez in a letter to union members. He accused Watts of just wanting to ticket a Miami cop.
...
He went on to tell officers: "Please do not get to her level and begin taking action against Troopers because of the poor decisions of one. … Do not be running her information on DAVID, FCIC/NCIC, etc.,'' referring to law enforcement databases that contain criminal records, addresses and dates of birth.
....
Though numerous threats and personal attacks have been directed at Watts, and purported members of both agencies are threatening to retaliate or not to back each other up in emergencies, there is no easy way to tell if the writers are actually law officers.
"She is an unfortunate-looking woman, her behavior probably has something to do with it,'' a pro-Miami writer said about Watts.
"Miami cops should be used to riding handcuffed in the back seat,'' wrote an FHP supporter. "So many get arrested for rape, murder, corruption, etc.''
And note the Miami cops defending their right to flaunt the law and insisting on being treated as above the law.
It's not just a few bad apples.
CR
Executive, judicial have counter balance powers what is the counter balance for cops?
Telling him you have AIDS after he gets your blood spatters all over himQuote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
IPCC in the United Kingdom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
So a protester is standing well back from the police line and peacefully filming. Best practices indicate it's time to shoot him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0pX9LeE-g8
He's a hippie and the cop has a "non-lethal" gun. Furthermore, the hippie wasn't cowering in fear like the worthless peasant he is. Of course the police officer had to correct that immediately. For his safety.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Question time; when you're being illegally assaulted with deadly force, how should you fight back?
More on the OWS front:
Long story short is that the cops use violence quicker against protesters than Marines in Afghanistan [edited], and are more vicious to the wounded American protesters than Marines are to wounded Taliban.Quote:
As the events that led to Oakland protester Scott Olsen's head injury continue to unfold and investigations begin, we thought it important to offer some perspective.
This comment is from a former Marine with special operations in crowd control.
He points out that shooting canisters such as those that likely hit Scott Olsen is prohibited under rules of engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regardless of any political position on the Occupy protests, these are some Interesting insights:
Before gas goes into a crowd shield bearers have to be making no progress moving a crowd or crowd must be assaulting the line. Not with sticks and stones but a no bullshit assault. 3 warnings must be given to the crowd in a manner they can hear that force is about to be used. Shield bearers take a knee and CS gas is released in grenade form first to fog out your lines because you have gas masks. You then kick the canisters along in front of your lines. Projectile gas is not used except for longer ranged engagement or trying to steer the crowd ( by steering a crowd I mean firing gas to block a street off ). You also have shotguns with beanbags and various less than lethal rounds for your launchers. These are the rules for a WARZONE!!
How did a cop who is supposed to have training on his weapon system accidentally SHOOT someone in the head with a 40mm gas canister? Simple. He was aiming at him.
I'll be the first to admit a 40mm round is tricky to aim if you are inexperienced but anyone can tell the difference between aiming at head level and going for range.
The person that pulled that trigger has no business being a cop. He sent that round out with the intention of doing some serious damage to the protestors. I don't care what the protestors were doing. I never broke my rules of engagement in Iraq or Afghanistan. So I can't imagine what a protester in the states did to deserve a headshot with a 40mm. He's damn lucky to be alive and that cop knows he was using lethal force against a protester he is supposed to be protecting.
Specifically these two transcribed directly from US Army Law of War/Law of Armed Conflict training.
The Military manual states:
…have a duty to collect and care for the wounded. Prioritize treatment according to injuries. Make NO treatment distinction based on nationality. All soldiers, enemy or friendly, must be treated the same.
Second, the officer threw a flash-bang directly into a group of people trying to carry him away for medical treatment. Here's the Military guidance on that decision:
Medical Personnel Considered out of combat if they exclusively engaged in medical duties. (GWS, art. 24.) Doctors, surgeons, nurses, chemists, stretcher-bearers, medics, corpsman, and orderlies, etc..., who are “exclusively engaged” in the direct care of the wounded and sick.
Fun times.
CR
That ones pretty funny, but this one is better:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fb6CcUjHOsw
Your disconnect from reality is mind boggling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Hmm. I should have said;Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Long story short is that the cops use violence quicker against protesters than Marines in Afghanistan, and are more vicious to the wounded American protesters than Marines are to wounded Taliban.
CR
As someone with prior law enforcement experience I can verify that police officers are able to see through thick clouds of tear gas and are trained how to hit people in the head with inaccurate, smoothbore weapons.
No, I'm joking. The truth is that the cops tried killing every one of those kids but they were too drunk to shoot straight.
So ... a protester is well back from the police lines, behaving peacefully, and him getting shot is funny. Wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
I don't care if it's the Tea Party, the OWS crew, the Westboro Baptist Church or the Klu Klux Klan. I do not like seeing police using force when it is not warranted. I get that you hold the OWS crowd in utter and total contempt. They are somehow more pathetic than other protesters. Got it. You've been super-clear on that. Still, I find your attitude about appropriate force beyond comprehension.
I do like to see the police using force. I would be unhappy if they got pushed around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
It isn't a disagreement about appropriate force. As far as I can tell from the clip he acted unprofessionally--just not in a way that we should care about. I expect some policemen to get angry and react. They should have that level of self respect, and having self respect and being professional are two good things that sometimes contradict each other.
I'm not going to start talking about fascist police grinding the peasants under their heel (or whatever CR said) when the protesters manage to get the youtube clips they want by sheer dint of effort :stare:
What continues to baffle me is the way this thread mixes in obvious police abuse with obvious non-abuse without people being able to tell the difference :dizzy2:
Someone who likes to see the police using force? Really?
Read his second sentence, then finish the rest of the post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slyspy
The alternative is to have a bunch of people running around in high visibility jacks and small, fuel efficient diesels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
There, I have underlined what is so highly unprofessional about it. Not just “unprofessional” as in using some choice language in a tight spot that isn't making good PR for the department. “Unprofessional” as in: is that cop even mentally fit for duty? The guy posed zero threat to the police, and they're not paid to be angry men with guns and the right to use them, they're paid to keep a cool and level head in all situations. Heck, it would be highly unprofessional in any line of work to respond in this manner (and would normally have rather more severe consequences than being called “unprofessional”, too).Quote:
I expect some policemen to get angry and react.
Nope. If they were professional they wouldn't let that camera get under their skin. Also, I fail to see how the inability to bear being put on camera equates to having any measure of self respect worth the name.Quote:
They should have that level of self respect, and having self respect and being professional are two good things that sometimes contradict each other.
You're being a sucker for the propaganda :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
The strategy is to provoke the police into retaliating, and then get it on youtube. They want you to think "The hippie wasn't cowering in fear like the worthless peasant he is. Of course the police officer had to correct that immediately." like CR said. And you do...you do.
It has the counterproductive effect of raising the standards of evidence for actually calling something abuse sky high. The fact that this is the best they've gotten so far is pretty telling.
VVV watch the video/interview. Proves exactly what I said. Unprofessional, but the guy is sooooo shootable that I forgive the police officer instantly.
But Olbermann wasn't there. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Obviously. But that doesn't negate the fact that the guy has every right to go out and about and record his day on camera, and that his doing so does not constitute a threat or act of violence towards those cops. Hence it remains highly unprofessional. Not to mention stupid in a don't-feed-the-trolls sort of way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Nope. He's holding a camera walking quite freely and calmly a few metres from the line of policemen. So obviously not a cowering peasant. He's still not up for target practice, though.Quote:
And you do...you do.
Which is where I beg to differ. I think this example is not necessarily symptomatic of abuse, but certainly unprofessional to the point that I wouldn't raise eyebrows if it ended up an dishonourable discharge. (Actually, I might, given the examples of the exact opposite in police HR being posted in this thread, but you get the idea.)Quote:
It has the counterproductive effect of raising the standards of evidence for actually calling something abuse sky high. The fact that this is the best they've gotten so far is pretty telling.
VVV watch the video/interview. Proves exactly what I said. Unprofessional, but the guy is sooooo shootable that I forgive the police officer instantly.
Don't see what distinction you are making between highly and regularly unprofessional. Do you care that this guy got shot? How do you feel about the officer as a person? Judging the action is much less relevant than judging the people.
I mean, if you are a lobbyist, being unprofessional involves being MORE moral. And if there were cosmic justice, many more people would have been shot and then disenfranchised, perhaps the officer was divinely inspired ~D
Also, anyone referring to someone as a "Citizen Journalist" deserves to be shot extra :whip:
Lovely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
By all means, let us shoot those we find distasteful. That will solve everything. Oh, wait, you were kidding? Man, I bet that joke rocked the house at the Stormfront conclave. Somebody's got a future in fascist standup comedy!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Meh Kojiro, you're just playing l'enfant terrible right now, admit it :wacko:
The police officer must be discharged without compensatory pay on the spot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kojiro
Secondly, you do know that citizen journalists have been instrumental in the past in unveiling the abuse of political regimes the world over, not the least in Eastern Europe. Plus, it is such an American way of asserting oneself, how can you right-leaning chaps be such biconceptuals about it?
Well I think it's hilarious. Even though you can't see what was happening behind the cameraman you heard at least one idiot making an ass of himself.
From that viewpoint it seems like the officer acted inappropriately and used a bit of his own mob mentality and annaminity to inflict pain on a provocative fool.
Here's another one for Sasaki's comedy self-pleasure: Iraq vet tries to walk home, gets beat-down. (But he was near the Occupy people and they're super-extra-bad, an police have a God-given right to beat and shoot people if their dignity is injured, so it's all okay! In fact, it's hilarious!)
When dinner was over, Sabeghi decided to call it a night because he had to work Thursday. He was walking home in west Oakland sometime late Wednesday or early Thursday when he encountered a line of police at the protest who wouldn't let him through, Goodstal said.
"Literally, you (could) see his apartment," she said. "The police for some reason ... said, 'No, you cannot pass.'"
Goodstal said Sabeghi told her he tried to explain his situation and officers began hitting him with batons.
Records show Sabeghi was booked on suspicion of resisting arrest. [...]
Goodstal said Sabeghi asked for medical attention several times from a jail cell and an ambulance came more than three hours after another friend posted his bail. [...] A Highland Hospital spokesman said Sabeghi was in fair condition Saturday but released no further details. Goodstal said Sabeghi was in the intensive care unit and had to undergo surgery for a lacerated spleen.
And why is that? One merely has to to read my posts over the course of this to see that I call abuse abuse and non-abuse non-abuse. I'm the sane one surrounding by a circle of partisans ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Sabeghi's story as told is clearly abuse, but I can't say what really happened.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...bay&id=8422482
http://globalgrind.com/news/kayvan-s...ks-out-details
No way. He made someone very happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowake
That's where the disconnect is between us I think. This isn't Eastern Europe. It's America 2011. Here,Quote:
Secondly, you do know that citizen journalists have been instrumental in the past in unveiling the abuse of political regimes the world over, not the least in Eastern Europe. Plus, it is such an American way of asserting oneself, how can you right-leaning chaps be such biconceptuals about it?
citizenwannabee journalists mainly spout garbage and it's wrong to dishonour people who actually do good work by automatically elevating hacks simply because they meet the minimum criterion. Or maybe I can call myself a philanthropist because I gave a homeless person a buck last week...
A difficult claim to support when you make merry over an unarmed protester who is at least ten yards from police lines being deliberately shot. You contradict yourself with your own mirth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
And so, since a citizen journalist is illegitimate in your eyes, any police action taken against him is valid and justified. I've said it before and I'll say it again, lovely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
-edit-
Here's a little thought experiment: Imagine a cause you agree with. Imagine a protester for that cause behaving exactly like the fellow with the camera, but remove your outsized contempt. Now imagine that person being shot without provocation. Seriously, try to wipe the thick film of hate from your eyeglasses and see the thing for what it is.
Police have every right to defend themselves and enforce order. But the cause, fashion sense and/or dislikeability of the protesters is irrelevant, utterly irrelevant. I don't care if it's the Wetboro Baptist Church, the Black Panthers or your grandma who is protesting: this is America, we have (restricted but extant) freedom of speech and assembly, and anyone who is abiding within the law has a reasonable expectation that force will not be applied by the organs of the state. That's some seriously basic stuff right there.
I wish I was surprised some people considered legally filming the police provocation and the violent reaction by police understandable. Like saying skimpy clothing causes rapes because rapists can't control themselves.
At the occupy UC-Davis, a cop casually torturing a bunch of protesters with pepper spray who posed absolutely no threat to him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjnR7xET7Uo&feature=player_embedded#!
https://i.imgur.com/J3AE5.jpg
EDIT: Cops in Iowa bust into a house, throw people on the ground, jump on the elderly folks who don't get on the floor quick enough, shoot the dogs as they're either right next to a person's head, or running away. All with warrants looking for "any kind of legal or illegal drugs" and a stolen Xbox. They found neither.
CRQuote:
POLICE BRUTALITY: Family Says Police Killed Their Dogs and Slammed Grandmother to Ground
JEFFERSON IA—
Matthew Spaulding says he and his family were terrorized at their own home by police who slammed his grandmother to the ground and shot his dogs-- missing his head by less than an inch. "Told us to get on the ground. I got on the ground they put me in handcuffs," Spaulding recalls, "Then they threw my dad to the ground and my dog Sadie was right here sniffing my head. She was next to me. They shot her. The blood got on my face and then she took off running behind me and they shot her like three more times."
Tuesday morning, Greene County Sheriffs Deputies and Perry Police officers arrived at Spaulding's Jefferson farmhouse to deliver a search warrant. The Spauldings say they were immediately ordered to the ground.. even Matthew Spauldings' disabled father, Chris. "My son hit the ground I hit the ground but I didn't make it too fast so (the officer) jumped on the middle of my back, shoved his knee in and held a gun to the back of my head and handcuffed me. After they shot my first dog my mom come out"
"They had taken me to the ground," Chris Spauldings' mother Susan Mace says, "So I was laying with my face in the ground. And I asked them why they shot the dog because the dogs weren't close to them"
The Spauldings say after the first dog was killed, a second dog running away from the shots --- and away from police--- was also shot. "They weren't barking. They weren't attacking nobody." Matthew Spaulding says, "They didn't even give us a chance to put them in the kennel. We have a big kennel outside our house we could have put them in but they wouldn't give us a chance."
Perry Police are not commenting. And they're refusing to turn over any paperwork or reports about the incident saying it's part of an ongoing investigation. But we were able to get copies of the search warrants. One warrant shows police were looking for any kind of legal or illegal drugs. The other shows police were looking for a stolen X-Box video game system. No drugs and no stolen games were found--and no one was arrested. Chris Spaulding says he's furious his dogs were killed--his mother was ruffed up and his son was almost killed by police---all over a missing video game system. "Some of these officers should be fired because they kinda took their job too far. No common sense. No public safety when you got a kid on the ground," he says, "That's messed up man. Right beside his head. You could have shot my son."
Reading the news about that...someone really needs to post that Orwell article on the degradation of language again.
A policeman pepper spraying people with dozens of cameras in plains sight has not been "caught" on camera.
That chubby man strolling casually along and spraying a group of people is neither violent nor is it torture. Saying that he used pepper spray is perfectly descriptive.
CR, don't you have any respect for property rights?
Quote:
I am writing to tell you about events that occurred Friday afternoon at UC Davis relating to a group of protestors who chose to set up an encampment on the quad Thursday as part of a week of peaceful demonstrations on our campus that coincided with many other occupy movements at universities throughout the country.
The group did not respond to requests from administration and campus police to comply with campus rules that exist to protect the health and safety of our campus community. The group was informed in writing this morning that the encampment violated regulations designed to protect the health and safety of students, staff and faculty. The group was further informed that if they did not dismantle the encampment, it would have to be removed.
Following our requests, several of the group chose to dismantle their tents this afternoon and we are grateful for their actions.
How childish do you have to be to refuse to decamp and then whine about being pepper sprayed? All they had to do was walk away. There's no free speech at stake, it is simply them making the police force them out of the area in the belief that they are now martyrs. It's sick.