Police lied about Laquan McDonald case

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Inspector general report shows at least 16 officers involved in cover-up of Laquan McDonald shooting

Several false statements served to "mischaracterize the events leading up to the McDonald shooting, and to thereby bolster a false narrative which might offer justification for the shooting," the report said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1064401

 

[Derec]

That may have been the case (although current Chicago government is very anti-police), but at the same time the dominant narrative is at least just as false.

Laquan McDonald wasn't some innocent 17 year old shot by police for no reason. No, he was hopped up on PCP and was violently slashing about with a knife. He even managed to damage two police cars. I still maintain that the first shot was justified. Even if LMcD was moving away from police, police are justified shooting a person that poses a clear and present danger to the community. LMcD was armed and dangerous and quite out of his mind.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

That may have been the case (although current Chicago government is very anti-police), but at the same time the dominant narrative is at least just as false.

Laquan McDonald wasn't some innocent 17 year old shot by police for no reason. No, he was hopped up on PCP and was violently slashing about with a knife. He even managed to damage two police cars. I still maintain that the first shot was justified. Even if LMcD was moving away from police, police are justified shooting a person that poses a clear and present danger to the community. LMcD was armed and dangerous and quite out of his mind.

Police lied about the danger to an extent. They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

 

[Derec]

Police lied about the danger to an extent.

The guy was armed with a knife and quite violent. He was high on PCP (Phencyclidine aka angel dust) during the episode. Even if police officers exaggerated the danger he posed, he was genuinely a dangerous individual. This is not akin to say the case of Jonathan Edwards, who truly did nothing wrong, but whose case received much less attention than LMcD.

They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

And I am sure they will be punished. As they should, if they are really guilty of falsifying reports as the inspector general alleges.
But at the same time, I do not think LMcD deserves the sanctification he received nor does his family and their lawyer deserve $5 million.
Getting high on hard drugs and menacing a neighborhood with a knife should not be rewarded by making your family millionaires.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Police lied about the danger to an extent.

To what extent? The guy was armed with a knife and quite violent.

Jeebus, read the op link.

They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

And I am sure they will be punished. As they should.

Nope.

But at the same time, I do not think LMcD deserves the sanctification he received nor does his family and their lawyer deserve $5 million.

No one in this thread or the op is sanctifying anyone. Try to keep up with the topic. Police lied and engaged in a coverup. Will this keep bouncing off you? Will you keep refusing to read the op link?

 

[Derec]

Jeebus, read the op link.

I edited my response in the meantime.

No one in this thread or the op is sanctifying anyone. Try to keep up with the topic. Police lied and engaged in a coverup. Will this keep bouncing off you? Will you keep refusing to read the op link?

The topic is Laquan McDonald. And he has received a lot of sanctification by the media and the activist class. Even though they would have shat their pants had they been confronted by knife-wielding LMcD that night.

 

[Arctish]

Police lied about the danger to an extent.

To what extent? The guy was armed with a knife and quite violent.

They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

And I am sure they will be punished. As they should. But at the same time, I do not think LMcD deserves the sanctification he received nor does his family and their lawyer deserve $5 million.

You are the only one sanctifying him. You are the only one who has ever sanctified him here. Everyone else understands that he was a suspect in a crime and justifiably subject to arrest.

Laquan MacDonald was murdered by a police officer acting well outside the law. This has been thoroughly established. The number of cops complicit in the cover-up wasn't widely known, but now we know at least 16 officers were involved. That's the topic of this thread, not all the bluster about how scary he was to the guy who shot him in the back from 15' away as he shambled down the street.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Jeebus, read the op link.

I edited my response in the meantime.

No one in this thread or the op is sanctifying anyone. Try to keep up with the topic. Police lied and engaged in a coverup. Will this keep bouncing off you? Will you keep refusing to read the op link?

The topic is Laquan McDonald. And he has received a lot of sanctification by the media and the activist class. Even though they would have shat their pants had they been confronted by knife-wielding LMcD that night.

The topic is "Police lied about Laquan McDonald case." I will let you stand on your soapbox and preach though it would be better if you could keep the scope to whether police lied or not. You can even post random pix of black men but you should deal with the fact police lied. It's good for your mind to accept facts even when antithetical to your ideology.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That may have been the case (although current Chicago government is very anti-police), but at the same time the dominant narrative is at least just as false.

Laquan McDonald wasn't some innocent 17 year old shot by police for no reason. No, he was hopped up on PCP and was violently slashing about with a knife. He even managed to damage two police cars. I still maintain that the first shot was justified. Even if LMcD was moving away from police, police are justified shooting a person that poses a clear and present danger to the community. LMcD was armed and dangerous and quite out of his mind.

Police lied about the danger to an extent. They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

It's only a murder if he would have survived the shots that knocked him down the first time. As Derec says, they were acceptable. He was out of his mind on PCP and attacking. You either contain (not feasible out in the open) or stop (up to and including firearms.)

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

That may have been the case (although current Chicago government is very anti-police), but at the same time the dominant narrative is at least just as false.

Laquan McDonald wasn't some innocent 17 year old shot by police for no reason. No, he was hopped up on PCP and was violently slashing about with a knife. He even managed to damage two police cars. I still maintain that the first shot was justified. Even if LMcD was moving away from police, police are justified shooting a person that poses a clear and present danger to the community. LMcD was armed and dangerous and quite out of his mind.

Police lied about the danger to an extent. They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

It's only a murder if he would have survived the shots that knocked him down the first time. As Derec says, they were acceptable. He was out of his mind on PCP and attacking. You either contain (not feasible out in the open) or stop (up to and including firearms.)

While a tazer could have been used, I don't see why you and Derec find it necessary to rehash old arguments in a thread about a new report. You and Derec are both well-known to be pro-police in all threads, but this is about police lying.

 

[Toni]

Jeebus, read the op link.

I edited my response in the meantime.

No one in this thread or the op is sanctifying anyone. Try to keep up with the topic. Police lied and engaged in a coverup. Will this keep bouncing off you? Will you keep refusing to read the op link?

The topic is Laquan McDonald. And he has received a lot of sanctification by the media and the activist class. Even though they would have shat their pants had they been confronted by knife-wielding LMcD that night.

No. Please read the OP again: The topic is the police cover up.

 

[Toni]

That may have been the case (although current Chicago government is very anti-police), but at the same time the dominant narrative is at least just as false.

Laquan McDonald wasn't some innocent 17 year old shot by police for no reason. No, he was hopped up on PCP and was violently slashing about with a knife. He even managed to damage two police cars. I still maintain that the first shot was justified. Even if LMcD was moving away from police, police are justified shooting a person that poses a clear and present danger to the community. LMcD was armed and dangerous and quite out of his mind.

Police lied about the danger to an extent. They engaged in a cover up of a murder. This is serious stuff. Can't you at least admit it?

It's only a murder if he would have survived the shots that knocked him down the first time. As Derec says, they were acceptable. He was out of his mind on PCP and attacking. You either contain (not feasible out in the open) or stop (up to and including firearms.)

He attacked...a car. Laquan McDonald's life had more value than car--or the car's tires. Even if he was black and even if he was high.


If he were 'out of his mind' then the shooting(s) are even less justifiable. There were multiple police officers and police vehicles present. There were multiple options that did not include firing 16 shots into Laquan McDonald.

There certainly were more options than lying which is the topic of this thread: the police lied. They falsified police documents. This is the topic of this thread and it's important no matter who was shot or why.

 

[laughing dog]

How come when civilians lie about their actions? It is considered evidence if their guilt but when the police lie? It isn’t?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's only a murder if he would have survived the shots that knocked him down the first time. As Derec says, they were acceptable. He was out of his mind on PCP and attacking. You either contain (not feasible out in the open) or stop (up to and including firearms.)

He attacked...a car. Laquan McDonald's life had more value than car--or the car's tires. Even if he was black and even if he was high.


If he were 'out of his mind' then the shooting(s) are even less justifiable. There were multiple police officers and police vehicles present. There were multiple options that did not include firing 16 shots into Laquan McDonald.

There certainly were more options than lying which is the topic of this thread: the police lied. They falsified police documents. This is the topic of this thread and it's important no matter who was shot or why.

Just because he only attacked a car doesn't mean he wouldn't have attacked a person. Imagine the howls if the police hadn't acted and he did kill someone.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Did he actually attack a car? Was it what we normally call vandalism? Or did that not even happen?

I am just trying to relate these claims to the op which is about how the police lied.

If the vandalism account came from earlier eyewitness testimony and 911 call, then it's a bit distant from the op and we might not need to rehash it.

 

[ruby sparks]

I believe the perpetrator was convicted of second degree murder (16 shots into the victim's body, wtf?). At least 4 of his colleagues were either disciplined or sacked because of dishonesty during the investigation. Now the report is published openly and it appears as if there were more culpable parties.

All round it's a pretty shocking set of circumstances and appalling police behaviour, which should surely be deplored. End of.

 

[Gun Nut]

How come when civilians lie about their actions? It is considered evidence if their guilt but when the police lie? It isn’t?

It is not evidence of guilt. It is evidence of a lie. The motive for the lie is another thing.

It is also important to always remember that police lie all the time.. as a matter of course... it is a core part of how they conduct investigations. Assume a cop is lying when they say anything to you. It is illegal to lie to a cop that is conducting an investigation. Not fair at all.. but that is the law. So keep that in mind too.

 

[laughing dog]

How come when civilians lie about their actions? It is considered evidence if their guilt but when the police lie? It isn’t?

It is not evidence of guilt. It is evidence of a lie. The motive for the lie is another thing.

It is also important to always remember that police lie all the time.. as a matter of course... it is a core part of how they conduct investigations. Assume a cop is lying when they say anything to you. It is illegal to lie to a cop that is conducting an investigation. Not fair at all.. but that is the law. So keep that in mind too.

You missed the point. Many posters on this board claim that when someone lies about a crime they may have committed, it is evidence of guilt. So the same standard ought to apply to the police when they lie about a crime they may have committed.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

How come when civilians lie about their actions? It is considered evidence if their guilt but when the police lie? It isn’t?

It is not evidence of guilt. It is evidence of a lie. The motive for the lie is another thing.

It is also important to always remember that police lie all the time.. as a matter of course... it is a core part of how they conduct investigations. Assume a cop is lying when they say anything to you. It is illegal to lie to a cop that is conducting an investigation. Not fair at all.. but that is the law. So keep that in mind too.

This isn't really about interrogations but instead when it's illegal for police to lie...in reports about police conduct when murdering someone.