Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[Derec]

Mr. Locke did not mishandle his firearm. The police saw the gun and fired at him. If anyone mishandled a firearm, it was the police.

Handling a firearm at all when not fully awake, alert and cognizant of your surroundings is mishandling it by definition.
Pointing your gun in the general direction of police officers serving a warrant is also mishandling your weapon.

 

[Derec]

But the police are totally not responsible for creating that situation in the first fucking place. Citizens need to be held to a higher standard than police in other words.

From the point of view of police officers, they were serving a legal warrant, signed off by a judge.
They were looking for an armed and dangerous homicide suspect. And then they see an individual arming himself when they entered the apartment. In their shoes, would you not shoot too?

I have some issue with that. I'd elaborate, but what's the fucking point.

Oh, please do!

 

[Derec]

Police should not have the right to attack people until they are defending themselves from an executed attack.

Nope. That is an insane standard.

Anything else is just... Attack.

The best defense is a good offense.
You do not have to wait to somebody get off the first shot in order to defend yourself and others.

 

[Derec]

There is more accountability than in the past. But Tamir Rice's killers were never charged.

For a good reason I think. That whole thing was a tragedy of errors with blame being spread between different actors, including Tamir himself for removing the orange tip.

Philandro Castile's killers were not convicted.

But he was charged and tried. Juries are notoriously unpredictable. And the case was murky enough about what officer saw or thought he saw and his state of mind when he pulled the trigger. That allowed for some reasonable doubt.

Hell, the killers of Brionna Taylor are still free.

They did nothing wrong. The fault lies with whoever lied to get the warrant, if there was such a lie.
But you can't blame officers for returning fire when somebody fires at them.

There was a similar, but far less known case in Florida. Andrew Coffee IV. The whole family is violent thugs, from II to IV.
Coffee family's criminal history dates back decades in Indian River County

In any case, police were serving a warrant on Coffee III and he was already outside in handcuffs when Coffee IV, awakened by the commotion, either did not realize they were police or wanted to shoot police, and opened fire. Police returned fire and accidentally killed Coffee IV's girlfriend. Women just love to date bad boys, but they can also be dangerous to be around. You know what they say, you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.

Andrew Coffee IV found not guilty on all counts of murder, attempted first degree murder

Unfortunately he was acquitted of felony murder and attempted murder by an idiot jury, but at least he will serve some time for having a gun as a convicted felon. With his priors, it should be a good chunk of time.

Having a gun in one's hand is not necessarily a threat. Whether you like it or not. Mr. Locke broke no law - he was asleep with a gun in his hand. While I think it is a stupid thing to do, it is not against the law. The police burst into his location and kicked him - he may not have been fully awake or even aware of what was going on.

Whether or not he technically violated an MN law, he violated the laws of good sense by handling a gun without being aware of his surroundings. What makes this all the more tragic is that by all accounts Locke wasn't a bad guy. But neither are the officers who defended themselves and their fellow officers the bad guys. There are no bad guys here except for Mekhi Speed. And Ben Crump.

In that situation, the police literally created the threat. IMO, they should be held accountable. Even if they are not charged, those officers should face some discipline.

I do not see how they did anything wrong. Rank and file do not make tactical decisions about how to enter. But once Locke presented a threat - even if unawares - they have not only the right to protect themselves and their comrades.

Mr. Floyd was not a thug.

Oh yes, he was.

In 2007, Floyd was charged with aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. Investigators said Floyd and other men barged into an apartment, where he pushed a pistol into a woman’s abdomen. Floyd pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years. When he was paroled in 2013 he was nearing 40.

Now you can say that he paid his debt to society, and that is true, although he continued criminal activity to some extent until his death. But it is wrong to make him into some kind of hero and raise statues to him at the same time as statues of great Americans like Thomas Jefferson are removed.

On the other hand. Mr. Chauvin is.

Chauvin should not have done what he did. But he did not have the intent to kill anybody. And I think his penalty is way too long, especially compared with 5 years Mohammed Noor got for shooting Justine Dammond.

The police work the community, not the other way around. Most citizens are honest and law-abiding but the police are losing their trust. It is up the police to rebuild that trust - it is part of the fucking job.

Law abiding citizens should stop with the nonsense of glorifying thugs like George Floyd, Daunte Wright, Jacob Blake or Winston Smith.

 

[Derec]

I strongly oppose no knock warrants. In fact, to me, they seem to be a violation of the 4th Amendment, so I did a little search to see what I could find out about the history of no knock warrants.

I see some very good points about restricting the use of no-knock warrants. I do not think they should be banned altogether.
But that is policy. Constitution is silent on the manner of service, just that a warrant needs to be based on probable cause and specific, i.e. not a fishing expedition.

https://hartmannreport.com/p/america-must-outlaw-nixons-no-knock

Thom Hartman? Really?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I truly see nothing here that would render no-knock warrant unconstitutional. Not in the text. If a future SCOTUS outlaws them, it will be because of emanations from the penumbra, not because of the text of the 4th Amendment.

Considering how many times the police have gone to the wrong home, or have mistaken someone for someone else,

Tbf, they can screw up that way even if they have to knock.
And that is a policy-level argument, not a constitutional one. Why do you think no-knocks may be unconstitutional?

 

[Derec]

George Floyd served his time and was on the right side of the law for some years until he was caught with counterfeit bills.

Which is a crime too, btw.

Derec, I'm sure that your "criminal past" defense would allow a heck of a lot of murderers to get away scot-free.

I am not saying that criminal past means somebody is fair game to be killed. I am saying that he was not a kind of guy who should be glorified and we certainly should not be making statues of him. That is the insanity of our contemporary society. George Floyd depicted as a hero, Thomas Jefferson as a villain. Am I in the Twilight Zone?

 

[Derec]

And citizens have the right to file civil suits.

Unfortunately, the whole US tort system is broken. Deliberately broken by trial lawyers who lobbied for laws that allowed them to enrich themselves with multimillion dollar suits.

Torts should be about compensating for damages. Not making people millionaires based on whims of a jury. Like awarding a woman who threatened police with a gun $38M. Insanity.

I think laws should be changed that a) clarify how damages are calculated and how responsibility is determined - numbers should not be the pulled out of jurors' asses and b) precluding damages be paid when a shooting is justified.

Korryn Gaines' greedy family should not have gotten one red cent, much less millions of dollars. Otherwise it becomes a perverse incentive for people to get themselves shot by police (even if a perp is armed, families get millions!) and set their families up for life.

 

[Gospel]

And citizens have the right to file civil suits.

Unfortunately, the whole US tort system is broken. Deliberately broken by trial lawyers who lobbied for laws that allowed them to enrich themselves with multimillion dollar suits.

Torts should be about compensating for damages. Not making people millionaires based on whims of a jury. Like awarding a woman who threatened police with a gun $38M. Insanity.

I think laws should be changed that a) clarify how damages are calculated and how responsibility is determined - numbers should not be the pulled out of jurors' asses and b) precluding damages be paid when a shooting is justified.

Korryn Gaines' greedy family should not have gotten one red cent, much less millions of dollars. Otherwise it becomes a perverse incentive for people to get themselves shot by police (even if a perp is armed, families get millions!) and set their families up for life.

Our tax money would also not get given away if an officer would stop watching kungfu movies and kicking sofas.

 

[Derec]

Our tax money would also not get given away if an officer would stop watching kungfu movies and kicking sofas.

Families of thugs get rich even when the perp was armed and the police officer did nothing wrong. Like the family of Korryn Gaines.

Btw, in my neck of the woods, a greedy thug family filed a $150M lawsuit. Their son stole a car and then ran with a gun.
Family of teen killed by police file $150M lawsuit against county
The officer was exonerated.
Grand jury rules officer justified in shooting of Cobb County teen Vincent Truitt
Unfortunately, that the greedy family will not be getting paid. While they will probably not get the $150M, they are still likely to get millions under our broken system.

 

[laughing dog]

There is more accountability than in the past. But Tamir Rice's killers were never charged.

For a good reason I think. That whole thing was a tragedy of errors with blame being spread between different actors, including Tamir himself for removing the orange tip.

Tamir Rice was gunned down by gungho chickenshit cops.

Philandro Castile's killers were not convicted.

But he was charged and tried. Juries are notoriously unpredictable. And the case was murky enough about what officer saw or thought he saw and his state of mind when he pulled the trigger. That allowed for some reasonable doubt.

Riiight- the police officer was scared. So effing what.

Hell, the killers of Brionna Taylor are still free.

They did nothing wrong. The fault lies with whoever lied to get the warrant, if there was such a lie.
But you can't blame officers for returning fire when somebody fires at them.

Brionna Taylor is dead, so they did something wrong. Brionna Taylor was not armed nor was she firing at anyone. So yes, those officers did something wrong.

Having a gun in one's hand is not necessarily a threat. Whether you like it or not. Mr. Locke broke no law - he was asleep with a gun in his hand. While I think it is a stupid thing to do, it is not against the law. The police burst into his location and kicked him - he may not have been fully awake or even aware of what was going on.

Whether or not he technically violated an MN law, he violated the laws of good sense by handling a gun without being aware of his surroundings. What makes this all the more tragic is that by all accounts Locke wasn't a bad guy. But neither are the officers who defended themselves and their fellow officers the bad guys. There are no bad guys here except for Mekhi Speed. And Ben Crump.

Mr. Locke was not attacking anyone. He broke no law. So, these officers needlessly killed someone because of their fear. So, yes, they did something wrong.

In that situation, the police literally created the threat. IMO, they should be held accountable. Even if they are not charged, those officers should face some discipline.

I do not see how they did anything wrong. Rank and file do not make tactical decisions about how to enter. But once Locke presented a threat - even if unawares - they have not only the right to protect themselves and their comrades.

Mr. Locke presented no threat. The only people who presented any threat to anyone's life were those officers.

Mr. Floyd was not a thug.

Oh yes, he was.

In 2007, Floyd was charged with aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. Investigators said Floyd and other men barged into an apartment, where he pushed a pistol into a woman’s abdomen. Floyd pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years. When he was paroled in 2013 he was nearing 40.

Now you can say that he paid his debt to society, and that is true, although he continued criminal activity to some extent until his death. But it is wrong to make him into some kind of hero and raise statues to him at the same time as statues of great Americans like Thomas Jefferson are removed.

Mr. Floyd was not a thug when he was killed. You can keep trying to smear him, but he was not a threat. BTW, saying someone is not a thug is not making him into a hero, so you can knock off that stupid straw man.

On the other hand. Mr. Chauvin is.

Chauvin should not have done what he did. But he did not have the intent to kill anybody.

You have no idea what that thug intended. But here you are defending a convicted killer. Of course, Mr. Chauvin was a police officer and a white man who killed a black "thug", so his conviction and sentence are unfair.

Law abiding citizens should stop with the nonsense of glorifying thugs like George Floyd, Daunte Wright, Jacob Blake or Winston Smith.

You keep repeating that non-sequitur. The police work the for community, not the other way around.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Having a gun in one's hand is not necessarily a threat. Whether you like it or not. Mr. Locke broke no law - he was asleep with a gun in his hand. While I think it is a stupid thing to do, it is not against the law. The police burst into his location and kicked him - he may not have been fully awake or even aware of what was going on.

In that situation, the police literally created the threat. IMO, they should be held accountable. Even if they are not charged, those officers should face some discipline.

Being not fully awake is not a defense. You sleep with a gun, you're responsible for mishandling it when half awake.

Mr. Locke did not mishandle his firearm. The police saw the gun and fired at him. If anyone mishandled a firearm, it was the police.

They saw him pulling it out from under the bedding, not merely sitting there.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Those cops should have fallen back and hidden behind the walls near the door. This was not worth risking one's life over.

Maybe I'm naive about urban warfare, but I've played lots of first-person shooters, and hiding behind stuff is a good thing to do.

Mythbusters. I forget who shot who but they successfully engaged through walls. Admittedly, paper walls as they were using paintballs rather than bullets. Interior walls will tumble a bullet and thus rob it of a lot of range but any round with enough penetration to be useful will go through unless it hits something substantial inside the wall.

I'm looking at the door to this room, as seen from where I'm sitting. The walkway outside goes north-south. Given my position going north is not a good idea, to get secure concealment requires going back several feet and around a corner. So he goes south. Assuming he's still standing I can virtually guarantee a hit within 6 shots. It's my house, I know the joist spacing and on my side of the wall one of the two relevant joists is clearly marked. (Shelf anchors.)

 

[Gospel]

Our tax money would also not get given away if an officer would stop watching kungfu movies and kicking sofas.

Families of thugs get rich even when the perp was armed and the police officer did nothing wrong. Like the family of Korryn Gaines.

Btw, in my neck of the woods, a greedy thug family filed a $150M lawsuit. Their son stole a car and then ran with a gun.
Family of teen killed by police file $150M lawsuit against county
The officer was exonerated.
Grand jury rules officer justified in shooting of Cobb County teen Vincent Truitt
Unfortunately, that the greedy family will not be getting paid. While they will probably not get the $150M, they are still likely to get millions under our broken system.

I don't have issue with police when they get it right. Heck I'm personally forgiving when they get it wrong (when no one dies as a result). I'm saying this because whenever the police got shit wrong you always bring up times when they got it right like that has fuck all to do with when they get shit wrong.

 

[laughing dog]

Having a gun in one's hand is not necessarily a threat. Whether you like it or not. Mr. Locke broke no law - he was asleep with a gun in his hand. While I think it is a stupid thing to do, it is not against the law. The police burst into his location and kicked him - he may not have been fully awake or even aware of what was going on.

In that situation, the police literally created the threat. IMO, they should be held accountable. Even if they are not charged, those officers should face some discipline.

Being not fully awake is not a defense. You sleep with a gun, you're responsible for mishandling it when half awake.

Mr. Locke did not mishandle his firearm. The police saw the gun and fired at him. If anyone mishandled a firearm, it was the police.

They saw him pulling it out from under the bedding, not merely sitting there.

No, they didn't. They saw him move with a gun in his hand.

Regardless, neither outcome is mishandling a firearm. Neither outcome is necessarily a threat.

 

[laughing dog]

Mr. Locke did not mishandle his firearm. The police saw the gun and fired at him. If anyone mishandled a firearm, it was the police.

Handling a firearm at all when not fully awake, alert and cognizant of your surroundings is mishandling it by definition.
Pointing your gun in the general direction of police officers serving a warrant is also mishandling your weapon.

Only to the kneejerk defenders of the police.

 

[atrib]

But the police are totally not responsible for creating that situation in the first fucking place. Citizens need to be held to a higher standard than police in other words.

From the point of view of police officers, they were serving a legal warrant, signed off by a judge.

The warrant does not give them the right to execute sleeping civilians, especially civilians who are NOT a target of the warrant.

They were looking for an armed and dangerous homicide suspect. And then they see an individual arming himself when they entered the apartment.

That is not true. The police saw a man sleeping on the couch when they entered the home, which they did without announcing their presence first. Instead of giving the man time to wake up and then comply with their instructions, they shot him. Owning a gun, and sleeping with a gun close to you is NOT a crime in the US, and millions of Americans routinely engage in such practices. Americans have a right to defend themselves against home invasions using guns, and until the police announce themselves as law enforcement officers performing a lawful search, and give the suspects/civilians sufficient time to comply with their lawful commands, the civilians have the right to defend themselves. The police are acting as the aggressors and the home invaders until that time. You cannot kill people without due process in this country, and you can't shoot sleeping civilians without first giving them the time to comply with your instructions.

In their shoes, would you not shoot too?

I would not be in their shoes, because I would not conduct operations that are likely to place both my officers and innocent civilians at risk of being shot, if I were a LEO. People getting shot is a predictable outcome of performing no-knock entries into private homes at night, especially when operating under a shoot-first, ask-questions-later attitude. It is not acceptable to kill innocent civilians in their sleep just to make your job easier. That's the part you don't seem to understand.

 

[atrib]

Our tax money would also not get given away if an officer would stop watching kungfu movies and kicking sofas.

Families of thugs get rich even when the perp was armed and the police officer did nothing wrong. Like the family of Korryn Gaines.

Btw, in my neck of the woods, a greedy thug family filed a $150M lawsuit. Their son stole a car and then ran with a gun.
Family of teen killed by police file $150M lawsuit against county
The officer was exonerated.
Grand jury rules officer justified in shooting of Cobb County teen Vincent Truitt
Unfortunately, that the greedy family will not be getting paid. While they will probably not get the $150M, they are still likely to get millions under our broken system.

Greedy thug family? Who wants to bet Derec is talking about a black family? And why did you neglect to tell us that the cops shot a fleeing teenager in the back? You don't think thats relevant?

Vincent allegedly had a firearm in his hand when an officer fired his gun and shot him twice in the back just after an officer began giving chase, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and local officials.

And then you wonder why some people think you are racist.

 

[Derec]

Greedy thug family?

Yes. They are greedy and the dead family member from whose death they want to profit was a thug.

Who wants to bet Derec is talking about a black family?

They are. Of course, both black and white families can be greedy, but in present US political and social situation, only black families can profit to the tune of millions when their thug family members get shot by police, even when it is justified.

And why did you neglect to tell us that the cops shot a fleeing teenager in the back? You don't think thats relevant?

I do not think it is relevant. The shooting was deemed justified.

After eight hours of deliberation, a grand jury ruled Thursday that a Cobb County police officer was justified in the fatal shooting of a teen last summer.
[...]
“You can clearly see, the weapon that he’s holding that was recovered on the ground at the end of the video,' said Deputy Chief Asst. District Attorney Jason Saliba.
The officer didn’t give any command to drop the weapon before firing. Cobb DA Broady the officer wasn’t required to.
"The law says if a officer is chasing a felon who has a weapon, who poses a threat to others, he has the right to use deadly force," he said.
Officials said the entirety of the video footage "speaks for itself."
“When you see the slowed down video, you’ll see that even though it’s just a couple seconds, there was plenty of distance that the officer ran before the officer reached for his gun," DA Broady explained. "And when he - Truitt - comes out the (car), the gun is obvious, and he actually takes a peek back at the officer. He’s running with the gun in the other direction that other officers are, and, like I said before, there are many places where he could have hid."

Police is not going to let an armed and dangerous felon get away. Truitt could have easily fired backwards, or, had he put some distance between himself and the cop, he could have carjacked an innocent bystander in order to deass the area.

And then you wonder why some people think you are racist.

Why? "Some people" are wrong.
I'd think the same thing if a white thug stole a car and then fled the police while holding a gun. And regardless of color his family would not deserve one red cent from the county, much less $150M they are greedily demanding.

 

[Derec]

The warrant does not give them the right to execute sleeping civilians, especially civilians who are NOT a target of the warrant.

Nobody "executed" him. He was shot because he pulled a gun at police and pointed it in the general direction of one of them. Whether he was named on the warrant is immaterial.

That is not true. The police saw a man sleeping on the couch when they entered the home, which they did without announcing their presence first. Instead of giving the man time to wake up and then comply with their instructions, they shot him.

They did announce their presence. That he did not hear them because he was asleep is unfortunate.
And they would have given him the time to wake up completely and catch his bearings had not his first response to waking up been to grab his gun.

Owning a gun, and sleeping with a gun close to you is NOT a crime in the US, and millions of Americans routinely engage in such practices.

There is a difference between owning a gun, sleeping with a gun and pulling a gun before you even catch your bearings. The last is probably a crime and it certainly can be very bad for one's health.

Americans have a right to defend themselves against home invasions using guns, and until the police announce themselves as law enforcement officers performing a lawful search, and give the suspects/civilians sufficient time to comply with their lawful commands, the civilians have the right to defend themselves.

Police did announce themselves. Locke did not have to go for his gun right after waking up. Without that move, police would have given him plenty of time.

The police are acting as the aggressors and the home invaders until that time. You cannot kill people without due process in this country, and you can't shoot sleeping civilians without first giving them the time to comply with your instructions.

It was a legal warrant, so due process is met.
Giving time is good under normal conditions. When somebody pulls a gun on you, giving them even another second can be fatal.

I would not be in their shoes, because I would not conduct operations that are likely to place both my officers and innocent civilians at risk of being shot, if I were a LEO. People getting shot is a predictable outcome of performing no-knock entries into private homes at night, especially when operating under a shoot-first, ask-questions-later attitude. It is not acceptable to kill innocent civilians in their sleep just to make your job easier. That's the part you don't seem to understand.

It was morning, not night. And while I think no-knocks should be expectations rather than a rule, warrant service is always dangerous for the police, as many suspects would. I do not see how no-knocks are more dangerous to the police.

I also am not sure a knock warrant would lead to a different outcome here. Locke was deep asleep. He may not have heard knocking, and police do not have to wait until somebody actually answers even with knock warrant.

 

[Derec]

No, they didn't. They saw him move with a gun in his hand.

Distinction without a difference.

Regardless, neither outcome is mishandling a firearm. Neither outcome is necessarily a threat.

Somebody "moving with a gun with his hand" toward the direction of one of the officers is a threat per se.