Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[Derec]

Screen-grab Al-Jazeera's news home page. Then screen-grab the home page of Fox News or one of the other QOPAnon sources admired by you and your Ilk. Post the pics here.
If you dare.

Why? I don't "admire" FOX nor "QOPAnon" sources (whatever those are), although FOX News is sometimes worthwhile as a source with news reporting, not opinion pieces (and these AJ videos are basically opinion pieces).

Your attempts at whataboutism do not change the fact that Al Jazeera is a very biased state-owned source.

 

[Derec]

Where do you get “propaganda organ” from?

They often run anti-Israel and anti-American pieces. For example attacks on US fracking (when Qatar is a major producer of natural gas) or this ridiculous claim that LASD is a 'gang'.

Unless you’re considering “editorial independence” a synonym for “propaganda organ”.

They are editorially independent of the Qatari state? Source for that?

 

[Swammerdami]

[Stupid tweet about Keenan Anderson]

That's not the whole video. Why just post one small part of it toward the end and not everything that led to the tazing?

Just for you I clicked the "whole video" and watched up until the first body-cam showing the tazing. There was about 30 seconds of tazing, all of which happened while the guy was under control with a knee in his back and handcuffed. Thirty seconds. He was tazed from 10:13 to 11:00 with two brief pauses. That tazing was unnecessary. I didn't watch until the end; was there even more tazing?

exposure [to tazing] longer than 15 seconds (whether continuous or cumulative) may increase the risk of serious injury or death and should be avoided.

Hope this helps.

 

[bilby]

Note, your initial claim was that Keenan Anderson should not be required to follow commands by police, even though he caused an accident and was suspected of DUI and attempted grand theft auto.

Note, my only claim was that your implication that "he would not follow simple commands" is a reasonable justification for his death, makes you a moral monster.

Your attempts to avoid considering this claim by dressing it up as a series of differing claims is both factually false, and quite pathetic.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Where do you get “propaganda organ” from?

They often run anti-Israel and anti-American pieces.

Unless you’re considering “editorial independence” a synonym for “propaganda organ”.

They are editorially independent of the Qatari state? Source for that?

The Wikipedia page YouTube links on the Al Jazeera channel.
Is this Wikipedia link the disclaimer you are referring to?
I’ve been reading Al Jazeera for about a year now and my bias detector has yet to go off.

 

[Swammerdami]

Where do you get “propaganda organ” from?

They often run anti-Israel and anti-American pieces.

Are you reduced to self-parody? Al-Jazeera reports true stories about Israel harassing and killing Palestinians. Your preferred sources spend their efforts posting lies about Hunter's laptop and its connection to the Benghazi Massacre.

Unless you’re considering “editorial independence” a synonym for “propaganda organ”.

They are editorially independent of the Qatari state? Source for that?

Obviously he's claiming, correctly, that Wikipedia made the claim. Why don't you prove that Wikipedia is wrong? But add that to your work queue; I want to see the screen-grabs first.

Can you prove that FoxNews is "editorially independent" of Koch Industries? Or the Proud Boys?

 

[Derec]

That tazing was unnecessary.

That's your opinion. But I really wanted you to watch the whole video because of what happened before the tasing.
Because there is a lot of misinformation going around, like that he was "in a traffic accident, asking for help" and that they tased him for no reason or even that "his only crime was asking for help". That is a general problem with cases like this. A lot of misinformation going around, a lot of misleadingly edited videos (like the one posted by that pro-ayatollah Iranian twit you chose to post here).

I didn't watch until the end; was there even more tazing?

Watch it until the end. There are different angles from several officers and one bystander video. All show the suspect moving around and resisting arrest. The bystander video is notable because the victim of the attempted grand theft auto is there, explaining to a bystander that Keenan caused the accident and tried to steal his car, which he is using for Uber.
The full video also shows the aftermath of the tasing, when Keenan is finally taken into custody. He is ranting about police being actors, and yelling "Cee Lo" several times. He is not in cardiac arrest then, and will not be for another four hours.

total exposure [to tazing] should not exceed 15 seconds.

Hope this helps.

Who are they? Is there a link? Some random "forum" is not necessarily an authority.
What do LAPD procedures and regulations say? What does California law say?

 

[Derec]

Are you reduced to self-parody? Al-Jazeera reports true stories about Israel harassing and killing Palestinians.

"Harassing"? Like yesterday you mean? When two peaceful terrorists from Islamic Jihad opened fire on IDF who then proceeded to "harass and kill" them?
2 Islamic Jihad gunmen killed in attempted West Bank shooting attack on IDF troops
You are as bad as AJ in your anti-Israel bias, if not more so!

Your preferred sources spend their efforts posting lies about Hunter's laptop and its connection to the Benghazi Massacre.

Hillary was wrong to blame the Benghazi massacre on a video. Hunter Biden is an overall little shit. What does either one of them have to do with anything?

I want to see the screen-grabs first.

Why? They are part of your silly whataboutism.

Can you prove that FoxNews is "editorially independent" of Koch Industries? Or the Proud Boys?

Fox News is not owned by Koch, or Proud Boys. AJ is wholly owned by Qatar. There is a difference.

 

[Swammerdami]

Are you reduced to self-parody? Al-Jazeera reports true stories about Israel harassing and killing Palestinians.

"Harassing"? Like yesterday you mean? When two peaceful terrorists from Islamic Jihad opened fire on IDF who then proceeded to "harass and kill" them?
2 Islamic Jihad gunmen killed in attempted West Bank shooting attack on IDF troops
You are as bad as AJ in your anti-Israel bias, if not more so

Your link isn't even from Al-Jazeera. What is it supposed to prove?

If I can "read between the lines" while pretending that your "rebuttal" is sensical, what I conclude is that you are advancing the syllogism
1. At least one Palestinian has abused at least one Israeli.
2. Therefore NO Israelis have ever abused any Palestinians.

Intriguing. May we ask where you studied logic?

 

[ZiprHead]

Can you prove that FoxNews is "editorially independent" of Koch Industries? Or the Proud Boys?

Or Donald Trump?

 

[Derec]

Your link isn't even from Al-Jazeera. What is it supposed to prove?

I did not say that link was from AJ. It was supposed to show how nonsensical your claim of poor little "harassed" Palestinians was. I did not even find a report on this incident form AJ. Probably because it does not fit the editorial agenda of the Qatari State and the House of Thani.

If I can "read between the lines" while pretending that your "rebuttal" is sensical, what I conclude is that you are advancing the syllogism
1. At least one Palestinian has abused at least one Israeli.
2. Therefore NO Israelis have ever abused any Palestinians.

I did not offer a syllogism. I showed a representative example. It is not about IDF "harassing" innocent Palestinians, it is about IDF going after Palestinian terrorists from Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and even Fatah-affiliated groups. Fatah is supposed to be the "moderate" faction and a partner for peace, but they really only appear "moderate" in comparison with the other major factions. They have a terrorist wing (Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigades) and their members are also active in cross-factional terror groups like the so-called "Lion's Den" in Arab occupied Shechem, about which AJ has recently written a favorable piece.
Inside the Lions’ Den: Will Palestinian resistance keep growing?

Intriguing. May we ask where you studied logic?

Where have you studied reading comprehension? School of bilby? I did not offer a syllogism, and yet you invented one and ascribed it to me. Hmm.

And since you wanted an AJ screen grab so bad ...

 

[Derec]

Note, my only claim was that your implication that "he would not follow simple commands" is a reasonable justification for his death, makes you a moral monster.

Reading comprehension fail. I never said that "he would not follow simple commands" justifies his death. I only offered that as part of the background as to what actually happened, as any context or background to the tasing was missing from the biased tweet Zipr posted.
Note also that police did not use lethal force against St. Keenan, and that he only died >4 hours after the tasing, most likely due to effects of cocaine intoxication.

And it is incorrect that that was your only claim. You ranted about how a suspect not following police commands is not "problematic", that as a "free man" you did not have to follow police commands, and that police responding with force to suspects who refuse to follow lawful orders is "totalitarian".

Your attempts to avoid considering this claim by dressing it up as a series of differing claims is both factually false, and quite pathetic.

No. Your rant was pathetic, as are your feeble attempts to backpedal. The nonsense you typed in $1,455 is quite clear.

 

[Derec]

Or Donald Trump?

He has nothing to do with any of this, so why name drop him?
How about you tell me what you think of the background on St. Keenan I provided. And why you chose to post a biased tweet by some pro-Putin, pro-ayatollah twit?

 

[Gospel]

Just for you I clicked the "whole video" and watched up until the first body-cam showing the tazing. There was about 30 seconds of tazing, all of which happened while the guy was under control with a knee in his back and handcuffed. Thirty seconds. He was tazed from 10:13 to 11:00 with two brief pauses. That tazing was unnecessary. I didn't watch until the end; was there even more tazing?

Hmm. Good point. Derec, your thoughts?

 

[Derec]

Just for you I clicked the "whole video" and watched up until the first body-cam showing the tazing. There was about 30 seconds of tazing, all of which happened while the guy was under control with a knee in his back and handcuffed. Thirty seconds. He was tazed from 10:13 to 11:00 with two brief pauses. That tazing was unnecessary. I didn't watch until the end; was there even more tazing?

Hmm. Good point. Derec, your thoughts?

Swami is misrepresenting the facts. Once they managed to handcuff him (they had to use two sets of handcuffs btw), they were no longer tasing him. And the videos (several body cameras and a bystander video) show him moving about and resisting while the police try to subdue him. That's the whole point of him being tased - they tried to handcuff him and could not because he was not under their control at the time. Both of you should really watch the whole video.

 

[laughing dog]

In a nutshell, Derec's argument is that the guy deserved what he got. Why else bring up the victim's past and then call him "St Keenan"?

If someone cannot acknowledge or grasp that the 30 seconds of continuous tazing of someone who is under the physical control of 3 police officers is, at a minimum, torture, and that it contributed to the victim's death, there really is no hope that facts or rational discussion will alter that position.

 

[Oleg]

In a nutshell, Derec's argument is that the guy deserved what he got. Why else bring up the victim's past and then call him "St Keenan"?

If someone cannot acknowledge or grasp that the 30 seconds of continuous tazing of someone who is under the physical control of 3 police officers is, at a minimum, torture, and that it contributed to the victim's death, there really is no hope that facts or rational discussion will alter that position.

He was tased, but kept resisting. When he was finally cuffed, the tazing stopped. What else are the cops to do in this situation, just let him go?

 

[Derec]

In a nutshell, Derec's argument is that the guy deserved what he got.

He deserved to get arrested, because he drove while high and caused an accident and also because he tried to steal a car. He also deserved getting tased since he resisted arrest.
I never said he deserved to die. That part was an accident. The luck of the draw. Note that he only died >4 hours after the tasing. Why do you all ignore that?

Why else bring up the victim's past and then call him "St Keenan"?

What past? Him getting high, causing an accident and trying to steal a car are technically his "past" since the present moment is infinitesimal, but they are all part of the incident police were responding to and trying to take him into custody for. It's not like any of that happened years ago.

"Saint" I use because of misleading reporting that tries to paint him as an innocent victim. Similar to "gentle giant" St. Michael Brown.

If someone cannot acknowledge or grasp that the 30 seconds of continuous tazing of someone who is under the physical control of 3 police officers

He was not under "physical control" of the officers. He continuously resisted arrest. They stopped deploying the taser once they managed to get the handcuffs on him. Note that they used two sets "in series" because he would not let them bring his hands close enough to only use one. That is not a suspect that is "under physical control".

is, at a minimum, torture, and that it contributed to the victim's death, there really is no hope that facts or rational discussion will alter that position.

It certainly is not torture. It is also questionable to what extent it might have contributed to him going into cardiac arrest four hours later, as opposed to cocaine intoxication and/or some underlying health issue he might have had.
The bottom line that none of this would have happened had Keenan not decided to drive high and to resist arrest once he caused the DUI accident.

 

[atrib]

And it is incorrect that that was your only claim. You ranted about how a suspect not following police commands is not "problematic", that as a "free man" you did not have to follow police commands, and that police responding with force to suspects who refuse to follow lawful orders is "totalitarian".

The rest of the civilized world has largely figured out how to let law enforcement deal with noncompliant, intoxicated, belligerent and/or mentally ill people who may be breaking the law without the use of excessive force, without placing their officers in any significant danger of bodily harm. Yet here in the USA police seem to consider the use of electrical shocks, violent beatings and/or shooting them with hollow point lead projectiles to be the first option in many cases. As citizens, we should be concerned about such behavior, and do everything we can to train the police to respond with more patience, more empathy and less violence without turning to deadly or potentially deadly force as the first and only resort. This is good for ALL of us. One day you may get swept up in a vice bust and get your ass beaten by the police or worse, simply because you may have been breaking a few laws that harmed no humans or even damaged anyone's property.

Most regular people aren't lawyers, they don't know that police can lawfully detain people and give them certain instructions to carry out their investigations safely, and some get confrontational and verbally abusive when they are detained by the police and given instructions that are technically lawful, but make no sense to them as they perceive themselves to be innocent victims of police abuse. And for good reason. It makes no sense for officers to escalate the confrontation and beat the shit out a man who may have been pulled over for a missing car tag, a man who does not pose any immediate threat to anybody, simply because the suspect does not immediately respond to their commands - the level of force must fit the severity of the crime and the potential for bodily harm to the police or to other citizens based on the totality of the circumstances. That is the law as opined by the Supreme Court. And we know that police often abuse their privilege to detain people to flex their authority, especially when the target of their investigation is poor, homeless and/or black and lacks the financial and social resources to hold them accountable for their misbehavior. Would you like to be abused and beaten by the police simply because they might suspect you had been smoking pot with a paid escort? I know you don't see non-white people as fully human, but still, try to put yourself in their shoes for a moment, someone who has never graduated high school, someone who never had a positive role model in their life, someone who has been abused by the police before. Try to be human.

 

[Swammerdami]

Some of use here seem to be missing an important point. The victim was tazed (spelling preference?) for twice as long as the recommended 15-second maximum. A claim is implied that this was needed to subdue the soon-to-be victim. This claim is false.

Police had sent several officers, enough to bind him thoroughly and send him to hospital or jail in a strait-jacket. Instead cops felt it would be more expeditious (and fun?) to taze him into submission. I didn't research to see how firm the 15-second maximum is, but common-sense suggests that excessive tazing is dangerous and should be avoided.

I see so many examples where American police act injudiciously. Would some of you agree that there are fewer such stories (even when controlled for news coverage) in most other countries? Sure, less-developed countries often have incompetent or corrupt police, but the nasty behavior seen in so many of these U.S. police stories doesn't stem from corruption or poor training; it comes more from an angry or unfulfilled attitude. There is little motive for the antagonism (aside from racism in some cases). Does the job description attract a certain unfortunate personality?

Derec, can you research this for us? Feel free to surprise us with the domains you choose for your URLs.