Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[laughing dog]

He has no legs ffs. There was no need to kill this guy, he could be easily overpowered by one person let alone the three or four cops at the scene. Shooting someone should be the very last resort.

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed. You need to taser them first and disarm them--but the video says they tried twice and it didn't work. (Quite possible--a taser will not function though sufficiently thick clothing.)

And I see no evidence there's nobody else around--the lack of anybody in the frame says nothing about what's off frame.

There is no evidence there is anyone else around. But the lack of urgency on the part of the police (outside of their move to kill) suggests there was no one else.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed.

What's the hurry? Wait for him to get tired and surrender. Nobody needs to overpower anyone. He's not going to escape, and he's not going to rush anyone. Nobody needs to get hurt.

And your evidence for this is what? We have no idea of who might be around. And how do you know he won't rush anyone? Sure, most people certainly could escape but not everyone and the police will have no idea of who can run and who can't (and who will freeze rather than run.)

 

[bilby]

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed.

What's the hurry? Wait for him to get tired and surrender. Nobody needs to overpower anyone. He's not going to escape, and he's not going to rush anyone. Nobody needs to get hurt.

And your evidence for this is what? We have no idea of who might be around. And how do you know he won't rush anyone? Sure, most people certainly could escape but not everyone and the police will have no idea of who can run and who can't (and who will freeze rather than run.)

Now you're just being ridiculous. The guy with no legs needs to die, just incase there's someone nearby that he might be able to outrun??

Did you even read that before posting it? Didn't you contemplate, just for a moment, how batshit crazy that is as a "reason" to kill a person?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed.

What's the hurry? Wait for him to get tired and surrender. Nobody needs to overpower anyone. He's not going to escape, and he's not going to rush anyone. Nobody needs to get hurt.

And your evidence for this is what? We have no idea of who might be around. And how do you know he won't rush anyone? Sure, most people certainly could escape but not everyone and the police will have no idea of who can run and who can't (and who will freeze rather than run.)

Now you're just being ridiculous. The guy with no legs needs to die, just incase there's someone nearby that he might be able to outrun??

Did you even read that before posting it? Didn't you contemplate, just for a moment, how batshit crazy that is as a "reason" to kill a person?

Why do you think continuing to chase until he finds someone to hurt is going to improve the situation? Then you run the risk of a bystander being hit by a ricochet.

 

[Oleg]

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed.

What's the hurry? Wait for him to get tired and surrender. Nobody needs to overpower anyone. He's not going to escape, and he's not going to rush anyone. Nobody needs to get hurt.

And your evidence for this is what? We have no idea of who might be around. And how do you know he won't rush anyone? Sure, most people certainly could escape but not everyone and the police will have no idea of who can run and who can't (and who will freeze rather than run.)

Now you're just being ridiculous. The guy with no legs needs to die, just incase there's someone nearby that he might be able to outrun??

Did you even read that before posting it? Didn't you contemplate, just for a moment, how batshit crazy that is as a "reason" to kill a person?

Why do you think continuing to chase until he finds someone to hurt is going to improve the situation? Then you run the risk of a bystander being hit by a ricochet.

It’s also ableist to say that stumpie can’t run.

 

[laughing dog]

Why do you think continuing to chase until he finds someone to hurt is going to improve the situation? Then you run the risk of a bystander being hit by a ricochet.

First, why would you think that these officers could not catch up with that fugitive? Second, since the fugitive had no firearm, any ricochet could have happened whenever those cowards opened fire, so clearly either that low probability event did not occur to them or they did not care.

Really, what is wrong with someone who comes up with such bizarre excuses?

 

[bilby]

Trying to overpower someone with a knife is a good way to get yourself killed.

What's the hurry? Wait for him to get tired and surrender. Nobody needs to overpower anyone. He's not going to escape, and he's not going to rush anyone. Nobody needs to get hurt.

And your evidence for this is what? We have no idea of who might be around. And how do you know he won't rush anyone? Sure, most people certainly could escape but not everyone and the police will have no idea of who can run and who can't (and who will freeze rather than run.)

Now you're just being ridiculous. The guy with no legs needs to die, just incase there's someone nearby that he might be able to outrun??

Did you even read that before posting it? Didn't you contemplate, just for a moment, how batshit crazy that is as a "reason" to kill a person?

Why do you think continuing to chase until he finds someone to hurt is going to improve the situation? Then you run the risk of a bystander being hit by a ricochet.

Stop digging. You are already looking like a fool, why make it any worse?

 

[lpetrich]

This Hollywood is Hollywood, Florida, between Miami and Ft. Lauderdale.
New video shows Hollywood police dragging man into elevator after shooting him - "Daughter heartbroken after seeing graphic clip, demands answers"

New surveillance video obtained by Local 10 News shows Hollywood police officers dragging a 69-year-old condominium owner into an elevator after shooting him last year.

David Cottes later died from his wounds and exactly what happened remains a mystery to family members.

On Feb. 26, 2022, Cottes asked neighbors to call Hollywood police, because he thought someone was breaking into his condominium at around 8 a.m.

He was a long-time resident of his condo.

“He said someone was in his apartment, in his condo, he comes out with his gun licensed to carry and everything,” Christina Cottes, David’s daughter, said.

After police arrived to the 14th floor, they shot Cottes, the condo’s board president, in the chest.

Exactly what transpired before isn’t clear, but his family says he was by the elevator and police came up the stairwell.

Christina Cottes saw the surveillance video for the first time Friday and broke into tears.

“He’s literally my best friend,” she said.

Cottes said her family needs answers.

“Why they would they treat him in such a way or drag him into an elevator, they already have him handcuffed behind his back,” she said. “He’s wounded.”

Cottes’ family says it took more than 30 minutes to get him help and they want to know why.

“He’s asking for police to help,” Christina Cottes said. “When police come to help, my dad is dead.”

They said they weren’t allowed to visit David in the hospital before he died weeks later, so he took what happened to the grave.

“It’s been a year waiting for forensic and ballistics (evidence) because they want to see who shot first,” private investigator Victor Elbeze said.

So having a gun is no guarantee of protection, because a cop might think that that makes one dangerous, and thus a legitimate target.

 

[marc]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why do you think continuing to chase until he finds someone to hurt is going to improve the situation? Then you run the risk of a bystander being hit by a ricochet.

First, why would you think that these officers could not catch up with that fugitive? Second, since the fugitive had no firearm, any ricochet could have happened whenever those cowards opened fire, so clearly either that low probability event did not occur to them or they did not care.

Really, what is wrong with someone who comes up with such bizarre excuses?

Of course they could catch up, that's not the issue. And of course it's a police bullet that would be ricocheting--in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

You still are sticking your head in the sand about the fundamental issue here--this guy randomly stabbed someone. To allow him near anyone is an undue risk. The police have no way of ensuring there's nobody around--even if the streets are clear someone could come out of a building. This happened in the real world, not some video game where there are no NPCs involved!

 

[bilby]

in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Of course you can. It's trivially easy.

Just don't fire a gun.

There was absolutely nothing about the situation that made firing a gun necessary or reasonable.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course they could catch up, that's not the issue. And of course it's a police bullet that would be ricocheting--in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Clearly those police were not worried about a ricochet, since they shot and killed their suspect. So why are you even bringing it up? After all, you never point out that the police are taking a risk of ricochet whenever they blow away a suspect.

You still are sticking your head in the sand about the fundamental issue here--this guy randomly stabbed someone. To allow him near anyone is an undue risk. The police have no way of ensuring there's nobody around--even if the streets are clear someone could come out of a building. This happened in the real world, not some video game where there are no NPCs involved!

Of course someone could come out a building while they are firing away and get shot (or hit by a ricochet?), but that does not appear to bother you.

Really, your excuses are getting flimsier and flimsier.

 

[ZiprHead]

Senior officials ordered destruction of Vallejo police shooting evidence

The Vallejo city attorney’s office has long resisted public scrutiny of the police department’s frequent shootings. With a new law poised to force the release of shooting records, a lawyer and a detective made a decision no court can reverse.

openvallejo.org

Just days into her transfer to the evidence unit two years ago, Vallejo police assistant Tina Encarnacion made her way to a tall metal cabinet known as the “homicide bookshelf,” and pulled case 12-11085.

Encarnacion found herself holding the case file for the notorious killing of Mario Romero, a young father whose death at the hands of Vallejo police in 2012 sparked citywide protests. Encarnacion documented her next steps in a public servant’s efficient prose.

“Per City Attorney this case has been approved for disposal,” she wrote in the file’s evidence log at 2:31 p.m. “Final disposition: Destroyed.”

Over the next several days, Encarnacion would empty box after box of evidence of police shootings into a large city dumpster.

In January 2021, officials for the city of Vallejo intentionally — and with approval from a senior attorney for the city — destroyed key evidence in multiple police killings and one non-fatal shooting, documents obtained in a public records lawsuit filed by Open Vallejo show. The city destroyed the records although many were set to be disclosed under California transparency laws — a potential crime, according to a motion filed by this newsroom last month.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Of course you can. It's trivially easy.

Just don't fire a gun.

There was absolutely nothing about the situation that made firing a gun necessary or reasonable.

Continuing to assert this doesn't make it so. What were the police supposed to do? Follow along until he stabs someone else? You are committing the standard leftist sin of seeing a bad situation and assuming that the side with the power could have handled it better.

 

[bilby]

in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Of course you can. It's trivially easy.

Just don't fire a gun.

There was absolutely nothing about the situation that made firing a gun necessary or reasonable.

Continuing to assert this doesn't make it so. What were the police supposed to do? Follow along until he stabs someone else? You are committing the standard leftist sin of seeing a bad situation and assuming that the side with the power could have handled it better.

There's absolutely no question whatsoever that the police could and should have handled this better.

The police were supposed to arrest the man without killing anyone. That's their fucking job. They're expected to risk their lives to do that job.

The idea that killing the suspect is an acceptable approach, solely in order to reduce risk of injury to police, is absurd and stupid. Police all over the world disarm people with knives as a matter of routine, without killing them, nor being killed themselves. That's slightly risky, but their job is to take risks in order to protect the public - including suspects.

Police who kill suspects to reduce risk to the police are as fucking pointless as fire fighters who refuse to approach burning buildings because they don't want to risk injury or death. It's the job. If they don't like it, they can retrain as accountants.

Your committing the standard Loren Pechtel sin of assuming that police have a greater right to personal safety than suspects. The opposite is true, always.

Police deserve public respect because they risk their lives for the public. ALL of the public. Including those they are supposed to be arresting.

The instant that they refuse to risk injury or death, and instead choose to kill a person, they cease to deserve any respect whatsoever, and are no longer doing the job of a police officer.

Respect for police doesn't come from their uniform, badge, or gun. It comes from their bravery, self-sacrifice, and care for the people they serve. And make no mistake, suspects are people who the police are duty bound to serve.

Police who exhibit cowardice, selfishness, and a cavalier disregard for the lives of suspects, are worthy of zero respect, and your constant sycophantic drivel about how they shouldn't be expected not to just summarily execute suspects, if detaining them entails even the tiniest risk to police, is a massive flaw in your character. You seriously need to re-think your attitude.

 

[Toni]

in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Of course you can. It's trivially easy.

Just don't fire a gun.

There was absolutely nothing about the situation that made firing a gun necessary or reasonable.

Continuing to assert this doesn't make it so. What were the police supposed to do? Follow along until he stabs someone else? You are committing the standard leftist sin of seeing a bad situation and assuming that the side with the power could have handled it better.

You are committing the sin of finding yourself at the bottom of a hole and continuing to dig.

 

[Toni]

For variety’s sake, a link to an article about police misconduct in London. In this case, the officer has been sentenced to life imprisonment for rape and sexual assault of multiple women over a period of years.

London Police Officer Sentenced to Life for Rape and Sexual Abuse

David Carrick had pleaded guilty to 49 crimes against 12 women in the latest case to cast a harsh spotlight on the Metropolitan Police.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Loren Pechtel]

in a world of hard surfaces you can't guarantee a round won't ricochet.

Of course you can. It's trivially easy.

Just don't fire a gun.

There was absolutely nothing about the situation that made firing a gun necessary or reasonable.

Continuing to assert this doesn't make it so. What were the police supposed to do? Follow along until he stabs someone else? You are committing the standard leftist sin of seeing a bad situation and assuming that the side with the power could have handled it better.

There's absolutely no question whatsoever that the police could and should have handled this better.

I note nothing in your reply that gives a better solution other than suggesting the police should have risked death to take the guy alive. I'm not surprised, most people have a very hard time comprehending blasphemy.

 

[Patooka]

Not sure if this is a youtube violation;

Blue Murder S01 Ep01

Set in the 1970s and 1980s in Sydney, the miniseries concerns the relationship between controversial former detective Roger "the Dodger" Rogerson and notorio...

www.youtube.com

When cops become heroes...

 

[bilby]

I note nothing in your reply that gives a better solution other than suggesting the police should have risked death to take the guy alive.

Well, duh. That's their job.

I note that you have apparently no clue that police routinely and frequently disarm able bodied suspects who are brandishing knives. It's not easy, but it's a fundamental part of their job, and they can and should be trained to do it.

I'm not surprised, most people have a very hard time comprehending blasphemy.

What the fuck are you blathering about?

This isn't about religion, it's about people whose job is to take suspects alive, and to take on a small degree of personal risk in doing so, instead deciding to kill someone.

It's like you have been asked to resolve a discrepancy in a customer's database, and your immediate response is to just delete the entire thing and all its backups. No database, no discrepancy, right? It might have been possible to fix the problem some other way, but that would have entailed both significant effort on your part, and a real risk the the problem would still exist by the deadline for completion of the work.

Can you grasp why this simple and effective solution might not be considered reasonable or appropriate?

And in my example, nobody is dead at the end. Are you incapable of grasping that needless deaths even of people who might have committed crimes are a tragedy that is worth taking risks to prevent?