• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

Looks like they can't prove it wasn't self defense, but her conduct certainly doesn't sound like it to me.

You think she's supposed to just take a beating? You think words justify assault? What are you saying?
Her encouraging him to shoot the woman makes her situation very shaky.

Prosecutors made that up. :rolleyes:
And why do you say it was made up??
Threatening an innocent bystander with a firearm is in itself a legal violation, irrespective of whether the individual was deemed not at fault for the shooting. It would seem peculiar for such charges to be dropped if the threat indeed took place, wouldn't you agree?
No--I don't see it as saying he actually pointed the firearm at a somewhat-innocent bystander (she was involved, but not a deadly threat), but rather the mother encouraging him to shoot her. That's the part that makes me seriously question self defense. Without that part this looks like a reasonable disparity-of-force self-defense case.
Does the article specify whether the details emerged from a witness testimony or the prosecutor's account? It's important to note that the prosecutor, certainly, was not a witness. I surmise they analyzed video footage and inferred from body language. Could you provide the foundation upon which your viewpoint rests?
It seems very unlikely the prosecutor would make up something like that.
 
It's highly unlikely they'd drop charges if they didn't.
 
It's highly unlikely they'd drop charges if they didn't.
If something's wrong with a witness it could easily be dropped.

Indeed, it's also plausible in scenarios where there are no witnesses, but merely the prosecutors concocting allegations from thin air. Nonetheless, irrespective of our personal biases, she remains innocent until evidence conclusively establishes her guilt.
 
The shyster just wants to sue the cops for millions, whether his client attacked police with a hammer or not. He is only out for $$$.
 
Why might the authorities choose to dismiss the charges? What could possibly have led to the officer's untimely departure under a cloud of disrepute?

Derec "Hey, divert your attention to that crafty lawyer over there!"
 
Does the article specify whether the details emerged from a witness testimony or the prosecutor's account? It's important to note that the prosecutor, certainly, was not a witness. I surmise they analyzed video footage and inferred from body language. Could you provide the foundation upon which your viewpoint rests?
It seems very unlikely the prosecutor would make up something like that.
That isn't evidence, that'd be a meaningless statistical supposition. There have been plenty of cases of prosecutors going off the rails.
 
Governor Ned Lamont said an investigation was being launched after a damning new audit found there is a “high likelihood” hundreds of Connecticut State Police troopers collectively falsified tens of thousands traffic ticket records over much of the past decade.

The findings, presented at a public meeting Wednesday, allege systemic violations of state law and that the misreporting skewed racial profiling data making it appear troopers ticketed more white drivers and fewer minority motorists than they really did.

Auditors cautioned their monthslong review – triggered by a Hearst Connecticut Media Group investigation that exposed how four troopers purposefully created fake tickets for their own personal gain – did not attempt to determine if the widespread problems were intentional. They said a formal investigation would need to determine that.

In a related story about one of the four cops that prompted this investigation...

Moore was later arrested on workers’ compensation fraud charges for allegedly continuing to run his side business while out on disability for the state police. He pleaded not guilty and his court case is pending. He remains employed by the department, which paid him $111,170 last year.

The department kept the matter in-house for years until Hearst Connecticut Media unearthed internal investigation records last summer.
 
Does the article specify whether the details emerged from a witness testimony or the prosecutor's account? It's important to note that the prosecutor, certainly, was not a witness. I surmise they analyzed video footage and inferred from body language. Could you provide the foundation upon which your viewpoint rests?
It seems very unlikely the prosecutor would make up something like that.
That isn't evidence, that'd be a meaningless statistical supposition. There have been plenty of cases of prosecutors going off the rails.

Apparently some of us live were a pin drop could be considered a public disturbance. Prosecutors bear the responsibility of safeguarding the public welfare. In certain instances, this could necessitate withholding evidence that may potentially absolve the accused. Though such a decision is fraught with moral complexity, prosecutors may deem it necessary, all in an effort to avert future harm to society. Prosecutors bear the weighty responsibility of establishing the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The handling of evidence is pivotal in this process. Simply presenting it without context or commentary falls short of the task at hand. Rather, prosecutors must weave a coherent narrative around the evidence, elucidating its relevance and implications to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the case.
 
Seattle: leaked body cam footage of the police break room show a Trump flag, and mock tomb stone of a teen the police killed

 
By no means does this indicate a flaw within the culture of Seattle's police department. Absolutely not. :rolleyes:
 
While I acknowledge the multifaceted nature of this , I've noticed some intriguing contradictions among people's viewpoints. There are those who express disdain for Democrat-led states, while concurrently expressing support for the police forces that are guided by these same Democratic leaders.

Conversely, there is a segment of people who profess an allegiance to the Democratic party, yet voice concerns about police culture. Interestingly, they do so seemingly oblivious to the fact that Democrats have often been at the helm of these cities for an average of two decades.

Just sayin,
 
The Demarius Butts shooting does appear to be justified. I can see the anger they would have at Butts for firing at them, but they get paid to be bigger than that in the job, to be professional.
 
In case you missed it.

Jadarrius Rose is seen on video during the July 4 traffic stop with his hands up surrendering to police before an officer deploys his canine.



The officer has been fired. Disciplinary actions are unknown to me at this time.
 
And before the "Why didn't he just stop" crowd arrives. The answer was given to the 911 operator.

Edit: And the confirmation of his fears were provided by the K9 operator.
 
Last edited:
And before the "Why didn't he just stop" crowd arrives. The answer was given to the 911 operator.

Edit: And the confirmation of his fears were provided by the K9 operator.
It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 
And before the "Why didn't he just stop" crowd arrives. The answer was given to the 911 operator.

Edit: And the confirmation of his fears were provided by the K9 operator.
It's called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Not it's not. It's called proof the police must have done something to cause the driver to not want to stop. If you watch the video you can see the Dog even went the wrong way and it's handler commanded it to come back and attack. I think we live in a different world Loren.
 
"Some More News" is a YouTube news show that tries to be like John Oliver's 'Last Week Tonight'. Mixing comedy with coverage of real topics. Honestly, I find most of the comedy bits rather meh.. but the news parts are actually very interesting.

So their latest show is on 'defund the police'

 
Back
Top Bottom