Report: Chicago police have 'no regard' for minority lives

[Loren Pechtel]

Looks like they don't know what they're talking about:



The percent which is black isn't the right yardstick. Rather, look at arrests. I don't know about Chicago but when you look at nationwide stats the supposed anti-black bias vanishes when you use the proper yardstick.

The comments even show the problem:

Let's apply that same "yardstick" to something else.

Whites are just as likely as blacks to use illegal drugs, but blacks are much more likely to be arrested or go to jail for illegal drugs.

So you assume that the same thing is not happening with other kinds of crimes? Really?

Poor people usually buy from street dealers. It's in the open, easy to catch.

Middle class and above usually buy behind closed doors. It's much harder to catch them.

Is it any wonder the police catch more poor drug deals? This is an economic issue, not a racial one.

- - - Updated - - -

Except the distrust is being driven by agitators, not by reality. The reality is that in proportion to arrests for violent crime blacks are slightly less likely to be shot. There is no racial problem in shootings.

The "agitators" are hitting a chord with the community. That would not happen if the distrust was not more widespread. The "reality" does not matter once distrust sets in.

Because the agitators have been preaching race hatred for many, many years. And the SJWs keep throwing gas on the fire.

 

[laughing dog]

Because the agitators have been preaching race hatred for many, many years. And the SJWs keep throwing gas on the fire.

And the police distrust has grown out of decades of interactions. And it is right wing reactionary SJWs who keep throwing gas on the fire with ignorant and handwaved denials of reality.

 

[Kusa]

I don't think that the minorities have any regard for minority lives.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Poor people usually buy from street dealers. It's in the open, easy to catch.

They do? Then why do all the suburban kids tend to be the ones I see buy from them?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Poor people usually buy from street dealers. It's in the open, easy to catch.

They do? Then why do all the suburban kids tend to be the ones I see buy from them?

Had this conversation with ALOT of my white friends recently. One of my coworkers -- a blonde female in her mid 20s -- expressed apprehension about having to drive through the south side to deliver a package for a customer. I and two other black employees all told her the same thing: They won't harass you and they sure as hell won't mistake you for a gang member. If anyone approaches you, it's because they think you're there to buy drugs. Just tell them "no thanks" and move on.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Poor people usually buy from street dealers. It's in the open, easy to catch.

They do? Then why do all the suburban kids tend to be the ones I see buy from them?

Kids--middle class kids generally don't have very much money. For the purpose of buying drugs they're poor.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

They do? Then why do all the suburban kids tend to be the ones I see buy from them?

Kids--middle class kids generally don't have very much money. For the purpose of buying drugs they're poor.

Except middle class kids aren't getting arrested or prosecuted at rates proportionate to their ACTUALLY poor black counterparts. Nor do they have an unusual tendency to be charged as adults for possession and/or possession with intent.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

They do? Then why do all the suburban kids tend to be the ones I see buy from them?

Kids--middle class kids generally don't have very much money. For the purpose of buying drugs they're poor.

Teens don't have jobs?

 

[bilby]

Looks like they don't know what they're talking about:



The percent which is black isn't the right yardstick. Rather, look at arrests.

No, look at convictions. Because the percentage of arrests doesn't actually tell you what -- if anything -- those people were charged with or how often they were actually brought to trial with enough evidence TO convict. "Catch and release" has been known to be a form of police harassment since at least the 1980s; a teenager gets arrested for "loitering," detained overnight and then released without charge the next day. Rinse and repeat.

It's a well-known phenomenon: you'll find people on the south side who have been arrested a half a dozen times without ever being CHARGED with anything. The conviction rate for lesser crimes when they ARE charged with something is also close to 100% because almost everyone who DOES get charged simply pleads guilty to get probation instead of jailtime, usually on the advice of a drastically overworked public defender who doesn't have the time or the motivation to actually take his case to trial.

From the 2015 stats, 43% of all violent crimes in Chicago were performed by WHITE perpetrators, with 22.5% by blacks. So the disparity in arrest rates doesn't actually bear this out either.

LOL at 'since at least the 1980s' - catch and release was notoriously common as a means to abuse suffragettes in the United Kingdom, so it would have been more accurate to say 'since at least the 1890s'.

 

[Derec]

Well that didn't take long...
Family of teen Pierre Loury sues city over deadly police shooting
Rahm should not give them a bent penny!

 

[Deepak]

You are confusing cause and effect. Because of the level of distrust of the police, the police get jumped on. Until the police earn the trust, this will continue.

Except the distrust is being driven by agitators, not by reality. The reality is that in proportion to arrests for violent crime blacks are slightly less likely to be shot. There is no racial problem in shootings.

Let's not kid ourselves here - finding cases of justified shootings isn't exactly sufficient evidence that there is a disconnect in reality in claiming that the police also have many bad actors. Just ask Serpico.

This is hardly uncommon:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/03/02/baltimore-school-cop-assault-student-todd-dnt-tsr.cnn
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-charged-lying-arrest-article-1.2474108
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeeFvg6whgw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtHDzMl7984
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTZxDalN9iQ

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Except the distrust is being driven by agitators, not by reality. The reality is that in proportion to arrests for violent crime blacks are slightly less likely to be shot. There is no racial problem in shootings.

Let's not kid ourselves here - finding cases of justified shootings isn't exactly sufficient evidence that there is a disconnect in reality in claiming that the police also have many bad actors. Just ask Serpico.

This is hardly uncommon:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/03/02/baltimore-school-cop-assault-student-todd-dnt-tsr.cnn
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-charged-lying-arrest-article-1.2474108
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeeFvg6whgw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtHDzMl7984
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTZxDalN9iQ

There are justified and unjustified shootings of whites. There are justified and unjustified shootings of blacks.

However, there's the BLM crowd that pretends any shooting of a black is unjustified.

 

[Deepak]

However, there's the BLM crowd that pretends any shooting of a black is unjustified.

So what? People thinking their star-sign has an impact on their life doesn't preclude us from studying the cosmos.

 

[Derec]

So what? People thinking their star-sign has an impact on their life doesn't preclude us from studying the cosmos.

If #BLM types had the same reputation in politics that astrologers have in science you'd have a point. Unfortunately #BLMers enjoy ill deserved respect from many quarters as well as significant levels of funding. Hell, a #BLM leader might become the next mayor of Baltimore because a drug dealer got himself killed in a transport van.

To get back to the recent shooting in Chi-town, the peaceful #BLM activists are at it again.
Man Tackled Police Officer At Pierre Loury Protest, Prosecutors Say

Shimron Robinson, 33, will face charges for knocking an officer to the ground, police said. Shimron Robinson, 33, will face charges for knocking an officer to the ground, police said. View Full Caption Getty Images/Keith Levit / Chicago Police Department
COOK COUNTY CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE — A suburban man tackled a Chicago Police officer Tuesday during a protest over the fatal CPD shooting of 16-year-old Pierre Loury, prosecutors said.
Shimron Robinson, 33, appeared in bond court Wednesday on charges of aggravated battery to a peace officer and resisting an officer.[..]
At one point, a group of people began jumping and pounding on police cars, Assistant State's Attorney Lorraine Scaduto said during Robinson's bond hearing.
As two uniformed officers headed toward the cars about 10 p.m. Tuesday, Robinson tackled one of the officers from behind, knocking him to the ground, prosecutors said.
Robinson fell on top of the officer, Scaduto said, and the officer suffered swelling, pain and cuts on one of his hands and both knees. The officer's pants were ripped at each knee, she added.
When the officer's partner tried to handcuff Robinson, he resisted arrest, prosecutors said.

The family is pretending to be clueless, in their bid to scam millions out of the city

At Tuesday's vigil, Loury's relatives slammed CPD's version of events, saying that didn't sound like the Loury they knew. Several posts on the teen's Facebook page show him holding what appear to be guns.
"We know what happened," said uncle Leroy Collins, 51. "They shot an innocent kid and are now covering it up. It's the same thing — just a different day and neighborhood."

Innocent? A known gang banger (sporting a prominent gang tattoo on his neck no less!) pointing a gun at police is not an innocent kid. And some wonder why "dindu nuffin" is a thing ...
If this Sneed guy has accurate information, this is the "prior contact" (as other media outlets tend to obliquely refer to) with police Loury had.
Sneed exclusive: Shooting victim had been given another chance

Last week, the family of Loury filed a federal wrongful-death lawsuit against the city, alleging racist practices by the Chicago Police Department and blasting the police for having “no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.”
But Sneed hears that four days before Loury was shot after scaling a fence following a chase by police, he appeared before Juvenile Court Judge William G. Gamboney on a probation violation stemming from a robbery case involving a female who had been pulled off a train by a group of people, beaten and robbed.
“Loury had been brought in on a probation violation on April 7 by his probation officer because he was not in compliance with the requirements,” a Sneed source familiar with the case said.
“But rather than take Loury into custody, the judge decided to give him one more chance. It’s not unusual. Happens all the time,” the source added.

This fits a pattern. Jamar Clark likewise was not sent back to prison for parole violation when he led police on a chase. Mario Woods likely suicided by cop in order to not go back to prison (he was on parole for a robbery).

“My baby was running from them so that he could get away and have a better chance, so he could have a better life,” the boy’s aunt, Karen Winters, told the Chicago Tribune.

Baby? And he wanted to have a better chance at what? Not be held responsible for his actions?

 

[Deepak]

I've got a point because the topic of this thread is not BLM.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

Among other problems described in the report: Some officers in charge of training are teaching while they themselves are under investigation for a range of alleged offenses. And there is a disturbing lack of legal counsel for those in custody. Last year, for example, only 6 out of every 1,000 people arrested had an attorney at any point while in police custody.

Derec - do you think this is the hallmark of an equitable and just system?

 

[Derec]

I've got a point because the topic of this thread is not BLM.

It is not? When a gangbanger gets justfiiably shot the family still blames the police, files a federal lawsuit and #BLM idiots block traffic the #BLM is definitely an issue.

Derec - do you think this is the hallmark of an equitable and just system?

I somehow doubt only 0.6% of people arrested in Chicago had a lawyer. Where did you get that snippet from?

The fact still remains that most police shootings are fully justified. That does not matter to police haters form #BLM though. They will continue to claim that gun toting bangers are "babies", "innocent kids" who never had a gun and who "didn't do nothing" etc.

 

[Deepak]

I'm confused by your using symbols to express ideas, while also somehow being incapable of reading the OP.

 

[Derec]

I'm confused by your using symbols to express ideas, while also somehow being incapable of reading the OP.

You know, you could have just said that it comes from the article in OP. You did not attribute your snippet and the thread is already on page 4.
Surprisingly (to you), I was able to read the article linked in OP. Unfortunately it does not offer any more details than your snippet. It does not say why these other people did not have attorneys (some may have been released without charge, others might have waived their right to an attorney) but it doesn't claim they were denied attorneys illegally either. So we just don't know. If they were denied access to a lawyer illegally that should obviously be rectified. What we do know is that there is a definite anti-police bent to the article.
There is much crime in Chicago and black people take the brunt of it. That's why it is unconscionable to me that a movement that is ostensibly based on the idea that black lives matter would defend and glorify violent criminals like Pierre Loury. Talk about having "no regard for minority lives!"

 

[Deepak]

I'm confused by your using symbols to express ideas, while also somehow being incapable of reading the OP.

You know, you could have just said that it comes from the article in OP. You did not attribute your snippet and the thread is already on page 4.
Surprisingly (to you), I was able to read the article linked in OP. Unfortunately it does not offer any more details than your snippet. It does not say why these other people did not have attorneys (some may have been released without charge, others might have waived their right to an attorney) but it doesn't claim they were denied attorneys illegally either. So we just don't know. If they were denied access to a lawyer illegally that should obviously be rectified. What we do know is that there is a definite anti-police bent to the article.
There is much crime in Chicago and black people take the brunt of it. That's why it is unconscionable to me that a movement that is ostensibly based on the idea that black lives matter would defend and glorify violent criminals like Pierre Loury. Talk about having "no regard for minority lives!"

Considering my last few posts in the thread were attempts at staving off the BLM derail I thought it might be a useful exercise to refer back to the OP.

The full report contains background on the circumstances - specifically starting on pp 56.

https://chicagopatf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/PATF_Final_Report_4_13_16-1.pdf

Now I'm sure the response will be that the police didn't violate the letter of the law... surely any trust issues by Chicagoans are imagined.