Why do people keep dying in police custody?

[Toni]

You got a mouse in your pocket? Who the hell is "we?"

Do you even know what you are going on about?

Yes, but I got tired of explaining it.

You didn't explain it. You just assumed the reaction to Roof having a cheeseburger was universal indignation.

It wasn't. My initial reaction was "Meh." My second reaction was "Actually, that makes sense... he'll be more cooperative if you make him comfortable. 'Rapport building' as intelligence guys call it."

My third reaction was "How come they never try that on black people?"

It's really simple. If you think no one was indignant about the appearance of preferential treatment for a mass murderer, it must be true. What I saw and read in news reports and internet comments must be something I imagined. I'll accept your authority on this matter.

I'm sure plenty of people were pretty indignant at the appearance of preferential treatment for Roof.

Thing is, it wasn't or at least should not have been preferential treatment. If you take someone into custody, you have a legal and moral obligation to provide adequate food, shelter, medical care necessary. No matter how loathesome the person is or how guilty you are certain he is. He may be a crazed inhuman monster but that doesn't mean that his jailers, representatives of the people, should be.

But more than that, as was stated, it is a known technique to get better cooperation. Feeding people breaks down barriers, creates a situation where the person's guard might be let down better. Which is very important if you are concerned that he might be part of a larger conspiracy and there might be other gunmen waiting to shoot up another place. Or just a conspiracy. You want to know as much as you can from this guy. One good way to get him talking is to feed him.



I also haven't heard a lot of outrage at his treatment. Doesn't mean that there isn't any. I just haven't heard it.

My word for it was "indignant," not outrage. Some of the news feed headlines made it sound like they stopped at Burger King on the way to the police station. Some people have trouble with comprehension and read what they think they see, not what is actually there.

Well, I haven't really had time to talk about this at work and I'm snowed under with projects at home, too so I haven't been out that much. I know one or two people who wouldn't just be indignant but would be outraged that Dylan Roof was fed anything at all. If the victims had been white, and Roof black, I am certain that more than one of my relatives would be outraged that he wasn't executed on the spot.

It may just be a difference in where we live. I'm pretty far up north so a shooting at a black church seems pretty far away to a lot of people. Some of those same people of course were calling for the execution of the Boston bomber. Now, if it had been a Catholic church....

 

[Bronzeage]

Well, I haven't really had time to talk about this at work and I'm snowed under with projects at home, too so I haven't been out that much. I know one or two people who wouldn't just be indignant but would be outraged that Dylan Roof was fed anything at all. If the victims had been white, and Roof black, I am certain that more than one of my relatives would be outraged that he wasn't executed on the spot.

It may just be a difference in where we live. I'm pretty far up north so a shooting at a black church seems pretty far away to a lot of people. Some of those same people of course were calling for the execution of the Boston bomber. Now, if it had been a Catholic church....

Roof's great distinction is that he did not kill himself last, which is the common pattern. This leaves us with the problem of what to do with such a person.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You got a mouse in your pocket? Who the hell is "we?"

Do you even know what you are going on about?

Yes, but I got tired of explaining it.

You didn't explain it. You just assumed the reaction to Roof having a cheeseburger was universal indignation.

It wasn't. My initial reaction was "Meh." My second reaction was "Actually, that makes sense... he'll be more cooperative if you make him comfortable. 'Rapport building' as intelligence guys call it."

My third reaction was "How come they never try that on black people?"

It's really simple. If you think no one was indignant about the appearance of preferential treatment for a mass murderer, it must be true. What I saw and read in news reports and internet comments must be something I imagined. I'll accept your authority on this matter.

My reflection on it was the rather nonchalant appearance during his actual arrest. Other than the number of officers there, you couldn't tell they were about to take a mass murderer into custody. No one even had a hand at their side on their gun.

 

[Toni]

Well, I haven't really had time to talk about this at work and I'm snowed under with projects at home, too so I haven't been out that much. I know one or two people who wouldn't just be indignant but would be outraged that Dylan Roof was fed anything at all. If the victims had been white, and Roof black, I am certain that more than one of my relatives would be outraged that he wasn't executed on the spot.

It may just be a difference in where we live. I'm pretty far up north so a shooting at a black church seems pretty far away to a lot of people. Some of those same people of course were calling for the execution of the Boston bomber. Now, if it had been a Catholic church....

Roof's great distinction is that he did not kill himself last, which is the common pattern. This leaves us with the problem of what to do with such a person.

If we were consistent, then he would receive the same sentence as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

But that would suppose that we placed the same value on black lives as we do on white ones. I find myself in a quandary. I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty and I think that the sentence for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was wrong. He is clearly guilty and was clearly under the influence of his unstable brother. Roof is clearly unstable. But giving him a lesser sentence (and yes, I know the jurisdictions are different) also gives the message that the victims in the church were less important. That's a bad message. But it's also bad to kill people, even mass murderers.

Roof is probably more mentally ill and more unstable than Tsarnaev and on that measure probably deserves more mercy. Also one does not right a wrong (death sentence, murders) by committing another wrong. And I believe that the death penalty is wrong.

I am grateful I am not going to be in the jury pool.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Roof's great distinction is that he did not kill himself last, which is the common pattern. This leaves us with the problem of what to do with such a person.

If we were consistent, then he would receive the same sentence as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

But that would suppose that we placed the same value on black lives as we do on white ones. I find myself in a quandary. I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty and I think that the sentence for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was wrong. He is clearly guilty and was clearly under the influence of his unstable brother. Roof is clearly unstable. But giving him a lesser sentence (and yes, I know the jurisdictions are different) also gives the message that the victims in the church were less important. That's a bad message. But it's also bad to kill people, even mass murderers.

I think the whole, he'll never be a free person again would send a message that killing is wrong.

Roof is probably more mentally ill and more unstable than Tsarnaev and on that measure probably deserves more mercy.

Is there much evidence for the Peanut Gallery to base a judgment on for that?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Roof is clearly unstable.

I want someone to actually explain this to me one of these days:

How is Dylan Roof "unstable?"

He has perfectly coherent and well-reasoned justifications for everything he did. He's not paranoid or delusional, he doesn't suffer from hallucinations or any recognizable pathology as far as I can tell. His actions were not motivated by thrill-seeking adventurism or an unrealized death wish. He was fully aware of what he was doing and why he was doing it.

So where exactly are we getting this notion that he is "unstable" as if the reason he did what he did is because there's something pathologically wrong with his mind? As his actions are of a type that no SANE person with the same ideology and the same beliefs would ever do?

Roof is probably more mentally ill

Being a murdering bastard is not a mental illness.

 

[arkirk]

I want someone to actually explain this to me one of these days:

How is Dylan Roof "unstable?"

He has perfectly coherent and well-reasoned justifications for everything he did. He's not paranoid or delusional, he doesn't suffer from hallucinations or any recognizable pathology as far as I can tell. His actions were not motivated by thrill-seeking adventurism or an unrealized death wish. He was fully aware of what he was doing and why he was doing it.

So where exactly are we getting this notion that he is "unstable" as if the reason he did what he did is because there's something pathologically wrong with his mind? As his actions are of a type that no SANE person with the same ideology and the same beliefs would ever do?

Roof is probably more mentally ill

Being a murdering bastard is not a mental illness.

What's the matter? Don't you want to share the "crazy" title with a perfectly crazy racist? I don't blame you on that score, but there is a thin line between mental illness and most antisocial behavior. I think a southern state will have to kill one of their ever lovin' white boys with THEIR DEATH PENALTY. I don't think you have to worry about Roof. They are not going to let him live. I believe they will be executing a kill crazy looney. Whether it is right or wrong, that is probably what will happen....after may years of appeals...unless he goes the McVeigh way and begs for the death penalty.

 

[Axulus]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone done an analysis on the death rate outside of police custody?

In other words, some people will die outside of police custody. To determine the additional death rate due to police custody, it would be the excess over the death rate outside police custody.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

What's the matter? Don't you want to share the "crazy" title with a perfectly crazy racist? I don't blame you on that score, but there is a thin line between mental illness and most antisocial behavior.

I don't think there is.

"Mental illness" is a diagnostic category. There are pathologies that can be identified in a person who is, for whatever reason, INCAPABLE of behaving in a way that reflects his or her external reality. A mental illness negatively affects that persons life and/or harms their quality of life, makes it more difficult for them to take care of themselves or form meaningful relationships with others. Some mental illnesses are less debilitating than others, and some disorders have consequences mild enough that thy do not actually fall into the category of "illnesses."

"Antisocial behavior" is not a symptom of mental illness in and of itself. It can be the symptom of "being an asshole" but that's not a mental illness either.

It seems to me that this "unstable" meme is being pushed by people who would refer to believe that RACISM is a mental illness and not a coherent ideology with a set of well-defined beliefs and concepts that a person can ascribe to and even support. That way they can just say that people like Dylan Roof aren't REALLY bad people, they just "need help."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone done an analysis on the death rate outside of police custody?

In other words, some people will die outside of police custody. To determine the additional death rate due to police custody, it would be the excess over the death rate outside police custody.

Are you suggesting there is a reasonable level for deaths of people in police custody?

 

[Axulus]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone done an analysis on the death rate outside of police custody?

In other words, some people will die outside of police custody. To determine the additional death rate due to police custody, it would be the excess over the death rate outside police custody.

Are you suggesting there is a reasonable level for deaths of people in police custody?

Since I haven't seen the analysis done, I can't say whether there is a large excess of deaths. And what is a "reasonable" level anyway? My question is more so to determine the magnitude of the problem. There seems to be a lot of people who believe the problem is severe enough that it deserves fundamental reform of how police operate across the nation and a large amount of resources and attention put into it to reduce the problem. I'm unsure of that without more comprehensive data, but they could be right.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are you suggesting there is a reasonable level for deaths of people in police custody?

Since I haven't seen the analysis done, I can't say whether there is a large excess of deaths. And what is a "reasonable" level anyway?

I'm going to have to argue 0. Much like people dying outside of police custody (and the presumption in the OP is unnatural causes) should be 0.

My question is more so to determine the magnitude of the problem.

Haven't we established that we just don't know. We have already seen multiple cases of officers flat out lying about the circumstances of a shooting. Should this be expected any different while in custody?

There seems to be a lot of people who believe the problem is severe enough that it deserves fundamental reform of how police operate across the nation and a large amount of resources and attention put into it to reduce the problem. I'm unsure of that without more comprehensive data, but they could be right.

Good passive aggressive response.

 

[Axulus]

I'm going to have to argue 0. Much like people dying outside of police custody (and the presumption in the OP is unnatural causes) should be 0.

0 is unreasonable. It demands perfection, which means unlimited resources would be poured into it until perfection is acheived. Unlimited resources which do not exist, staffed by perfect humans which do not exist.

Haven't we established that we just don't know. We have already seen multiple cases of officers flat out lying about the circumstances of a shooting. Should this be expected any different while in custody?

"Multiple" in a country with 330 million people does not a severe problem make. And no, we shouldn't expect police to tell the truth in such circumstances. I've no idea what made you think I thought otherwise.

Good passive aggressive response.

What is your definition of passive aggressive? You should add a trademark to it, whatever it is.

 

[Bronzeage]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone done an analysis on the death rate outside of police custody?

In other words, some people will die outside of police custody. To determine the additional death rate due to police custody, it would be the excess over the death rate outside police custody.

Are you suggesting there is a reasonable level for deaths of people in police custody?

If there is a reasonable level of deaths in a hospital, there would have to be one for jails and prisons. As I said in my earlier posts, people in police custody are in one of the most stressful situations possible in life. Factors which have nothing to do with their legal problems are magnified.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

0 is unreasonable. It demands perfection, which means unlimited resources would be poured into it until perfection is acheived. Unlimited resources which do not exist, staffed by perfect humans which do not exist.

*sigh*

Haven't we established that we just don't know. We have already seen multiple cases of officers flat out lying about the circumstances of a shooting. Should this be expected any different while in custody?

"Multiple" in a country with 330 million people does not a severe problem make.

Not quite sure where I indicated there is a pandemic of cases of people dying in custody. Also I want to run for president so I can ban Yoda speak.

And no, we shouldn't expect police to tell the truth in such circumstances. I've no idea what made you think I thought otherwise.

I'm saying that there are no known metrics and the fact that we are seeing cases popping up where shootings have occurred and only because of a video being taken was the lying officer caught. Heck, even an officer with a camera on him, lied about what happened in the most recent case.

Good passive aggressive response.

What is your definition of passive aggressive? You should add a trademark to it, whatever it is.

It is the part where you pretend to think that there could be a problem. You are pretty much kicking the can down to the road. If x number of deaths are demonstrated, you will then argue that these deaths are just noise in the system.

 

[Toni]

Well, here's what I think is an acceptable number of people being shot by police during a traffic stop: Zero.

 

[ronburgundy]

Are you suggesting there is a reasonable level for deaths of people in police custody?

If there is a reasonable level of deaths in a hospital, there would have to be one for jails and prisons. As I said in my earlier posts, people in police custody are in one of the most stressful situations possible in life. Factors which have nothing to do with their legal problems are magnified.

^^THIS^^

Zero is ridiculous. The reasonable number (the number at which no reasonable person would assume notable unjustice or incompetence) is not only not zero, it isn't even the same as death rates outside of jail, it is higher. The inherent stress of jail will increase death by natural causes, and will increase suicides which cannot be reasonably prevented in many cases unless their is clear evidence of imminent intent. In addition, death by other innmates is guaranteed to be more than zero, unless every prisoner is kept permanently in solitary. Despite greater control than outside of prisons, there is also a 10000 fold increase the concentration of people seeking to harm each other and more people doing things that motivate others to want to kill them. Thus it is hard to estimate what is a reasonable (see above definition for that) number of unnatural deaths would be relative to such death rates outside of prison.
Finally, death by jailors is guaranteed to be above zero, because legit efforts of jailors to protect themselves, prevent escapes, and prevent attacks on other inmates will always be above zero.

Pollyanna mayors of fairylands can say things like "The death rate of people in custody should be zero", but those of us seeking a rational perspective on what our goals and expectations should be would pay no heed to it.

 

[ksen]

0 is unreasonable.

When it comes to people under the total control of the State I don't think zero or as close to it as we can get is unreasonable.

It demands perfection, which means unlimited resources would be poured into it until perfection is acheived. Unlimited resources which do not exist, staffed by perfect humans which do not exist.

Nah, that's just fear mongering and hand waving.

 

[ronburgundy]

Well, here's what I think is an acceptable number of people being shot by police during a traffic stop: Zero.

That is also the ideally "acceptable" number of cops being shot or assaulted, the number of suspects fleeing, the number of people later harmed by those stopped then let go, etc.. The problem is that grown-ups recognize the inherent conflict between guaranteeing that all these numbers are zero, and that many things done or not done to ensure one number is zero make the other numbers not zero.

In traffic stops where the driver does nothing at all to indicate a reasonable threat to anyone, whether the cop, bystanders, or other people down the road, then yes, there should be zero people shot by the police. In any instances that don't meet that criteria the shootings won't and cannot reasonably be expected to be zero.

- - - Updated - - -

When it comes to people under the total control of the State I don't think zero or as close to it as we can get is unreasonable.

It demands perfection, which means unlimited resources would be poured into it until perfection is acheived. Unlimited resources which do not exist, staffed by perfect humans which do not exist.

Nah, that's just fear mongering and hand waving.

No, its rational thinking and consideration of objective facts.

 

[ksen]

If there is a reasonable level of deaths in a hospital, there would have to be one for jails and prisons. As I said in my earlier posts, people in police custody are in one of the most stressful situations possible in life. Factors which have nothing to do with their legal problems are magnified.

^^THIS^^

Zero is ridiculous. The reasonable number (the number at which no reasonable person would assume notable unjustice or incompetence) is not only not zero, it isn't even the same as death rates outside of jail, it is higher.

I disagree that it is unreasonable to think that the death rate of people in State custody should be lower than those outside of State custody.

In the OP I'm not talking about deaths that can be attributed to natural causes, i.e. old age. That's going to happen irregardless of any preventative measures.

The inherent stress of jail will increase death by natural causes, and will increase suicides which cannot be reasonably prevented in many cases unless their is clear evidence of imminent intent.

Why can't suicides while in State custody be reasonably prevented? These people are under constant guard and surveillance . . . or at least they should be.

In addition, death by other innmates is guaranteed to be more than zero, unless every prisoner is kept permanently in solitary. Despite greater control than outside of prisons, there is also a 10000 fold increase the concentration of people seeking to harm each other and more people doing things that motivate others to want to kill them. Thus it is hard to estimate what is a reasonable (see above definition for that) number of unnatural deaths would be relative to such death rates outside of prison.

It might be hard to estimate but death at the hands of other prisoners should also never, or at least very rarely, happen. We pay guards to watch these people.

Finally, death by jailors is guaranteed to be above zero, because legit efforts of jailors to protect themselves, prevent escapes, and prevent attacks on other inmates will always be above zero.

The legitimate cases you mention above are to be expected yes. However I don't think it is unreasonable to attempt to make it as few dead inmates as possible. I'm willing to wager that even in those circumstances there are a number of cases where lethal force did not have to be used.