TeeDub
Guest
|
|
« Reply #345 on: March 12, 2015, 09:57:53 am » |
|
At least he was fired. Is he open for civil litigation?
Hopefully his cohorts will learn from his actions (something like not using excessive force, not the more obvious turn off the cameras.)
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tgra
Citizen
Offline
Posts: 6
|
|
« Reply #346 on: March 14, 2015, 01:09:05 pm » |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
heironymouspasparagus
|
|
« Reply #347 on: March 16, 2015, 09:28:41 am » |
|
Another reason to not like OKC....
|
|
|
Logged
|
"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?" --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.
I don’t share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently. I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.
|
|
|
DolfanBob
|
|
« Reply #348 on: March 17, 2015, 12:36:50 pm » |
|
The 18 minute uncut version of this is great. They should release all Cop shooting videos like this. Heck, Why not a new Television show "Cops Uncensored" I'm sure several people will call this shooting justified. Cause we all know how lethal a screwdriver in the hands of a mentally ill black man can be. Especially if there are two of you and your white, on his front porch, with his mother there, in broad daylight. That can be very scary. But at all times. Be aware and mention that you are wearing a body camera. So be careful what you say or do naturally. Cause you know how you don't like cameras or being accountable for your actions. http://gawker.com/body-cam-films-cops-gunning-down-mentally-ill-man-holdi-1691916719
|
|
|
Logged
|
Changing opinions one mistake at a time.
|
|
|
TeeDub
Guest
|
|
« Reply #349 on: March 17, 2015, 01:20:29 pm » |
|
Wow. I don't even know what you say to that.... I know that they teach the whole 21 foot thing, but you might think they would consider something else as it was only a screwdriver.
It doesn't take that blue wall long to go up and call for union reps and buddies does it.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
guido911
|
|
« Reply #350 on: March 18, 2015, 07:03:20 pm » |
|
As of Feb. 17, police in this country have killed 190 citizens since January 1, 2015 – about three people per day. Only one on-duty cop has been intentionally killed by a citizen this year, a Fulton County Sheriff’s Detective. We are well on our way to breaking last years record of 1,101. http://killedbypolice.net http://truegif.com/1543
|
|
|
Logged
|
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.
|
|
|
DolfanBob
|
|
« Reply #351 on: March 19, 2015, 08:18:38 am » |
|
And that just gives credit to their training skills of paranoia.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Changing opinions one mistake at a time.
|
|
|
guido911
|
|
« Reply #352 on: March 19, 2015, 09:59:06 pm » |
|
And that just gives credit to their training skills of paranoia activism.
had to fix that.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Someone get Hoss a pacifier.
|
|
|
|
DolfanBob
|
|
« Reply #354 on: March 23, 2015, 10:00:48 am » |
|
Wow. He needs to get some triple beams. Those digital scales aren't worth a shite.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Changing opinions one mistake at a time.
|
|
|
Vashta Nerada
|
|
« Reply #355 on: March 23, 2015, 09:51:51 pm » |
|
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Poor training has left Philadelphia police with the mistaken belief that fearing for their lives alone justifies using deadly force, the Justice Department said Monday in a review of the city's nearly 400 officer-involved shootings since 2007.
The review found Philadelphia's investigations into officer-involved shootings lacked consistency, and an internal affairs shooting team that waits months until after the district attorney clears an officer before interviewing him or her.
Officers interviewed for the assessment consistently mentioned fear for their lives as sufficient justification for using deadly force. That notion, running counter to Philadelphia police policy, which does not include the word "fear," and court rulings that require an "objectively reasonable belief" that lives are at immediate risk, appeared to stem from the department's lack of regular, consistent training on its deadly force policy, the assessment found.
The problem with “in fear for my life” statements
The report dives into a common misconception that it seems many police have internalized: the belief that fear of life justifies the use of deadly force. From the findings:
The dictum “in fear for my life” was the most common theme throughout all of our conversations with PPD officers and sergeants regarding deadly force policy. Yet, notably, the word “fear” does not appear in PPD’s [use of deadly force policy] nor is it supported by current case law. As noted in the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Deorle v. Rutherford, a simple statement that an officer is in fear for his life is not an objective factor.
Officers receive firearms training annually, the report notes. But that training is not in line with the department’s actual policies:
According to PPD’s [use of deadly force policy], justification for use of deadly force is far more restrictive than “fear for my life.” An officer must have a set of facts and circumstances that a reasonable or rational officer would determine would likely result in unavoidable death or serious injury in order to justify the use of deadly force. Although PPD officers are briefed on use of force law and policy annually through a portion of firearms training, neither of these courses covers PPD policy in depth.
http://fusion.net/story/108190/the-new-doj-report-on-philadelphia-police-shootings-is-mandatory-reading
In Tulsa, an “in fear for my life” statement by police is an automatic "get out of jail free" card with the D.A.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
heironymouspasparagus
|
|
« Reply #356 on: March 23, 2015, 10:23:35 pm » |
|
In Tulsa, an “in fear for my life” statement by police is an automatic "get out of jail free" card with the D.A.
Tulsa DA office has an assortment of people with an automatic "get out of jail free" card. 'Good buddies' - part of the sense of entitlement people....Because they ARE more special than the rest of us!!
|
|
« Last Edit: March 23, 2015, 10:25:14 pm by heironymouspasparagus »
|
Logged
|
"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?" --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.
I don’t share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently. I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.
|
|
|
|
tulsa_fan
|
|
« Reply #358 on: March 26, 2015, 08:41:11 am » |
|
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Poor training has left Philadelphia police with the mistaken belief that fearing for their lives alone justifies using deadly force, the Justice Department said Monday in a review of the city's nearly 400 officer-involved shootings since 2007.
The review found Philadelphia's investigations into officer-involved shootings lacked consistency, and an internal affairs shooting team that waits months until after the district attorney clears an officer before interviewing him or her.
Officers interviewed for the assessment consistently mentioned fear for their lives as sufficient justification for using deadly force. That notion, running counter to Philadelphia police policy, which does not include the word "fear," and court rulings that require an "objectively reasonable belief" that lives are at immediate risk, appeared to stem from the department's lack of regular, consistent training on its deadly force policy, the assessment found.
The problem with “in fear for my life” statements
The report dives into a common misconception that it seems many police have internalized: the belief that fear of life justifies the use of deadly force. From the findings:
The dictum “in fear for my life” was the most common theme throughout all of our conversations with PPD officers and sergeants regarding deadly force policy. Yet, notably, the word “fear” does not appear in PPD’s [use of deadly force policy] nor is it supported by current case law. As noted in the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Deorle v. Rutherford, a simple statement that an officer is in fear for his life is not an objective factor.
Officers receive firearms training annually, the report notes. But that training is not in line with the department’s actual policies:
According to PPD’s [use of deadly force policy], justification for use of deadly force is far more restrictive than “fear for my life.” An officer must have a set of facts and circumstances that a reasonable or rational officer would determine would likely result in unavoidable death or serious injury in order to justify the use of deadly force. Although PPD officers are briefed on use of force law and policy annually through a portion of firearms training, neither of these courses covers PPD policy in depth.
http://fusion.net/story/108190/the-new-doj-report-on-philadelphia-police-shootings-is-mandatory-reading
In Tulsa, an “in fear for my life” statement by police is an automatic "get out of jail free" card with the D.A. It's just a matter of semantics. Fear for one's life (or another's) is justification for use of deadly force. There are court cases that confirm this over and over again. The litmus tool is would a reasonable person in the same situation believe life was in jeopardy. Someone is holding a gun at me, the only people who wouldn't think it's reasonable I am in fear of my life are dead ones. It shouldn't, but sometimes silly me, I'm amazed that people believe an officer has to be actually injured or shot at before they should have the ability to return fire. Since you seems to have such a good grasp on how policing should work have you applied?
|
|
« Last Edit: March 26, 2015, 08:42:57 am by tulsa_fan »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
AquaMan
|
|
« Reply #359 on: March 26, 2015, 09:47:33 am » |
|
Have you?
Or do you have a law degree?
Or are you an expert witness in "fear for life" cases.
Organizational training is failing us in many areas right now because politics, greed and bumper sticker mentalities are exerting undue influence. Its real obvious that policing forces are having to re-examine their courses and make changes. To ignore these widespread cases of abuse is just a waste of opportunity.
|
|
|
Logged
|
onward...through the fog
|
|
|
|