ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th December 2017, 11:14 AM   #161
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,329
The fact the officers had the suspect (and I use that term reluctantly) in control for close to five minutes before deciding to shoot him, without ever moving in to handcuff him, is... There's just no words.

As for the failed prosecution, juries are historically reluctant to convict police officers for violent behavior towards "subjects" while on-duty. Juries in a place like Arizona are probably even more reluctant. It's a political/cultural reaction, isn't it? Isn't that the only way this not guilty verdict even makes a smidgen of sense? That the jurors felt, probably without ever saying this out loud (they didn't have too), cops protect us from the scum. We have to back them up. Period.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:21 AM   #162
lobosrul5
Muse
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 579
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The fact the officers had the suspect (and I use that term reluctantly) in control for close to five minutes before deciding to shoot him, without ever moving in to handcuff him, is... There's just no words.

As for the failed prosecution, juries are historically reluctant to convict police officers for violent behavior towards "subjects" while on-duty. Juries in a place like Arizona are probably even more reluctant. It's a political/cultural reaction, isn't it? Isn't that the only way this not guilty verdict even makes a smidgen of sense? That the jurors felt, probably without ever saying this out loud (they didn't have too), cops protect us from the scum. We have to back them up. Period.
That's what I've heard from a couple of people (not here, in "real life"). Essentially: cops deal with scum all day long every day. On rare occasions they screw up. If we punished them for said screw-ups, they'd be more reluctant to help us when we need it. Also, almost everyone they do shoot is a bad guy anyways and it saves us from providing them a prison bed.
lobosrul5 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:23 AM   #163
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,402
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The fact the officers had the suspect (and I use that term reluctantly) in control for close to five minutes before deciding to shoot him, without ever moving in to handcuff him, is... There's just no words.

As for the failed prosecution, juries are historically reluctant to convict police officers for violent behavior towards "subjects" while on-duty. Juries in a place like Arizona are probably even more reluctant. It's a political/cultural reaction, isn't it? Isn't that the only way this not guilty verdict even makes a smidgen of sense? That the jurors felt, probably without ever saying this out loud (they didn't have too), cops protect us from the scum. We have to back them up. Period.
I think a key here is the 5 minutes part. Precedent in the US feels like it puts little weight on the leadup to the event, but only focuses on the moment of the event itself. That is like how Zimmerman got off.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:28 AM   #164
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 26,412
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
you can't really argue that a person's position is unreasonable after they claim it is reasonable.
Yes you can; examining that type of claim is exactly what courts of law exist to do.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:34 AM   #165
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,372
I've seen time and time again that the police* don't just fail to de-escalate, they actively escalate the situation. One of the worst that I've seen in person was when my daughter brought a friend home who was looking for a place to stay and had been sleeping in the park. She said her mom had kicked her out, her mom had reported her as a runaway. Frankly I believe the kid and think the mom reported her to avoid charges of neglect, but regardless...

We check in with the police and confirm she's reported as a runaway. So they come down to talk to her. So you're approaching a kid who has been reported as a runaway. She hasn't committed a crime, everyone is calm and safe... how do you approach the situation?

Did you answer "get up in her face, yell at her, demand information but interrupt her when she tries to answer and then get really hostile when she becomes defensive"? Then congratulations! You're qualified to be a police officer. Short of just hauling off and punching her in the face I don't think I could have done more to escalate the situation if that was my goal. If my wife and I hadn't been there I don't know what would have happened.

I use that example partly because it's a first hand account, but also because this is a call where there was no weapon or danger of any kind, where the person was in no conceivable way a threat, and they still charged in like they wanted to be in an action movie. That's what we're dealing with. That's the attitude that has been allowed to develop.

I like police, in theory. I want law enforcement to be a thing. But I don't know how we can fix this. If this was a smaller issue, if this was a problem at a call center or something where they all had terrible attitudes and were giving bad customer service... I would suggest trying to find a way to fire them all and start over. It's extremely hard to get rid of ingrained attitudes like that. The issue is that we can't and won't clean house so... I think we're going to have to get used to the idea that calling the police may randomly result in the death of one or more innocent people and so calling them should not be something you do quickly.

*Obvious disclaimer: #NotAllCops, of course some individuals or some specific local departments may be better than others.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:35 AM   #166
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,402
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Yes you can; examining that type of claim is exactly what courts of law exist to do.

Dave
They can't. They say they do. And because they are backed up by the guys with guns their positions get to stand. The Pope isn't interpreting the will of god, either.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:40 AM   #167
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 26,412
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
They can't. They say they do. And because they are backed up by the guys with guns their positions get to stand. The Pope isn't interpreting the will of god, either.
No, you're wrong. It is quite feasible for a court to examine claims of the type "I believe that my behaviour was reasonable in this instance," and that is in fact a part of what courts are supposed to be there to do. However, it seems to me that US courts, when examining the behaviour of police officers, fail to use a tenable definition of the word "reasonable."

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:42 AM   #168
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,402
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
No, you're wrong. It is quite feasible for a court to examine claims of the type "I believe that my behaviour was reasonable in this instance," and that is in fact a part of what courts are supposed to be there to do. However, it seems to me that US courts, when examining the behaviour of police officers, fail to use a tenable definition of the word "reasonable."

Dave
The fact that they are using an untenable definition makes wonder why you then think the process is feasible?
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:50 AM   #169
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
.....
I like police, in theory. I want law enforcement to be a thing. But I don't know how we can fix this. If this was a smaller issue, if this was a problem at a call center or something where they all had terrible attitudes and were giving bad customer service... I would suggest trying to find a way to fire them all and start over. It's extremely hard to get rid of ingrained attitudes like that. The issue is that we can't and won't clean house so... I think we're going to have to get used to the idea that calling the police may randomly result in the death of one or more innocent people and so calling them should not be something you do quickly.
.....
At a time when most entry-level professional jobs require college degrees (the actual value of college is a whole different discussion), most police departments require only high school diplomas or the equivalent. People can usually be hired as cops at age 21, sometimes younger. So police on average have less education and life experience than much of the public. Then they are trained like combat soldiers to divide the world into friend and foe. Other countries put a much bigger emphasis on serving the public and solving the problem.

And cops have not been enthusiastic about de-escalation training:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/u...-escalate.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.f7300635a3bc
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 11:59 AM   #170
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42,270
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
At a time when most entry-level professional jobs require college degrees (the actual value of college is a whole different discussion), most police departments require only high school diplomas or the equivalent. People can usually be hired as cops at age 21, sometimes younger. So police on average have less education and life experience than much of the public. Then they are trained like combat soldiers to divide the world into friend and foe. Other countries put a much bigger emphasis on serving the public and solving the problem.

And cops have not been enthusiastic about de-escalation training:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/u...-escalate.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.f7300635a3bc
No, soldiers often have far more restrictive rules of engagement. As has been pointed out, doing this on the battlefield would be a war crime. See the prosecution of the Israeli soldier not that long ago. Don't go around insulting soldiers by bringing them into this.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 12:12 PM   #171
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
No, soldiers often have far more restrictive rules of engagement. As has been pointed out, doing this on the battlefield would be a war crime. See the prosecution of the Israeli soldier not that long ago. Don't go around insulting soldiers by bringing them into this.
Whoa, I didn't mean to say a U.S. soldier serving among other U.S. soldiers would kill an unarmed, compliant prisoner or would try to justify it after the fact. But when cops are trained to see everybody they encounter as a potential lethal threat, it's easy for them to believe that it's "reasonable" to kill anybody that moves (literally, in this case). And this cop was prosecuted for murder. It's the jury that sent him back into the community.

Last edited by Bob001; 11th December 2017 at 12:14 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 12:22 PM   #172
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 66,280
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
In terms of accuracy I'm going by what the defense attorney was claiming in a news article. In terms of morality, I think it's wrong to train a police officer to shoot so quickly. But I'm not the police, so I'm on the outside looking in.
It was clear to anyone with a brain that the victim was trying to follow confusing directions. Nothing that man did was the least bit threatening.

You of course can maintain your POV that you don't know all the facts. I maintain mine that the video is indisputable.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 12:34 PM   #173
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 20,947
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
I read your link. One of the comments was that the prosecution was ineffective. I do not know the system involved, but I wondered would the prosecution deliberately throw the case? Would it be seen as a bad thing for the prosecutor to have successfully convicted a LEO?

It would have been a bad thing from the viewpoint of other cops in his jurisdiction, whom he relies on on a regular basis for finding evidence and arresting suspects, as well as testifying on behalf of the prosecution in many cases. This is why prosecutors are hesitant to bring charges against cops under even the most compelling of circumstances.

The other cops don't care about the out-of-control cop, regardless of how egregious their crime might be. They want their invulnerability maintained.

I think that merely prosecuting the case would be sufficient to earn their resentment. Not so sure that blatantly throwing the case would fix that. There's still going to be a mark on the defendant's record. The rest of the cops are going to view any attempt at prosecution as an act of disloyalty no matter what the outcome.

If it looked like he lost in spite of trying to win they would only see that as a victory against him.

Variations of "blue flu" would likely complicate cases he had until he was no longer in office.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow

Last edited by quadraginta; 11th December 2017 at 12:41 PM.
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 01:46 PM   #174
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 26,412
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
The fact that they are using an untenable definition makes wonder why you then think the process is feasible?
Other legal systems manage it fine. The US just has a very strange relationship with firearms.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 02:07 PM   #175
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,762
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
The video makes what happened very clear. You can imagine some other extraordinary evidence that would rationally lead to an acquittal, but we have no reason to believe that any such evidence exists, and if it did we would expect it to have been mentioned in the articles.
Seriously, I wouldn't count on that last part. I see news articles that leave out pivotal points all the time. I see a big hole in the coverage I've read. As far as I can tell reporters did not make any attempt to talk to jurors. That's allowed, unless maybe the defense attorney had the judge issue some kind of injunction against it. If jurors hurry from the courtroom surrounded by a defense team scrum and hastily close the elevator door - put it in the article.

Something about the UK vs. the U.S.: It's unfortunately true that police in the U.S. face "suspects" who are far likelier to be armed.

"Shoot to kill": I'm not sure that's an articulated policy anywhere. I'm pretty sure it's often a de facto policy.

I'm not defending the cop who shot and I'm really not defending the cop who was giving orders. The shooter was fired but I don't know what role this incident played. The sergeant has retired and has moved to the Philippines. (I would have liked evidence that reporters tried to find him as well). But really the main thing I wanted to say here is, don't assume the article would tell you something. Reporters get so familiar with the facts of the case that they forget to put stuff in more often than you'd think.

Posters who say they would be in jail if they did the same thing may be wrong. Civilians get acquitted in these kinds of cases as well. I know someone who chased his brother around with a rifle before shooting him and was acquitted. As is often the case with police shootings, some people never get charged at all.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 02:23 PM   #176
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 10,602
The first time I saw the video, I was so disgusted, I missed the reach that caused the cop to shoot. I thought it was earlier when he puts his hands behind his back and then up into the air.

That reach is to where the cop can see there is no gun in the waistband of his trousers, his hand comes away empty and is going down straight back to the floor to continue his crawl.

For a jury to accept the cops claim he felt threatend is, IMO, possibly due to other gun owners wanting to make conviction for themselves less likely by keeping the threashhold of what is a threat to life very low indeed.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 02:35 PM   #177
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,208
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Drunk.

Pointed a gun out a hotel window.

Guy would have been lucky to NOT be shot.

We know that many police now train their officers to shoot first and ask questions later in a terrorist or mass-shooting scenario.

Why? Because recent history has shown that mass shooters care not about negotiations or survival. All they care about is mass-casualties.

This idiot, was drunk, brought a gun to a hotel and pointed it out a window.

If you're stupid enough to do that, you're also stupid enough to have a weapon in your back pocket and point it at a cop.
Had a pellet gun for work.

Was of legal age to consume alcohol.

Showed some friends the pellet gun he used for work.

Cops shouted contradictory orders.

Cop that shot him put "you're ******" on his weapon

Hopefully the city is going to have to pay his family millions & at the very least the actual idiot (Coppy McYoure******) will never work as a LEO again & will be hounded about this for the rest of his life.
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
332nd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 03:24 PM   #178
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by 332nd View Post
Had a pellet gun for work.

Was of legal age to consume alcohol.

Showed some friends the pellet gun he used for work.

Cops shouted contradictory orders.

Cop that shot him put "you're ******" on his weapon

Hopefully the city is going to have to pay his family millions & at the very least the actual idiot (Coppy McYoure******) will never work as a LEO again & will be hounded about this for the rest of his life.
Notably, the cops never saw him with a gun. Suppose the cops had gotten the wrong room number, or somebody had made a prank call? During the conversation where he begged for his life, the cops as far as I know never said anything like "We're here because we received a report that you pointed a rifle out the window. Did you do that? Do you have a rifle in your room?" Etc. He could have explained his job, the pellet gun, his license, etc. They might have held him on the floor while somebody checked out the room. They might have run his ID. The cops didn't consider any possibility other than they had captured a dangerous terrorist, maybe more than one.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 03:41 PM   #179
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
At a time when most entry-level professional jobs require college degrees (the actual value of college is a whole different discussion), most police departments require only high school diplomas or the equivalent. People can usually be hired as cops at age 21, sometimes younger. So police on average have less education and life experience than much of the public. Then they are trained like combat soldiers to divide the world into friend and foe. Other countries put a much bigger emphasis on serving the public and solving the problem.

And cops have not been enthusiastic about de-escalation training:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/u...-escalate.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.f7300635a3bc
Sir Robert Peel founder of the British Police wrote in 1829 that the function of police was;
1) To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2) To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3) To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4) To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5) To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6) To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7) To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8) To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9) To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

This is a surprisingly modern view.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 03:49 PM   #180
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 20,947
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
The fact the officers had the suspect (and I use that term reluctantly) in control for close to five minutes before deciding to shoot him, without ever moving in to handcuff him, is... There's just no words.

As for the failed prosecution, juries are historically reluctant to convict police officers for violent behavior towards "subjects" while on-duty. Juries in a place like Arizona are probably even more reluctant. It's a political/cultural reaction, isn't it? Isn't that the only way this not guilty verdict even makes a smidgen of sense? That the jurors felt, probably without ever saying this out loud (they didn't have too), cops protect us from the scum. We have to back them up. Period.
That's what I've heard from a couple of people (not here, in "real life"). Essentially: cops deal with scum all day long every day. On rare occasions they screw up. If we punished them for said screw-ups, they'd be more reluctant to help us when we need it. Also, almost everyone they do shoot is a bad guy anyways and it saves us from providing them a prison bed.

This is where a lot (Most? All?) of the problem is rooted.

Cops have an 'us vs. them' mentality where anyone who doesn't instantly yield to their idea of their authority is just as instantly "them", and therefore scum.

And the people on the juries accept this dichotomy without understanding that they only remain out of the 'scum' classification by pure good fortune. Their next on-the-street interaction could change that ... no matter how they behave.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 04:26 PM   #181
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,970
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It was clear to anyone with a brain that the victim was trying to follow confusing directions. Nothing that man did was the least bit threatening.
I agree.

Quote:
You of course can maintain your POV that you don't know all the facts.
Ditto.

Quote:
I maintain mine that the video is indisputable.
It is indisputable that a man was needlessly shot. It is not undisputable that the jury were idiots for doing so. Until I know more about testimony and the instructions the jury, I'm not ready to insult them as you do
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 05:02 PM   #182
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
.....
This is a surprisingly modern view.

Wrong. It's a candy-ass, weak-kneed, bleeding-heart-liberal view. What kinda cop doesn't even carry a gun? This is the modern view:
Quote:
"Cops fight violence," Grossman often says. "What do they fight it with? Superior violence. Righteous violence."
https://www.mensjournal.com/features...s-cops-w463304
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 05:23 PM   #183
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 10,324
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
This is where a lot (Most? All?) of the problem is rooted.

Cops have an 'us vs. them' mentality where anyone who doesn't instantly yield to their idea of their authority is just as instantly "them", and therefore scum.
It's even worse than that. The guy in the video did instantly yield to their authority. They shot him anyway.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 05:34 PM   #184
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think a key here is the 5 minutes part. Precedent in the US feels like it puts little weight on the leadup to the event, but only focuses on the moment of the event itself. That is like how Zimmerman got off.
It's also a good portion of our counter-terrorism operations.

These guys wanted to blow up a bridge! Nevermind that we spent 3 months plying them with drugs, sex, and money. Pay no attention to the fact that even after all that, when they got cold feet about actually hurting people, we hinted that we might murder their families. These guys wanted to blow up a bridge! Our methods might be a bit unorthodox, but we're doing it to protect you, so don't question it. Have a a nice day.

P.S. Would you be interested in helping us blow up a bridge or other landmark in your area?

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 11th December 2017 at 05:36 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 05:58 PM   #185
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,320
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
It would have been a bad thing from the viewpoint of other cops in his jurisdiction, whom he relies on on a regular basis for finding evidence and arresting suspects, as well as testifying on behalf of the prosecution in many cases. This is why prosecutors are hesitant to bring charges against cops under even the most compelling of circumstances.

The other cops don't care about the out-of-control cop, regardless of how egregious their crime might be. They want their invulnerability maintained.

I think that merely prosecuting the case would be sufficient to earn their resentment. Not so sure that blatantly throwing the case would fix that. There's still going to be a mark on the defendant's record. The rest of the cops are going to view any attempt at prosecution as an act of disloyalty no matter what the outcome.

If it looked like he lost in spite of trying to win they would only see that as a victory against him.

Variations of "blue flu" would likely complicate cases he had until he was no longer in office.
Yeah, among the most shocking parts of the case, to me, are that it went to trial at all.

Usually the Grand Jury is the "get out of jail free card" for this kind of thing. The Prosecutor/DA can't just dismiss the concern of the public, so they need political cover. See, there's this piece of paper certified by some anonymous citizens who were shown a totally one-sided presentation of evidence in a little faux trial we had that says successful prosecution is unlikely.

But then this is a rather cut-and-dry case. So I guess it's no surprise that a blatant, on-video assassination of an innocent man after several moments of depraved toying with him still only gets you to an acquittal.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 05:58 PM   #186
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,329
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
It's even worse than that. The guy in the video did instantly yield to their authority.

When you're crawling on the floor, crying and pleading not to be shot... Hard to see the threat there.

However, having read some of the local news stories -- and fellow officers did testify they did not see a threat at the moment the (former) officer, Philip Brailsford, began firing -- I think I see the narrative. Mesa (Az) police Sgt. Charles Langley (who has retired and moved to the Philippines) was the one barking commands. The defense conceded the commands were confusing and raised the tension level. When Brailsford saw the man on the floor, Daniel Shaver, reach behind himself (one witness speculated he was trying to pull his pants up), he began firing in reaction to what he had been trained was a threat: a potentially armed suspect reaching behind his back.

Another Mesa officer noted that none of the officers present mentioned in their incident reports that, just prior to being shot, Shaver was crying and begging for his life. I think that bothers even a lot of police officers. In fact, I know it does.

Hey they arrested him and charged him, put him on trial. Very frustrating for everyone. And yes I think it is almost certain there will be a multi-million dollar settlement. It's the only recourse the family has left.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 06:21 PM   #187
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,970
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
No. Just that the defense doesn't want people on the jury who are well informed on the type of case. Possibly the prosecution too.
I was responding to a person who said the jurors were "picked because they were stupid".
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2017, 06:48 PM   #188
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 8,970
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
The stories about the verdict summarize the case pretty thoroughly.
The details in those 3 articles amount to;

Brailsford wanted to arrest Shaver.
Brailsford claimed Shaver escalated the situation.
Brailsford said that his training meant Shaver's movement indicated reaching for a weapon.
Shaver was drunk.
The police were called to the hotel upon getting a report of a person pointing a rifle out of a window.
Jeff Jacobs, a Mesa police academy use-of-force trainer thought Brailsford followed his training properly.
Two other officers who also had their weapons out at the scene didn't shoot.
Brailsford said he would do the same thing in the future.
Footage of the shooting was shown at trial. (All of the footage?)
A photo of the rifle used with the You're **********" engraving was not shown.
The DA portrayed the police officer as a killer during the trial.

Quote:
But don't you think the video stands on its own?
I think it's very damning.

Quote:
The cop's defense was that he acted justifiably in the circumstances we saw for ourselves in the video. Many, including the police chief who fired him and the prosecutors who tried to lock him up, disagree.
I also disagree.

I'd like to know more about what the judge's instructions were to the jury. Although 2nd murder might have been a stretch, I don't see how this guy got off on the manslaughter charge based on what I read about AZ law.
Ranb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2017, 06:30 AM   #189
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42,270
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'd like to know more about what the judge's instructions were to the jury. Although 2nd murder might have been a stretch, I don't see how this guy got off on the manslaughter charge based on what I read about AZ law.
Because hearing the word gun at some time previous in the day is enough to put a cop in a panic and that excuses all their actions.

More legal law abiding gun owners killed by cops and the NRA is still silent.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2017, 09:43 AM   #190
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 9,329
The most stomach-churning aspect of this shooting was put very well, I thought, by Jacquielynn Ford, a columnist and editorial writer for the Dallas Morning News. (The victim, Daniel Shaver, lived in the Dallas area. He was in Mesa, Arizona on business.)
Quote:
The sergeant in command began shouting a rapid-fire series of threatening and sometimes contradictory commands: hands up, hands behind your head, hands out flat, cross your legs, crawl, shut up, and — frighteningly, "If you make a mistake ... there's a possibility you're going to get shot." Not "If you move" or "If you reach for a weapon." It's like a macabre twist on the childhood game "Simon Says," except that in this game, if you trip up over what Simon says, you die.
So insane it even has some on the right upset.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Daniel-Shaver-and-Mitch-Brailsford.jpg (114.6 KB, 24 views)

Last edited by newyorkguy; 12th December 2017 at 09:47 AM.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 04:16 PM   #191
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,182
I heard the Sargent fled to the Philipines, is that true? I can't imagine being this cop in Arizona right now, other AZ cops aren't being too quiet about this guy getting accidental lead poisoning, but it seems like his commanding officer had a lot to account for as well.
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 04:20 PM   #192
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 5,218
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
I heard the Sargent fled to the Philipines, is that true? I can't imagine being this cop in Arizona right now, other AZ cops aren't being too quiet about this guy getting accidental lead poisoning, but it seems like his commanding officer had a lot to account for as well.
Seriously, I'd like to see evidence of him having "fled" and didn't his CO fire him?
bluesjnr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 04:25 PM   #193
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 20,947
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
I heard the Sargent fled to the Philipines, is that true?

<snip>

I don't think that they really need any more homicidal cops in the Philippines, if he's looking for work. They apparently already have plenty.

Of course, he may just feel more comfortable living in a real, live police state where gunning down innocents is a part of everyday life.

Oh. Wait. He didn't have to leave here to find that.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 08:16 PM   #194
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,182
If he's really there, maybe he'll end up on a Philipino helicopter ride
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 08:17 PM   #195
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,182
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
Seriously, I'd like to see evidence of him having "fled" and didn't his CO fire him?
I was hoping someone here had links, I was having a lot of trouble finding much on him.
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 09:43 PM   #196
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
Seriously, I'd like to see evidence of him having "fled" and didn't his CO fire him?
Reports say the sergeant "retired" to the Philippines, sounds like under pressure. The department fired the shooter.
https://www.tmz.com/2017/12/13/danie...sive-behavior/
http://www.azfamily.com/story/369858...ilty-of-murder

Last edited by Bob001; 13th December 2017 at 09:44 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2017, 11:23 PM   #197
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,182
Imagine having pretty much every other police force in Arizona after you, the Philipines seem about the best place to be
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th December 2017, 12:38 AM   #198
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 20,947
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Imagine having pretty much every other police force in Arizona after you, the Philipines seem about the best place to be

There's always Finland.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2017, 02:20 AM   #199
erlando
Graduate Poster
 
erlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,418
This was one of the hardest videos I have ever watched. That was straight up execution. There was no way Daniel Shaver was going to survive that encounter.

This has to cause someone in law enforcement to stop and think "what have we become"?

Yet another (as if I needed it) reason why I'm so so happy not to live in the US. I would be scared ******** of the police. I don't think that's the original intention.
__________________
"If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved?
Evolution IS a blind watchmaker
erlando is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th December 2017, 02:35 AM   #200
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 41,846
But we've already had someone saying that children should be taught to be extremely afraid of the police so that they don't do whatever it was that Daniel Shaver did to justify the well-deserved bullet in the face that the cop was completely justified in shooting. Because it's always the victim's fault for not reacting correctly to police demands and if only they were more aware that they're going to be killed if they make the tiniest wrong move they'd have a better chance of survival.

Or something like that. This society is indescribably screwed up.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.