What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Is police brutality overstated or exaggerated by the Media? (1 Viewer)

Is police brutality overstated or exaggerated by the Media?

  • Yes

    Votes: 45 46.9%
  • No

    Votes: 47 49.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 4 4.2%

  • Total voters
    96
See what happens when people run off the good cops?
Yes, this is definitely a new phenomenon. Cops never did anything like this prior to the invention of body cams...
You have more inexperienced police out there now also.
The cop who shot the 20 year old in Ohio was a 30 year vet.
Most of the cops in these killings are experienced. If there were any that weren't I stand corrected but I don't recall any.
 
So now this is the thread where anecdotes are used as replacements for actual data? Didn't we already have a bunch of threads for that purpose? It's truly a shame we can't have actual discussions based upon data, but this wouldn't be the PSF if that happened.
 
He had both hands in the air when he was shot.

Police body-cam footage shows an officer opening a bedroom door in an apartment and immediately shooting Lewis, who was in bed. Lewis appeared to be holding the vape pen before he was shot, said Columbus Police Chief Elaine Bryant. No weapon was found.
The officer yelling stop resisting really pissed me off.
You just shot the guy, maybe that's why he is having trouble moving his damn arm
 
So now this is the thread where anecdotes are used as replacements for actual data? Didn't we already have a bunch of threads for that purpose? It's truly a shame we can't have actual discussions based upon data, but this wouldn't be the PSF if that happened.
Anecdotes are stories, like that one time with those two strippers.

These are not 'anecdotes'.
 
See what happens when people run off the good cops?
Yes, this is definitely a new phenomenon. Cops never did anything like this prior to the invention of body cams...
You have more inexperienced police out there now also.
Let's reallocated the funds to proper training...i don't know...maybe a full year instead of just a few months before we put them in charge of people's lives.
Agree. Academy enrollment is down big, so thats a problem also. A cop still has to keep their cool no matter what,
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

This is what I'm talking about. In this case it was clearly a mistake. No criminal intent either.


Whether Potter had intended to draw her Taser or handgun was not at issue in the trial. Lawyers for both sides agreed she mistakenly drew the wrong weapon. Instead, the trial centered on questions of whether she should have recognized she was holding the heavier metal gun or whether she should have drawn any weapon at all.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
 
Last edited:
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
 
Last edited:
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
That really wasn’t my point. And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
That really wasn’t my point. And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.
I wish you were kidding. The most disgusting abuse of our justice system in modern times. The prosecutor should be in prison for misconduct.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
That really wasn’t my point. And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.
Seriously, put a black kid in the exact same situation as Kyle was in. Ambushed by three people, one openly welding a handgun and one trying to jump him from behind and chasing him screaming at him and lunging for his gun. Then being chases by a half dozen people, kicking him, hitting him with a skateboard and another pointing a gun at him. In what universe would you put the black kid on trial for murder? The difference is, I would not judge based on color or politics.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
That really wasn’t my point. And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.
Seriously, put a black kid in the exact same situation as Kyle was in. Ambushed by three people, one openly welding a handgun and one trying to jump him from behind and chasing him screaming at him and lunging for his gun. Then being chases by a half dozen people, kicking him, hitting him with a skateboard and another pointing a gun at him. In what universe would you put the black kid on trial for murder? The difference is, I would not judge based on color or politics.
A black kid would have been shot well before that happened.
 
What type of human being would want to even be a cop these days? It is a thankless job which ties your hands and second guesses every action when you are in a life or death situation. I don't know how we possibly expect a good number of high quality people would want to be a cop in this environment where cops are viewed as evil.
A couple of our range instructors are cops or ex cops and they echo this. One left the force because he felt like he had to second guess himself in dangerous situations and that creep started to endanger him.

Cops are flawed people too. There are plenty of bad cops, but I think the overwhelming majority of police have good intentions.

Shooting scenarios are hard to train for. You never know how people are going to react in them. All of a person's faculties diminish under that level or stress.

Day in and day out you are tasked with dealing with the criminal element of society. You could go 20 years and make every correct life or death decision correct. Then, you make one mistake and boom, you're looking at a criminal trial.
If it’s a criminal act its probably not a mistake.

Not even close. The blood thirty liberals wanted to string up Rittenhouse which was the clearest act of legal self-defense ever caught on tape. But we had a witch trail and thank God there was sane (non-liberals) people on the jury. When clearly innocent people are railroaded into a trial, anything can happen....including an innocent man be found guilty.
This whole exchange is about police officers. When did Rittenhouse become a police officer?
He didn't. But Tim made the point if they act legally they have nothing to worry about. Rittenhouse was an example no matter how textbook you behave in these shooting situations, a prosecutor can still make your life hell.
That really wasn’t my point. And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.
Seriously, put a black kid in the exact same situation as Kyle was in. Ambushed by three people, one openly welding a handgun and one trying to jump him from behind and chasing him screaming at him and lunging for his gun. Then being chases by a half dozen people, kicking him, hitting him with a skateboard and another pointing a gun at him. In what universe would you put the black kid on trial for murder? The difference is, I would not judge based on color or politics.
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.
 
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.

I was unemployed at the time of his trial. I watched every second of that trial. The evidence supports Jon's description of the events 100%. Believe it or not there is video evidence of most of it. There wasn't any evidence of a different narrative. As usual, you believe what you want to believe regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
 
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.

I was unemployed at the time of his trial. I watched every second of that trial. The evidence supports Jon's description of the events 100%. Believe it or not there is video evidence of most of it. There wasn't any evidence of a different narrative. As usual, you believe what you want to believe regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
OK.

It’s certainly possible I’m believing what I want to believe. I’ve been guilty of that before and I probably will be again. But I do try to be fair, and I remain skeptical of the narrative.

I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision. I didn’t watch as much as you did but based on what I saw I would have voted to acquit him too. Too much reasonable doubt to convict. But that doesn’t mean I think he didn’t commit a crime. I suspect he did.
 
I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision.

WTH are you talking about? You literally just posted:

And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.

You can't "agree" with the jury's decision and ALSO not be convinced that he should have been acquitted. This illustrates the utter frustration some of us have with you. Your "opinion" changes with the wind. Here it did so within minutes.
 
I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision.

WTH are you talking about? You literally just posted:

And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.

You can't "agree" with the jury's decision and ALSO not be convinced that he should have been acquitted. This illustrates the utter frustration some of us have with you. Your "opinion" changes with the wind. Here it did so within minutes.
Sorry I screwed up on the first post, what I meant to write is that Im still not sure Rittenhouse was innocent. I agree with his acquittal. My bad.
 
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.

I was unemployed at the time of his trial. I watched every second of that trial. The evidence supports Jon's description of the events 100%. Believe it or not there is video evidence of most of it. There wasn't any evidence of a different narrative. As usual, you believe what you want to believe regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
OK.

It’s certainly possible I’m believing what I want to believe. I’ve been guilty of that before and I probably will be again. But I do try to be fair, and I remain skeptical of the narrative.

I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision. I didn’t watch as much as you did but based on what I saw I would have voted to acquit him too. Too much reasonable doubt to convict. But that doesn’t mean I think he didn’t commit a crime. I suspect he did.
What crime would that be? You just want him to be guilty so bad. There was so much video and so many eye witnesses....nothing supports you assertion. Pure wishful thinking wanting the comservstive boy to be guilty of something.

You have the nerve to project your bias on me. I could tell you about ever relevant piece of evidence and witnesses at the trial. I could even tell you what the couple of pixels from the surveillance video which the prosecution falsely claimed was Kyle's gun pointed up. It was the frame of the car door behind him. Every lawyer in here thought Kyle should plea, which I said would be stupid. There was never a case.
 
Last edited:
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.

I was unemployed at the time of his trial. I watched every second of that trial. The evidence supports Jon's description of the events 100%. Believe it or not there is video evidence of most of it. There wasn't any evidence of a different narrative. As usual, you believe what you want to believe regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
OK.

It’s certainly possible I’m believing what I want to believe. I’ve been guilty of that before and I probably will be again. But I do try to be fair, and I remain skeptical of the narrative.

I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision. I didn’t watch as much as you did but based on what I saw I would have voted to acquit him too. Too much reasonable doubt to convict. But that doesn’t mean I think he didn’t commit a crime. I suspect he did.
What crime would that be? You just want him to be guilty so bad. There was so much video and so many eye witnesses....nothing supports you assertion. Pure wishful thinking wanting the comservstive boy to be guilty of something.

You have the nerve to project your bias on me. I could tell you about ever relevant piece of evidence and witnesses at the trial. I could even tell you what the couple of pixels from the surveillance video which the prosecution falsely claimed was Kyle's gun pointed up. It was the frame of the car door behind him. Every lawyer in here thought Kyle should plea, which I said would be stupid. There was never a case.
I never called him “the conservative boy” and never have thought of him, or anyone, in such terms. And I haven’t discussed your bias either. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
 
As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions.

I was unemployed at the time of his trial. I watched every second of that trial. The evidence supports Jon's description of the events 100%. Believe it or not there is video evidence of most of it. There wasn't any evidence of a different narrative. As usual, you believe what you want to believe regardless of the evidence to the contrary.
OK.

It’s certainly possible I’m believing what I want to believe. I’ve been guilty of that before and I probably will be again. But I do try to be fair, and I remain skeptical of the narrative.

I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision. I didn’t watch as much as you did but based on what I saw I would have voted to acquit him too. Too much reasonable doubt to convict. But that doesn’t mean I think he didn’t commit a crime. I suspect he did.
What crime would that be? You just want him to be guilty so bad. There was so much video and so many eye witnesses....nothing supports you assertion. Pure wishful thinking wanting the comservstive boy to be guilty of something.

You have the nerve to project your bias on me. I could tell you about ever relevant piece of evidence and witnesses at the trial. I could even tell you what the couple of pixels from the surveillance video which the prosecution falsely claimed was Kyle's gun pointed up. It was the frame of the car door behind him. Every lawyer in here thought Kyle should plea, which I said would be stupid. There was never a case.
I never called him “the conservative boy” and never have thought of him, or anyone, in such terms. And I haven’t discussed your bias either. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
Tim....you said this above..
"As I’ve pointed out in previous threads, you’ve taken Kyle Rittenhouse’s narrative of events without question or doubt, and you base all of your arguments on that. I begin with a different set of assumptions."

You completely dismissed me because of bias and assumed I did not know the facts. I know the facts and law of the case. Every lawyer on this forum thought Kyle should plea, which I told them it would be dumb. He would be doing 10 years listening to them.
 
I should add that I agreed with the jury’s decision.

WTH are you talking about? You literally just posted:

And I’m still not convinced that Kyle Rittenhouse should have been acquitted.

You can't "agree" with the jury's decision and ALSO not be convinced that he should have been acquitted. This illustrates the utter frustration some of us have with you. Your "opinion" changes with the wind. Here it did so within minutes.
You have to remember that Tim plays the race card more than anyone here, so he wants there to be more. He is assuming he probably committed a crime because he is hoping he did because he loves to talk about how racist x, y and z are. It's all so sad and blatant.
 
I guess this is as close we have to a thread on the need for criminal justice reform. What is wrong with these people? Just disgusting behavior from the BoP.

Judge Holds Federal Bureau of Prisons in Contempt for Allowing Man To Waste Away From Untreated Cancer


In a scathing opinion, a federal judge held the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) in civil contempt and levied sanctions against the agency last week for allowing an incarcerated man to waste away from untreated cancer, as well as for willfully ignoring and misleading the court.

U.S. District Judge Roy Dalton for the Middle District of Florida wrote that the BOP should be "deeply ashamed" of how it treated the now-deceased inmate Frederick Bardell. Its actions, he said, were "inconsistent with the moral values of a civilized society and unworthy of the Department of Justice of the United States of America."

Bardell was convicted in 2012 of downloading child pornography from a peer-to-peer file sharing website and sentenced to 151 months in federal prison. But he was not sentenced to death by medical neglect, and he was ostensibly protected by the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, as are all incarcerated people, no matter how heinous their crimes. That includes the right to basic health care behind bars.

Nevertheless, the BOP allowed a highly treatable colon cancer to progress until Bardell was terminally ill, all while insisting in court that there was no evidence he had cancer and that he was receiving appropriate, timely care.

In addition to holding the BOP and Kristi Zook, the warden of Seagoville Federal Correctional Institution, in contempt, Dalton ordered the BOP to pay Bardell's parents nearly $500 to reimburse them the airline ticket they purchased to get their dying son home. Dalton also requested that the attorney general and the Office of Inspector General for the Justice Department investigate the circumstances of Bardell's death.

"It takes a deeply rotten culture to make otherwise decent people act as these prison officials did," Kevin Ring, president of the criminal justice advocacy group FAMM, says. "The BOP is in desperate need of independent oversight."

Medical neglect in U.S. prisons and jails is an ongoing constitutional disaster. Earlier this year, federal judges also held the Arizona and Illinois prison systems in contempt for failing to address gruesome medical neglect within their walls. The infamous Rikers Island jail complex in New York City is also under threat of being put in receivership by a federal judge because of chronic corruption, violence, and preventable deaths.

Reason also reported in 2020 on several allegations of fatal medical neglect inside FCI Aliceville, a federal women's prison in Alabama.

Earlier this month, bipartisan legislation was introduced in both the House and Senate that would create an independent ombudsman to act as a BOP watchdog. Criminal justice advocacy groups say Bardell's case is exactly the sort of incident that makes such a position necessary.

Bardell filed a motion for compassionate release—a process through which terminally ill inmates can be afforded the comfort of returning home for their last days—in November of 2020, arguing that he likely had advanced colon cancer. An affidavit from a doctor accompanying his motion said he had "a high likelihood of having cancer of the colon with likely metastasis to the liver."

The BOP and federal prosecutors, in their opposition to Bardell's motion, argued that while Bardell had liver lesions, no one had determined his condition was life-threatening; they assured the judge that Bardell was receiving adequate medical treatment. Dalton denied Bardell's motion.

Bardell filed a second motion for compassionate release in February of 2021, this time with an affidavit from an oncologist. The oncologist wrote that a more than year-long delay in getting Bardell a colonoscopy after he first noticed rectal bleeding "allowed this tumor to progress from a stage III with an average cure rate of 71 percent in November 2019 to a stage IV disease in September 2020."

That delay, the doctor stated, would, "more likely than not, cost Mr. Bardell his life in a matter of weeks to months."

The government again opposed Bardell's motion, arguing, as Dalton summarized it in his opinion, "that it was not even definitive that Mr. Bardell had cancer—let alone terminal cancer."

This time, a disgusted Judge Dalton ordered the BOP to free Bardella as soon as the U.S. Probation Office crafted a proper release plan for him. But the Bureau of Prisons defied Dalton's order and instead immediately released Bardell. The prison directed Bardell's parents to pay nearly $500 for an airline ticket to fly their dying son back home on a commercial flight.

Although he had to be pushed out of prison in a wheelchair, a BOP van dropped Bardell off on a curb outside the Dallas/Fort Worth airport without a wheelchair and left him there. Bardell was weak, as well as bleeding and soiling himself, but he managed to navigate the airports, layovers, and connecting flights through the help of good Samaritans. When he arrived back in Florida to meet his parents, "his father had to take off his own shirt and put it on the seat of [Bardell's lawyer's] car to absorb the blood and feces," Dalton's opinion says.

Bardell died in the hospital nine days later. Pictures accompanying Dalton's order show Bardell severely emaciated.

Dalton's opinion is worth quoting at length:

While the sanctions imposed are remedial in nature and restricted by law, the Court admonishes the BOP and Warden Zook for their blatant violation of a Court Order and sheer disregard for human dignity. The BOP as an institution and Warden Zook as an individual should be deeply ashamed of the circumstances surrounding the last stages of Mr. Bardell's incarceration and indeed his life. No individual who is incarcerated by order of the Court should be stripped of his right to simple human dignity as a consequence. The purposes of incarceration, which include rehabilitation, deterrence, and punishment, do not include depriving a human being of the fundamental right to a life with some semblance of dignity. The treatment Mr. Bardell received in the last days of his life is inconsistent with the moral values of a civilized society and unworthy of the Department of Justice of the United States of America….
The Court is hopeful that in some small way, these proceedings will illuminate the BOP's arrogant—and wholly mistaken—notion that it is beyond reproach and the reach of the Court. It is not. If any institution should embody respect for the Rule of Law, it is an agency that operates under the aegis of the Department of Justice. This Court will do everything in its power to ensure that the BOP is held to account for its demonstrated contempt for the safety and dignity of the human lives in its care.
The BOP did not respond to a request for comment.
 
San Antonio police officer fired after shooting teenager in McDonald's parking lot
https://abcnews.go.com/US/san-antonio-police-fired-shooting-17-year-mcdonalds/story?id=91249594
The officer has been arrested and charged with aggravated assault
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-...u-shooting-mcdonalds-parking-lot-san-antonio/

Looked more like attempted murder to me.
I can't disagree with this. Hopefully the kid survives w/out lifelong physical/mental problems. From what I understand he's still in the hospital.

This is outrageous beyond belief. The cop should be doing significant time for this.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top