Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Another killing at the hands of the Police


In The Zone

Recommended Posts

On 5/21/2021 at 12:56 PM, Summer Wheat said:

Stuff like that is why I pull over right away when I am stopped.  Leading police a high speed chase never seems to work out well.

Are we certain there was a high speed chase? The police also said he died instantly after crashing into a tree. We know now there was no crash with a tree and he didn't die as a result of it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/23/2021 at 9:03 AM, PinkydaPimp said:

Who drives around with their dead baby's ashes in an unmarked vial?  It is very sad that his daughter died of starvation and neglect.  After the police found the 80 grams of marijuana that he originally copped to,  I think it is reasonable for them to test the unmarked ashes before asking about the contents.  It is bogus for them to bluff in an attempt to get him to confess.  But once he and his father insisted they were dead baby ashes, the police returned them without further testing. What gives the civil lawsuit ($$) merit? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Navin Johnson said:

Video now surfacing of the Malcolm Jenkins shooting in Missouri on March 26

Makes the Floyd video look tame 

Malcolm Johnson. 
Interesting it was initially reported like this:  https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/missouri/articles/2021-03-26/kansas-city-officer-injured-suspect-killed-in-shootout

Quote

As the officers attempted to arrest the man, a fight ensued, the patrol said, and the man pulled a gun and shot one officer in the leg. The officer returned fire, killing the suspect, the patrol said.

https://news.yahoo.com/cell-phone-video-released-kansas-223200428.html

Now that it appears one of the cops shot the other cop accidentally, they are saying:

https://news.yahoo.com/cell-phone-video-released-kansas-223200428.html

Quote

“We have received videos from witnesses and community members for our review. We are closely analyzing this information.

 

Honestly, i cant tell from the video who shot who but it seems more logical based on the struggle that the officer did as opposed to the guy with like 6 people on him.  And the people recording seemed to indicate the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve heard many people joke about this.  And my comment was a joke about that.  The “we will see” was we will see if there is reform once animals are being killed by police at high rates.  Again a joke about a joke.  Sort of :unsure:  :crickets: 

42 minutes ago, djmich said:

Who makes that joke?  What do you mean by we will see?  Sorry if it was apparent from the article.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PinkydaPimp said:

I’ve heard many people joke about this.  And my comment was a joke about that.  The “we will see” was we will see if there is reform once animals are being killed by police at high rates.  Again a joke about a joke.  Sort of :unsure:  :crickets: 

 

You run in some interesting circles my friend 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PinkydaPimp said:

Malcolm Johnson. 
Interesting it was initially reported like this:  https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/missouri/articles/2021-03-26/kansas-city-officer-injured-suspect-killed-in-shootout

https://news.yahoo.com/cell-phone-video-released-kansas-223200428.html

Now that it appears one of the cops shot the other cop accidentally, they are saying:

https://news.yahoo.com/cell-phone-video-released-kansas-223200428.html

 

Honestly, i cant tell from the video who shot who but it seems more logical based on the struggle that the officer did as opposed to the guy with like 6 people on him.  And the people recording seemed to indicate the same.

 

Agree with the bolded...but if the cop shot first then she should be in jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, PinkydaPimp said:

I’ve heard many people joke about this.  And my comment was a joke about that.  The “we will see” was we will see if there is reform once animals are being killed by police at high rates.  Again a joke about a joke.  Sort of :unsure:  :crickets: 

 

I've never heard this 'joke'.  I have seen people on this forum say they would save their dog before a stranger.  Maybe I didn't correctly interpret what they meant by stranger?

From the article: "In Glen Burnie, Maryland, an officer investigating a robbery at a house shot and killed Vern, the family’s dog. The officer said Vern “confronted and attacked him,” but the jury did not believe him and awarded the family $1.26 million, the largest civil judgment in U.S. history for the death of a pet at the hands of police."

A large sum but much smaller than the compensation awarded when the police kill people, black and white.  Police excessively killing dogs seems to result from the same training and culture that allows them to excessively kill people.  All part of the same problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, PinkydaPimp said:

"To be clear, to suggest that dogs in some neighborhoods pose a greater deadly risk to police officer safety than dogs in wealthier and whiter neighborhoods simply does not add up."

They dismissed any potential argument about where cops are more likely to encounter powerful dogs with a trained aggressive temperament by saying "does not add up" but I didn't see them add up anything or supply any statistics.  They followed up with this line:

"Rather than a matter of vicious dogs residing in some areas more than in others, or a geography of “careless” pet owners, we argue that the geography of these dog killings reveals, once again, that police officers are more apt to pull the trigger in neighborhoods with high rates of poverty, particularly those with larger proportions of Black and brown residents."

One section that seemed to offer some interesting insight was this:

"In addition to the sheer numbers and geography of dog killings, our data also reveal that upon increased scrutiny of police use of force after the killing of Michael Brown and the subsequent Ferguson protests in 2014, police started shooting dogs but not people less. Before Ferguson, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department shot upward of 2.6 dogs every month. In the post-Ferguson era, that figure dropped to fewer than one dog per month. The same trend is reflected in the LAPD data, with dog shooting declining to 22 percent of all shootings, down from 33 percent in the pre-Ferguson era."

But they did not provide a link to the study, nor could I find it myself.  They also concluded the article with this absolute: "Notwithstanding the seemingly endless training that cops receive, the geography of dog shootings by police further reveals disproportionate police violence that can only be ameliorated through a concerted defunding effort."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Navin Johnson said:

Every cop present should be put in jail.

I agree that they should all be fired and if it can be proven that they lied in their reports then they should be facing jail time.  We can't trust that the investigation will be impartial, though.

Often times problems seem to begin with cops who are not fit enough to physically handle uncooperative suspects.  There were already 4 cops on top of the guy when the female cops showed up.  What motivated her to pull out her gun?  The first shot goes off while her gun appears to be pointed downwards towards another cop's legs.  Maybe she had a negligent discharge?  Then she unloads on the suspect.  

It seems impossible to me that the cops could manipulate the scene, ballistics, etc to fit their lie if they truly fired all those shots, but I've been amazed by their lies before so I can't rule anything out.  The police have destroyed any trust that a reasonable person would normally grant them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Caveman33 said:

"To be clear, to suggest that dogs in some neighborhoods pose a greater deadly risk to police officer safety than dogs in wealthier and whiter neighborhoods simply does not add up."

They dismissed any potential argument about where cops are more likely to encounter powerful dogs with a trained aggressive temperament by saying "does not add up" but I didn't see them add up anything or supply any statistics.  They followed up with this line:

"Rather than a matter of vicious dogs residing in some areas more than in others, or a geography of “careless” pet owners, we argue that the geography of these dog killings reveals, once again, that police officers are more apt to pull the trigger in neighborhoods with high rates of poverty, particularly those with larger proportions of Black and brown residents."

One section that seemed to offer some interesting insight was this:

"In addition to the sheer numbers and geography of dog killings, our data also reveal that upon increased scrutiny of police use of force after the killing of Michael Brown and the subsequent Ferguson protests in 2014, police started shooting dogs but not people less. Before Ferguson, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department shot upward of 2.6 dogs every month. In the post-Ferguson era, that figure dropped to fewer than one dog per month. The same trend is reflected in the LAPD data, with dog shooting declining to 22 percent of all shootings, down from 33 percent in the pre-Ferguson era."

But they did not provide a link to the study, nor could I find it myself.  They also concluded the article with this absolute: "Notwithstanding the seemingly endless training that cops receive, the geography of dog shootings by police further reveals disproportionate police violence that can only be ameliorated through a concerted defunding effort."

It certainly does add up considering Pitbulls and Rottweilers seem to be the dogs of choice for a lot of black people.  I'm not surprised there are more dog shootings in black neighborhoods.  This is ZERO proof of racism.  

https://thespun.com/nfl/nfc-east/dallas-cowboys/ezekiel-elliott-dogs-rottweiler-alleged-attack-lawsuit

 

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Caveman33 said:

I agree that they should all be fired and if it can be proven that they lied in their reports then they should be facing jail time.  We can't trust that the investigation will be impartial, though.

Often times problems seem to begin with cops who are not fit enough to physically handle uncooperative suspects.  There were already 4 cops on top of the guy when the female cops showed up.  What motivated her to pull out her gun?  The first shot goes off while her gun appears to be pointed downwards towards another cop's legs.  Maybe she had a negligent discharge?  Then she unloads on the suspect.  

It seems impossible to me that the cops could manipulate the scene, ballistics, etc to fit their lie if they truly fired all those shots, but I've been amazed by their lies before so I can't rule anything out.  The police have destroyed any trust that a reasonable person would normally grant them.

From what I have read, they double tapped him to the back of the head after the officer was hit with friendly fire.  You could argue this is first degree murder with every LEO present charged at best, as an accessory after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Navin Johnson said:

From what I have read, they double tapped him to the back of the head after the officer was hit with friendly fire.  You could argue this is first degree murder with every LEO present charged at best, as an accessory after the fact.

If the scenario you are describing is accurate then I agree with murder charges.  And I would be happy to see the other officers involved in the cover-up spending years or decades in prison.  Police need to be held to a higher standard, not lesser standard as we have allowed for so long.  Neither political party seems willing to make any meaningful change to how police misconduct is handled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Considering Pitbulls and Rottweilers seem to be the dogs of choice for a lot of black people, I'm not surprised there are more dog shootings in black neighborhoods.  This is ZERO proof of racism.  

https://thespun.com/nfl/nfc-east/dallas-cowboys/ezekiel-elliott-dogs-rottweiler-alleged-attack-lawsuit

 

I don't know the statistics but I believe I have encountered more aggressive dogs in poor neighborhoods.  That's not to say that some type of bias didn't factor into the decision making of some of the cops who shot dogs.  There are likely multiple factors that contribute to this end result.  But race baiting and declaring everything as motivated by racism only sows more division and racism, in my opinion.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Caveman33 said:

If the scenario you are describing is accurate then I agree with murder charges.  And I would be happy to see the other officers involved in the cover-up spending years or decades in prison.  Police need to be held to a higher standard, not lesser standard as we have allowed for so long.  Neither political party seems willing to make any meaningful change to how police misconduct is handled.

They need to be held to a higher standard, agree.  The police also needs the city to have their backs and not cave in to public pressure.  This is happening far too much now.

Edited by FairWarning
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Caveman33 said:

But they did not provide a link to the study, nor could I find it myself.  They also concluded the article with this absolute: "Notwithstanding the seemingly endless training that cops receive, the geography of dog shootings by police further reveals disproportionate police violence that can only be ameliorated through a concerted defunding effort."

lol oof

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, John123 said:

That's ridiculous.  He should be fired.  Dude has serious judgment issues and clearly shouldn't be enforcing the law.

Aside from that, when we can always find anecdotes on either side, the whole PIT maneuver, particularly for really any traffic stop barring a high speed chase where other lives are imminently in danger, should not be used, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, John123 said:

That's ridiculous.  He should be fired.  Dude has serious judgment issues and clearly shouldn't be enforcing the law.

I'll go further and argue that the officer should be prosecuted for reckless endangerment, or whatever the appropriate charge would be if a civilian pulled something like this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gianmarco said:

Perfect example of a situation where qualified immunity shouldn't apply.  Why should taxpayers be paying to settle the inevitable lawsuit?

I think everyone agrees there are some bad apples.  There is significant disagreement about how many bad apples there are, and whether the good apples do enough to weed out the bad ones.  I would propose a solution such that police pension funds pick up the tab for settled or successful lawsuits due to abuse of authority, rather than taxpayers.  I bet we'd see the good apples start rooting out the bad ones real fast.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gianmarco said:

Aside from that, when we can always find anecdotes on either side, the whole PIT maneuver, particularly for really any traffic stop barring a high speed chase where other lives are imminently in danger, should not be used, IMO. 

I think that's the general rule - you can only pit someone when they are endangering other lives.  This cop should be fired and criminally prosecuted, without question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/10/2021 at 5:30 PM, PinkydaPimp said:

What’s worse about this the cop talked like he does this all the time.  Like it’s the normal process.  This is an example where maybe you look at his leadership.  Is this trained?  Are they encouraged to do this? 

Also the pool of future officers is shallow, so departments are reaching more (like everyone else)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jury finds former SLMPD officer Dustin Boone guilty for role in assault on undercover detective

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46403547

 

Full group chat is amazing and likely the only reason they were convicted: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1115986/download

Quote

The three police officers exchanged text messages discussing attacking protesters, the indictment said.

"It's gonna be a lot of fun beating the hell out of these [expletive] once the sun goes down and nobody can tell us apart!!!!" one text from Mr Boone read.

"Remember were are [sic] in south city. They support us but also cameras. So make sure you have an old white dude as a witness," read another from Mr Hays.

Mr Boone, Mr Hays and Mr Myers allegedly threw the undercover officer to the ground, kicked him and beat him despite the fact he was "compliant and not posing a physical threat to anyone", the indictment said.

They later allegedly tried to cover up the incident by seeking to influence witnesses and contacting Mr Hall directly to dissuade him from pressing charges.

Ms Colletta, who was in a romantic relationship with Mr Hays, lied about knowing the victim and knowing about the attack, the indictment says. Mr Myers is also accused of intentionally destroying Mr Hall's cellphone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
27 minutes ago, PinkydaPimp said:

1.  "off color joke?"

2.  HTF does a police chief not realize there are cameras in the station.   (I guess maybe he didn't care since it was just a joke?) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

1.  "off color joke?"

2.  HTF does a police chief not realize there are cameras in the station.   (I guess maybe he didn't care since it was just a joke?) 

My question is how many incidents and cases and practices and policies have been impacted by this guy over the years?

 

and yes he must not be very smart to not know there were cameras but then again when you have been getting away with anything you wish for so long and basically control the law and how it’s used sometimes you just do it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2021 at 1:54 AM, PinkydaPimp said:

My question is how many incidents and cases and practices and policies have been impacted by this guy over the years?

 

and yes he must not be very smart to not know there were cameras but then again when you have been getting away with anything you wish for so long and basically control the law and how it’s used sometimes you just do it. 

Joke?   Sounds like he might be better as a gas station cashier.   

Police chief nope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...