That’s just messed up on many levels.
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.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.
Interesting, thanks for posting.
The one dude just casually standing and waltzing around. Interesting approach.
Do you think these tactics would work in Chicago? No problem that they wortk in Charlotte as we have to start somewhere.
what makes you think they work in charlotte?Do you think these tactics would work in Chicago? No problem that they wortk in Charlotte as we have to start somewhere.
From the article
The company in August also pulled down shirts with the phrase “Joe and Hoe” that disparaged the then-Vice Presidential nominee Kamala Harris.
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?
Malcolm Johnson.Video now surfacing of the Malcolm Jenkins shooting in Missouri on March 26
Makes the Floyd video look tame
https://news.yahoo.com/cell-phone-video-released-kansas-223200428.htmlAs 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.
“We have received videos from witnesses and community members for our review. We are closely analyzing this information.
Who makes that joke? What do you mean by we will see? Sorry if it was apparent from the article.I found this sad and interesting:
DOJ: Police Shooting Family Dogs has Become ‘Epidemic’ | Criminal Legal News
People joke about some folks caring more about dogs than black people. guess we will see huh
article is 3 years old, is this still an epidemic?I found this sad and interesting:
DOJ: Police Shooting Family Dogs has Become ‘Epidemic’ | Criminal Legal News
People joke about some folks caring more about dogs than black people. guess we will see huh
Who makes that joke? What do you mean by we will see? Sorry if it was apparent from the article.
"In addition to the fact that no police officer has ever been killed by a dog while in the line of duty" from the article, and thanks for posting that. they shouldn't being shooting dogs.
You run in some interesting circles my friendI’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 :crickets:
Agree with the bolded...but if the cop shot first then she should be in jail.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.
Every cop present should be put in jail.Agree with the bolded...but if the cop shot first then she should be in jail.
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?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 :crickets:
"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."
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.Every cop present should be put in jail.
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."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."
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.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.
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.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.
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.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
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.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.
lol oofBut 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."
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.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.That's ridiculous. He should be fired. Dude has serious judgment issues and clearly shouldn't be enforcing the law.
Perfect example of a situation where qualified immunity shouldn't apply. Why should taxpayers be paying to settle the inevitable lawsuit?
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.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.
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)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?
Not encouraged unless you are angling for some great sex.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?
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.
WTF
1. "off color joke?"
My question is how many incidents and cases and practices and policies have been impacted by this guy over the years?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?)
Joke? Sounds like he might be better as a gas station cashier.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.
was anyone killed by the police?
Well looks like police are on the hate crime bandwagon now. This is not the first one.