Police abuse power, again

[DanteGabriel]

BR,

Link please. That'a certainly not the story told in the article I found.

Scot, he's saying that his hypothetical scenario is now more likely because of the events in your article.

[polishgenius]

BR,

Link please. That'a certainly not the story told in the article I found.

You're missing his point, albeit he is misunderstanding how things would actually work.

@BR: if the police actually have an emergency call they're responding to, they'll know about it and won't just fuck off because the person at the door tells them to.

[KiDisaster]

Could be a prank call though. I don't know if you guys have heard of "swatting" (prank 911 calls claiming to be someone else and claiming to have a bomb or other similar things so that the SWAT team raids their house) but it's becoming more and more common unfortunately.

Vice did a story on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ziLjOPCQwg

Gotta love "pranks" that cost 10s of thousands in tax dollars and could result in an innocent person getting killed by a SWAT team. People have started doing it to Twitch streamers quite a bit so the raids get broadcast live to thousands of people. Fucking morons.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

BR,

Sorry, I was missing your point.

[Summah]

How is police abusing power news? They do it every day.

Yeah and if they wanted to search my property, it would depend on specific circumstances, but I probably wouldn't say no because I don't want get beat up by a cop or arrested for some bs thing I didn't do.

[Fiddler]

Could be a prank call though. I don't know if you guys have heard of "swatting" (prank 911 calls claiming to be someone else and claiming to have a bomb or other similar things so that the SWAT team raids their house) but it's becoming more and more common unfortunately.

Vice did a story on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ziLjOPCQwg

Gotta love "pranks" that cost 10s of thousands in tax dollars and could result in an innocent person getting killed by a SWAT team. People have started doing it to Twitch streamers quite a bit so the raids get broadcast live to thousands of people. Fucking morons.

I've heard someone on youtube that I occasional watch having this done to him. He has actually had to get in contact with the local Police and explain that morons are just trying to get him in trouble and I believe he has a way of identifing himself if he ever has to call.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

SWATing could be done stratigically by someone who wants SWAT teams out of position when they plan real violence.

[BloodRider]

You're missing his point, albeit he is misunderstanding how things would actually work.

@BR: if the police actually have an emergency call they're responding to, they'll know about it and won't just fuck off because the person at the door tells them to.

Yup. This is also a possibility. Now the person at the door is at real risk of getting shot or arrested for obstruction of justice.

[Jaxom 1974]

The article indicates that the officer in this case claims this was a common practice, though higher-ups denied it was policy. In any case I don't see where Scot is painting over broadly, all he's said is that this is another example of police abusing power, which seems unquestionable.

I interpreted the article as the office in question claiming it was a standard practice to cover his own ass. Until evidence to the contrary is shown, it's a broadly painted picture.

Everyone knows that there is abuse of police power. Along with every other group that had authority. It's not news. Sometimes I wonder if the focus on it doesn't make things worse.

[Trebla]

No, I don't think focusing on it makes it worse. There needs to be a focus on it because of things like this. By now most have seen the horrific video of the CHP officer beating the homeless woman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV7lO_1kWfo

Here's an interview of the man who took the video. http://www.eurweb.com/2014/07/chp-trying-to-discredit-man-who-recorded-officer-beating-black-woman-listen/

1. On what Diaz felt as he was recording the incident.

“Like this is really happening. I’m really watching this officer really just plunge as hard as he can into this woman on the ground.”

“You can tell this was beyond the call of duty,” Diaz explained. “This was clearly excessive. He–this wasn’t just, again, soft hits. You clearly see him cocking back his hand and his arms and really punching down with force. I mean, there’s no, there’s no bias in this. There’s no conspiracy in this. What was on the tape was what really happened. What you see is what happened. That force happened. We need to stop rationalizing this.”

2. On why Diaz didn’t give the video to the police right away.

“Giving it to authorities, we don’t do that here. We don’t do that in L.A., to give it to authorities. Those were the authorities.”

“It’s funny because people say why didn’t you call the cops. That was the cops! And everyone’s a tough guy, they go oh– you should have intervened. Like yeah, so the other guy–so the other cop that comes in at the later end, so he can shoot me? Like c’mon, people need to be realistic.”

3. On the CHP trying to discredit him.

“The CHP has come to my house to take statements. So they have questioned me. They’ve tried to discredit me and they’ve tried to poke holes in my story. So that’s happened. And they are one of the people that have questioned why I didn’t help out and why I didn’t call 911 and why I didn’t stick around to assist her into the hospital if I felt so concerned. They tried to poke holes at me to discredit me for sure.

[Sturn]

The officer claimed that his superiors allow such unlawful entries under a department policy in cases where domestic violence is alleged, recalled Morgan Canady, the defendants lawyer.

So where is the policy? Policies are written or at least should be. This is just a defense attorney and/or defendant reaching for straws when he has nothing else as a defense. They are trying to draw a connection between lying about a 911 call to look for drugs with an actual 911 call over a DV dispute and the guy at the door refuses entry to check welfare on all inside. Police do enter without consent under the second circumstances. It has nothing to do with the first.

I'm no lawyer either, but gaining consent by illegal means should make that consent null and void.

Yep.

Really? So someone under the influence can't give consent?

In that case, pretty much everyone I know is a rape victim.

I've seen a person go to prison for exactly this. There were some other facts of the case which made it a heinous act and not just a drunken sexual encounter. But, the laws as written in some states do allow for drunken people to lose their ability to give consent. So yes, the letter of these laws are being violated quite often every weekend. In the case I had knowledge of, the defendant was also drunk. In the case I had knowledge of, justice was actually done in my opinion without giving the details. But, the law does have openings for extreme abuse by police or DA's without common sense or a grudge against a possible defendant. A couple that goes to a bar, has enough drinks to be .08, gets a cab, goes home and has sex, have technically by the letter of some laws, raped each other.

On topic, I'm actually surprised at the judge given that cops will often lie to get people to admit or consent.

Two different things. Lying to get consent or lying to get Miranda signed away (not currently an issue anymore) was never permissable. But telling Bobby that his friend Joe already told you all about the crime they committed to get Bobby to spill the beans has been and still is permissable.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sturn,

I will always believe that commiting fraud to gain a confession shoud be illegal.

[The Mance]

Yeah, I don't understand why police feel as though people should be honest and forthcomming with them when they are under no such constrictions. What? I'm not a suspect? You just want to ask a few questions? Fuck off, I want a lawyer.

[KiDisaster]

But Mance, lawyering up makes you look guilty :rolleyes:

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I hate the phrase "lawyering up". It implies there is something wrong with getting an attorney.

[Sturn]

Sturn,

I will always believe that commiting fraud to gain a confession shoud be illegal.

Supreme Court doesn't think so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazier_v._Cupp

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sturn,

I think they are wrong and always will.

[KiDisaster]

I hate the phrase "lawyering up". It implies there is something wrong with getting an attorney.

Which is exactly what the police want you to think. Easier to fuck with someone who doesn't have an attorney present.

[awesome possum]

"Am I being detained? Am I free to go?"

The only two sentences that you should speak if you ever find yourself being harassed/questioned by a cop for no reason. You can add in there, "Am I legally obliged to answer/show ID/whatever?" for fun. Having your phone camera turned on also helps, as it forces (most) cops to act like human beings. Just be aware of if you live in a state where you must inform someone you are videotaping them.

[MerenthaClone]

"Am I being detained? Am I free to go?"

The only two sentences that you should speak if you ever find yourself being harassed/questioned by a cop for no reason. You can add in there, "Am I legally obliged to answer/show ID/whatever?" for fun. Having your phone camera turned on also helps, as it forces (most) cops to act like human beings. Just be aware of if you live in a state where you must inform someone you are videotaping them.

Great. What happens when they just refuse to answer? There are no "one trick phrase to get you out of harassment! Cops hate it!" words. They can just ignore your question, coincidentally keeping you there. Because when you leave, you were being detained, and now you're resisting. Why do people keep thinking that officers who already flout the law will suddenly be bound by it when you invoke your magic words at them?

Yes, there are things you should do. Saying nothing besides the above phrase and the follow-up "I'm would like to speak to an attorney" are good ideas. But they're individual answers, not societal ones, and a person taking the smart route with an officer is still going to have significant problems.