General Police Abuse Thread

[Dominus Atheos]

Original local source

http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/bs ... ed-8072862

[Crazedwraith]

Latest threatening action which requires immediate deadly force to protect police officers:

Sitting and eating your dinner.

Page not found?

Missing the l of html: working link

[Raw Shark]

Yeah, I had a cop pull his gun and point it at me because I was eating an apple one time. Leave the crystal meth in the evidence room, guys.

[RogueIce]

Original local source

http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/bs ... ed-8072862

Thanks. I'm going to wait for more: the family says he was sitting, the police say he was standing. Theoretically, the autopsy should be able to determine which of those mutually exclusive states was the case. With that determined, I'd feel more comfortable in trying to form an opinion as to which version of events is more likely.

[Raw Shark]

IMHO, if you put a bullet in a man who is standing with a chicken wing in his hand and not attacking you, you're still a dick.

[Borgholio]

IMHO, if you put a bullet in a man who is standing with a chicken wing in his hand and not attacking you, you're still a dick.

I dunno man...some chicken wings are worth it...

[Flagg]

Original local source

http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/news/bs ... ed-8072862

Thanks. I'm going to wait for more: the family says he was sitting, the police say he was standing. Theoretically, the autopsy should be able to determine which of those mutually exclusive states was the case. With that determined, I'd feel more comfortable in trying to form an opinion as to which version of events is more likely.

Assuming the ME isn't a corrupt official and doesn't use passive language as to the posture of the person when shot or just leave that part blank.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Latest threatening action which requires immediate deadly force to protect police officers:

Sitting and eating your dinner.

The other side of this story is that the decedent pulled a knife on his family members and then later pulled a knife on the police when they tried to speak with him.

By the way from the article that DA linked;

...this is probably why your article vanished, Vendetta...

Neighbors who were present at the time of the shooting say the man was shot in the back six times.

Frazier was black. His family says the deputies who responded to the call were white

Now from the Broward Sheriff's Office facebook page posted on 9/12 @ 3:43pm

While we await the investigation to publicly reveal the full facts of this case, it is irresponsible for some to report unverified and unattributed misinformation that could create tension between deputies and the community. FACT: Two deputies fired their weapons -- one was black, one was white. FACT: Mr. Frazier was facing the two deputies when the shots were fired. We ask the community's continued patience and trust while FDLE investigates and seeks to find the truth.

[Lost Soal]

Police Accidentally Record Themselves Conspiring to Fabricate Criminal Charges Against Protester

UCLA

The ACLU of Connecticut is suing state police for fabricating retaliatory criminal charges against a protester after troopers were recorded discussing how to trump up charges against him. In what seems like an unlikely stroke of cosmic karma, the recording came about after a camera belonging to the protester, Michael Picard, was illegally seized by a trooper who didn’t know that it was recording and carried it back to his patrol car, where it then captured the troopers’ plotting.

“Let’s give him something,” one trooper declared. Another suggested, “we can hit him with creating a public disturbance.” “Gotta cover our ass,” remarked a third.

ACLU affiliates around the country have done a lot of cases defending the right to record in public places, but this case (press release, complaint) is particularly striking. I spoke to ACLU of Connecticut Legal Director Dan Barrett, and he told me about how the incident came about:

Our client is a guy who is very concerned with privacy, and who protests DUI checkpoints around the capital region here in Hartford, Connecticut. He feels they’re both unconstitutional and a waste of money. He has done public records investigations, for example, and recently found that for every two man hours put into a check point, it yields just one minor traffic citation—almost always for defective equipment. He was well known to the police, who also knew that he is a peaceful privacy and open-carry gun rights activist.

So Michael was out on Sept. 11, 2015 in West Hartford. He shows up, has a big sign that says “cops ahead, remain silent.” It’s handwritten—this is not threatening stuff. He stood on a small triangular traffic island. He was standing there for an hour, hour and a half without any problems. Then, the state police officers who were working the checkpoint come over to Michael, and the first thing they do is slap the camera out of his hand so it hits the ground. He thinks it’s broken.

It was really brazen. There’s another video showing that the first thing the state trooper does is walk up and with his open hand slap the camera down to the ground. He doesn’t even say anything like “put that down,” or “please lower your camera.” He just slaps it to the ground. Then he interacts with Michael as if nothing happened, as if, “I’m just allowed to do that, and I don’t even have to tell you why I just broke your camera.” It’s an amazing level of hostility.

The troopers search Michael, and theatrically announce that he has a gun—which they knew he had, and which he was carrying legally under Connecticut’s open carry law. So they take his gun, and they go run his pistol permit. As they’re doing that, Michael picks the camera up off the pavement—it’s a nice SLR that can also record video. He picks it up and tries to turn it on as one of the cops walks back over, and that’s where the video starts. The cop announces that “taking my picture is illegal.” Michael debates with him a little because he’s very knowledgeable about the law and the First Amendment, and the end result is that the trooper snatches the camera, walks away, and puts it on top of the cruiser, without realizing that it is working and is recording video.


This is the point at which the troopers’ accidental self-surveillance begins. Barrett continues:

So we get the three troopers at the cruiser talking about what to do. Michael’s permit comes back as valid, they say “oh crap,” and one of the troopers says “we gotta punch a number on this guy,” which means open an investigation in the police database. And he says “we really gotta cover our asses.” And then they have a very long discussion about what to charge Michael with—none of which appear to have any basis in fact. This plays out over eight minutes. They talk about “we could do this, we could do this, we could do this….”

In Connecticut, police officers have clear requirements under the law to intervene and stop or prevent constitutional violations when they see them. But at no time did any of the three officers pipe up and say, “why don’t we just give him his camera back and let him go.”

In the end they decide on two criminal infractions: “reckless use of a highway by a pedestrian,” and “creating a public disturbance.” They have a chilling discussion on how to support the public disturbance charge, and the top-level supervisor explains to the other two, “what we say is that multiple motorists stopped to complain about a guy waving a gun around, but none of them wanted to stop and make a statement.” In other words, what sounds like a fairy tale.

The tickets they gave him started a criminal prosecution in the Connecticut superior court. Eventually the state dismissed first one then the other count, though it took a whole year for him to disentangle himself from the criminal justice system.

Meanwhile, Michael filed a complaint with the state police. They claimed they couldn’t do their internal investigation without interviewing Michael. They kept calling Michael directly—and they did that even though there were criminal charges pending and Michael had a criminal defense lawyer. His lawyer kept calling them and saying “don’t you ever call my client again, you have to talk to me.” But they continued to try and get Michael to come in and be interviewed without his lawyer, claiming that they couldn’t do the investigation unless Michael gave a statement. It was unbelievable—this is an interaction that was recorded from start to finish on high-quality digital video. A year later there has been zero movement on the internal affairs investigation as far as anyone knows, which just shows that police and prosecutors in Connecticut should not be in charge of policing themselves.

As a result of the police’s clear inability to police themselves, the only avenue left for Picard and the ACLU of Connecticut is a lawsuit. That lawsuit is based on three claims, as Barrett laid out for me:

The first claim is the violation of Michael’s right to record—the efforts to prevent Michael from recording what was happening. That includes the fact that they swatted his camera and attempted to break it, and took it away, and they also tried to block him from taking photos of the license plates on the police cruiser using his cell phone after his camera was taken.

The second count is a Fourth Amendment claim: the seizure of Michael’s camera without probable cause to believe that it contained evidence of a crime, or a warrant for its seizure. The police cannot grab people’s property and confiscate it on a whim.

The third is a First Amendment retaliation claim. Whether it was because he was carrying a sign criticizing the police, because he was recording the police, because they just didn’t like him, or all of the above, it really appears from the evidence that they completely manufactured criminal charges against Michael.

If Michael had been just jotting down license plate numbers with a pen and pad and the troopers had taken it, or slapped the pen out of his hand saying “you’re not allowed to write down our license plate numbers,” everyone would recognize how ridiculous the situation was. And if the defendants had been any other kind of state or local employee—if they had been a road crew, and Michael had wanted to film them paving, and they had forced him to stop recording, their actions wouldn’t get any serious consideration by a court. Nothing about the defendants here being police makes their actions any more defensible. All Michael was doing was recording state employees doing their jobs on a public street.

The really interesting thing about this case is not just that the state troopers were so openly hostile to being recorded, or to anyone seeing what they were up to, but also that they appear to have had a very frank discussion inside the cruiser about how to punish somebody who was protesting them.

It’s surprising that we are still regularly hearing about incidents in which police are not respecting the constitutional right to record in public. But to hear police officers casually discussing the fabrication of criminal charges to retaliate against a protester is even more shocking. As Barrett put it to me, “It’s one of those things that on your darker days you may think happens all the time, but you never really thought there’d be a video recording of.”

Video in question is at the link, I can't seem to embed it.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Good. Let the trash take itself out.

[Flagg]

Good. Let the trash take itself out.

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

[Elheru Aran]

Good. Let the trash take itself out.

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

"Obviously these three cops were rotten from the start and we're ashamed that these have sullied the good name of the police. We stand with the department and hope that the actions of these individuals are properly punished."

Not much twisting needed there. Disassociate yourself from them, set them up as individual troublemakers, act as though every other officer is pure as driven snow and it's just these three poisoning the well...

[Flagg]

Good. Let the trash take itself out.

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

"Obviously these three cops were rotten from the start and we're ashamed that these have sullied the good name of the police. We stand with the department and hope that the actions of these individuals are properly punished."

Not much twisting needed there. Disassociate yourself from them, set them up as individual troublemakers, act as though every other officer is pure as driven snow and it's just these three poisoning the well...

Yeah, I've never heard of police union reps ever doing that. Though obviously me not hearing about it isn't a refutation. But they've defended bigger scum from worse.

[Elheru Aran]

Probably. I suspect if it's this cut and dried, they won't even bother trying and just release some vague blanket statement.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Good. Let the trash take itself out.

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

"Obviously these three cops were rotten from the start and we're ashamed that these have sullied the good name of the police. We stand with the department and hope that the actions of these individuals are properly punished."

Not much twisting needed there. Disassociate yourself from them, set them up as individual troublemakers, act as though every other officer is pure as driven snow and it's just these three poisoning the well...

The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Donald Trump, do you think police unions have anything vaguely resembling scruples? That there haven't been mass protest resignations from cops that voted against endorsing an authoritarian asshole that encourages violence against dissenters says something. There's a dangerously large number of cops that despise the very notion of being questioned, that believe that condemning one cop is condemnation of every cop.

I will personally be shocked if the police union in this case condemns the actions in even the slightest. If they can't find a good spin to put on it, they'll make only the vaguest of comments. Probably some shit about allegations like this must be investigated, blah dee blah, such good behavior maybe they were having a bad day. Or even try and spin it as saying that the officers were just trying to figure out what the appropriate charges were and this is all being blatantly misinterpreted. Do not question our authoritah.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, while I'm sure their are some good cops, the very fact that police around the country are lining up to back the candidate who's practically running on authoritarianism and contempt for the Constitution says a lot about how corrupt the profession is overall.

Maybe they're looking forward to their nice cushy jobs in the new Administration's secret police, rounding up Muslims, liberals, immigrants, and Latinos.

[Flagg]

Oh for fucks sake. Napoleon I agree with, but yet again TRR has again gone a bridge too far. While I'm sure there are police who would gladly join an American Ghestapo (as well as numerous people in other professions), that's a far fucking cry from your average beat cop doing the same.

[The Romulan Republic]

That last bit was intended to some extent as deliberate hyperbole/just me being snide. Albeit to make a genuine point about where this sort of bullshit is potentially heading.

No, most cops probably aren't dreaming of joining the Ghestapo, but the pervasive acceptance of authoritarianism and un-Constitutional acts creates a climate in which ordinary people will be willing to do terrible things, or at least look the other way and be quietly complicit in their colleagues' crimes. Its cliche perhaps, but true, that most people in any authoritarian state don't start out as monsters. That's arguably the most hideous thing about tyranny- that ordinary people are willingly complicit in it.

[Flagg]

That last bit was intended to some extent as deliberate hyperbole/just me being snide. Albeit to make a genuine point about where this sort of bullshit is potentially heading.

I didn't get that, but being guilty of using hyperbole that others took literally happens to me on a regular basis I'm more than willing to take your word for it.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Rule 0 of Internet Hyperbole: You must always indicate you are engaging in hyperbole, lest people take you literally.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

I think their job has changed from what it was meant to be and that change isn't for the better. It's one thing to protect officers during a controversy when you have two sides to a story and not all the facts are known. It's quite another to protect them when they have conspired to commit a crime and were stupid enough to get caught on their own camera. If they do end up protecting them I would like to ask them if they'd protect an officer caught on camera committing armed robbery.

The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Donald Trump, do you think police unions have anything vaguely resembling scruples? That there haven't been mass protest resignations from cops that voted against endorsing an authoritarian asshole that encourages violence against dissenters says something. There's a dangerously large number of cops that despise the very notion of being questioned, that believe that condemning one cop is condemnation of every cop.

There haven't been mass protest resignations because the legal protection plan is the primary reason why many cops joined the FOP. That being said I wonder if the FOP is aware of how much damage it did to the reputation of police in this country by endorsing that piece of shit.

I will personally be shocked if the police union in this case condemns the actions in even the slightest. If they can't find a good spin to put on it, they'll make only the vaguest of comments. Probably some shit about allegations like this must be investigated, blah dee blah, such good behavior maybe they were having a bad day. Or even try and spin it as saying that the officers were just trying to figure out what the appropriate charges were and this is all being blatantly misinterpreted. Do not question our authoritah.

Police unions act more and more like lawyers every day.

[Lost Soal]

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

I think their job has changed from what it was meant to be and that change isn't for the better. It's one thing to protect officers during a controversy when you have two sides to a story and not all the facts are known. It's quite another to protect them when they have conspired to commit a crime and were stupid enough to get caught on their own camera. If they do end up protecting them I would like to ask them if they'd protect an officer caught on camera committing armed robbery.

Considering they seized that camera with no legal justification, they damn well know its not illegal to film them, I'd say they just did commit armed robbery.

[Flagg]

I just wonder how the Police Union will spin it. Ive seen cases where they contort themselves like they are in a pro twister competition with a billion dollar prize where everyone is double jointed. Granted it's their job, but still.

I think their job has changed from what it was meant to be and that change isn't for the better. It's one thing to protect officers during a controversy when you have two sides to a story and not all the facts are known. It's quite another to protect them when they have conspired to commit a crime and were stupid enough to get caught on their own camera. If they do end up protecting them I would like to ask them if they'd protect an officer caught on camera committing armed robbery.

2 good, honest cops in 1 day!

It's off topic, but I was in a big box store with police security today and my back was really hurting and while my mom was still shopping I took the keys and went into the parking lot to get to the rental to sit down when after stumbling around because I was in so much pain I fell to my knees and hands. Then a cop comes over and helps me up. After I noticed him surreptitiously smelling my breath for alcohol he asked if I'd taken any narcotics and I told him just my chronic pain meds, which never have this reaction, it was my back really hurting and giving out, he still seemed a bit suspicious and escorted me to my rental SUV after asking if I was planning on driving (the answer was a definite "no") and after sitting in the passenger seat for awhile he just asked if I needed an ambulance, I said I think I'll be OK, he then said have a nice day, I thanked him profusely with the expected "sir" being used through the whole exchange and not long after my mom came out and we left with me forgetting to get his name.

When bad shit is going down with police in other places you forget there are truly good cops out there (I think I had 10 years on this guy ) and with KS being truly honest about some Police Unions it's nice to see.

[General Zod]

I haven't shitposted in awhile so . . .

Atlanta Officer murders breastfeeding mother.

In a continuation of the ongoing police scandals rocking the country, 28-year-old Latoya Smith has been pronounced dead following an incident this afternoon in Atlanta, according to multiple local media outlets. This closely follows the recent shooting deaths of Tulsa resident Terence Crutcher and Charlotte resident Keith Lamont Scott which have thrown the nation into turmoil resulting in violent demonstrations.

According to eyewitness accounts, Latoya was sitting on a bench in the neighborhood of Marietta Street (recently named one of America’s 25 most dangerous neighborhoods) waiting for the bus when her infant child began crying insistently. Knowing that her baby was hungry Ms. Smith began to breastfeed her daughter, Layla. She was then approached by a police officer, later identified as Michael Eaton, who requested that she stop feeding the baby in public as it was “indecent”. Ms. Smith refused to comply with the directive and told Officer Eaton that she wasn’t doing anything illegal. Officer Eaton again insisted that she stop and threatened to arrest her for indecent exposure. Ms. Smith calmly responded to the Officer that he could not arrest her because breastfeeding in public wasn’t against the law.

“He got so mad at her”, said Tyrone Webb, who witnessed the unfortunate altercation. “He started yelling at her, saying that he was the police, and that she didn’t know s**t about what was against the law. He got all red in the face, pointing his finger right at her nose. She just sat there and kept feeding the baby calm as could be, being real polite and reasonable. Someone else tried to chime in and tell him he was wrong and he told the lady to shut up and mind her business.”






As the argument transpired the bus approached and Ms. Smith stood up and moved Layla to her other arm, momentarily exposing her whole breast to the Officer and other onlookers. Ms Smith then clipped her breastfeeding bra shut and went to get on the bus with her baby.
Sandra Parker, another witness to the incident, described what followed next: “He screamed at her to stop and told her that she was under arrest. When she ignored him and kept walking toward the bus he grabbed her by the back collar of her shirt and violently yanked her backwards. The poor baby just toppled out of her hands. She hit the ground and the poor little thing just started bleeding from her head. At that point, Latoya became extremely upset and the officer was clearly taken aback. She moved forward aggressively when he pulled out his gun and shot her twice, right there on the street. It was the most horrifying thing I’ve ever seen!”

Onlookers grabbed the injured baby and attempted to staunch the flow of blood from her split head. Officer Eaton is reported to have made the statement to the crowd that “it was an accident but you can’t resist arrest”. Layla was transported to Marietta Central Hospital.

Officer Eaton has been placed on paid leave pending a full investigation. The police department has issued a statement expressing their concern regarding this “unfortunate” event and states that all citizens must comply with orders to submit to arrest peacefully so that accidental injuries can be avoided.

Local community leader and Smith family friend Harold Jackson has called for the arrest of Officer Eaton on charges of murder, calling his actions a travesty of justice. The Smith family has not yet commented on the death of their daughter.

Of course this piece of shit is getting placed on administrative leave instead of being arrested like any other person would be.

[General Zod]

Looks like I got suckered in by a fake news site, meh. Feel free to delete.