More black man & dog shootings by police

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Dominus Atheos
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3904
Joined: 2005-09-15 09:41pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Dominus Atheos »

http://www.pnj.com/article/20130730/NEW ... g-man-yard
Escambia County Sheriff David Morgan called the shooting by two deputies of an unarmed 60-year-old man outside a car in his own driveway early Saturday “a tragedy” and said it’s reasonable to ask how the call went “so horribly bad.”

Morgan said that one major reason was that Roy Middleton, whom he referred to as a suspect and a victim, did not immediately comply with officers’ instructions to put up his hands as they approached.

“If we rolled on the scene and Mr. Middleton had been compliant and Mr. Middleton had followed all directions of the law enforcement officers, I can give you with a 99.9 percent of assurance that this shooting would not have occurred,” the sheriff said. “But when an individual, a suspect, or victim in this case, is not compliant, then the officers react to that.”

Morgan’s statement contradicts what Middleton told the News Journal during an interview from his Baptist Hospital bed on Saturday. He’s recovering from a gunshot wound to his leg, was listed in good condition Monday and believes he may be released Wednesday.

He said he had been rummaging in his mother’s car for a cigarette but backed out of the car with his hands raised when the deputies came upon him. He said they immediately opened fire when he turned to face them.

“It was like a firing squad,” he said. “Bullets were flying everywhere.”
'Officer anxiety'

Until Morgan’s news conference Monday afternoon, the Sheriff’s Office had offered only a one-paragraph summary of what occurred around 2:40 a.m. at the home on Shadow Lawn Drive in Warrington.

Morgan called the news conference as the shooting garnered national attention. Thousands of comments have been posted on sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Reddit, and many have lambasted the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office and Florida in general.

Morgan identified the officers who fired an estimated 15 rounds combined as Deputy Jeremiah Meeks, a second-year officer, and Sgt. Matthew White, a 15-year veteran and a field training officer. Deputy Wayne Charles Wright arrived as back-up but did not fire any shots.

The sheriff attributed the large number of shots fired to “officer anxiety” prompted by fear that the suspect could shoot them.

Meeks fired first from his 40-caliber Glock, Morgan said.

White, who was to Meeks’ right, could not tell if the suspect was shooting back “so as a back-up he also fired,” the sheriff said.

Meeks and White have been placed on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation, as is standard in officer-involved shootings.

The case then will be referred to the State Attorney’s Office for a decision on whether the officers should face criminal charges.

The officers have not been involved in excessive force complaints in the past, Morgan said.
911 call

The two deputies responded to a 911 call from Middleton’s neighbor who, standing nearby, reported that a black man was in his neighbor’s four-door car and trying to hotwire it.

“He keeps ducking down underneath the dashboard, trying to reach for something,” the neighbor, speaking calmly, said in the call that Morgan played at the news conference.

At one point, the dispatcher asked the caller if the suspect had noticed him.

“No ... this is crazy,” the caller replied. “I’m standing out here in the middle of the yard talking on the phone and he’s hardly even noticed me.”

Within four minutes, Meeks and White arrived on scene.

Morgan said the deputies reported that they directed Middleton to show his hands and exit the Lincoln Town Car. However, Middleton, who was seated in the car, responded by sticking one hand out of the car window and then withdrawing it, the sheriff said.

They again instructed Middleton to show his hands, and he responded by opening the car door and making a movement to exit the car before lunging back inside, the sheriff reported. As the officers continued to command him out of the vehicle, he exited the vehicle in “a lunging motion and very quickly,” Morgan said.

Morgan said Middleton spun toward the officers with what appeared to be a metallic object in one hand and his other hand concealed behind his back.

Middleton was in a darkened area, the sheriff said. However, a law enforcement source noted that at least one deputy was shining a flashlight on Middleton.

The sheriff said the fact that Middleton had failed to comply with instructions, that he was holding an object and that the hand behind his back could have been holding a gun prompted Meeks, followed by White, to open fire.

“We had at that time a suspect who we believed to be a suspect who was noncompliant with the officer’s directions,” Morgan said. “The officer feared that he had a weapon in his hand and he fired.”

Morgan said the object in Middleton’s hand and another object were later collected by officers. He refused to say what they were.

“Two objects have been taken into the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for evidence for further testing to determine which one of these objects was the one Mr. Middleton had in his hand,” he said.

However, Middleton’s mother, Ceola Walker, said her son told her he had a key set with a small flashlight attached in his hand. A law enforcement source said the other object was a steel pry bar.
No joke

Middleton, in the interview with the News Journal, said he did not immediately realize, as he searched for the cigarette, that deputies had arrived.

He said he initially believed it was a neighbor playing a joke on him with a flashlight. When he realized deputies were there, he immediately complied with their instructions, he said.

He suffered shattered bones in his left thigh that, according to his family, will require the insertion of a metal rod.

Middleton’s family said 17 shell cases were found in the carport.

Middleton has been retired on disability for a number of years from his job as a Coca-Cola Co. factory worker. He suffers from a painful back.

Morgan said he did not believe that officer training was an issue in the shooting.

“As much as we are trained and as much as officers — which have Type A personalities — like to say we are in control, we are not,” he said. “... If you don’t comply and you attempt to flee or you’re rummaging around in the interior of your car, and officers are asking you to show your hands, we now have an escalation of a situation that becomes very dangerous, very quickly.”
This happened just 1 week later in the same town, by the same Sheriff's Dept:
Two deputies remain on administrative duty and many questions still are unanswered three days after Escambia County sheriff’s deputies entered a Warrington couple’s home without a search warrant and shot the couple’s two dogs, resulting in one of them being euthanized.

The Sheriff’s Office refused Wednesday to elaborate on what led deputies to climb into a window while looking for a suspect, enter the home, roust the residents from bed, handcuff them and shoot the two dogs.

“There is both a criminal and an administrative investigation ongoing,” sheriff’s spokeswoman Sena Maddison wrote in an email Wednesday.

“More details will be available pending the conclusion of both the criminal and administrative investigation. But not before that time.”

The deputies went into the home of Travis Nicholas, 22, and Cristina Moses, 32, on Flynn Drive on Sunday night in search of a suspect involved in an armed disturbance that occurred earlier on the same street, a sheriff’s report released Tuesday said.

Earlier in the evening, Wayde Morris, 22, was arrested on a charge of aggravated assault after allegedly getting into an argument with his ex-girlfriend and her father and approaching them with a baseball bat and machete.

But several witnesses also reported that another man pointed a gun at several people involved in the earlier disturbance, and one witness identified the man as “Travis,” according to an incident report.

In a 911 dispatch record from the same night and address, a man is heard telling the dispatcher, “This little punk down the road has got a gun pointed at me, my daughter and my roommate.”

Neither Nicholas nor Moses had been charged as of Wednesday, and Nicholas denied owning a gun or making threats.

The couple said six deputies entered their home, but it was only one officer who fired shots at their dogs.

How many came in the window is not clear.
Legal entry?

Whether the deputies could legally enter the home is in question.

Under the law, officers must either obtain a search warrant or must identify emergency factors that make a warrantless entry necessary, such as probable cause to think people are in imminent danger, evidence faces immediate destruction or a suspect will escape.

The sheriff’s news release Tuesday said, “Deputies entered the house through the open widow in an effort to locate the suspect and to assure the safety of the occupants.”

Moses disputed that account, saying the window was not open because the air conditioning was on.

She said the officer who fired the shots was Deputy Mikel Anthony Lee.

Lee’s name is listed as the reporting officer on a sheriff’s report on which Nicholas is listed as the suspect. However, the Sheriff’s Office redacted the entire narrative of the report, saying it is not a public record.

Maddison declined to confirm if Lee was the deputy who fired the shots or give any further details about the deputies involved.
No video

Nicholas and Moses said they were sleeping in their bedroom with the two dogs with the door closed when deputies arrived.

Deputies reported that they knocked on the door, but the couple said they didn’t hear anything until the deputies approached their door and the dogs began barking.

“I opened the door, and there were six police officers pointing guns at me and flashlights, saying ‘Show me your hands. Get on the ground,’ ” Moses said Tuesday.

She said she and her fiance had been dragged to the hallway and the dogs were in the bedroom when the single deputy returned to the bedroom and shot the dogs.

Deputies later took the dogs to a veterinary hospital. One was euthanized the next morning; one is recovering at home with a bullet still lodged under his lung.

A sheriff’s report states that there is no video evidence of the incident, and the Sheriff’s Office has declined to provide a reason.

A spokesperson for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement said the agency is not investigating the case at this point.
I guess the moral of the story is that in order to not get shot by the police, you should always try as hard as you can to be white (and not a dog). Being law-abiding citizens only goes so far...
User avatar
TheFeniX
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4869
Joined: 2003-06-26 04:24pm
Location: Texas

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by TheFeniX »

This kind of shit gets me because you're taking it upon yourself to notice a "bad" situation and give the police good information and you say something like this:
At one point, the dispatcher asked the caller if the suspect had noticed him.

“No ... this is crazy,” the caller replied. “I’m standing out here in the middle of the yard talking on the phone and he’s hardly even noticed me.”
Crazy thought, but maybe he hasn't noticed you because he's not bothering looking because he's A. either the dumbest criminal around or B. he's not breaking the law, so he's not worried about some guy standing around on the phone.

Seriously, a "Hey, you ok over there?" is too much to ask? Obviously, yes.

As for dog murdering, it just seems to be a past-time for cops and size doesn't even factor in. They'll happily gun down your 5 pound dog after it bites them, because they're too fucking stupid to know that dogs have teeth and scared ones will bite you. However, shooting a five pound dog due to the standard "I felt threatened" line cops use makes them out to be huge weenies.
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22465
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Mr Bean »

This double standard has always puzzled me. It's against the law to enter my home in my state without my consent or a court order. Yet it's okay to enter it if there has been a crime committed in the last few hours and maybe someone saw something someplace near me that might have been an escaping criminal. Not only enter but discharge their weapons multiple times and at the end of the day... be judged as acting within scope.

Look like we need to bring back moats and gatehouses to prevent these "accidents"

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Mr Bean wrote:This double standard has always puzzled me. It's against the law to enter my home in my state without my consent or a court order. Yet it's okay to enter it if there has been a crime committed in the last few hours and maybe someone saw something someplace near me that might have been an escaping criminal. Not only enter but discharge their weapons multiple times and at the end of the day... be judged as acting within scope.

Look like we need to bring back moats and gatehouses to prevent these "accidents"
It is not even a double standard. It is what we should come to expect from any organization responsible for policing its own members, where the person in charge is elected. If the police chief/sheriffs office went around saying "My police officers have a discipline problem" he would not keep his job, and the DA has to have a working relationship with the police that can get hampered pretty quickly if they charge officers with crime in all but the most serious and unambiguous of cases (like police officers performing a consent-and-warrant-free vaginal search for drugs on camera. Yes this happened in TX recently)
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Dominus Atheos
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3904
Joined: 2005-09-15 09:41pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Dominus Atheos »

And now in Wisconsin, a "swat-like raid" to kill a baby deer that was being rehabilitated at an animal shelter:
WISN 12 News investigates an operation raising questions about the use of government resources and the state policy that meant a death sentence for a fawn.

"It was like a SWAT team," shelter employee Ray Schulze said.

Two weeks ago, Schulze was working in the barn at the Society of St. Francis on the Kenosha-Illinois border when a swarm of squad cars arrived and officers unloaded with a search warrant.

"(There were) nine DNR agents and four deputy sheriffs, and they were all armed to the teeth," Schulze said.
Best quote:
"Could you have made a phone call before showing up, I mean, that's a lot of resources," WISN 12 News investigative reporter Colleen Henry asked.

"If a sheriff's department is going in to do a search warrant on a drug bust, they don't call them and ask them to voluntarily surrender their marijuana or whatever drug that they have before they show up," (DNR supervisor) Niemeyer said.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

If the first incident went down how the officers described then it is yet another example of people escalating a situation by not complying. Some people behave in unbelievably stupid ways even when they can clearly see guns pointed at them and the officers are clearly identifying themselves and clearly giving instructions.

If it is how the victim describes it then the officers are completely incompetent and should be criminally charged. This is why I am an outspoken supporter of officer body cameras in my department.

The second incident is criminal as far as I'm concerned...assuming the article is accurate. It describes them climbing into a window to look for a suspect but not under hot pursuit circumstances. They were legally required to secure a warrant.
TheFeniX wrote: As for dog murdering, it just seems to be a past-time for cops and size doesn't even factor in. They'll happily gun down your 5 pound dog after it bites them, because they're too fucking stupid to know that dogs have teeth and scared ones will bite you. However, shooting a five pound dog due to the standard "I felt threatened" line cops use makes them out to be huge weenies.
I agree. Killing a five pound dog or dogs of non-aggressive breeds does make them look like terrified people that have no business in law enforcement. However, I think the way the law is written in respect to animal attacks is to blame. Many states allow for lethal force to be used against any animal that is attacking another person or animal. Size, breed, species, etc is not discussed at all. There are states that specifically say the animal must be capable of inflicting serious bodily harm or death for the response to warrant lethal force.

The SWAT style raid for the deer I do not understand at all. That is mind boggling to me and only reinforces my desire for there to be a national standard for when SWAT can be used and when it can't. This would also include heavy weapons, surprise assaults and overwhelming force.

Basically, in they were required by law to remove this animal then under this standard only two law enforcement officers would be allowed to go. I mean if I can go on a domestic violence call into unknown conditions involving unknown people then so can they.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
Grumman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2488
Joined: 2011-12-10 09:13am

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Grumman »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:Killing a five pound dog or dogs of non-aggressive breeds does make them look like terrified people that have no business in law enforcement. However, I think the way the law is written in respect to animal attacks is to blame. Many states allow for lethal force to be used against any animal that is attacking another person or animal. Size, breed, species, etc is not discussed at all. There are states that specifically say the animal must be capable of inflicting serious bodily harm or death for the response to warrant lethal force.
Even if the law says it is not illegal for them to kill a dog in this situation, that doesn't mean they should. So no, the law is not to blame.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Grumman wrote:
Kamakazie Sith wrote:Killing a five pound dog or dogs of non-aggressive breeds does make them look like terrified people that have no business in law enforcement. However, I think the way the law is written in respect to animal attacks is to blame. Many states allow for lethal force to be used against any animal that is attacking another person or animal. Size, breed, species, etc is not discussed at all. There are states that specifically say the animal must be capable of inflicting serious bodily harm or death for the response to warrant lethal force.
Even if the law says it is not illegal for them to kill a dog in this situation, that doesn't mean they should. So no, the law is not to blame.
No no. If it was just because the law didn't specifically make it illegal then I'd agree with you. It is because the law specifically says "you can do this" is why I think it is to blame.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Jub »

Police need to be better monitored and better trained if they're going to keep being used in such a confrontational manner.

As it stands, I think the law needs to be changed so that police accept the risks of being shot more so than he civilians. The police have the gear and the training that a civilian lacks and frankly they went in knowing the risks. I'd take more dead and wounded police officers over more dead people and animals if only because people can't opt out of dealing with trigger happy officers and police can wash out at any time. Plus if police had to act with restraint and accept that they will always be shot at or attacked before they are allowed to fire, then we won't see them used as they are now.
User avatar
PeZook
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13237
Joined: 2002-07-18 06:08pm
Location: Poland

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by PeZook »

Eh, the single biggest problem is the drug war, which funnels incredible amounts of cash to drug distributors, letting them arm themselves to the teeth, and of course the war on terror which creates the mentality that law enforcement is FIGHTING TO SAVE TEH NATION when they're looking for potential terror suspects.

The former means departments are seeking more resources to combat ever better equipped gangs (and get them because hey it's a WAR, right?), and the latter that you can justify a lot because TEH NATION IS IN DANGER TICKING TIME BOMB STOP THEM!

Plus I guess Iraqistan means a lot of veterans come home and many end up with the police.
Image
JULY 20TH 1969 - The day the entire world was looking up

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- NEIL ARMSTRONG, MISSION COMMANDER, APOLLO 11

Signature dedicated to the greatest achievement of mankind.

MILDLY DERANGED PHYSICIST does not mind BREAKING the SOUND BARRIER, because it is INSURED. - Simon_Jester considering the problems of hypersonic flight for Team L.A.M.E.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Jub wrote:Police need to be better monitored and better trained if they're going to keep being used in such a confrontational manner.
Better training is the answer. Thanks to budget cuts many departments don't have enough money to pay their officers and train them. If a city wishes to have a police department or a county a sheriff department it should be law that their officers meet certain training requirements with specific training in multiple subjects requiring hands on evaluations. Most states just have a training requirement of 40 hours per year of anything law enforcement related. So, it could be 40 hours of criminal code refresher and not a single minute devoted to tactics and/or stressful incidents.

This needs to change and I believe it is the answer.
As it stands, I think the law needs to be changed so that police accept the risks of being shot more so than he civilians. The police have the gear and the training that a civilian lacks and frankly they went in knowing the risks. I'd take more dead and wounded police officers over more dead people and animals if only because people can't opt out of dealing with trigger happy officers and police can wash out at any time. Plus if police had to act with restraint and accept that they will always be shot at or attacked before they are allowed to fire, then we won't see them used as they are now.
You make it sound like civilians can't get training. This is untrue. If they have the money they can get the gear and/or pay for training. They can join the military and get the training for free or they can learn it from someone who already did so.

People join the police with the understanding that they will be allowed to use force to defend themselves. You're not defending yourself under a get shot at first policy. Gun fights happen quickly and even under current conditions of shooting without being shot at first the timing is just about even.

Reaction Time

“The process of perceiving the suspect’s movement, interpreting the action, deciding on a response, and executing the response for the officer generally took longer than it took the suspect to execute the action of shooting, even though the officer already had his gun aimed at the suspect.”

Under the study I just quoted a group of highly trained (SWAT team members) were told to fire at the suspect as soon as they saw him move. The suspect was told to raise his weapon and fire on the officers as fast as he/she could. On average the officers were able to fire in .39 seconds. The suspect .038 seconds. Aimed fire was also just even.

Under your conditions it is likely that you will be hit by multiple bullets before your brain has a chance to go through the Observe, Orient, Decide, Act steps. Being shot can severely compromise this process.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
TheFeniX
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4869
Joined: 2003-06-26 04:24pm
Location: Texas

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by TheFeniX »

The problem isn't reaction time, it's police putting themselves into situations where reaction times are a factor due to either incompetence (as in the case of trespassing on the wrong property) or forcing a situation they didn't have to. They should understand that armed homeowners exist. A citizen shouldn't have to understand the cops there to protect them might be chuckle-fucks who can't read address signs or can't wait to get a warrant so they break in someone's window and murder their dog.

EDIT: I actually do understand their immediate reaction. I just think it's incredibly stupid and short-sighted.

But I understand the stupid shit will happen as a matter of course. What I don't understand is the immediate "it was justified" line from police.
GALVESTON, TX (KTRK) -- A La Marque man claims police brutality, and he's filed a civil lawsuit. There is video of Reginald Davis' arrest along the Galveston seawall, but Galveston police say it's what you do not see that may justify the actions of five police officers.

Related Content
More: Free ABC13 iPhone, iPad and Android apps
More: Got a story idea? Let us know!

The man says it was right on the beach where a group of officers repeatedly kicked him and punched him during an arrest. The police chief says the officers believed the man was trying to get rid of some evidence -- possibly drugs -- and he's standing by his officers.

Video captured of the arrest shows officers delivering kicks to the head of a man detained along the surf of Galveston Beach. Moments later, those kicks were followed by repeated punches. The blows and stomps continued as more officers arrived on scene.

Reginald Davis recalled, "I really thought I was going to die out there."

Davis says he's the man a group of Galveston police were attacking during that arrest that was caught on a patrol car's camera back in March this year. That arrest, the 34-year-old admits, came after he ran from an officer who was searching him and his car.

"I made a mistake, I ran," Davis admitted. "I shouldn't have did that. You know, but what happened after I ran, it wasn't called for."

Davis and his attorney Chad Pinkerton are now filing a lawsuit against the city of Galveston and officers involved in that videotaped beating arrest. Police say they initially approached Davis when he was caught sleeping in his car along the seawall, violating Galveston's camping ordinance.

Galveston Police Chief Henry Porretto said, "Our officers were faced with a violent offender, who ran, assaulted an officer and continually resisted arrest."

Police say they believe Davis ran toward the beach to get rid of some type of evidence. Davis claims he ran because he was afraid he'd go to jail due to outstanding traffic issues.

"The offender put our officers' lives in jeopardy, and their response was appropriate," Chief Porretto insisted.

Galveston police say its use of force experts reviewed the tape and the officers involved have not been disciplined.

Davis said, "I don't want them to get away with it."

Davis and his lawyer say now it's up to the courts to decide.

The Galveston police chief says the officers involved are still working the streets. They add that they already completed their own internal investigation before a formal complaint was lodged in the case. The officers faced no discipline as a result of that investigation.

Davis was charged with evading arrest and served about 100 days behind bars.
This broke last night and I thought I was watching old school Wanderlei Silva before I realized it was Galveston Cops once again proving they are worse that worthless. "He's tossing drugs away! Quick, kick him in the face repeatedly!" But hey, when he wins the lawsuit, it will all work out because the taxpayer will pick up the tab and the officers are free to do it again a few months later and start it all over again.
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

You make it sound like civilians can't get training. This is untrue. If they have the money they can get the gear and/or pay for training. They can join the military and get the training for free or they can learn it from someone who already did so.
Jub is an idiot, but I don't think that is what he means. A police officer knows the risk of his profession, and accepts it. They opt in. I cannot opt out of being stopped by the police. Just two weeks ago, I was collecting dragonfly larvae at a pond, in a park, where people are known to do things like sell drugs. I was stopped. Now, I know the drill for this sort of thing, and saw the police coming. So, no biggie, but lets say I didn't. What if the officer had given me instructions while I had headphones on (I like to listen to audiobooks while collecting) and so I did not hear him/her, and it is night, so I did not see them? They get closer, I get startled when the light shines in my eyes or they make physical contact, I jump up, I get shot. I should not have to go about my daily business being concerned that I will be accidentally shot by the police, but I do.

Lets take the case in the OP. Neither party has to be dishonest for this to happen. Failure to notice the police, followed by panic and trying to comply very quickly, can look a great deal like a lunge. Especially when--as controlled experiments have repeatedly shown--black men are more likely to be the victims of a false-positive threat assessment than white people. A black man carrying any object is more likely to have that object mistaken for a gun and shot than an otherwise identical white person... and as I recall, more likely to be shot, and faster to be shot, than an otherwise identical white person who is actually carrying a gun.

Then you get into the Prison Experiment shit. Where either a lack of supervision or tacit approval (like departments standing by their officers unless they rape a woman on camera) combined with a superiority complex (institutionalized, of course) turns otherwise good people into gigantic dickbags.

It is not training that is the answer. Training will not stop someone from becoming frustrated, angry, or just fucking sadistic and shooting an overweight jack russell terrier--then claiming justification, even though the only thing the terrier is a threat to is bacon. It wont stop the police in New Orleans from strapping a woman suffering an asthma attack onto her back in five point restraints until her heart stops, then have the coroner rule the death a drug overdose, due to the needle marks induced by the intervention of paramedics. It wont stop the police from executing a suspect in the back of their squad car, then claiming a Mysterious Black Man(tm) drove by and did it.

The answer is an external enforcement system. Either state or federal level, outside the police chain of command and its institutions, the sole job of which is to watch the fucking watchers, complete with independent prosecutorial power.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

TheFeniX wrote:The problem isn't reaction time, it's police putting themselves into situations where reaction times are a factor due to either incompetence (as in the case of trespassing on the wrong property) or forcing a situation they didn't have to. They should understand that armed homeowners exist. A citizen shouldn't have to understand the cops there to protect them might be chuckle-fucks who can't read address signs or can't wait to get a warrant so they break in someone's window and murder their dog.

EDIT: I actually do understand their immediate reaction. I just think it's incredibly stupid and short-sighted.
Different subject. My reply was tailored towards Jub. Not you.
But I understand the stupid shit will happen as a matter of course. What I don't understand is the immediate "it was justified" line from police.
GALVESTON, TX (KTRK) -- A La Marque man claims police brutality, and he's filed a civil lawsuit. There is video of Reginald Davis' arrest along the Galveston seawall, but Galveston police say it's what you do not see that may justify the actions of five police officers.
This broke last night and I thought I was watching old school Wanderlei Silva before I realized it was Galveston Cops once again proving they are worse that worthless. "He's tossing drugs away! Quick, kick him in the face repeatedly!" But hey, when he wins the lawsuit, it will all work out because the taxpayer will pick up the tab and the officers are free to do it again a few months later and start it all over again.
I wouldn't call that immediate. The incident happened back in March. The investigation was concluded and the chief is taking the side of the investigation. Though I disagree with their conclusions considering the high level of force used over someone swallowing drugs. Kicking someone in the head is pretty much reserved for serious threats.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
You make it sound like civilians can't get training. This is untrue. If they have the money they can get the gear and/or pay for training. They can join the military and get the training for free or they can learn it from someone who already did so.
Jub is an idiot, but I don't think that is what he means. A police officer knows the risk of his profession, and accepts it. They opt in. I cannot opt out of being stopped by the police. Just two weeks ago, I was collecting dragonfly larvae at a pond, in a park, where people are known to do things like sell drugs. I was stopped. Now, I know the drill for this sort of thing, and saw the police coming. So, no biggie, but lets say I didn't. What if the officer had given me instructions while I had headphones on (I like to listen to audiobooks while collecting) and so I did not hear him/her, and it is night, so I did not see them? They get closer, I get startled when the light shines in my eyes or they make physical contact, I jump up, I get shot. I should not have to go about my daily business being concerned that I will be accidentally shot by the police, but I do.
The incident in the OP and the incident you described are two different levels of stops. One is a reported crime in progress. The other is "let's go talk to this guy and see what we can see". Your incident doesn't actually qualify as a stop. In other when they come and talk to you legally you can say "I don't want to talk with you right now" and walk away. (If they say stop then you should stop but it would be unlawful detainment unless they had reasonable suspicion that you were committing a crime.

Even the details that result in the use of force in the OP are completely different from your scenario. In your scenario you describe yourself jumping up suddenly. In the OP he is told to show his hands and only shows one while trying to reach into the vehicle and then withdraws his hand back into the vehicle. He then opens the car door and looks like he's exiting before lunging back inside. He then lunges out of the vehicle and spins towards them holding a metallic object in one hand with the other concealed behind his back.
Lets take the case in the OP. Neither party has to be dishonest for this to happen. Failure to notice the police, followed by panic and trying to comply very quickly, can look a great deal like a lunge. Especially when--as controlled experiments have repeatedly shown--black men are more likely to be the victims of a false-positive threat assessment than white people. A black man carrying any object is more likely to have that object mistaken for a gun and shot than an otherwise identical white person... and as I recall, more likely to be shot, and faster to be shot, than an otherwise identical white person who is actually carrying a gun.
I would agree if it was just a lunge. However, this wasn't just a lunge. It was failure to obey numerous commands to show both hands several times. It was failure to obey numerous commands to exit the vehicle. Then he exits quickly and spins around holding a metallic object in one hand while concealing the other hand.
Then you get into the Prison Experiment shit. Where either a lack of supervision or tacit approval (like departments standing by their officers unless they rape a woman on camera) combined with a superiority complex (institutionalized, of course) turns otherwise good people into gigantic dickbags.

It is not training that is the answer. Training will not stop someone from becoming frustrated, angry, or just fucking sadistic and shooting an overweight jack russell terrier--then claiming justification, even though the only thing the terrier is a threat to is bacon. It wont stop the police in New Orleans from strapping a woman suffering an asthma attack onto her back in five point restraints until her heart stops, then have the coroner rule the death a drug overdose, due to the needle marks induced by the intervention of paramedics. It wont stop the police from executing a suspect in the back of their squad car, then claiming a Mysterious Black Man(tm) drove by and did it.

The answer is an external enforcement system. Either state or federal level, outside the police chain of command and its institutions, the sole job of which is to watch the fucking watchers, complete with independent prosecutorial power.
I agree about the external enforcement system. I also think the law enforcement concept of state, county, and city is a failure and needs to be changed.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Jub »

Kamakazie Sith wrote:
Jub wrote:Police need to be better monitored and better trained if they're going to keep being used in such a confrontational manner.
Better training is the answer. Thanks to budget cuts many departments don't have enough money to pay their officers and train them. If a city wishes to have a police department or a county a sheriff department it should be law that their officers meet certain training requirements with specific training in multiple subjects requiring hands on evaluations. Most states just have a training requirement of 40 hours per year of anything law enforcement related. So, it could be 40 hours of criminal code refresher and not a single minute devoted to tactics and/or stressful incidents.

This needs to change and I believe it is the answer.
Smarter allocation of funding is the issue. The SWAT units get far more funding than they should based on their utility and this leads them them being used to justify the fact that they eat so much funding. Breaking this cycle would go a long way to fixing things as it would mean that the culture of the police force has changed and it would also free up funding to train officers properly.
As it stands, I think the law needs to be changed so that police accept the risks of being shot more so than he civilians. The police have the gear and the training that a civilian lacks and frankly they went in knowing the risks. I'd take more dead and wounded police officers over more dead people and animals if only because people can't opt out of dealing with trigger happy officers and police can wash out at any time. Plus if police had to act with restraint and accept that they will always be shot at or attacked before they are allowed to fire, then we won't see them used as they are now.
You make it sound like civilians can't get training. This is untrue. If they have the money they can get the gear and/or pay for training. They can join the military and get the training for free or they can learn it from someone who already did so.
It's more that police are explicitly trained in these things and wear bullet and stab resistant vests while on duty. You would have to be a paranoid nut to wear a vest and get combat training unless you had/have a need for them on a daily basis.

Plus, police go into the force knowing that they could be subject to deadly force at any time simply for what they do and what they stand for, an accountant doesn't. A police officer can change careers, I can't choose to never deal with police. Thus they need to be held to vastly higher standards than most civilians and that currently isn't happening.
People join the police with the understanding that they will be allowed to use force to defend themselves. You're not defending yourself under a get shot at first policy. Gun fights happen quickly and even under current conditions of shooting without being shot at first the timing is just about even.
Bullshit, I can't defend myself as a civilian unless I can confirm a weapon or a punch has already been thrown and if I mess up in my assessment of threat I have a good chance of being punished. Police will get desk duty with pay until an internal investigation is carried out and will likely be back on active duty after that investigation concludes. This pushes police more into the realm of what a civilian faces when having to defend themselves.
Reaction Time

“The process of perceiving the suspect’s movement, interpreting the action, deciding on a response, and executing the response for the officer generally took longer than it took the suspect to execute the action of shooting, even though the officer already had his gun aimed at the suspect.”

Under the study I just quoted a group of highly trained (SWAT team members) were told to fire at the suspect as soon as they saw him move. The suspect was told to raise his weapon and fire on the officers as fast as he/she could. On average the officers were able to fire in .39 seconds. The suspect .038 seconds. Aimed fire was also just even.

Under your conditions it is likely that you will be hit by multiple bullets before your brain has a chance to go through the Observe, Orient, Decide, Act steps. Being shot can severely compromise this process.
You've posted this before and I understand that officers have tough jobs and already face a lot of risk. What I don't like is that they have a culture that allows them to get away with using force where it shouldn't be used. Forcing more risk back on them should serve to make them more defensive and less likely to try and escalate things. Police shouldn't be able to use lethal force until they can confirm that they are facing such force coming back at them. If it takes them getting fired on to have that happen, then so be it.
User avatar
Kamakazie Sith
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7555
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Kamakazie Sith »

Jub wrote: Smarter allocation of funding is the issue. The SWAT units get far more funding than they should based on their utility and this leads them them being used to justify the fact that they eat so much funding. Breaking this cycle would go a long way to fixing things as it would mean that the culture of the police force has changed and it would also free up funding to train officers properly.
All that needs to be done for this to be accomplished is for our elected representatives to stop the drug war.
It's more that police are explicitly trained in these things and wear bullet and stab resistant vests while on duty. You would have to be a paranoid nut to wear a vest and get combat training unless you had/have a need for them on a daily basis.
The US has lot of a paranoid nuts. See militias, sovereign citizens, extreme right wing people in general.
Plus, police go into the force knowing that they could be subject to deadly force at any time simply for what they do and what they stand for, an accountant doesn't. A police officer can change careers, I can't choose to never deal with police. Thus they need to be held to vastly higher standards than most civilians and that currently isn't happening.
I agree. That isn't happening. The solution, however, is to not make it so their lives are placed in greater risk by requiring unreasonable criteria before they can defend themselves. People join the police department with the understanding that they will be allowed to reasonably defend themselves.
Bullshit, I can't defend myself as a civilian unless I can confirm a weapon or a punch has already been thrown and if I mess up in my assessment of threat I have a good chance of being punished. Police will get desk duty with pay until an internal investigation is carried out and will likely be back on active duty after that investigation concludes. This pushes police more into the realm of what a civilian faces when having to defend themselves.
Maybe in your country. However, in the United States civilians defend themselves all the time against unarmed people including up to lethal force and have not been charged. What matters is your ability to articulate what happened. If you mess up with that articulation then you will be in trouble. Same with police.
You've posted this before and I understand that officers have tough jobs and already face a lot of risk. What I don't like is that they have a culture that allows them to get away with using force where it shouldn't be used. Forcing more risk back on them should serve to make them more defensive and less likely to try and escalate things. Police shouldn't be able to use lethal force until they can confirm that they are facing such force coming back at them. If it takes them getting fired on to have that happen, then so be it.
Then we need to fix that culture. Instituting unreasonable use of force requirements will get people killed that don't need to be. Just like having lax oversight is getting people killed now. The solution isn't going to the extreme the other way. It's fixing the actual problem.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Jub »

I don't like how much power that American police have already, and I don't think that effective oversight will be enough to curb the things that they do that I find distasteful. Placing a greater risk on them, might be extreme, but it's also a bit of a proxy for me generally wanting to see powers limited as an addition to their activities being externally policed and monitored. Placing them under the same RoE as soldiers in Vietnam served under seems like a good place to start given that they aren't in a war zone.
User avatar
Alyeska
Federation Ambassador
Posts: 17496
Joined: 2002-08-11 07:28pm
Location: Montana, USA

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Alyeska »

Jub wrote:I don't like how much power that American police have already, and I don't think that effective oversight will be enough to curb the things that they do that I find distasteful. Placing a greater risk on them, might be extreme, but it's also a bit of a proxy for me generally wanting to see powers limited as an addition to their activities being externally policed and monitored. Placing them under the same RoE as soldiers in Vietnam served under seems like a good place to start given that they aren't in a war zone.
Effective Oversight by definition is sufficient. Deliberately putting the police into danger makes them more likely to make mistakes. Are you fucking stupid or something?

You implement rules and prosecute the police for violating these rules. Hold them to a high standard and make them earn their status. That is what independent oversight can do for the police.
"If the facts are on your side, pound on the facts. If the law is on your side, pound on the law. If neither is on your side, pound on the table."

"The captain claimed our people violated a 4,000 year old treaty forbidding us to develop hyperspace technology. Extermination of our planet was the consequence. The subject did not survive interrogation."
User avatar
Dominus Atheos
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3904
Joined: 2005-09-15 09:41pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Dominus Atheos »

The New Yorker
On a bright Thursday afternoon in 2007, Jennifer Boatright, a waitress at a Houston bar-and-grill, drove with her two young sons and her boyfriend, Ron Henderson, on U.S. 59 toward Linden, Henderson’s home town, near the Texas-Louisiana border. They made the trip every April, at the first signs of spring, to walk the local wildflower trails and spend time with Henderson’s father. This year, they’d decided to buy a used car in Linden, which had plenty for sale, and so they bundled their cash savings in their car’s center console. Just after dusk, they passed a sign that read “Welcome to Tenaha: A little town with BIG Potential!”

They pulled into a mini-mart for snacks. When they returned to the highway ten minutes later, Boatright, a honey-blond “Texas redneck from Lubbock,” by her own reckoning, and Henderson, who is Latino, noticed something strange. The same police car that their eleven-year-old had admired in the mini-mart parking lot was trailing them. Near the city limits, a tall, bull-shouldered officer named Barry Washington pulled them over.

He asked if Henderson knew that he’d been driving in the left lane for more than half a mile without passing.

No, Henderson replied. He said he’d moved into the left lane so that the police car could make its way onto the highway.

Were there any drugs in the car? When Henderson and Boatright said no, the officer asked if he and his partner could search the car.

The officers found the couple’s cash and a marbled-glass pipe that Boatright said was a gift for her sister-in-law, and escorted them across town to the police station. In a corner there, two tables were heaped with jewelry, DVD players, cell phones, and the like. According to the police report, Boatright and Henderson fit the profile of drug couriers: they were driving from Houston, “a known point for distribution of illegal narcotics,” to Linden, “a known place to receive illegal narcotics.” The report describes their children as possible decoys, meant to distract police as the couple breezed down the road, smoking marijuana. (None was found in the car, although Washington claimed to have smelled it.)

The county’s district attorney, a fifty-seven-year-old woman with feathered Charlie’s Angels hair named Lynda K. Russell, arrived an hour later. Russell, who moonlighted locally as a country singer, told Henderson and Boatright that they had two options. They could face felony charges for “money laundering” and “child endangerment,” in which case they would go to jail and their children would be handed over to foster care. Or they could sign over their cash to the city of Tenaha, and get back on the road. “No criminal charges shall be filed,” a waiver she drafted read, “and our children shall not be turned over to CPS,” or Child Protective Services.

“Where are we?” Boatright remembers thinking. “Is this some kind of foreign country, where they’re selling people’s kids off?” Holding her sixteen-month-old on her hip, she broke down in tears.

Later, she learned that cash-for-freedom deals had become a point of pride for Tenaha, and that versions of the tactic were used across the country. “Be safe and keep up the good work,” the city marshal wrote to Washington, following a raft of complaints from out-of-town drivers who claimed that they had been stopped in Tenaha and stripped of cash, valuables, and, in at least one case, an infant child, without clear evidence of contraband.

Outraged by their experience in Tenaha, Jennifer Boatright and Ron Henderson helped to launch a class-action lawsuit challenging the abuse of a legal doctrine known as civil-asset forfeiture. “Have you looked it up?” Boatright asked me when I met her this spring at Houston’s H&H Saloon, where she runs Steak Night every Monday. She was standing at a mattress-size grill outside. “It’ll blow your mind.”

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013 ... t_stillman
It's a long article. Best quote:
One result is the rise of improbable case names such as United States v. One Pearl Necklace and United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. (Jennifer Boatright and Ron Henderson’s forfeiture was slugged State of Texas v. $6,037.)... Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. The Real Property and Improvements Known as [their address]... One of the first cases that caught his attention was titled State of Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix.
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Jub »

Alyeska wrote:
Jub wrote:I don't like how much power that American police have already, and I don't think that effective oversight will be enough to curb the things that they do that I find distasteful. Placing a greater risk on them, might be extreme, but it's also a bit of a proxy for me generally wanting to see powers limited as an addition to their activities being externally policed and monitored. Placing them under the same RoE as soldiers in Vietnam served under seems like a good place to start given that they aren't in a war zone.
Effective Oversight by definition is sufficient. Deliberately putting the police into danger makes them more likely to make mistakes. Are you fucking stupid or something?

You implement rules and prosecute the police for violating these rules. Hold them to a high standard and make them earn their status. That is what independent oversight can do for the police.
Except that the rules as they stand would still legally allow them to do stuff like shooting dogs if they can articulate feeling threatened. The rules on police, regardless of oversight, are too lax and give them too much power. Plus they already have less restrictive RoE's than soldiers in certain war zones, so why shouldn't we tighten that up?
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Jub »

Ghetto Edit: Plus like I said, it's a proxy for wanting less police power, not some grand end goal or a seriously thought out idea for how to fix things. I know exactly what the end result of letting criminals shoot first will be and it won't be less armed criminals. What I do want is to slow police down a bit so they don't put themselves in stupid situations.
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

One result is the rise of improbable case names such as United States v. One Pearl Necklace and United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. (Jennifer Boatright and Ron Henderson’s forfeiture was slugged State of Texas v. $6,037.)... Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. The Real Property and Improvements Known as [their address]... One of the first cases that caught his attention was titled State of Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix.
The Fuck? Um... This is still happening? I thought the DOJ and subsequently FBI threw the small towns in TX that were doing this into federal prison on racketeering charges (yes. the towns, as in, their elected governments). And that is what this is. It is racketeering.

And how the hell does the legal theory work here? You cannot sue a non-person.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

The incident in the OP and the incident you described are two different levels of stops. One is a reported crime in progress. The other is "let's go talk to this guy and see what we can see". Your incident doesn't actually qualify as a stop. In other when they come and talk to you legally you can say "I don't want to talk with you right now" and walk away. (If they say stop then you should stop but it would be unlawful detainment unless they had reasonable suspicion that you were committing a crime.
And they can make up that reasonable suspicion.
Even the details that result in the use of force in the OP are completely different from your scenario. In your scenario you describe yourself jumping up suddenly. In the OP he is told to show his hands and only shows one while trying to reach into the vehicle and then withdraws his hand back into the vehicle. He then opens the car door and looks like he's exiting before lunging back inside. He then lunges out of the vehicle and spins towards them holding a metallic object in one hand with the other concealed behind his back.
Which is perfectly consistent with not hearing them while rummaging through a car + as mentioned, a false positive in a threat assessment due to subconscious racism.

And then there is the good old "Oh shit, we just shot an unarmed man. Quick, make something up that seems plausible. The department will back us.", which they can do, because people trust the police and the department will in fact stand by them.
The US has lot of a paranoid nuts. See militias, sovereign citizens, extreme right wing people in general.
Yes, but that is not most of the population, nor is it the case in the average traffic stop.

Even so, if the police abuse their power and the civilian resists, the civilian gets charged with a crime and the very fact that they were resisting after the fact will be used as justification. If the police start beating me with a baton because I am protesting somewhere, and I fight back, I get arrested, and even though they beat me first, my fighting back will be used as justification for the initial beating. And there is nothing I can do about it.
People join the police department with the understanding that they will be allowed to reasonably defend themselves.
The problem is that they are permitted to unreasonably "defend themselves".
If you mess up with that articulation then you will be in trouble. Same with police.
The difference is that the police are trained in exactly how to articulate such things--irrespective of the truth value of that articulation--and they belong to the very institution that investigates and has that institution backing them up. Combined with a prosecutors obvious who does not want to alienate the police department upon which they depend.

Of course, Jub is an idiot with an entirely separate axe to grind from the actual problem...
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Beowulf
The Patrician
Posts: 10621
Joined: 2002-07-04 01:18am
Location: 32ULV

Re: More black man & dog shootings by police

Post by Beowulf »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
One result is the rise of improbable case names such as United States v. One Pearl Necklace and United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins. (Jennifer Boatright and Ron Henderson’s forfeiture was slugged State of Texas v. $6,037.)... Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. The Real Property and Improvements Known as [their address]... One of the first cases that caught his attention was titled State of Texas vs. One Gold Crucifix.
The Fuck? Um... This is still happening? I thought the DOJ and subsequently FBI threw the small towns in TX that were doing this into federal prison on racketeering charges (yes. the towns, as in, their elected governments). And that is what this is. It is racketeering.

And how the hell does the legal theory work here? You cannot sue a non-person.
DoJ stop this? They're the biggest users of civil forfeiture. Under the equitable sharing program, they even work around state laws designed to keep the police from profiting from seizure.

As to why they can sue property? Technically, they're assuming the owners of the property aren't known, and so rather than place John Doe in all the case names, they put the property itself.
"preemptive killing of cops might not be such a bad idea from a personal saftey[sic] standpoint..." --Keevan Colton
"There's a word for bias you can't see: Yours." -- William Saletan
Post Reply