General Police Abuse Thread

[The Romulan Republic]

Link

Isn't this what they wanted?

I think what they mostly wanted is police who would actually protect the innocent.

Or, you know, do their jobs.

The way things are going in the US, police training might as well include a course called "latest screw-ups" with recruits just watching the news and the instructor saying "see what that officer did? Don't do that".

Our start of shift briefings do actually.

Good for your department, then.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Our start of shift briefings do actually.

Good for your department, then.

Thanks man.

Debriefing is pretty common in most major departments. The efficiency of this could be increased though if law enforcement agencies shared all their information with other agencies.

I mean full access to everything the investigation revealed so we can all learn from their mistakes.

As it stands right now all we have access to is what is revealed in the news. Still can learn something but not as complete as it could be.

[Dominus Atheos]

Federal court rules that owning a computer is enough probable cause to get a search warrant in any case that involves a computer.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinion ... 13p-06.pdf

This is a weird case, so bear with me as I try to explain it. First, a guys was accused of sending fake letters to the school of a confidential informant's children telling them that he was a CI and that he was previously a drug dealer. The alleged sender's house was searched and nothing was found. First, the search warrant:

Taken as a whole, the affidavit clearly supports the magistrate’s finding of probable cause
to believe that the mailings originated with Mr. Peffer. Specifically, Sergeant Stephens averred:
(1) Beemer had provided information that led to Mr. Peffer’s arrest; (2) the letters naming
Beemer had been sent after Mr. Peffer’s arrest; (3) the fliers, which specifically named a
prosecutor who had been present at Mr. Peffer’s sentencing, had been sent within two weeks of
said sentencing; (4) Trooper Glentz received the marijuana seeds while he was trying to contact
Mr. Peffer; (5) Mr. Peffer was the only person on whom Beemer had informed whom Trooper
Glentz had attempted to contact; (6) the fliers asked for any information regarding Beemer to be
forwarded to CMET and TNT, and Mr. Peffer was the only individual in the counties targeted by
the mailings who had been charged with crimes stemming from interactions with both CMET
and TNT; and (7) the mailings had been postmarked from Grand Rapids, which is the central
sorting facility for the area where the Bierri Road residence is located. We agree with the
district court that no reasonable jury could fail to find that Sergeant Stephens’s affidavit provided
“adequate supporting facts about the underlying circumstances to show that probable cause
exist[ed]” to connect Mr. Peffer to the mailings. See Weaver, 99 F.3d at 1377.

That's a good amount of circumstantial evidence, but doesn't actually include any evidence directly linking Peffer to the crime. Or, importantly, directly connecting Peffer's residence to the crime, which is necessary to get a search warrant for that residence.

But wait, plot twist! Peffer owned a computer, so that is evidence that he sent the letters from his house, obviously.

It appears to be a question of first impression in this circuit whether the nature of a
computer is such that its use in a crime is alone sufficient to justify an inference that, because of
“the nature of the things to be seized,” ibid., evidence of the crime is likely to be found in the
alleged criminal’s residence. But this question is not a difficult one to answer based on basic
principles.

The court's reasoning if a cop or CI sees someone with a gun, that is probable cause to search someone's house for guns. And computers are just like guns, right?

When it comes to guns, because we “have acknowledged that individuals who own guns
keep them at their homes,” United States v. Smith, 182 F.3d 473, 480 (6th Cir. 1999), a suspect’s
use of a gun in the commission of a crime is sufficient to find a nexus between the gun that was
used and the suspect’s residence. For example, in United States v. Vanderweele, an informant
told an ATF agent that he had seen Vanderweele in possession of a silencer at a clubhouse.
545 F. App’x 465, 467 (6th Cir. 2013). The agent sought a search warrant for Vanderweele’s
residence based on nothing more than the informant’s statement that Vanderweele had been in
possession of a silencer and his awareness, “based on his training and experience, ‘that firearms,
ammunition, and related items are commonly stored within the owner or possessor’s dwelling.’”
Id. at 469. We held that based on these alleged facts, “[t]he magistrate judge had reason to
believe that the silencer would be found at Vanderweele’s house,” and we upheld the warrant.
Ibid.

It is clear that the use of a gun in the commission of a crime is sufficient to establish a
nexus between the suspected criminal’s gun and his residence. Computers are dissimilar to guns
in many ways, including the nature of the crimes in which they are used and the relative ease
with which guns can be transported and discarded. Computers are similar to guns, however, in
that they are both personal possessions often kept in their owner’s residence and therefore
subject to the presumption that a nexus exists between an object used in a crime and the
suspect’s current residence. This is borne out by our cases involving the consumption of child
pornography via computer.

Although we have never been asked to pass judgment on a magistrate’s finding of a
nexus between the computer used to consume child pornography and the alleged consumer’s
residence based on nothing more than the use of the computer, we have placed our imprimatur
on a number of search warrants issued based on affidavits with scant evidence supporting a
nexus beyond the use of a computer. See, e.g., United States v. Elbe, 774 F.3d 885, 890 (6th Cir.
2014) (finding that affidavit established nexus because the suspect’s residence had high-speed
internet and the suspect had been observed using a laptop on his front porch); United States v.
Lapsins, 570 F.3d 758, 766 (6th Cir. 2009) (finding that affidavit established nexus because the
IP address used to distribute prohibited material was accessed by a residential modem located in
the general vicinity of suspect’s residence and that suspect had participated in an online chat
regarding prohibited material between the hours of 6:30 and 8:30 a.m., when suspect would be at
home); United States v. Terry, 522 F.3d 645, 648 (6th Cir. 2008) (finding nexus because affidavit
established that the suspect had a computer at his residence and had sent an email containing
prohibited material at approximately 2:30 a.m.).

Those are a little more direct of connections, aren't they?

Just as guns, and other possessions, are generally kept in the home, so too are computers,
and so we readily find a nexus between computers used in the consumption of child pornography
and the suspected consumer’s residence.

Here, the affidavit included allegations that Mr. Peffer had used a computer in the
commission of his crime, that evidence of the crime would likely be found on that computer, and
that Mr. Peffer resided at the Bierri Road residence, thereby establishing a presumption that
evidence of the crime would be found at the Bierri Road residence. That the affidavit did not
allege that Mr. Peffer owned a computer or that he kept one at the Bierri Road residence is
immaterial, because the averment that he used one in the commission of a crime is sufficient to
create the presumption that it would be found at his residence. See e.g., Vanderweele, 545 F.
App’x at 469

No, no it doesn't. And just a reminder, nothing was found at the residence or on the computer, and Peffer was never charged.

[Simon_Jester]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the case where "suspect used a gun in a crime" establishes a nexus between the suspect's gun and his residence, there was specific, non-circumstantial evidence that the suspect had committed a gun crime (i.e. owned a silencer).

And in the other cases cited where "suspect used a computer in a crime" establishes a nexus between the suspect's computer and his residence, there was specific, non-circumstantial evidence that the suspect had committed a computer crime, thus justifying search of the home for the computer in question. Which seems fair enough; using computers from the home isn't exactly rare behavior.

It seems to me, the problem here isn't having a judge reason "well, we have good reason to think that this guy used a computer to commit a crime, so let's go search his house for computers with evidence of the crime."

The problem here was having a judge reason "well, we have good reason to think that this guy used a computer to commit a crime" at all.

[Kamakazie Sith]

The problem here was having a judge reason "well, we have good reason to think that this guy used a computer to commit a crime" at all.

Unless I'm misunderstanding the crime that was alleged to have been committed was; witness intimidation and impersonating a police officer". The computer became a sought piece of evidence because letters and fliers were created that specifically targeted a confidential informant that was being used as a witness and they were created in such a way that a person would think they were from law enforcement.

Also, DA is exaggerating a bit that the federal court ruled that owning a computer is enough probable cause to get a search warrant in any case that involves a computer. The magistrate went off the totality of the information provide and determined that probable cause existed that evidence probably existed on the defendants computer.

As a reminder. Probable cause is not 100% sure. Hell, it's not even 70% sure. Probable cause has been consistently described to me throughout my education in criminal law as greater than 50% while other legal sources describe it as even lower. See for yourself.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia ... quire.html

I remember a preliminary trial that I observed once while in the academy. The preliminary was to determine if law enforcement had probable cause. The details aren't important but what the judge said stuck with me. She ruled that the police did have probable cause but she also said it was quite obvious that reasonable doubt existed and had this been a trial she would find the defendant not guilty. So, the trial was scheduled later and sure enough the defendant was found not guilty.

Just something to keep in mind about why a judge would approve a search warrant when "no direct link" existed.

[Dominus Atheos]

Also, DA is exaggerating a bit that the federal court ruled that owning a computer is enough probable cause to get a search warrant in any case that involves a computer. The magistrate went off the totality of the information provide and determined that probable cause existed that evidence probably existed on the defendants computer.

[urlhttps://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/john-k-bushs-opinion-in-peffer-v-stephens-is-truly-awful.html]I'm hardly the only one saying that.[/url]

An Awful Ruling From One of Trump’s Worst Judicial Appointees

John K. Bush’s opinion in Peffer v. Stephens will let the police ransack almost any suspect’s home.

...

Here’s where the Fourth Amendment came into play. In order to search Peffer’s house for evidence, the police needed a warrant. In order to obtain a warrant, the police had to provide “probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” To fulfil this obligation, one detective submitted an affidavit to the court asserting he had probable cause to believe Peffer’s residence “may contain evidence of the crime of Impersonating a Police Officer and Witness Intimidation.” The detective asked permission to search Peffer’s house for “computer hardware,” “computer-related equipment,” printers, scanners, any “electronic storage device,” and Peffer’s personal email.

A judge issued a warrant granting this request. The police promptly ransacked the house and seized all the electronics they could find. Law enforcement searched the items but apparently found nothing incriminating; prosecutors elected not to press charges. Peffer and his wife sued, alleging a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. A lower court threw out their suit, and Bush affirmed its decision in a unanimous decision for a three-judge panel. (Bush was joined by two conservative Republican appointees.)

Bush correctly noted that at the heart of the case lay “a question of first impression” for the 6th Circuit: Can a judge issue a search warrant that allows the police to search an individual’s entire residence for electronics based on an inference that he might have committed a crime using a computer that may or may not be in his home?

“This question,” Bush wrote, “is not a difficult one.” Turning to “basic principles,” Bush asserted that “it is reasonable” to “assume that a person keeps his possessions where he resides.” And if “an affidavit presents probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed by means of an object,” Bush wrote, a judge “may presume that there is a nexus between that object and the suspect’s current residence.” Therefore, because Peffer may have committed a crime using a computer, and that computer might be in his house, the police have constitutional authority to scour his entire home in search of evidence.

This ruling is now controlling precedent in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, the states within the 6th Circuit. It is almost certainly incorrect. In 2016, the 6th Circuit explained that, under the Fourth Amendment, the police must establish a “nexus” between a suspect’s crimes and his residence to justify a home search. In that case, the defendant was caught leaving a drug deal with more than 500 grams of heroin. The court held that “a suspect’s status as a drug dealer” does not justify a search of his home. Instead, it demanded “facts that directly connect the residence with the suspected drug dealing activity.”

That principle should clearly apply to Peffer’s case. The police presented no facts indicating Peffer created or printed the fliers at home—or that he had a computer in his house. Even if law enforcement knew Peffer owned a computer and printer, the warrant would still be overbroad. Most Americans now own a computer, and the police can frequently concoct some tenuous theory as to how that computer might have factored into some suspected crime. If Bush is right, and the Peffer warrant was constitutionally sound, then the Fourth Amendment’s protections of the home have now been rendered toothless by modern technology.

Although I don't really like that article because it spends half the time blaming trump for appointing this judge. An Obama judge totally could have authored the same opinion, most of his appointees are just as bad on civil liberties.

[Simon_Jester]

DA, under what circumstances would the police be justified in searching a home for computers on the grounds that they suspect the resident to have used the computer for a crime?

[Dominus Atheos]

When they have direct, non-circumstantial evidence that the resident actually committed a crime.

[TheFeniX]

DA, under what circumstances would the police be justified in searching a home for computers on the grounds that they suspect the resident to have used the computer for a crime?

(finding that affidavit established nexus because the
IP address used to distribute prohibited material was accessed by a residential modem located in
the general vicinity of suspect’s residence and that suspect had participated in an online chat
regarding prohibited material between the hours of 6:30 and 8:30 a.m., when suspect would be at
home); United States v. Terry, 522 F.3d 645, 648 (6th Cir. 2008) (finding nexus because affidavit
established that the suspect had a computer at his residence and had sent an email containing
prohibited material at approximately 2:30 a.m.).

I would say an IP address tieing it to the home... which seems to be the case here, but I'm confused about "general vicinity." They track this shit, most Internet providers tie you to an IP. They hand out (semi) static addresses like candy these days. Depending on where this is and what provider was used. Coverage seems to be about 50% in Reed City. If he was using some kind of directed wireless or satellite from some podunk ISP, then that could explain it. They may have an address pool with dynamically assigned IPs on a short lease. Could be that's why they can't narrow it down more. Or someone like Hughesnet, which is garbage, could just not have records.

That said, I don't think this is a straight "he had a computer, so we can search his house because computer crime was committed" deal.

[Simon_Jester]

When they have direct, non-circumstantial evidence that the resident actually committed a crime.

So your underlying argument is that circumstantial evidence cannot be sufficient to trigger the "probable cause"
standard for warrants? And that all the evidence in this case was circumstantial?

[Dominus Atheos]

Yes, the evidence they had was that he was the only person with the motive to commit the crime. Which is pretty good cause to start an investigation, probably even detain and question him (although "I'm not saying anything without my lawyer" would be enough to get him out of even that) but there's still nothing actually showing that he specifically committed the crime, or that the crime was carried out from his residence or that evidence of the crime would be found there.

[Highlord Laan]

Baltimore PD, serving and protecting

Notable testimony from the Baltimore Police Gun Trace Task Force corruption trial

Here’s a rundown of what we’ve learned from the trial of two police officers, detectives Daniel Hersl and Marcus Taylor, from the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force:

Trial Day 1: Tuesday, Jan. 23
Detective Maurice Ward, one of the Gun Trace Task Force officers who has pleaded guilty to his role in a racketeering conspiracy, took the stand on the first day of trial for two of his co-defendants, Hersl and Taylor, and laid out a wide array of astonishing corruption he said the officers took part in.

» Ward testified that his squad would prowl the streets for guns and drugs, with his supervisor, Sgt. Wayne Jenkins, driving fast at groups of people and slamming on the brakes. The officers would pop their doors open to see who ran, then give chase and detain and search them. Ward said this occurred 10 to 20 times on slow nights, and more than 50 times, “easy,” on busier nights.

The officers had no reason to target the crowds other than to provoke someone who might have drugs or a gun into running. “A lot of times” guns and drugs were recovered in this way, Ward said.

» Ward said Jenkins liked to profile certain vehicles for traffic stops. Honda Accords, Acura TLs, Honda Odysseys were among the “dope boy cars” that they would pull over, claiming the drivers weren’t wearing seat belts or their windows were too heavily tinted.

» Ward testified that his squad would prowl the streets for guns and drugs, with his supervisor, Sgt. Wayne Jenkins, driving fast at groups of people and slamming on the brakes. The officers would pop their doors open to see who ran, then give chase and detain and search them. Ward said this occurred 10 to 20 times on slow nights, and more than 50 times, “easy,” on busier nights.

The officers had no reason to target the crowds other than to provoke someone who might have drugs or a gun into running. “A lot of times” guns and drugs were recovered in this way, Ward said.

» Ward said Jenkins liked to profile certain vehicles for traffic stops. Honda Accords, Acura TLs, Honda Odysseys were among the “dope boy cars” that they would pull over, claiming the drivers weren’t wearing seat belts or their windows were too heavily tinted.

» Later, Ward said Jenkins contacted him about wanting to rob the man again. They met at an apartment, where Jenkins and Hersl sipped Twisted Teas and discussed a robbery. Another time, he proposed a different robbery, and showed the officers a large black bag that was full of balaclava ski masks, black clothing and shoes. Another bag contained tools such as a crow bar, battering ram, and a rope with a grappling hook. “I didn’t understand that part,” Ward said of the grappling hook. Both bags were emptied out for jurors in the courtroom.

That was just day one. There's much more through the link, but I don't want to clog the page with all of it. I expect some truly earthshaking examples to be made after this case. There might even be a wrist slap after the paid administrative leave.

[Dragon Angel]

NYPD precinct tweets with BLM hashtag, random cops raise shit about it, precinct caves and replaces tweet.

NYPD Cops Outraged After NYPD Official Tweets #BlackLivesMatter
by Colin Kalmbacher | 4:25 pm, February 10th, 2018

A New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) precinct commander is in hot water after a controversial civil rights phrase appeared on the precinct’s Twitter feed.

The adverse reaction occurred after the NYPD’s 100th Precinct in Queens posted an update on their official Twitter account in an attempt to take part in Black History Month.

That tweet referenced boxer Jack Johnson–who became the first African American world heavyweight boxing champion in 1908–at the height of Jim Crow.

The offending tweet reads as follows:

Jack Johnson became the first African American man to hold the World Heavyweight Champion boxing title in 1908. #Blacklivesmatter

New York City cops were not amused by the post. The backlash was quick and fierce.

One police source complained to the New York Post, “How can a precinct commander lead people when she aligns herself with a group that is known to hate law enforcement and wishes police officers dead?She’s making a political statement on a job Web site. Let’s see what the police commissioner does now. If they don’t take action, then I guess the police commissioner and the mayor condone this.”

The tweet was later deleted and replaced with the same message and the hashtag: #BlackHistoryMonth.

The bio for the account in question reads, “Deputy Inspector Janice Holmes, Commanding Officer. The official Twitter of the 100th Precinct.” Holmes’ headshot is also the account’s avatar. But, according to Holmes, she wasn’t the one who posted the tweet in question. It was allegedly posted by an underling and Holmes reportedly ordered the original tweet to be deleted-and-replaced.

An NYPD spokesperson said that officials are “currently reviewing the Twitter account of the 100th Precinct.” The NYPD admitted, however, that nothing was likely to come of that investigation, noting, “There is no indication that any discipline will be given out.”

Every time I think there may actually be some measure of even incremental improvement happening, there's always a group of morons ready and willing to stand up and march that one step back...

[Dominus Atheos]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

This matter involves a school resource officer’s decision to handcuff a calm, compliant elementary school student for fighting with another student three days prior. The child brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive use of force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and several state law claims. On a motion for summary judgment, the district court concluded that the officer’s conduct did not amount to a constitutional violation and that the officer was entitled to both federal qualified immunity and state statutory immunity under the Maryland Tort Claims Act (“MTCA”). For the reasons that follow, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

...

E.W. was then removed from class and placed in a closed office with Dolgos and two school administrators. Dolgos told E.W. that she was there to discuss what took place on the bus. But, in Dolgos’s estimation, “E.W. [did not] seem to care.” J.A. 23. E.W. explained, (what happened 3 days ago) J.A. 23. Dolgos attempted to emphasize to E.W. the seriousness of the situation and the possible repercussions, telling her that adults could be jailed for such behavior. Still, in Dolgos’s opinion, “E.W. continued to act as if the situation simply was not a ‘big deal.’” J.A. 23. Dolgos then decided to take E.W. into custody.

Dolgos placed E.W. in handcuffs from behind and reseated her. Dolgos inserted two fingers between the handcuffs and E.W.’s wrists to ensure that they were not too tight. In her affidavit, Dolgos stated that she was concerned about the physical safety of herself and the school administrators because of both the incident she observed in the surveillance video and E.W.’s apathy. Dolgos expressed concern in the affidavit that E.W. might act violently against her or someone else if she attempted to walk E.W. from the school to her patrol car. Dolgos also admitted, however, that she had no idea whether E.W. had “any past or current behavioral issues or past involvements with law enforcement.” J.A. 24. According to Dolgos, E.W. stood 4’4” and weighed about 95 pounds, while Dolgos stands 5’4” and weighs 155 pounds.

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/161608.P.pdf

[White Haven]

[quote="CNN"A western North Carolina police officer who resigned after a body camera video shows him hitting and using a Taser on a man suspected of jaywalking will face preliminary charges of assault, the Buncombe County District Attorney's Office said Thursday.

Senior Police Officer Christopher Hickman, 31, was removed from patrol duty a day after the incident last August and resigned from the Asheville Police Department in January, the same day he was to be terminated, according to a timeline of the case released by the Asheville City Council.
On Thursday, a judge issued a warrant for Hickman's arrest on one count each of assault by strangulation, assault inflicting serious injury and communicating threats.

Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer said Hickman has been taken into custody. It is unclear whether Hickman has an attorney.
CNN reached out to the Fraternal Order of Police lodge in Asheville and didn't receive an immediate comment.
The release of body cam video in late February caused outrage in this North Carolina city in the Blue Ridge Mountains. The video shows Hickman and an officer in training stopping Johnnie Jermaine Rush, then 32, for allegedly jaywalking in the early morning hours of August 25, 2017.
After initial words were exchanged, Hickman moves to arrest Rush, who then flees on foot, according to video of the incident published by the Asheville Citizen-Times on February 28.
"(He) thinks it's funny," Hickman is heard saying as he chases Rush. "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore."
The officers catch Rush and tackle him. As Rush is being restrained on the ground, Hickman punches him in the head several times, shoots him with a stun gun and chokes him.
"I can't breathe! I can't breathe!" Rush repeatedly yells. "Help! Help!"
Later in the video, Hickman speaks with another officer.
"I beat the s--- out of his head," Hickman says. "Not gonna lie about that."
The violent arrest is one of several videotaped instances in recent years that have generated anger and public debate about police use of force.
Hickman did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment. Rush could not be reached for comment.
A spokesman for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation said that the FBI has launched an investigation into the incident, according to the Citizen-Times. The US Department of Justice told CNN it never comments on whether there is an investigation.
Tempers flared at a town hall meeting Wednesday as locals expressed their frustration and anger about the incident, according to CNN affiliate WLOS. Amid the outcry, police Chief Tammy Hooper said she would resign if it would help resolve the problem, WLOS reported.
CNN called the police department but was unable to get a comment from the chief.
"There is no excuse for what happened to Johnnie Rush," the ACLU of North Carolina said in a tweet. "Police must protect and serve everyone, regardless of race. Instead, a Black man gets beaten, tased, and choked over jaywalking. That's right, jaywalking."
Manheimer apologized to Rush in a statement on behalf of the City Council.
"The City Council and I immediately contacted city administration to express our outrage at the treatment of Mr. Rush and our outrage of not being informed about the actions of APD officers," Manheimer wrote. "We will have accountability and, above all, transparency."
Manheimer said the council wants to review how the incident was handled by police administrators and to look at police policies and training.
Officer resigned before termination
Rush initially was charged with second-degree trespassing and resisting a public officer. He filed a complaint with police the day he was arrested alleging Hickman used excessive force.
Chief Hooper watched the body camera footage, according to the timeline, and ordered Hickman off the street and told him to turn in his badge and gun. He was placed on administrative duty after Rush's complaint.

"The whole thing is bad, right? When I watched the video, I had the same reaction as probably you did when you watched it," Hooper told WLOS. "It's just a terrible, egregious case. The whole reason around the stop to begin with was just a bad thing from start to finish."
The district attorney and Asheville police agreed to dismiss the charges against Rush in September after watching the body camera footage, according to documents from the City Council.
"The acts demonstrated in the video were egregious and unacceptable," Asheville police said. "Therefore, APD requested that all charges against Mr. Rush related to this incident be dropped, to which the DA agreed and dismissed them."
Officials then went back and reviewed 58 hours of Hickman's body camera footage and found four other instances in which he displayed "discourteous and rude conduct to members of the public," according to the timeline.
In January, Hooper moved to fire Hickman but the officer resigned first.
Hooper also asked a detective to investigate whether Hickman committed criminal assault in the interaction, according to the timeline. That investigation is ongoing.
"The acts demonstrated in this video are unacceptable and contrary to the department's vision and the progress we have made in the last several years in improving community trust," the police chief said in a statement.
"Officers know that they must earn the trust of our community by providing fair and respectful service. That very clearly did not happen during the incident depicted and for that I apologize to Mr. Rush, as well as the community," Hooper said.

Asheville Police
@AshevillePolice
Statement from Chief Hooper regarding the video on @asheville. #The acts demonstrated in this video are unacceptable and contrary to the Department's vision and the progress we have made in the last several years in improving community trust..."

The body camera video published online by the Citizen-Times begins as Hickman and an officer in training decide to get out of the car and talk to Rush. They say in the video that they had just warned him not to jaywalk.
"You ain't got nothing better to do besides mess with me, and I'm trying to go home," Rush says. "I just got off of work, man. I'm tired."
The officer in training says he saw Rush fail to use a crosswalk four times in a row.
"I was polite with you and asked you, use the crosswalk. I know what you're doing man," the officer in training says. "You think I'm a punk. Guess what, I'm not. I don't think you're a punk either."
The officer in training says he can either arrest Rush or write him a ticket. After more words are exchanged, the officer in training begins to write a ticket.
"Ya'll ain't got s--- better to do besides harass somebody about f---ing walking," Rush says.
Hickman then tells Rush to put his hands behind his back. As the officers approach, Rush flees.
The officers catch up to him and tackle him to the ground. They order him to put his hands behind his back, and he says he can't.
"I can't breathe! I can't breathe!"
Hickman picks up his stun gun and shoots Rush on the ground, who screams in pain. The video shows Hickman putting his left hand around Rush's throat and ordering him to put his hands behind his back.
"I can't!" Rush says.

Other officers arrive on the scene, and Rush is handcuffed on the ground.
"All this over you getting a ticket? Now it's serious, bro," Hickman says.
Hickman then begins yelling at Rush and asks him, "What's wrong with you?"
"Stop yelling at me," Rush says.
"Well, then get up and we'll put you in a car, tough boy," Hickman says.
Officers help Rush up, the video shows, and as Hickman moves him over to his patrol car, he pushes Rush's head down.
"Stop, man, you ain't got to do all of that," Rush says.
"Don't look at me with your spitty, blood face," Hickman responds.
"Yeah, because you've been hitting me in my face," Rush says.
"Yeah, you're right," Hickman says.
"So that give you the right to punch me in my face?" Rush says.
"Unfortunately, it is," officer says.
Later, Hickman speaks with a supervisor on the scene about what happened. The city manager identified the person as a supervisor.
"He started throwing a fit on the sidewalk. I told him to get his hands behind his back, and it was on from there. (He) ran, laughing, saying 'f--- you,' 'can't wait til you catch me.' So we caught him," Hickman says.
"Then he wanted to fight. Tried to drag the Taser out of my hand, and then I just went on his f---ing head. I beat the s--- out of his head. Not gonna lie about that."
The supervisor tasked with reviewing cases of use of force failed to forward any information or notes from Hickman or Rush and did not review the body camera footage, according to the City Council timeline. That supervisor was disciplined and ordered to undergo more training.
CNN's Tina Burnside and Steve Almasy contributed to this report.[/quote]

I'm posting this not so much for the abuse in question, although it's unquestionably there, but for the refreshing sight of a reaction to blatant police abuse that;'s actually mostly not wrong. I would have liked to see Hickman stopped mid-beating by the other officer on-scene, but I understand the difficulty there given that the officer with Hickman was a trainee. Otherwise, for fucking once, we're not seeing the kind of cover from on high that exemplifies so many of these reports. The one person who tried (the supervisor) both failed and is ALSO in hot water over it.

[White Haven]

A western North Carolina police officer who resigned after a body camera video shows him hitting and using a Taser on a man suspected of jaywalking will face preliminary charges of assault, the Buncombe County District Attorney's Office said Thursday.

Senior Police Officer Christopher Hickman, 31, was removed from patrol duty a day after the incident last August and resigned from the Asheville Police Department in January, the same day he was to be terminated, according to a timeline of the case released by the Asheville City Council.
On Thursday, a judge issued a warrant for Hickman's arrest on one count each of assault by strangulation, assault inflicting serious injury and communicating threats.

Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer said Hickman has been taken into custody. It is unclear whether Hickman has an attorney.
CNN reached out to the Fraternal Order of Police lodge in Asheville and didn't receive an immediate comment.
The release of body cam video in late February caused outrage in this North Carolina city in the Blue Ridge Mountains. The video shows Hickman and an officer in training stopping Johnnie Jermaine Rush, then 32, for allegedly jaywalking in the early morning hours of August 25, 2017.
After initial words were exchanged, Hickman moves to arrest Rush, who then flees on foot, according to video of the incident published by the Asheville Citizen-Times on February 28.
"(He) thinks it's funny," Hickman is heard saying as he chases Rush. "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore."
The officers catch Rush and tackle him. As Rush is being restrained on the ground, Hickman punches him in the head several times, shoots him with a stun gun and chokes him.
"I can't breathe! I can't breathe!" Rush repeatedly yells. "Help! Help!"
Later in the video, Hickman speaks with another officer.
"I beat the s--- out of his head," Hickman says. "Not gonna lie about that."
The violent arrest is one of several videotaped instances in recent years that have generated anger and public debate about police use of force.
Hickman did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment. Rush could not be reached for comment.
A spokesman for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation said that the FBI has launched an investigation into the incident, according to the Citizen-Times. The US Department of Justice told CNN it never comments on whether there is an investigation.
Tempers flared at a town hall meeting Wednesday as locals expressed their frustration and anger about the incident, according to CNN affiliate WLOS. Amid the outcry, police Chief Tammy Hooper said she would resign if it would help resolve the problem, WLOS reported.
CNN called the police department but was unable to get a comment from the chief.
"There is no excuse for what happened to Johnnie Rush," the ACLU of North Carolina said in a tweet. "Police must protect and serve everyone, regardless of race. Instead, a Black man gets beaten, tased, and choked over jaywalking. That's right, jaywalking."
Manheimer apologized to Rush in a statement on behalf of the City Council.
"The City Council and I immediately contacted city administration to express our outrage at the treatment of Mr. Rush and our outrage of not being informed about the actions of APD officers," Manheimer wrote. "We will have accountability and, above all, transparency."
Manheimer said the council wants to review how the incident was handled by police administrators and to look at police policies and training.
Officer resigned before termination
Rush initially was charged with second-degree trespassing and resisting a public officer. He filed a complaint with police the day he was arrested alleging Hickman used excessive force.
Chief Hooper watched the body camera footage, according to the timeline, and ordered Hickman off the street and told him to turn in his badge and gun. He was placed on administrative duty after Rush's complaint.

"The whole thing is bad, right? When I watched the video, I had the same reaction as probably you did when you watched it," Hooper told WLOS. "It's just a terrible, egregious case. The whole reason around the stop to begin with was just a bad thing from start to finish."
The district attorney and Asheville police agreed to dismiss the charges against Rush in September after watching the body camera footage, according to documents from the City Council.
"The acts demonstrated in the video were egregious and unacceptable," Asheville police said. "Therefore, APD requested that all charges against Mr. Rush related to this incident be dropped, to which the DA agreed and dismissed them."
Officials then went back and reviewed 58 hours of Hickman's body camera footage and found four other instances in which he displayed "discourteous and rude conduct to members of the public," according to the timeline.
In January, Hooper moved to fire Hickman but the officer resigned first.
Hooper also asked a detective to investigate whether Hickman committed criminal assault in the interaction, according to the timeline. That investigation is ongoing.
"The acts demonstrated in this video are unacceptable and contrary to the department's vision and the progress we have made in the last several years in improving community trust," the police chief said in a statement.
"Officers know that they must earn the trust of our community by providing fair and respectful service. That very clearly did not happen during the incident depicted and for that I apologize to Mr. Rush, as well as the community," Hooper said.

Asheville Police
@AshevillePolice
Statement from Chief Hooper regarding the video on @asheville. #The acts demonstrated in this video are unacceptable and contrary to the Department's vision and the progress we have made in the last several years in improving community trust..."

The body camera video published online by the Citizen-Times begins as Hickman and an officer in training decide to get out of the car and talk to Rush. They say in the video that they had just warned him not to jaywalk.
"You ain't got nothing better to do besides mess with me, and I'm trying to go home," Rush says. "I just got off of work, man. I'm tired."
The officer in training says he saw Rush fail to use a crosswalk four times in a row.
"I was polite with you and asked you, use the crosswalk. I know what you're doing man," the officer in training says. "You think I'm a punk. Guess what, I'm not. I don't think you're a punk either."
The officer in training says he can either arrest Rush or write him a ticket. After more words are exchanged, the officer in training begins to write a ticket.
"Ya'll ain't got s--- better to do besides harass somebody about f---ing walking," Rush says.
Hickman then tells Rush to put his hands behind his back. As the officers approach, Rush flees.
The officers catch up to him and tackle him to the ground. They order him to put his hands behind his back, and he says he can't.
"I can't breathe! I can't breathe!"
Hickman picks up his stun gun and shoots Rush on the ground, who screams in pain. The video shows Hickman putting his left hand around Rush's throat and ordering him to put his hands behind his back.
"I can't!" Rush says.

Other officers arrive on the scene, and Rush is handcuffed on the ground.
"All this over you getting a ticket? Now it's serious, bro," Hickman says.
Hickman then begins yelling at Rush and asks him, "What's wrong with you?"
"Stop yelling at me," Rush says.
"Well, then get up and we'll put you in a car, tough boy," Hickman says.
Officers help Rush up, the video shows, and as Hickman moves him over to his patrol car, he pushes Rush's head down.
"Stop, man, you ain't got to do all of that," Rush says.
"Don't look at me with your spitty, blood face," Hickman responds.
"Yeah, because you've been hitting me in my face," Rush says.
"Yeah, you're right," Hickman says.
"So that give you the right to punch me in my face?" Rush says.
"Unfortunately, it is," officer says.
Later, Hickman speaks with a supervisor on the scene about what happened. The city manager identified the person as a supervisor.
"He started throwing a fit on the sidewalk. I told him to get his hands behind his back, and it was on from there. (He) ran, laughing, saying 'f--- you,' 'can't wait til you catch me.' So we caught him," Hickman says.
"Then he wanted to fight. Tried to drag the Taser out of my hand, and then I just went on his f---ing head. I beat the s--- out of his head. Not gonna lie about that."
The supervisor tasked with reviewing cases of use of force failed to forward any information or notes from Hickman or Rush and did not review the body camera footage, according to the City Council timeline. That supervisor was disciplined and ordered to undergo more training.
CNN's Tina Burnside and Steve Almasy contributed to this report.

I'm posting this not so much for the abuse in question, although it's unquestionably there, but for the refreshing sight of a reaction to blatant police abuse that;'s actually mostly not wrong. I would have liked to see Hickman stopped mid-beating by the other officer on-scene, but I understand the difficulty there given that the officer with Hickman was a trainee. Otherwise, for fucking once, we're not seeing the kind of cover from on high that exemplifies so many of these reports. The one person who tried (the supervisor) both failed and is ALSO in hot water over it.

[Dragon Angel]

Beaten. Tazed. Choked.

For jaywalking.

Jaywalking.

jaywalking

FOR FUCKING JAYWALKING

What ... the ... FUCK was wrong with them? Not just that one cop, all of fucking them. If your partner is beating the shit out of someone who is clearly helpless, it is your responsibility to fucking stop them. Otherwise, you are nothing less than an accomplice.

If they don't get more than a slap on the fucking wrist for this, then there is no justice. He could have fucking died. Other people in a very similar situation have died, and by a miracle of the fucking universe, he lived. "I can't breathe", who does this remind you of? Oh yeah, Eric Garner. Another black man who was murdered by cops.

[Vendetta]

Mostly he's just lucky he didn't get shot for aggressively running away.

Because apparently US police are so racist they can't tell the back of a black man from the front

Stephon Clark, the unarmed California man killed by police in his grandmother’s back yard, was facing away from the officers when they fired and hit him seven times from behind, the family’s attorney announced Friday, saying an independent autopsy revealed falsehoods in law enforcement’s narrative.

The 22-year-old father of two also did not die instantly and was alive for about three to 10 minutes while police failed to provide him medical aid and instead yelled commands at him and handcuffed him, according to the doctor who conducted an autopsy for Clark’s loved ones.

The news conference in Sacramento is likely to spark further outrage across the country after a week of national scrutiny surrounding the police killing of an unarmed black father in his family’s home on 18 March.

“It contradicts the narrative that has been put forth by the police … that they had to open fire because he was charging at them,” said Benjamin Crump, the family’s attorney. “The bullets were from behind.”

Sacramento police have said the officers were responding to calls about someone breaking into cars when they located Clark in the back yard. Body-camera revealed that two officers ran in and shouted “show me your hands!” and “gun!” and fired a rapid succession of bullets at the unarmed man less than 20 seconds after they arrived.

Police officials said the officers fired a total of 20 bullets and that they later discovered Clark was only holding his cellphone in his hands.

“Prior to the shooting, the involved officers saw the suspect facing them, advance forward with his arms extended, and holding an object in his hands,” police wrote in an initial press release.

The autopsy for the family was conducted by Bennet Omalu, an internationally recognized forensic pathologist famous for his work identifying head trauma in NFL players.

“The proposition that has been presented that … he was facing the officers, is inconsistent with the prevailing forensic evidence,” Omalu told reporters, adding, “It was not an instantaneous death.”

Asked if Clark could have survived if he had received medical attention directly after the shooting, Omalu said he could not speculate, but noted that the US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords survived a gunshot wound to the head after receiving immediate help.

Clark was hit six times in the middle of his back, one time on the back side of his body and once in the front in his thigh “when he was either on the ground or falling close to the ground”, Omalu said. Each bullet wound could have been fatal, he added.

The question of whether Clark was facing the officers or running toward the officers could be key in terms of whether prosecutors file charges or secure a conviction, though the law broadly allows officers to avoid consequences for killings if they argue they feared for their lives.

Regardless of Clark’s exact movements, his supporters have pointed out that the officers did not announce they were police and immediately started firing at him while on his family’s property.

Earlier in the week, Stevante Clark, Stephon’s older brother, told the Guardian that he was not confident that his family would find resolution in the criminal justice system.

“The chances of cops going to jail are very rare,” he said in a wide-ranging interview about the family’s fight to defend Clark while struggling through immense grief. “We’re not going to get justice, because my brother’s not coming back.”

The family’s lawyers have said they plan to file a lawsuit over the killing.

Sacramento police said in a statement on Friday that they had not yet received the official report from the county coroner and could not comment further on the case.

A spokesperson added in an email: “We acknowledge the importance of this case to all in our community and we are committed to a thorough and comprehensive investigation.”

[Dominus Atheos]

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/23/bor ... d-cbp-fbi/

HOW THE BORDER PATROL FAKED STATISTICS SHOWING A 73 PERCENT RISE IN ASSAULTS AGAINST AGENTS

...

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data, assaults on Border Patrol officers increased dramatically in fiscal year 2016, reversing a long downward trend. That year, CBP claims, there were 454 assaults on agents nationwide, compared with 378 in fiscal year 2015, a 20 percent increase. The increase from 2016 to 2017 was even more surprising. In 2017, according to CBP, there were 786 assaults, a spike of 73 percent, even as apprehensions fell from 415,816 to 310,532.

Almost the entire increase — 271 purported assaults — was said to have occurred in one sector, the Rio Grande Valley, in South Texas. A large number of the assaults supposedly occurred on a single day, according to charts and details provided by Christiana Coleman, a CBP public affairs spokesperson. In response to questions from The Intercept, Coleman explained in an email that “an incident in the Rio Grande Valley Sector on February 14, 2017, involved seven U.S. Border Patrol Agents assaulted by six subjects utilizing three different types of projectiles (rocks, bottles, and tree branches), totaling 126 assaults.”

According to conventional law enforcement accounting, this single incident should have been tallied as seven agents assaulted — not seven agents times six perpetrators times three projectiles. Subtracting the seven agents from 126 leaves 119 extra “assaults” that falsely and grossly inflate the data, making it appear to the public that far more agents were assaulted.

Holy shit, that is some next level dishonesty right there. 1 incident involving 7 agents, 6 perpetrators, and 3 types of weapon becomes 126 assaults because that's what you get when you multiply those numbers together.

Fuck, if nothing else, you have to admire their brass iron balls in admitting these details and standing behind them.

[TheFeniX]

"Man charged with 5 counts of assault for taking 5 steps toward an officer."

[Agent Fisher]

Mostly he's just lucky he didn't get shot for aggressively running away.

Because apparently US police are so racist they can't tell the back of a black man from the front

Stephon Clark, the unarmed California man killed by police in his grandmother’s back yard, was facing away from the officers when they fired and hit him seven times from behind, the family’s attorney announced Friday, saying an independent autopsy revealed falsehoods in law enforcement’s narrative.

The 22-year-old father of two also did not die instantly and was alive for about three to 10 minutes while police failed to provide him medical aid and instead yelled commands at him and handcuffed him, according to the doctor who conducted an autopsy for Clark’s loved ones.

The news conference in Sacramento is likely to spark further outrage across the country after a week of national scrutiny surrounding the police killing of an unarmed black father in his family’s home on 18 March.

“It contradicts the narrative that has been put forth by the police … that they had to open fire because he was charging at them,” said Benjamin Crump, the family’s attorney. “The bullets were from behind.”

Sacramento police have said the officers were responding to calls about someone breaking into cars when they located Clark in the back yard. Body-camera revealed that two officers ran in and shouted “show me your hands!” and “gun!” and fired a rapid succession of bullets at the unarmed man less than 20 seconds after they arrived.

Police officials said the officers fired a total of 20 bullets and that they later discovered Clark was only holding his cellphone in his hands.

“Prior to the shooting, the involved officers saw the suspect facing them, advance forward with his arms extended, and holding an object in his hands,” police wrote in an initial press release.

The autopsy for the family was conducted by Bennet Omalu, an internationally recognized forensic pathologist famous for his work identifying head trauma in NFL players.

“The proposition that has been presented that … he was facing the officers, is inconsistent with the prevailing forensic evidence,” Omalu told reporters, adding, “It was not an instantaneous death.”

Asked if Clark could have survived if he had received medical attention directly after the shooting, Omalu said he could not speculate, but noted that the US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords survived a gunshot wound to the head after receiving immediate help.

Clark was hit six times in the middle of his back, one time on the back side of his body and once in the front in his thigh “when he was either on the ground or falling close to the ground”, Omalu said. Each bullet wound could have been fatal, he added.

The question of whether Clark was facing the officers or running toward the officers could be key in terms of whether prosecutors file charges or secure a conviction, though the law broadly allows officers to avoid consequences for killings if they argue they feared for their lives.

Regardless of Clark’s exact movements, his supporters have pointed out that the officers did not announce they were police and immediately started firing at him while on his family’s property.

Earlier in the week, Stevante Clark, Stephon’s older brother, told the Guardian that he was not confident that his family would find resolution in the criminal justice system.

“The chances of cops going to jail are very rare,” he said in a wide-ranging interview about the family’s fight to defend Clark while struggling through immense grief. “We’re not going to get justice, because my brother’s not coming back.”

The family’s lawyers have said they plan to file a lawsuit over the killing.

Sacramento police said in a statement on Friday that they had not yet received the official report from the county coroner and could not comment further on the case.

A spokesperson added in an email: “We acknowledge the importance of this case to all in our community and we are committed to a thorough and comprehensive investigation.”

So, just a little follow up. Sacramento County Coroner released their findings of the official Autopsy and had it reviewed by four other Forensic Pathologists before doing so. Seems the family autopsy was “erroneous” so they wanted theirs reviewed by other doctors, including an independent Forensic Pathologist. And according to the independent Doctor, the first round was likely a hit to the left thigh, front to back, as Clark was moving forward. Also included is the toxicology report. Does it completely clear the officers or take away from the fact that Clark was unarmed? No. But it’s not some simple cut and dried black man in his own backyard story that it seemed like the national media wanted to portray.

KCRA story, with links to official autopsy and independent review.

[Dominus Atheos]

Found this one on Snopes. They rated it "mixture" although I have no idea how, by their own summery it's obviously true.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ramad-chatman/

Ramad Chatman was given a jail sentence for a crime of which he was acquitted.

RATING
MIXTURE

WHAT'S TRUE
A judge in Floyd County, Georgia revoked Ramad Chatman's probation, and jailed him, on the basis that he committed armed robbery — a charge of which he was acquitted by a jury.

WHAT'S FALSE
Chatman was not jailed for the same crime of which he was acquitted.

ORIGIN
Critics and observers of the American criminal justice system have long pointed to disparities and discrimination as one of its most significant and deeply-embedded problems. These disparities are perhaps most visible at the sentencing stage, where black individuals in particular are statistically proven to receive higher sentences — and for the same or similar crimes — than their white counterparts.
In that vein, in April 2018 the “Counter Current News” Facebook page described the case of Ramad Chatman, in a widely-shared video. A voiceover narrates:
A black man in Georgia will be jailed until 2022 even though he was found not guilty. Ramad Chatman was on probation for breaking into an apartment and stealing a television, back in 2012. He paid his fines, did community service and never broke the terms of his probation.

Then, in 2014, a store clerk was robbed at gunpoint. The security footage was too grainy to see who the robber was, but he was black. A year later, the clerk was scrolling through Facebook when she saw a picture of Chatman. She testified in court: “It triggered something in me, and it just made me freak out.”

Over a year later, Chatman heard he was a suspect in the store robbery. Knowing he had nothing to do with it, he went to the police station. They arrested him. In the trial, the store clerk kept changing her testimony, and a jury decided that Ramad was not guilty. The judge didn’t care. The judge decided to sentence Chatman to 10 years in prison, backdated to 2012. If there’s any justice, hopefully there’s a lawyer working on his appeal right now.

Chatman’s case is a relatively complicated one, and the video gets most of the basic details right. However, it leaves out a crucial detail: The charge on which Chatman was acquitted was not the same charge for which he was given a jail sentence, although the two cases were linked.

In July 2012, 20-year-old Ramad Ahshad Chatman and three other men were charged with breaking into an apartment and stealing a television. Chatman pleaded guilty, and Floyd County Superior Court judge John Niedrach agreed to deal with Chatman under Georgia’s First Time Offenders Act and gave him five years’ probation. This meant that, because Chatman had not previously been convicted of a felony, he would avoid jail time and ultimately have the charges against him dismissed if he honored the terms of his probation.

In July 2014, a clerk at the Lucky Lotto store on Shorter Avenue in Rome, Georgia was robbed at gunpoint by a black man. Later that year, the store clerk saw Chatman’s photograph on Facebook and, convinced he was the man who robbed her, reported it to the police. The clerk positively identified Chatman as the man who had robbed her at gunpoint.
In November 2015, Chatman became aware that he was a suspect in the Lucky Lotto robbery, and reported in person to police in Rome, according to the Atlanta, Georgia NBC affiliate WXIA-TV. He was arrested and charged with armed robbery.

In February 2016, Judge Niedrach held a hearing on whether Chatman had violated the terms of his probation on the 2012 theft. After hearing testimony from the Lucky Lotto store clerk, Niedrach ruled that Chatman had probably committed the Lucky Lotto armed robbery and thereby violated the terms of his probation. Niedrach revoked Chatman’s first-offender probation, which triggered an automatic conviction on the 2012 theft charges.

Niedrach sentenced Chatman to a ten-year prison sentence for the 2012 theft. Because Chatman had already spent four years on probation, Niedrach suspended this portion of the sentence, effectively meaning Chatman would spend six years in prison with his release provisionally scheduled for 2022.

A jury acquitted Chatman of armed robbery in the Lucky Lotto case in May 2016. According to the Rome News-Tribune, Chatman’s attorneys filed an emergency motion for Niedrach to reconsider his revocation of Chatman’s probation, since the judge’s ruling on the probation was based on his conclusion that Chatman probably committed the Lucky Lotto armed robbery and a jury had just acquitted Chatman of that charge. However, Niedrach did not agree to reconsider his decision, because the jury trial — although it came to a different conclusion about Chatman’s guilt — did not bring forth any new evidence.
Judge Niedrach appears to have acted according to the relevant Georgia law, which states that a judge may revoke an individual’s probation either if that individual admits to violating one of the terms of their probation, or if in the judge’s opinion “the evidence produced at the revocation hearing establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the violation or violations alleged.”

The judge indicated in Floyd County Superior Court documents that there was “proof by a preponderance of evidence” that Chatman had committed the armed robbery and that he had been in possession of a gun. This violated two conditions of his probation: that Chatman would not “violate the criminal laws of any governmental unit;” or “receive, possess or transport any firearm or other offensive weapon.”

In other words, in 2016 Niedrach came to the conclusion that, on balance, the evidence mostly pointed towards Chatman committing a crime and being in possession of a firearm in 2014, and that was enough to revoke his probation and trigger his conviction and imprisonment on the 2012 charge. Chatman was not jailed for the same charge on which he was acquitted, something that the Counter Current News video does not clarify, misleadingly claiming he was jailed “even though he was found not guilty.”

Similarly, when the video’s narrator says Chatman “never broke the terms of his probation,” this denies viewers the full facts. Although a jury acquitted Chatman of the 2014 armed robbery, Judge Niedrach, in accordance with the procedures set out in Georgia law, found that Chatman had indeed broken two of the terms of his probation.

As of May 2018, Chatman remains incarcerated at Rogers state prison in Reidsville, Georgia. His provisional release date is 6 July 2022.

1. Guy commits crime, is sentenced to probation.

2. Guy is accused of second crime, gets probation revoked on basis of committing second crime, sentenced to 10 years in prison for first crime.

3. Guy is found "not guilty" of committing second crime.

4. Judge who revoked probation says "but he might have committed the crime", so still keeps 10 year sentence for first crime.

5. Is definitely not because he's black, come on guys, that's just crazy. Not everything is about race you guys, come on.

[TheFeniX]

Cop shoots at dog with multiple kids in his 180,° a little girl in his 0°, richochet hits girl in the face. Video at the link, is not fun. Cops is fired and facing charges of battery. Cop is black so. Still a really dumb move, but I'm jaded enough at this point to wonder why the department isn't throwing full support behind him and went so far as to release the video.

Kind of surprised he didn't handcuff the little girl to "Control the situation." Eh, cheap shot. Really though, kind of shows again that a cop can act reckelessly and put himself into a dangerous situation, and he/she isn't the one who gets hurt when shit goes down.

Link Here

Sedgwick County District Attorney Marc Bennett on Thursday released body camera video that shows a police shooting that wounded a 9-year-old girl and led to a Wichita officer being fired in January.

Dexter Betts was at the girl's home in response to a 911 call on Dec. 30 when he shot twice at her dog, a 35- to 40-pound English bull terrier named Chevy. The girl was sitting behind the dog on the floor in the living room. Three other children were also in the room.

Betts' rounds missed their target. But bullet fragments that ricocheted off of the concrete floor under the carpet hit the 9-year-old's face above her eye, injuring her.

Betts defense attorney has said the dog was attacking the officer.
Breaking News

Be the first to know when big news breaks

Dexter Betts mug.jpg
Former Wichita police officer Dexter Betts is charged with one count of aggravated battery in a shooting that wounded a 9-year-old girl on Dec. 30, 2017.
Courtesy photo Sedgwick County Jail

An attorney for the girl's family, Charley O'Hara, has previously told The Eagle that the girl was directly in Betts' line of sight and line of fire when he pulled the trigger. The body camera video Bennett released Thursday in response to a request from The Eagle shows the girl partially illuminated by Betts' flashlight in the moments before the shooting.

The footage shows Betts and another officer approaching the house with flashlights and going in through the front door. Two of the children are standing in front of a television in the living room. The girl is sitting on the floor in front of a couch. Betts checks the hallway and a few rooms quickly then returns to the living room.

"Ok, we got a dog inside here, too," he says on the video.

Right after, Betts shouts "Whoa! Whoa!" The camera swings over to show a dog moving on the floor between Betts and the girl. It barks. Betts fires two shots.

The girl immediately wails, "Ow! Ow! Ow, you hurt my eye! Ow! Ow!"

Betts then tells the children to get out.

When Betts is asked over his police radio what happened, he says: "Dog inside attacked us."

The video Bennett released Thursday to The Eagle is 6 minutes, 22 seconds long. A copy of it is published on www.Kansas.com.

It's rare for body camera footage from Wichita police to be released. The Eagle sued the city after it denied requests to release body camera video that shows an Iraqi American family being detained at a Wichita bank in September and footage connected to a hit-and-run crash that allegedly involved an off-duty Wichita police officer who had been drinking.

Bennett agreed to release the body camera video in the December shooting in response to a request from The Eagle after parts of it were shown in court during a hearing last week.

Evidence presented in open court, including video footage, becomes part of the public record even if it hasn’t been released before.

At last week's preliminary hearing, Betts was bound over for trial on a felony aggravated battery charge connected to the girl's injury. He has pleaded not guilty to that charge.

The case is thought to be the first in two decades where a Wichita police officer is facing criminal charges for an on-duty shooting that resulted in an injury or death. The Wichita Police Department fired him less than a month after the girl was hurt.

The city of Wichita previously refused to give a copy of the video to The Eagle, saying it is not required by law to do so and that releasing it would violate the girl's privacy.

O'Hara, the family's attorney, has previously said that authorities should release the video so the public can see the officer’s actions and “people can make up their own mind.”

Police went to the girl's home, on North Gentry, after her mother called 911 saying her husband had put a gun in his mouth, according to testimony in court. The husband was unarmed and standing in the driveway with his hands up when Betts and another officer arrived.

The girl and her siblings were in the living room when officers went into the front door to see who was inside the home and find the gun described in the 911 call. The dog was inside with the children. The dog also was hit with bullet fragments.

At Betts' hearing last week, Bennett argued that the officer acted recklessly and with disregard for the girl's life and safety when he fired his gun at the dog because it was too close to the girl and he didn't have a clear background.

Defense attorney Jess Hoeme disagreed that Betts' actions were inappropriate, saying the officer "acknowledged the danger" of an attacking dog and dealt with it.

[Rogue 9]

Speaking of shooting dogs...

‘Paw Patrol’ Writers Defend Episode Where German Shepherd Cop Shoots Unarmed Black Lab 17 Times In Back

LOS ANGELES—Explaining that their goal has always been to hold a mirror to society, whether focusing on the power of friendship or a racially motivated killing, the writers behind the hit children’s television series PAW Patrol defended a recent episode of the show Friday in which a German shepherd “police pup” shoots an unarmed black lab 17 times in the back. “What we tried to do in ‘Paw-lice Bru-tail-ity’ was use Chase’s gunning down of a weaponless Zuma to start a dialogue,” staffer Louise Moon said of the storyline in which a bigoted Cap’n Turbot reports a “thuggish black dog” for loitering in his gated community moments before Chase arrives, mistakes Zuma’s bone for a gun, and shoots indiscriminately at the fleeing canine while shouting his signature catchphrase, “These paws uphold the laws!” “The fact is that whether they’re 2- or 11-years-old, our viewers are smart enough to decide for themselves whether Chase’s family and career should be ripped apart just because of a split-second decision. Our job is just to represent the political moment—from the violent Antifa protests to Chase’s PTSD-fraught leave of absence—using the only medium we have, and I believe we did that.” At press time, the PAW Patrol writers remained silent about the episode involving the deportation of thousands of Chihuahuas accused of stealing jobs and crippling Adventure Bay’s economy.

[Kamakazie Sith]

No offense Rogue and I'm sure you mean well but is this thread really an appropriate place for an onion article?

This thread contains stories of unbelievable abuses and murders so it just seems out of place, you know?