Author Topic: Police State - Official Thread  (Read 995110 times)

Jack T. Cross

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1975 on: April 10, 2015, 06:24:30 PM »


I have no doubt, that had this not been on tape, nothing would have happened to this cop - even with the witness.  No doubt.



I haven't closely followed, but without the vid he would have most likely had a much better chance of getting out of it. And you can bet he would have taken every inch toward doing that.

Can't believe the bullshit on the news, fuck. I saw the indroduction to the story this morning saying "WHITE!!! officer shoots BLACK!!! man..."

There's absolutely nothing to say this cop wouldn't have shot any other person just the same. So why try to fuck with peoples' minds like that? Hm.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1976 on: April 10, 2015, 08:33:56 PM »
I haven't closely followed, but without the vid he would have most likely had a much better chance of getting out of it. And you can bet he would have taken every inch toward doing that.

Can't believe the bullshit on the news, fuck. I saw the indroduction to the story this morning saying "WHITE!!! officer shoots BLACK!!! man..."

There's absolutely nothing to say this cop wouldn't have shot any other person just the same. So why try to fuck with peoples' minds like that? Hm.

Couldn't agree more..

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1977 on: April 10, 2015, 08:36:04 PM »
Are you suggesting it's ok if it's there's no video?

No, I'm agreeing that it is not a matter of an increase.. it's a matter of more recording devices, more interest from media. I am PRO video. Get it on tape. Should be nothing to hide. 

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1978 on: April 10, 2015, 08:36:58 PM »
That looks like a straight up execution. 

\Pretty much it does..

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20785
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1979 on: April 10, 2015, 11:09:10 PM »

Is The Abuse of Power / Job okay in your Book.?
Or Should those With The Authority Of Law Enforcement
Be Held To Zero Tolerance.
And a Higher Standard of Professional Behaviour.
Or Do We Continually Overlook & Make Excuses.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1980 on: April 11, 2015, 01:09:32 AM »
Without a video, this definitely goes down as a CLEAN SHOOT.

The cop gets a medal.  The taser is found next to body.  Cop says they were only a few feet apart.  Ballistics backs up everything and voila, bad guys goes in the ground, and cop gets a promotion for showing bravery when needed.

Donny

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15782
  • getbig Zen Master
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1981 on: April 11, 2015, 01:17:46 AM »
Without a video, this definitely goes down as a CLEAN SHOOT.

The cop gets a medal.  The taser is found next to body.  Cop says they were only a few feet apart.  Ballistics backs up everything and voila, bad guys goes in the ground, and cop gets a promotion for showing bravery when needed.
yes and round the Dinner table that evening he tells his loved ones how daddy was a brave man on that day...

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1982 on: April 11, 2015, 09:10:31 AM »


No, it's not ok
Held to a higher standard and not overlook and make excuses.

The reality is.. you and I can look at a video (as we have) and because of different experiences, conclude it was proper or improper. The problem is, there is a group who will claim that is making excuses when it is not. But in general, yes. The current Slagel Scott incident.. dude straight up acted improper and should be held accountable. Dudes kicking the guy who stole the horse, no excuse, straight up abuse, fire them and hold them accountable

It's when my opinion varies from yours that I get accused of making excuses and covering up that I have the problem with. Not saying you specifically but in general.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1983 on: April 11, 2015, 09:15:31 AM »
yes and round the Dinner table that evening he tells his loved ones how daddy was a brave man on that day...

He may have Donny.. I know about 5 officers personally that have had to shoot someone. You would be surprised to know that's not their response. They don't beat their chest, they don't re-tell the story a choir practice as the rookies look upon them wide eyed. They do meet as a group on ocassion and talk about it with a counselor present to help them through it. They also meet with other officers that are involved in shootings to help them through the process... That's the reality of it for the most part.

Donny

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15782
  • getbig Zen Master
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1984 on: April 11, 2015, 09:27:51 AM »
He may have Donny.. I know about 5 officers personally that have had to shoot someone. You would be surprised to know that's not their response. They don't beat their chest, they don't re-tell the story a choir practice as the rookies look upon them wide eyed. They do meet as a group on ocassion and talk about it with a counselor present to help them through it. They also meet with other officers that are involved in shootings to help them through the process... That's the reality of it for the most part.
I think that Guys like you should be teaching in a Central Academy. You say your opinion but are a fair man.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1985 on: April 11, 2015, 09:36:22 AM »
I think that Guys like you should be teaching in a Central Academy. You say your opinion but are a fair man.

Donny, a central academy is a cool concept. But with airfare, lodging for 6 months, being away from home reducing the number applicants willing to do it.. it just isnt realistic. It's cost prohibitive to say the least. There is an Accreditation that departments can seek. CALEA which standardizes procedures.

And thanks for the compliment. I try to work at being fair.

Donny

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15782
  • getbig Zen Master
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1986 on: April 11, 2015, 09:48:52 AM »
Donny, a central academy is a cool concept. But with airfare, lodging for 6 months, being away from home reducing the number applicants willing to do it.. it just isnt realistic. It's cost prohibitive to say the least. There is an Accreditation that departments can seek. CALEA which standardizes procedures.

And thanks for the compliment. I try to work at being fair.
You come over as an experienced Officer, Sgt i think. Maybe 2 Academies .. to make it more accessible  but you know better than me about the inner workings there.

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20785
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1987 on: April 11, 2015, 01:08:28 PM »
No, it's not ok
Held to a higher standard and not overlook and make excuses.

The reality is.. you and I can look at a video (as we have) and because of different experiences, conclude it was proper or improper. The problem is, there is a group who will claim that is making excuses when it is not. But in general, yes. The current Slagel Scott incident.. dude straight up acted improper and should be held accountable. Dudes kicking the guy who stole the horse, no excuse, straight up abuse, fire them and hold them accountable

It's when my opinion varies from yours that I get accused of making excuses and covering up that I have the problem with. Not saying you specifically but in general.
























 :o Thanks some straight answers.
No issue with you having differing view point.
It's the Politically Correct whitewash none straight
Answers that I dislike, they seem evasive & as
Trying to cover or justify.

And as for accusations
you have accused me of being a cop hater
& having authority problems.

I do intensely dislike scumbags be they cops or not.
More so those that abuse there position of authority.
As I would think all right minded people do.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15002
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1988 on: April 11, 2015, 01:17:26 PM »
You come over as an experienced Officer, Sgt i think. Maybe 2 Academies .. to make it more accessible  but you know better than me about the inner workings there.

It would just be impossible due to logistics and cost. Plus, after the initial Academy, (ours runs about 7 months long) we have annual on-going training. I think there is a concerted effort to standardize training simply due to best practices. International Association of Chiefs or Police and P.E.R.F. meet and exchange ideas.. people are coming to our city to see how we handle protests as we have a pretty good system. We learn District Rep techniques from Ft. Worth or Seattle. Ultimately we should all be training with the latest information. Again, funding is a big part of it all. Generally speaking, we all have access to the same Supreme Court rulings and case law updates. No one trains warning shots anymore, it's all pretty much the same. I could go to almost any department tomorrow and handle calls. The difference would be their report writing system, procedures for booking etc. But use of force will be almost the same.

Back when I think it was Katrina hit and Houston was having issues, we sent a deployment of about 50 cops to Houston to help out. There were no real problems adapting to the city and patroling. APD rode in a squad car with a HPD. 

Donny

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15782
  • getbig Zen Master
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1989 on: April 11, 2015, 01:40:19 PM »
It would just be impossible due to logistics and cost. Plus, after the initial Academy, (ours runs about 7 months long) we have annual on-going training. I think there is a concerted effort to standardize training simply due to best practices. International Association of Chiefs or Police and P.E.R.F. meet and exchange ideas.. people are coming to our city to see how we handle protests as we have a pretty good system. We learn District Rep techniques from Ft. Worth or Seattle. Ultimately we should all be training with the latest information. Again, funding is a big part of it all. Generally speaking, we all have access to the same Supreme Court rulings and case law updates. No one trains warning shots anymore, it's all pretty much the same. I could go to almost any department tomorrow and handle calls. The difference would be their report writing system, procedures for booking etc. But use of force will be almost the same.

Back when I think it was Katrina hit and Houston was having issues, we sent a deployment of about 50 cops to Houston to help out. There were no real problems adapting to the city and patroling. APD rode in a squad car with a HPD. 
yes it is a shame it comes down to money... that i think is the problem.

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15704
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1990 on: April 11, 2015, 03:15:05 PM »
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez Signs Civil Forfeiture Abolition Bill

A quick and happy update from New Mexico: Gov. Susana Martinez (R) has signed HB 560, which I detailed here, into law. New Mexico has thus effectively abolished civil asset forfeiture by requiring a criminal conviction before the government can seize property.

Gov. Martinez’s statement can be read here.

    House Bill 560 (HB 560) makes numerous changes to the asset forfeiture process used by law enforcement agencies in New Mexico. As an attorney and career prosecutor, I understand how important it is that we ensure safeguards are in place to protect our constitutional rights. On balance, the changes made by this legislation improve the transparency and accountability of the forfeiture process and provide further protections to innocent property owners.

As expected, civil liberties advocates across the political spectrum cheered the move.

ACLU-NM Executive Director Peter Simonson:

    This is a good day for the Bill of Rights. For years police could seize people’s cash, cars, and houses without even accusing anyone of a crime. Today, we have ended this unfair practice in New Mexico and replaced it with a model that is just and constitutional.

Institute for Justice Legislative Counsel Lee McGrath:

    New Mexico has shown that ending policing for profit is a true bipartisan issue with broad public support. America is ready to end civil asset forfeiture, a practice which is not in line with our values or constitution. This law shows that we can be tough on crime without stripping property away from innocent Americans.

Emily Kaltenbach of the New Mexico chapter of the Drug Policy Alliance:

    New Mexico has succeeded today in reining in one of the worst excesses of the drug war. Like other drug war programs, civil asset forfeiture is disproportionately used against poor people of color who cannot afford to hire lawyers to get their property back. This law is an important step towards repairing some of the damage the drug war has inflicted upon our society and system of justice.

Civil asset forfeiture is an inherently abusive practice that provides perverse incentives to law enforcement, encourages “policing for profit,” and allows the government to take the property of individuals and businesses that are never charged with any wrongdoing. Hopefully the bipartisan spirit of the New Mexico abolition (HB 560 passed the legislature unanimously) will serve as a model for other legislatures around the country who wish to restore our cherished concepts of due process and private property to their proper status.


http://www.cato.org/blog/new-mexico-governor-susana-martinez-signs-civil-forfeiture-abolition-bill

avxo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5605
  • Iron Pumping University Math Professor
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1991 on: April 11, 2015, 04:06:45 PM »
Which is, at best, anecdotal evidence. . Get back to me when you have something a bit more solid.

Said the man who uses anecdotal evidence to defend positions like "everyone who gets abused by the police is low -life trash and deserves it."

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1992 on: April 11, 2015, 04:32:47 PM »
Said the man who uses anecdotal evidence to defend positions like "everyone who gets abused by the police is low -life trash and deserves it."

can you post post where i said everyone,you seem to have a problem with stretching the truth  ;)

illuminati

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20785
  • The Strongest Shall Survive.- - Lest we Forget.
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1993 on: April 11, 2015, 05:09:52 PM »
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez Signs Civil Forfeiture Abolition Bill

A quick and happy update from New Mexico: Gov. Susana Martinez (R) has signed HB 560, which I detailed here, into law. New Mexico has thus effectively abolished civil asset forfeiture by requiring a criminal conviction before the government can seize property.

Gov. Martinez’s statement can be read here.

    House Bill 560 (HB 560) makes numerous changes to the asset forfeiture process used by law enforcement agencies in New Mexico. As an attorney and career prosecutor, I understand how important it is that we ensure safeguards are in place to protect our constitutional rights. On balance, the changes made by this legislation improve the transparency and accountability of the forfeiture process and provide further protections to innocent property owners.

As expected, civil liberties advocates across the political spectrum cheered the move.

ACLU-NM Executive Director Peter Simonson:

    This is a good day for the Bill of Rights. For years police could seize people’s cash, cars, and houses without even accusing anyone of a crime. Today, we have ended this unfair practice in New Mexico and replaced it with a model that is just and constitutional.

Institute for Justice Legislative Counsel Lee McGrath:

    New Mexico has shown that ending policing for profit is a true bipartisan issue with broad public support. America is ready to end civil asset forfeiture, a practice which is not in line with our values or constitution. This law shows that we can be tough on crime without stripping property away from innocent Americans.

Emily Kaltenbach of the New Mexico chapter of the Drug Policy Alliance:

    New Mexico has succeeded today in reining in one of the worst excesses of the drug war. Like other drug war programs, civil asset forfeiture is disproportionately used against poor people of color who cannot afford to hire lawyers to get their property back. This law is an important step towards repairing some of the damage the drug war has inflicted upon our society and system of justice.

Civil asset forfeiture is an inherently abusive practice that provides perverse incentives to law enforcement, encourages “policing for profit,” and allows the government to take the property of individuals and businesses that are never charged with any wrongdoing. Hopefully the bipartisan spirit of the New Mexico abolition (HB 560 passed the legislature unanimously) will serve as a model for other legislatures around the country who wish to restore our cherished concepts of due process and private property to their proper status.


http://www.cato.org/blog/new-mexico-governor-susana-martinez-signs-civil-forfeiture-abolition-bill













That was far too much power for cops &
Government, Stealing people's Property etc
Without any charges or court case.

Good to hear it's been brought to an end.

avxo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5605
  • Iron Pumping University Math Professor
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1994 on: April 12, 2015, 02:42:32 PM »
can you post post where i said everyone,you seem to have a problem stretching the truth  ;)

You suggested that someone who had previous run-ins with the law and recorded an interaction between police and a third party was trash as if somehow that made what the police were doing is ok.

So cut the crap.

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1995 on: April 12, 2015, 03:05:59 PM »
You suggested that someone who had previous run-ins with the law and recorded an interaction between police and a third party was trash as if somehow that made what the police were doing is ok.

So cut the crap.

and you said i said everyone which i never did,so cut the crap

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1996 on: April 12, 2015, 03:10:49 PM »


Except that the evidence suggests that it's not just a few individuals. The evidence suggests that most abuse their authority, albeit to varying degrees. It's wrong to ignore some of abuse because it doesn't result in someone being beaten to within an inch of their life or outright killed.
[/quote]

link to where it says most police abuse their authority

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1997 on: April 13, 2015, 02:26:41 PM »
http://watchdog.org/211545/no-liability-for-judge/

I need a lawyer to explain this shit.

A judge can make up a charge, have you put away, and they are completely protected?

WTF




========================

Federal court: no liability for PA judge who made up criminal charge

PITTSBURGH — A federal court recently told a Lawrence County woman she’s simply out of luck and can’t sue local officials, including a Common Pleas judge who apparently made up a criminal charge that was used to place her on electronic monitoring.

Shutterstock image

Shutterstock image

DENIED: The Third Circuit said that a Lawrence County woman can’t sue the judge who used a seemingly-made-up charge in her case.

A judge has absolute civil immunity, even if the action “was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority,” the three-judge panel ruled in its six-page opinion.

Judge Thomas Piccione had ordered Lynn Van Tassel to report to jail after she didn’t pay her ex-husband’s attorney’s fees as ordered — even though she was appealing that order. He sentenced her to 90 days in jail and had her arrested on a bench warrant.

He then put a criminal charge in the system to place her on electronic monitoring. Van Tassel had never been charged with anything, much less had a trial or been convicted. And the law the judge used clearly describes what it’s for, and there’s certainly no mention of using it to collect attorney fees.

Van Tassel was almost fired for being absent without leave from work because she was in jail and the criminal charge she could provide no paperwork for, because that process hadn’t occurred in any real-world way.

But there’s no remedy for Van Tassel.

Like a bad April Fool’s Day joke, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit officially agreed April 1 with the district court’s tossing of the case.

Van Tassel had sued the judge, the chief probation officer, the jail warden, a state trooper and the district attorney for violating a variety of her constitutional rights.

Photo courtesy of EllwoodCity.org

Photo courtesy of EllwoodCity.org

JUDGE AS COLLECTION AGENCY? Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas Judge Thomas Piccione appears to have used an irrelevant law to enforce collection of attorney’s fees against a local woman, in favor of an attorney who’s now partner with his former partner.

Instead of filing something in her existing case file, the court used a miscellaneous docket, listing a charge that looks like it could be relevant. It’s described as “contempt for violation of order or agreement.” That law deals with “indirect criminal contempt,” and under that section a judge certainly can fine and jail someone.

But there’s a problem — or looks like there should be. That law is in a chapter titled “Protection from Abuse,” and the law Van Tassel is made to look like she violated distinctly talks about protection from abuse orders.

There is no PFA in Van Tassel’s case, however, that she could have violated. While that law does discuss fines, they are to go to specific agencies — there’s nothing about “fines” to pay someone else’s attorney’s fees. Additionally, James Manolis is a partner with Piccione’s former partner. It was Manolis’ fees that Van Tassel didn’t promptly pay, resulting in jail time.

Van Tassel was jailed for six days before there was any hearing, though state law seems to require one within three.

Van Tassel was on electronic monitoring for a little over a month, paying $750 for that, and Manolis told Watchdog.org on Friday the attorney’s fees totaled more than $10,000 after Van Tassel’s appeals.

The federal court was not concerned the court seems to have made up its own procedure to use electronic monitoring in civil cases, here to essentially play collection agency for an attorney.

When Watchdog asked Piccione for comment, his secretary returned the call, saying only “he is not able to comment on cases.”

There are other remedies for alleged judicial misconduct — in theory. Van Tassel could file a complaint with the Judicial Conduct Board of Pennsylvania or try to have Piccone prosecuted for any false swearing involved with filing that charge.

She tried both and got nowhere. The Judicial Conduct Board denied her complaint, and she said the attorney general’s office, weirdly, referred her to the consumer complaint department.


Longtime Pennsylvania lawyer Charles Steele confirmed to Watchdog, “Suing a judge is almost impossible.”

It’s a matter of public policy. Otherwise, “you open the floodgates for every frustrated party,” he said, “though that doesn’t mean that judges don’t abuse their positions.”

One of the landmark cases on judicial immunity is Stump v. Sparkman, in 1978. The U.S. Supreme Court said even that judge couldn’t be sued — even though he approved a mother’s petition for authority to sterilize her “somewhat retarded” 15-year-old daughter who was perhaps having sex with boys older than her or young men, “in order ‘to prevent unfortunate circumstances.’”

The judge approved the petition the same day, without filing with the clerk and without any sort of hearing. The daughter was told she was having her appendix removed and didn’t find out about the forced sterilization until she was married and couldn’t conceive.

Nonetheless, no liability.

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15704
  • Silence you furry fool!
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1998 on: April 13, 2015, 06:24:41 PM »
A judge has absolute civil immunity, even if the action “was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority,” the three-judge panel ruled in its six-page opinion.

Insane.

avxo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5605
  • Iron Pumping University Math Professor
Re: Police State - Official Thread
« Reply #1999 on: April 13, 2015, 08:23:19 PM »
Insane.

Stump v. Sparkman was a horrible decision by the Court and one which it hasn't had occasion to revisit, sadly. The dissents by Justices Stewart and Powell are required reading in most ethics classes in law schools and are both well worth a read.