The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

News and events of the day
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:26 am So, Brad, you're saying that the cop isn't responsible for her own actions? Yes or no?
So, GU, do you think she should be tried for murder and put away for life? Yes or no?
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:43 am So, GU, do you think she should be tried for murder and put away for life? Yes or no?
I think she should be held responsible for her actions. It's that simple. You can't end a person's life like that and walk like it's all good.

I think at the least, she's guilty of manslaughter and get the max. Cops should be held to a higher standard.

Do you agree with that?
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:46 am I think she should be held responsible for her actions. It's that simple. You can't end a person's life like that and walk like it's all good.

I think at the least, she's guilty of manslaughter and get the max. Cops should be held to a higher standard.

Do you agree with that?
So, GU, do you think she should be tried for murder and put away for life? Yes or no?
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:51 am
I answered your question. You run away from mine.
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:52 am I answered your question. You run away from mine.
i'll simplify it. In the court of public opinion there are some that think involuntary manslaughter is not good enough. They want to put her away on murder charges. Do you agree with that? Yes or no?
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:57 am i'll simplify it. In the court of public opinion there are some that think involuntary manslaughter is not good enough. They want to put her away on murder charges. Do you agree with that? Yes or no?
I'd be happy with the max on manslaughter.

But there is merit to the view that cops need to be held to a higher standard. Up until now they haven't been. So, cops feel they can do whatever they want and have no consequences. If they started getting put away they might think twice.

On the surface, she didn't pre-meditate the action, so murder one isn't the correct charge. On the other, she's given the responsibility of being able to use her gun as the force of the government.

See? I have no problem giving my opinion. I don't play stupid passive/aggressive games.

And again, since her case is tried before a jury, that's a court of public opinion.

I'm tired of cops feeling like they can do whatever they want with no consequences. How about you?
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 8:15 am I'd be happy with the max on manslaughter.

But there is merit to the view that cops need to be held to a higher standard. Up until now they haven't been. So, cops feel they can do whatever they want and have no consequences. If they started getting put away they might think twice.

On the surface, she didn't pre-meditate the action, so murder one isn't the correct charge. On the other, she's given the responsibility of being able to use her gun as the force of the government.

See? I have no problem giving my opinion. I don't play stupid passive/aggressive games.

And again, since her case is tried before a jury, that's a court of public opinion.

I'm tired of cops feeling like they can do whatever they want with no consequences. How about you?
[bold] Have a nice day GU.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 8:18 am [bold] Have a nice day GU.
Thanks for proving me correct. You play your stupid fucking passive/aggressive games, I answer your questions, you run away from mine.

Like always.
Bludogdem
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Bludogdem »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:34 am Doesn't help that it's being tried in the court of public opinion.

Because of that, my guess, small chance she'll be acquitted. More likely, Involuntary manslaughter. With good behavior, out in in a year, with upwards of 5 years probation.
I’d say this one could end up in a hung jury. I have doubts on acquittal but ya never know for sure.

Potter is expected to take the stand. Plus an expert in quick reaction to pressure situations is expected to give testimony.
Bludogdem
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Bludogdem »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 8:15 am I'd be happy with the max on manslaughter.

But there is merit to the view that cops need to be held to a higher standard. Up until now they haven't been. So, cops feel they can do whatever they want and have no consequences. If they started getting put away they might think twice.

On the surface, she didn't pre-meditate the action, so murder one isn't the correct charge. On the other, she's given the responsibility of being able to use her gun as the force of the government.

See? I have no problem giving my opinion. I don't play stupid passive/aggressive games.

And again, since her case is tried before a jury, that's a court of public opinion.

I'm tired of cops feeling like they can do whatever they want with no consequences. How about you?
The Equal Protection Clause doesn’t permit setting a higher standard under law. The charges apply the same to police as to anyone else.
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

gounion wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 8:50 am Thanks for proving me correct. You play your stupid fucking passive/aggressive games, I answer your questions, you run away from mine.

Like always.
No GU, it has more to do with my desire to put gotcha games behind me.

i have a long record of wanting to hold the Police to a higher standard. You should know that.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

Bludogdem wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:25 am The Equal Protection Clause doesn’t permit setting a higher standard under law. The charges apply the same to police as to anyone else.
And here I thought you were a legal genius! :lol: :lol: :lol:

In sentencing, you can CERTAINLY take that into account. I said she should receive the max. Did you know that there is usually a range of possible sentences for crimes?

You didn't? Well, you learned something today, Otto! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Well, if it's possible for you to learn...
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:25 am No GU, it has more to do with my desire to put gotcha games behind me.

i have a long record of wanting to hold the Police to a higher standard. You should know that.
Really? A desire to put gotcha games behind you?

The why the demands for answers? "Yes or no"?

Sounds like a gotcha game to me.

You just don't want to answer questions. You just want to ask them. That way you don't actually have to take a stand.
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 4087
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by ProfX »

Licensed professionals, including police officers, are often held to higher legal standards.

If you ask me, Joe Rando, "should I buy this house," and I tell you, yes, even though it's structurally compromised and will collapse and kill you; well, I as Joe Rando am not very liable for telling you that. You asked a rando their advice; you had no particular reason to trust that person nor did they present themselves as an authority.

Now if I was a realtor and offering this as professional advice, it's possible not only could I be sued but go to jail.

There most definitely is a higher standard for police use of force and rules of engagement than for an armed civilian. They issue you that badge and with that great power also comes great responsibility. It is exactly WHY police departments have internal affairs departments. They make sure higher professional standards are being followed.

Accepting professional standards out of professionals does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Today in King of the Weasel Words:
bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:57 am… there are some that think …
Some people say https://youtu.be/R5SuQOZ-1tk
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Bludogdem wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:25 am The Equal Protection Clause doesn’t permit setting a higher standard under law. The charges apply the same to police as to anyone else.
but i feared for my life, tho
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

bradman wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:25 am No GU, it has more to do with my desire to put gotcha games behind me.

i have a long record of wanting to hold the Police to a higher standard. You should know that.
Your record consists of across the board defense of cops, resentment against anyone who protests police abuses, support for those who kill protesters, and mealy mouthed lip service to vagueries like “training.”
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Can't repl..

NYPD seriously punished just 1% of cops accused of misconduct, NYCLU study finds - NYDN
The NYCLU’s report, “COP OUT: Analyzing 20 Years of Records Proving NYPD Impunity,” reviewed 180,700 complaints filed with the Civilian Complaint Review Board and found that officers were disciplined just 4,283 times.

The investigations led to serious penalties like loss of vacation days, suspensions, probation or termination in just 1,530 cases, or 1% of the time. The NYCLU said it does not consider training letters of instruction, which are admonishment letters placed in an officer’s file, to be serious discipline.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
gounion
Posts: 17051
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

Ah, so now suddenly Chauvin is pleading guilty?

So he was lying in the first trial, right?

Wonder what this will do to the other cop's cases?

Something else interesting:
As part of the plea deal, Chauvin also pleaded guilty to violating the rights of a then-14-year-old boy during a 2017 arrest in which he held the boy by the throat, hit him in the head with a flashlight and held his knee on the boy’s neck and upper back while he was prone, handcuffed and not resisting.
Advertisement

Floyd’s arrest and death, which a bystander captured on cellphone video, sparked mass protests nationwide that called for an end to racial inequality and police mistreatment of Black people.

To bring federal charges in deaths involving police, prosecutors must believe an officer acted under the “color of law,” or government authority, and willfully deprived someone of their constitutional rights. That’s a high legal standard. An accident, bad judgment or simple negligence on the officer’s part isn’t enough to support federal charges. Prosecutors have to prove the officer knew what he was doing was wrong in that moment but did it anyway.

According to evidence in the state case against Chauvin, Kueng and Lane helped restrain the 46-year-old Floyd as he was on the ground — Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back and Lane held down Floyd’s legs. Thao held back bystanders and kept them from intervening during the 9 1/2-minute restraint.

All four former officers were charged broadly in federal court with depriving Floyd of his rights while acting under government authority, but the federal indictment broke down the counts even further. The first count against Chauvin alleges he violated Floyd’s right to be free from unreasonable seizure and unreasonable force by a police officer when he kept his knee on Floyd’s neck, even after Floyd was unresponsive.
And this also proves that however much BluDogDem/Greengrass holds himself as a legal genius, he don't know what the fuck he's talking about. Police ARE held to a higher standard when committing crimes while acting as an officer of the law.

But we've always known he was an idiot.
User avatar
Libertas
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Libertas »

Remarkable how on every topic, every issue, you will find right wingers are not just wrong but harmful and wrong.

Like only two of them voting to hold Mark Meadows in contempt meaning the other 200 of them are not patriots.
I sigh in your general direction.
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Documents Reveal LAPD Collected Millions of Tweets from Users Nationwide - Brennan Center for Justice
The technology used by police disproportionately tracked Twitter activity surrounding protests.

The Los Angeles Police Department piloted social media monitoring software that vacuumed up millions of tweets in October and November 2020 from users throughout the United States, according to internal documents released Wednesday by the Brennan Center. The monitoring tool, ABTShield, was developed by Polish software company EDGE NPD. A large portion of the posts collected were about police reform protests, raising serious concerns about the impact on First Amendment rights.

Over the last several months, the Brennan Center has released numerous documents obtained through a freedom of information lawsuit. They reveal the LAPD’s use of third-party monitoring tools and other social media collection mechanisms to amass data on innocent people and track racial justice activists, often in violation of social media platforms' policies. The LAPD’s trial of ABTShield is yet another example of the department’s misguided efforts to carry out its public safety mandate through broadscale social media surveillance.

ABTShield’s service for the LAPD focused solely on Twitter, assembling daily reports on how many people tweeted about various topics selected by the police department. In its sales pitches, EDGE NPD claimed that ABTShield was uniquely positioned to help government agencies combat the disinformation and foreign malign influences that undermine public trust in institutions.

However, the LAPD used the service largely to collect information far afield from disinformation, tracking communications in six categories: civil unrest, American policing, white nationalism and domestic extremism, potential danger, and the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan (due to the large Armenian population in Los Angeles), in addition to election security and disinformation.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Captain Says LAPD Demoted Him for Reporting Excessive Force By Police During George Floyd Protests - LAist
An LAPD captain has filed a whistleblower lawsuit that claims he was demoted for warning Chief Michel Moore and other superiors that officers were using excessive force during the protests that erupted last year after George Floyd’s murder.

Capt. Johnny Smith also claims he was demoted for telling commanders that the department’s body camera policy makes it too easy for officers to leave their cameras off.

Neither the LAPD nor City Attorney’s office would comment on the lawsuit. It is their policy to not comment on pending litigation.

The lawsuit states Smith disclosed to his commanding officers that officers were using bean bag shotguns "unlawfully by targeting and shooting demonstrators as individuals, including media, that were not threatening any individuals or property, but were peacefully protesting." Verbal threats of violence and mere non-compliance by a demonstrator do not alone justify the use of bean bag shotguns "because the use of the round could cause serious injury," the suit adds.

Smith also demanded that the department investigate the shootings as being unlawful and an excessive use of force, "but was counseled by his commanding officers to 'let it be.' Consequently, no appropriate investigation was initiated," according to the lawsuit.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

Meanwhile, back in Minnesota.....


https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/05/ ... te-wright/
Service File Shows Commendations, Minor Reprimands For Kim Potter, Officer Who Killed Daunte Wright
One note of praise for Potter in 2006 was based mainly on a citizen who called the department that year, praising her and three other officers for “how professionally they conducted themselves during a high risk stop and not like what he sees on the T.V. show COPS,” according to the chief’s notes of the call.
[bold] Which creates a huge misconception of the average cops daily life.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
bradman
Posts: 2518
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

Bludogdem wrote: Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:23 am I’d say this one could end up in a hung jury. I have doubts on acquittal but ya never know for sure.

Potter is expected to take the stand. Plus an expert in quick reaction to pressure situations is expected to give testimony.
Weapon confusion. It happens.

In the many articles i have read there was one that caught my eye. Redesign tazers. Instead of a regular trigger, design a tazer that has a thumb trigger on top of the tazer. i think they could do even better than that.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 4087
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by ProfX »

bradman wrote: Sun Dec 19, 2021 8:01 am Weapon confusion. It happens.

In the many articles i have read there was one that caught my eye. Redesign tazers. Instead of a regular trigger, design a tazer that has a thumb trigger on top of the tazer. i think they could do even better than that.
Regardless of the verdict, I agree on that point. Tasers should be redesigned so they look less like other firearms, including maybe putting the trigger in a different spot. Also - seriously - why not put a little voice chip in there, I mean if you can put it in a doll in Toys R Us, and the chip ITSELF in a robotic voice says "Taser. Taser. Taser." when it's pulled out. So you know for sure it's a taser you've pulled. Or put bright red coloration markings on it. There are all kinds of things they could do.

Training for officers should also emphasize being aware of these distinctions and being aware of them so they can make quick distinctions in a high stress situation if they're going to carry both.

I'm not gonna comment on the Potter trial. For once I have nothing to say there.

I have to add one more thing, though, and it's this: as a recent case in Miami made clear, it's not always accurate to claim tasers are "nonlethal". (A kid hit by one had a heart attack and died. Rare, but young people can have congenital heart issues, and this can happen.) I guess it would be fair to call them "less lethal". There should be caution in using them as well.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
Post Reply