Police misconduct

[BlueLaser]

This is a frequent topic here. Every time there's an article out that shows cops in an unfavourable light, the circle jerk of hate continues. With everything including comments congratulating reports of people who attack cops. And if you encourage discretion or waiting for the facts, people are quick to post article after article after article that show police misconduct. As though a handful of articles prove anything, especially when most come without context. So when I read this article, I could help but think of terb.

http://goo.gl/q7HHjM

The headline (which has since been changed but is still the link description from the main news page) was: L.A. police detain black actress for 'showing affection' with white boyfriend.

This is why I don't trust the media and why I am suspicious of complaints about police misconduct. Nice sensationalizing CBC. Bad cops exist, I've never said otherwise (see "I'm going to kill you" video). But not all complaints or reports about it are true, and this is the more standard response you see from police when they do. Calm, professional... Even in the face of hysterics and drama.

I remember the incident were police "shoved an old woman" in BC a few years ago. The media was livid. Carelessly knocking her over and ignoring her, then the truth came out: he had made sure she was alright, apologized, the whole thing was a misunderstanding....and this had all happened before the media reported it. And, it turns out, they knew he had apologized and made sure she was alright when they ran their story and left that tidbit out.

The point isn't give police misconduct a pass. The point is that not all reports of misconduct are. Not all officer shootings are unjustified. And when you are dealing with police, don't automatically assume the constable you are faced with is a thug or a racist or a bully. Chances are, like the vast majority of interactions, it's just someone doing their job.

 

[nobody123]

The point is that not all reports of misconduct are. Not all officer shootings are unjustified.

Well doesn't that just fill me with confidence. (as does your odd choice of an incident where the police were clearly in the wrong in detaining someone as an example of a misleading headline)

 

[BlueLaser]

Well doesn't that just fill me with confidence. (as does your odd choice of an incident where the police were clearly in the wrong in detaining someone as an example of a misleading headline)

Clearly wrong? How do you figure? California may not have stop and identify statutes, but police can, and will, detain you if you're suspected of wrongdoing to ID you. In Canada we have specifically codified it even under the "identification of criminals act". If you're just walking down the street, they can't. But if you're suspected of wrongdoing, which she was, they are indeed empowered with ID'ing you and detaining you if you refuse.

 

[shack]

I have the utmost respect for the police, in general.

Guaranteed that if anyone were in their situation, i.e. dealing with total strangers, anyone of whom could be dangerous, numerous times a day, they would be using the same extreme caution to protect themselves, their partners and the welfare of their families.

Are there some that abuse their power? Sure. But you can't blame them for making sure the people they engage cannot harm them before dealing with whatever the situation is. They are always going to be more likely to be much firmer with people who do not obey to their instructions.

I like the Chris Rock video of "How not to get your ass kicked". It is quite simple. Based on this story she did not do what they told her to. She turned a 5 minute interaction into a 30 minute handcuff ordeal.

 

[Aardvark154]

The one slight problem people in the Directors Guild offices phoned the LAPD reporting a couple having sex in the front passenger's seat of a parked car with the door open. Some people consider that slightly more than "showing affection in public!"

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/15/django-actress-daniele-watts-lapd-race-card-fame-audio/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aim-police-audio-claims-went-racism-rant.html

 

[nobody123]

Clearly wrong? How do you figure? California may not have stop and identify statutes, but police can, and will, detain you if you're suspected of wrongdoing to ID you. In Canada we have specifically codified it even under the "identification of criminals act". If you're just walking down the street, they can't. But if you're suspected of wrongdoing, which she was, they are indeed empowered with ID'ing you and detaining you if you refuse.

My bad. I was leaping to conclusions based on a version of the incident I had read earlier in the day. I had understood that he happened upon the two of them, not that he was following up on a call. And while the possibility does exist that had she been white she would have been let off with a "move along now ma'am", there is no way we can ever know that. Nothing "clearly" or necessarily even "in the wrong" here. Sorry about that.

I still maintain that "Not all officer shootings are unjustified." is damning them with faint praise though

 

[MRBJX]

This is a frequent topic here. Every time there's an article out that shows cops in an unfavourable light, the circle jerk of hate continues. With everything including comments congratulating reports of people who attack cops. And if you encourage discretion or waiting for the facts, people are quick to post article after article after article that show police misconduct. As though a handful of articles prove anything, especially when most come without context. So when I read this article, I could help but think of terb.

http://goo.gl/q7HHjM

The headline (which has since been changed but is still the link description from the main news page) was: L.A. police detain black actress for 'showing affection' with white boyfriend.

This is why I don't trust the media and why I am suspicious of complaints about police misconduct. Nice sensationalizing CBC. Bad cops exist, I've never said otherwise (see "I'm going to kill you" video). But not all complaints or reports about it are true, and this is the more standard response you see from police when they do. Calm, professional... Even in the face of hysterics and drama.

I remember the incident were police "shoved an old woman" in BC a few years ago. The media was livid. Carelessly knocking her over and ignoring her, then the truth came out: he had made sure she was alright, apologized, the whole thing was a misunderstanding....and this had all happened before the media reported it. And, it turns out, they knew he had apologized and made sure she was alright when they ran their story and left that tidbit out.

The point isn't give police misconduct a pass. The point is that not all reports of misconduct are. Not all officer shootings are unjustified. And when you are dealing with police, don't automatically assume the constable you are faced with is a thug or a racist or a bully. Chances are, like the vast majority of interactions, it's just someone doing their job.

The point IS they ARE giving police misconduct a pass.

 

[shack]

The point IS they ARE giving police misconduct a pass.

Was there misconduct in this case?

 

[BlueLaser]

My bad. I was leaping to conclusions based on a version of the incident I had read earlier in the day. I had understood that he happened upon the two of them, not that he was following up on a call. And while the possibility does exist that had she been white she would have been let off with a "move along now ma'am", there is no way we can ever know that. Nothing "clearly" or necessarily even "in the wrong" here. Sorry about that.

I still maintain that "Not all officer shootings are unjustified." is damning them with faint praise though

My point is that with an officer involved shooting, what happened to innocent until proven guilty? What happened to benefit of the doubt? Sure, the victim deserved that same courtesy from the officer, but how do we know they didn't get it? Racing to conclusions isn't how we should treat people, anyone, whether they have a badge or not.

 

[Frosty]

Majority of police are good cops and we need a police force to provide security and stability in any society. But the problem lies in the fact that a police union is loyal group that would protect "bad" police officers who do break the law instead of terminating them.

 

[MRBJX]

Was there misconduct in this case?

You know very well, I am not speaking of this case, nor any case in isolation.
Check it out

 

[Babypowder]

Majority of police are good cops and we need a police force to provide security and stability in any society. But the problem lies in the fact that a police union is loyal group that would protect "bad" police officers who do break the law instead of terminating them.

dont blame unions. These same "good cops" see the misconduct all the time and they turn a blind eye. and when they actually decide to do something they get ridiculed for it. http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...takes_heat_for_arresting_offduty_officer.html

police officer that does nothing when they see misconduct is just as bad as these "bad apples"

 

[shack]

You know very well, I am not speaking of this case,

Actually, I wasn't sure. It was a serious question.

Guess I have my answer.

 

[BlueLaser]

You know very well, I am not speaking of this case, nor any case in isolation.
Check it out

Who is this "THEY" that's giving misconduct a pass?

I like your link that highlights a bunch of prominent cases of police brutality. How many of those cops were disciplined, charged, dismissed? What percentage of interactions with police involve misconduct?

 

[BlueLaser]

dont blame unions. These same "good cops" see the misconduct all the time and they turn a blind eye. and when they actually decide to do something they get ridiculed for it. http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...takes_heat_for_arresting_offduty_officer.html

police officer that does nothing when they see misconduct is just as bad as these "bad apples"

And when officers are caught acting that way, they're disciplined, docked pay, sometimes even terminated.

People say police officers never come forward: yet here one did. Apparently "never" isn't accurate. And while the media (don't forget to see the article that prompted this thread about their shitty, biased and sensationalized reporting) makes it sound every officer he met was against him, how do you know he didn't get pats on the back from others, or get bought beer by like-minded coworkers during an off-duty visit to the local watering hole? Even if he had told that to the media, would you trust them to print it? I don't. If it doesn't generate controversy, it doesn't generate readership. Why do you think they do things like, "Find out what's in your drinking water tonight at 8." Really? If the water was deadly and poisonous, you'd make us tune into to a program several hours from now? And when we do, and find it's the old debate about fluoride, we should know what kind of games the media play. I would love to hear PC Vandenburgh tell us what support, if any, he has received, from coworkers and the institution itself, but the media doesn't seem to even be interested in asking that question. Doesn't that tell you all you need to know about the media's reporting of these situations, that they don't even ask for positive information, only the scandalous and the controversial?

 

[Babypowder]

how do you know he didn't get pats on the back from others, or get bought beer by like-minded coworkers during an off-duty visit to the local watering hole?

SO you think a bunch of imaginary "Good cops" decided to give this officer a high five while the division was busy giving him false tickets and calling him a rat? wow you are clueless

 

[BlueLaser]

SO you think a bunch of imaginary "Good cops" decided to give this officer a high five while the division was busy giving him false tickets and calling him a rat? wow you are clueless

The division? You mean one guy that gave him a ticket and was disciplined for it? You're worse than the media. The report names Little (the guy who gave him the ticket), the partner and the booking Sgt, all of whom were punished, and says 2 others who aren't named were punished, and you're calling it "the division". You make it sound like everyone was against him, when even the sensationalizing media can only manage to name 5 guys. What makes you think it was more than just those 5 let alone the entire division? Maybe he had no support, maybe it would turn out you're right to be so negative about it...but no one bothered to even ask the PC the question.

 

[Babypowder]

The division? You mean one guy that gave him a ticket and was disciplined for it? You're worse than the media. The report names Little (the guy who gave him the ticket), the partner and the booking Sgt, all of whom were punished, and says 2 others who aren't named were punished, and you're calling it "the division". You make it sound like everyone was against him, when even the sensationalizing media can only manage to name 5 guys. What makes you think it was more than just those 5 let alone the entire division? Maybe he had no support, maybe it would turn out you're right to be so negative about it...but no one bothered to even ask the PC the question.

how about his partner that refused to help in arresting a DRUNK DRIVER?? you are worse than bad cops. but thank god for the pretend officers you made up that praised the only rookie that did the right thing.

 

[BlueLaser]

how about his partner that refused to help in arresting a DRUNK DRIVER?? you are worse than bad cops. but thank god for the pretend officers you made up that praised the only rookie that did the right thing.

I mentioned the partner. If you can't read, I can't help you.

The division? You mean one guy that gave him a ticket and was disciplined for it? You're worse than the media. The report names Little (the guy who gave him the ticket), the partner and the booking Sgt, all of whom were punished, and says 2 others who aren't named were punished, and you're calling it "the division". You make it sound like everyone was against him, when even the sensationalizing media can only manage to name 5 guys. What makes you think it was more than just those 5 let alone the entire division? Maybe he had no support, maybe it would turn out you're right to be so negative about it...but no one bothered to even ask the PC the question.

Do you have information that wasn't reported to show that it was more than just those 5 people in order to justify your claim that "the division" was harassing him? Like I said, maybe they were, but why didn't the media ask if anyone sided with him, or report the answer if they did? We know 2 people who sided with him at least: the chief who punished and/or ordered punished those who did and made statements about how harassing officers for arresting fellow officers will not be tolerated, and the head of the police union that not only didn't fight the punishments handed down but repeated the chiefs warning. How many more did? We don't know. But we also don't know how many more didn't. There are roughly 5,400 police officers on the TPS. The media, in all their wisdom, can tell us of a grand total of 5 that harassed this officer. What about the other 5,395? You say I'm worse than bad cops for believing SOME of them might just support with this guy did. I like to think I'm just an optimist. But the point is, we have no idea. You assume, based on..... your obvious and biased attitude that cops are scumbags. I'm not speaking with bias. I'm saying let's get the facts. Someone ask this PC if anyone backed him up from within the ranks. Until we have all the facts, how can we judge? I suppose you think it's fine to just judge away, without even knowing. That's called prejudice. Prejudice about race is racism. Prejudice about sex is sexism. Do you support either of those? If not, why do you support prejudice against police?

 

[Babypowder]

I'm not speaking with bias. I'm saying let's get the facts.

Because making uo imaginary cops that are congragulating this cop isnt speaking with bias but getting facts??? wow. what a joke