Hold on Fam I didn't say it was only blacks that get killed by the police, I said that there isn't much of a fervor if it's a black woman
Do you have the similar chart for the propensity to commit crimes, and or interact with police? Would seem to me that might be needed to be able to add context.
Cop is wrong here, but dude does jump into the car a little quick for a license. Again, Cop is wrong, and in the longer (unedited) video of the interaction, it is the cop that is distraught over having shot the guy, and getting EMS there to help him. You have to consider the split second decision the cop has to make here. IF the jump back into the car is to grap the handgun in the center console, and this guy spins around and leads up the cop. Not a tough decision to make, but an easy one for us to sit here and arm chair QB from the comfort of our couch. Again, he absolutely made the wrong split second decision here. Also dude didn't die, therefore murder conviction would probably be unlikely; but I confess I'm not a lawyer.
you're implying all sorts of shit here tbh all i said was that there isn't much of a concern here because its not the standard demographic getting killed in sketchy ways never said others don't get killed by the police, that's retarded
committing crimes and being arrested for crimes is two wholly different things. there's some disparity in arrests case in point - drug possession or sale arrests. in new york more minorities are stopped and frisked because 1) they live in higher crime areas or 2) cops just find them "suspicious".
You were responding to fafa fofo's stance on how to interact with police and hit him with the, 'Yeah people support that when it isn't their kind getting shot and hanged' or whatever. I mean come on man that's pretty obviously a race shot. I do however don't think you actually believe that, and just got caught up in the conversation fwiw
Seriously now, Do you really think they are stopped more often because they are black? And "live in high crime areas": Who you think is committing the crimes in the black neighborhoods? White kids? Like Ark said though, this really shouldn't be a race issue, the question in this thread is vile cops versus citizens, and for the most part my thought is there is a time for disputing your arrest. While you are being arrested is not it. Fighting your arrest after the cop has decided you are under arrest will be very painful.... for you. Fighting it in court after the fact is really your only shot at some redemption, but when the cop is trying to put cuffs on you, it would seem to me that you are better served just accepting it and lawyering up. Being polite and civil prior, from the start of the interaction, would be an advisable way to avoid the bracelets in this humble white man's opinion. I was pulled over on my bike getting on the interstate doing 90 down the shoulder, merging beyond slower traffic, accelerating to 120, and continuing for a few minutes without noticing the fuzz behind me, all with (unbeknownst to me) a suspended license. I was issued m 4 tickets, the officer provided me his cell since mine was dead to try to call for a tow to get the bike, and then advised to go straight home with the bike when I could not contact for help. I chalk this up to how I responded to the officer when I first started talking to him. Do you chalk it up to white?
For stop and frisks? Absolutely. The NYPD's even said as much And that's a retarded question that answers itself. But if the same policies were instituted in affluent areas, there would be an equal number of arrests for possession. the issue is vile cops, but when the citizens who face the majority of the issue are of one specific demographic, it evolves into another issue of race. and that's assuming that you have a chance to win. odds are the civil suit leads to nothing and i don't know enough about your experience to come to a solid conclusion on anything tbh
I don't think it was racist from the beginning due to the fact that he was letting her off with a warning, just like the white girl he stopped previously. If he really wanted to stick it to her he would have given her a ticket. The whole thing changes when she tells him how irritated she is and why, not when he sees that she is black. Up to that point the stop is very similar to the previous stop. It's still up to the cop to handle that situation in a calm manner, and he failed miserably.
Not saying she was dead in the mugshot, but she does have a Michael Jackson Thriller look in the 2nd photo.
This woman needs a Xanax or something. She also needs to get her headlight fixed. And not be a journalist.
I had a headlight out a while ago. Due to working 85-90 hours a week at the time (and general apathy), it took me about two weeks or so to replace it. In those two weeks, I was stopped no fewer than a combined six times by four different LE agencies. POLICE WILL PULL YOU OVER IF YOUR HEADLIGHT IS OUT EVEN IF YOU'RE WHITE!!!
Where I grew up if you get a ticket for having a headlight out, you could get it thrown out if you could prove that you got it fixed. Complaining about being stopped for a headlight being out is stupid and takes away from some of the valid issues that exists between cops and citizens.
I was following a cop this morning whose brake lights weren't working, came up next to him at the next light and thought about rolling down my window to try and tell him, but I decided I didnt want any confrontation so I just let it go
Great little read from a former infantryman on his experiences raiding insurgents in Iraq compared to how police raid homes in the USA. Spoiler In Iraq, I raided insurgents. In Virginia, the police raided me. Alex Horton is a member of the Defense Council at the Truman National Security Project. He served as an infantryman in Iraq with the Army’s 3rd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. I got home from the bar and fell into bed soon after Saturday night bled into Sunday morning. I didn’t wake up until three police officers barged into my apartment, barking their presence at my door. They sped down the hallway to my bedroom, their service pistols drawn and leveled at me. It was just past 9 a.m., and I was still under the covers. The only visible target was my head. In the shouting and commotion, I felt an instant familiarity. I’d been here before. This was a raid. I had done this a few dozen times myself, 6,000 miles away from my Alexandria, Va., apartment. As an Army infantryman in Iraq, I’d always been on the trigger side of the weapon. Now that I was on the barrel side, I recalled basic training’s most important firearm rule: Aim only at something you intend to kill. I had conducted the same kind of raid on suspected bombmakers and high-value insurgents. But the Fairfax County officers in my apartment were aiming their weapons at a target whose rap sheet consisted only of parking tickets and an overdue library book. My situation was terrifying. Lying facedown in bed, I knew that any move I made could be viewed as a threat. Instinct told me to get up and protect myself. Training told me that if I did, these officers would shoot me dead. In a panic, I asked the officers what was going on but got no immediate answer. Their tactics were similar to the ones I used to clear rooms during the height of guerilla warfare in Iraq. I could almost admire it — their fluid sweep from the bedroom doorway to the distant corner. They stayed clear of one another’s lines of fire in case they needed to empty their Sig Sauer .40-caliber pistols into me. They were well-trained, their supervisor later told me. But I knew that means little when adrenaline governs an imminent-danger scenario, real or imagined. Triggers are pulled. Mistakes are made. I spread my arms out to either side. An officer jumped onto my bed and locked handcuffs onto my wrists. The officers rolled me from side to side, searching my boxers for weapons, then yanked me up to sit on the edge of the bed. At first, I was stunned. I searched my memory for any incident that would justify a police raid. Then it clicked. Earlier in the week, the managers of my apartment complex moved me to a model unit while a crew repaired a leak in my dishwasher. But they hadn’t informed my temporary neighbors. So when one resident noticed the door slightly cracked open to what he presumed was an unoccupied apartment, he looked in, saw me sleeping and called the police to report a squatter. Sitting on the edge of the bed dressed only in underwear, I laughed. The situation was ludicrous and embarrassing. My only mistake had been failing to make sure the apartment door was completely closed before I threw myself into bed the night before. I told the officers to check my driver’s license, nodding toward my khaki pants on the floor. It showed my address at a unit in the same complex. As the fog of their chaotic entry lifted, the officers realized it had been an unfortunate error. They walked me into the living room and removed the cuffs, though two continued to stand over me as the third contacted management to confirm my story. Once they were satisfied, they left. When I later visited the Fairfax County police station to gather details about what went wrong, I met the shift commander, Lt. Erik Rhoads. I asked why his officers hadn’t contacted management before they raided the apartment. Why did they classify the incident as a forced entry, when the information they had suggested something innocuous? Why not evaluate the situation before escalating it? Rhoads defended the procedure, calling the officers’ actions “on point.” It’s not standard to conduct investigations beforehand because that delays the apprehension of suspects, he told me. I noted that the officers could have sought information from the apartment complex’s security guard that would have resolved the matter without violence. But he played down the importance of such information: “It doesn’t matter whatsoever what was said or not said at the security booth.” This is where Rhoads is wrong. We’ve seen this troubling approach to law enforcement nationwide, in militarized police responses to nonviolent protesters and in fatal police shootings of unarmed citizens. The culture that encourages police officers to engage their weapons before gathering information promotes the mind-set that nothing, including citizen safety, is more important than officers’ personal security. That approach has caused public trust in law enforcement to deteriorate. It’s the same culture that characterized the early phases of the Iraq war, in which I served a 15-month tour in 2006 and 2007. Soldiers left their sprawling bases in armored vehicles, leveling buildings with missile strikes and shooting up entire blocks during gun battles with insurgents, only to return to their protected bases and do it all again hours later. The short-sighted notion that we should always protect ourselves endangered us more in the long term. It was a flawed strategy that could often create more insurgents than it stopped and inspired some Iraqis to hate us rather than help us. In one instance in Baghdad, a stray round landed in a compound that our unit was building. An overzealous officer decided that we were under attack and ordered machine guns and grenade launchers to shoot at distant rooftops. A row of buildings caught fire, and we left our compound on foot, seeking to capture any injured fighters by entering structures choked with flames. Instead, we found a man frantically pulling his furniture out of his house. “Thank you for your security!” he yelled in perfect English. He pointed to the billowing smoke. “This is what you call security?” We didn’t find any insurgents. There weren’t any. But it was easy to imagine that we forged some in that fire. Similarly, when U.S. police officers use excessive force to control nonviolent citizens or respond to minor incidents, they lose supporters and public trust. That’s a problem, because law enforcement officers need the cooperation of the communities they patrol in order to do their jobs effectively. In the early stages of the war, the U.S. military overlooked that reality as well. Leaders defined success as increasing military hold on geographic terrain, while the human terrain was the real battle. For example, when our platoon entered Iraq’s volatile Diyala province in early 2007, children at a school plugged their ears just before an IED exploded beneath one of our vehicles. The kids knew what was coming, but they saw no reason to warn us. Instead, they watched us drive right into the ambush. One of our men died, and in the subsequent crossfire, several insurgents and children were killed. We saw Iraqis cheering and dancing at the blast crater as we left the area hours later. With the U.S. effort in Iraq faltering, Gen. David Petraeus unveiled a new counterinsurgency strategy that year. He believed that showing more restraint during gunfights would help foster Iraqis’ trust in U.S. forces and that forming better relationships with civilians would improve our intelligence-gathering. We refined our warrior mentality — the one that directed us to protect ourselves above all else — with a community-building component. My unit began to patrol on foot almost exclusively, which was exceptionally more dangerous than staying inside our armored vehicles. We relinquished much of our personal security by entering dimly lit homes in insurgent strongholds. We didn’t know if the hand we would shake at each door held a detonator to a suicide vest or a small glass of hot, sugary tea. But as a result, we better understood our environment and earned the allegiance of some people in it. The benefits quickly became clear. One day during that bloody summer, insurgents loaded a car with hundreds of pounds of explosives and parked it by a school. They knew we searched every building for hidden weapons caches, and they waited for us to gather near the car. But as we turned the corner to head toward the school, several Iraqis told us about the danger. We evacuated civilians from the area and called in a helicopter gunship to fire at the vehicle. The resulting explosion pulverized half the building and blasted the car’s engine block through two cement walls. Shrapnel dropped like jagged hail as far as a quarter-mile away. If we had not risked our safety by patrolling the neighborhood on foot, trusting our sources and gathering intelligence, it would have been a massacre. But no one was hurt in the blast. Domestic police forces would benefit from a similar change in strategy. Instead of relying on aggression, they should rely more on relationships. Rather than responding to a squatter call with guns raised, they should knock on the door and extend a hand. But unfortunately, my encounter with officers is just one in a stream of recent examples of police placing their own safety ahead of those they’re sworn to serve and protect. Rhoads, the Fairfax County police lieutenant, was upfront about this mind-set. He explained that it was standard procedure to point guns at suspects in many cases to protect the lives of police officers. Their firearm rules were different from mine; they aimed not to kill but to intimidate. According toreporting by The Washington Post, those rules are established in police training, which often emphasizes a violent response over deescalation. Recruits spend an average of eight hours learning how to neutralize tense situations; they spend more than seven times as many hours at the weapons range. Of course, officers’ safety is vital, and they’re entitled to defend themselves and the communities they serve. But they’re failing to see the connection between their aggressive postures and the hostility they’ve encountered in Ferguson, Mo., Baltimore and other communities. When you level assault rifles at protesters, you create animosity. When you kill an unarmed man on his own property while his hands are raised — as Fairfax County police did in 2013 — you sow distrust. And when you threaten to Taser a woman during a routine traffic stop (as happened to 28-year-old Sandra Bland, who died in a Texas jail this month), you cultivate a fear of police. This makes policing more dangerous for everyone. I understood the risks of war when I enlisted as an infantryman. Police officers should understand the risks in their jobs when they enroll in the academy, as well. That means knowing that personal safety can’t always come first. That is why it’s service. That’s why it’s sacrifice. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...114e54-2b02-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html
I've got to say... I love when Anonymous gets involved in this type of shit. It always makes it considerably more interesting. And from what I can tell, they tend to do some thorough research before doing so but the 'dead in the mugshot' stuff is really difficult for me to believe. I know essentially nothing about how to determine if someone is dead in a photo or not but it just seems especially difficult to believe. Also, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, unless that voicemail she left on someone's phone was not real or she left it immediately after being arrested then I'm not sure how they would have faked that.
Yep, covered that a page or two back. That's my point. And the Anonymous video shows that (based on all of the mugshots listed on their website) they usually make you take your mugshot before being put in a jumpsuit at that particular jail.
I've never bothered watching one of their videos. I'm very skeptical that the police killed her in jail and covered it up. So many people would have to be in on it. And she had depression issues.
She also tells the person in the VM, that she already went in front of the judge, a coverup this big seems impossible.
tell that to 9/11 but seriously there have been much larger conspiracies involving a lot of people that have been covered up for a long time. This one is still fairly fresh. Have they said why her mug shot is in a jumpsuit?? It feels suspicious that they are trying to blame the suicide on weed. First saying it was in her system from 2 days prior, then saying she must have smoked or ingested some just before killing herself. That seems very implausible and reeks of some sort of cover up. The "evidence" that she was dead in the photo seems flimsy, and centers on this other photo, that seems like it could have been a photo shop job, and the angle of her shoulders. Not exactly compelling evidence IMO. Though the wall behind her does not look like any of the other mug shots, it doesn't look like brick, but smooth concrete. I'm not sure what the purpose of not taking her mug shot when they booked her would be though. ?
This is another issue than cops vs citizens but rather my opinion and experience on profiling and the stats that go with it suggesting minorities commit more crimes. It's a snowball effect, at least for some of the population, and a lot of it usually starts with driving. Citations result in fines which result in suspended licenses and court dates. Court dates result in missed court dates and warrants being issued, which leads to arrests. Arrests make a person known to police, especially if they're visible in a small area, like many poor neighborhoods. I know a few people who have been arrested 10+ times just from missed court dates for traffic violations. I know more people though who are known to have a suspended license so when I see them driving, it's an instant traffic stop. A lot of those people sell drugs or carry guns illegally. Some of them probably sell to pay off traffic tickets. Certainly not an end all be all, and Raleigh doesn't have foot patrol on level NYC does obviously so some of the stop and frisk stuff doesn't equal out. But just some things I see. It can also be answered by saying more cops are in poor/high crime areas so naturally there is going to be more things found. I would counter that though by saying that we generally exist where we get called to. Folks calling the police dictate our presence as much as anything, again coming from primarily vehicle based policing.
Once again...fucking idiots have hijacked a problem to make it seem like an evil cabal is behind a scheme of epic proportions. Denying the fact that she committed suicide and was instead murdered only takes away from the real argument...which is why the fuck was she in jail in the first place.
Well I think we could look at both points; should she have been in jail? And once in jail, WTF happened?
If someone drove up on me like that and got out of their car and began reaching at their waistband like they might be grabbing a gun, I'd be backing up my vehicle too. You definitely can't see that they are holding a badge that easily. I'm not going to assume an aggressive driver yelling out of a civilian vehicle who gets out of it wearing what seem to be camouflage shorts and a wife beater is a law enforcement officer. I might even be starting to reach for a firearm to protect myself if it came to that. Definitely what a cop would do if the roles were reversed.
1 cop was an ass. 1 did his job and actually told him to leave so it wouldn't get worse. Would love an update of this. Obviously he didn't confiscate the camera.
Cincinnati government bracing for public outrage based on the footage of this interaction. The Police Chief said that he has seen the video and "it's not good." The City Manager has also seen it and responded similarly. Now they're debating when they will release the video to the public and trying to work things (like the investigation) out before doing so to ensure there aren't riots. http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news...ith-leaders-to-discuss-deadly-police-shooting
RIP to the dead mugshot theory Unless they had already planted the poison in her brain and it had a delayed fuse?!
Officer shot dog that was tied to front post on a home when they showed up for a child custody dispute. http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/29644924/woman-says-tpd-officer-shot-her-dog Why is it that police have so much more difficult a time with people's dogs than anyone else? You don't really hear of postal delivery workers or pizza men or anyone else needing to shoot family pets.
If those pizza delivery men and postal works had guns in order to shoot those dogs I bet ud hear about Pretty dumb comparison
Perfect. But they don't have guns to shoot those animals (and they couldn't get away with it if they did) and thus they don't shoot them. And yet somehow the humans and the animals both live! You're an idiot.
The mailman shows up and a dog comes at him aggressively up to the fence, the mail man just never enters the yard and leaves the mail in the mailbox out front If a cop shows up to a domestic dispute or a gun call and a dog comes up aggressive to the fence...should they just leave a card and get the hell out of there or enter the yard?
This dog in the article being discussed was tied to a post and wasn't a direct threat to the officer. Are you trolling me or are you really like this?