Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WeAreNDHockey
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    Until this recent case, everyone wanted a trial. Not a special investigation, not an independent whatever. They wanted a trial. Well, they got a trial. Transparent. It was up to the peers. And not guilty.
    What we want Brent, is a FAIR trial. My experience tells me this is most definitely NOT happening. If it was, these cops would be getting convicted left and right. Prosecutors simply don't lose very often when they go to trial. That is a provable, verifiable fact. Look at the numbers. If your prosecuting attorneys or district attorneys, or whatever they are called in your jurisdiction, are losing more than they are winning, elect a new D.A and have him or her hire better trial lawyers. But time and time again, when it is a cop charged with a crime, the prosecutors lose. Why? They are throwing the game. They don't cover all their bases. They don't bring forward as many witnesses. They don't fight tooth and nail when pieces of evidence are thrown out by judges. THEY DON'T TRY AS HARD TO WIN! TAKE THAT TO THE BANK!

    This is all just like the stuff we talked about surrounding the elections. Its ugly. People don't want to believe that there are ugly, awful things about our society and this is just another one of those things. I know as sure as I know what state I am in right now that if I emptied my clip and put 16 bullets into the back of an unarmed man running away from me I would likely be spending most of the rest of my life in prison, at best. There is very little chance I could prove justification. Unless I am a cop. Then, my chances of spending a day in prison are almost nil.

    Leave a comment:


  • trixR4kids
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    When different standards are clearly being applied by juries, prosecutors, and judges in these particular cases involving cops shooting black people then there's plenty reason to believe the system is broken.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Rube
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    It says he was not found guilty.
    Same concept.

    Yes it is semantics. Not guilty isn't the same as innocent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    It says he was not guilty.
    It says he was not found guilty.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Rube
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    That is kind of what you are saying.

    And the system followed the rules...saying it didnt "work".

    Just because the verdict was right based on the system doesnt mean the system is right or it worked. You are ignoring all nuance and context in order to prove a point.
    Until this recent case, everyone wanted a trial. Not a special investigation, not an independent whatever. They wanted a trial. Well, they got a trial. Transparent. It was up to the peers. And not guilty.

    Again, I do not think the verdict was correct from what I have seen/read, but I have not had access to the whole court transcripts. Yet people are saying the system didn't work, it didn't deliver "justice." Yes, it delivered justice. It does NOT diminish the tragedy that happened whatsoever. It does NOT say Yanez was innocent. It says he was not guilty.

    Leave a comment:


  • trixR4kids
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    You're not wrong Maize, I obviously agree.

    The problem is without video the defense can create some doubt (not what I would consider reasonable) as to whether he reached too quickly, understood/was complying with orders due to being high (and as someone who's smoked plenty of times that's ridiculous, if anything you'd be overly cautious and paranoid), and I'm guessing there were other things as well. The problem is the prosecution usually gets past this hurdle pretty easily when it's anyone other than a cop or a black victim is involved (Trayvon). So yeah, plenty of blame to the jury for sure but the prosecutor must've done a **** job if it was 10-2 in favor of acquittal.

    And yeah ND is right, I wouldn't doubt for a second the judges treat these differently too in terms of how they frame the burden of proof and whatnot.
    Last edited by trixR4kids; 06-17-2017, 02:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • WeAreNDHockey
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by MaizeRage View Post
    To accept that as a realistic and reasonable possibility strips away any sort of humanity from Castile.
    Without reading the transcript we don't know how testimony was framed or what the precise instructions to this jury were, but in many cases we know exactly what was said and what they were told. And frequently it is allowed that the defense in these kinds of trials can much more liberally dehumanize the victim and the judge will allow it and that judges go over the top in making sure the jury believes in fact what is beyond the possibility of any and all doubt is only reasonable doubt. Juries convict based in large part on how they perceive the victim, and what a judge charges them (the jury) with as they begin their deliberations.

    The road we are going down is going to lead to this eventual outcome: People of color will be so fearful of people wearing badges they are eventually going to conclude that the cop is a threat, even if he isn't. And guess what? That will lead to more firearm violence directed at cops, not less. Is it right? Of course not. But the fact is the way cops behave is eventually going to see a lot more of them harmed and killed than if they got their act together beforehand. It is exactly what is happening now, the cops are concluding that these people of color are a threat, even when they are not. The people who have knee jerk support for the law enforcement community better begin to understand this. Do you really want to see more cops hurt or killed? This is what the situation is eventually going to devolve into.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaizeRage
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by dave122793 View Post
    Exactly. Once a cop gets on the stand and says the magic words ("I feared for my.....whatever") then it's all over.
    Sadly true, and this is what needs to change. The officer probably did fear for his life--I doubt he got out of his car planning to murder someone--but then the question needs to be asked: why did he fear for his life? Looking at the situation: 1. I'd assume he'd already run the plates on that car, in which case he could have seen Castile had been stopped over 40 times without major incident. 2. He's pulling the guy over for a busted tail light. 3. The guy is in the car with his girlfriend and small child. 4. He announced he had a gun to someone that already had his gun unholstered, when the element of surprise is probably the only possibility he gets a shot off before the cop.

    The entire scenario the acquittal is based on is that a guy with nothing more than a cost-of-being-black criminal record was going to try to murder a police officer in cold blood in front of his small child over a $50 ticket(and the fact that he probably would have gotten a ticket for that is its' own issue), and end his life one way or another. To accept that as a realistic and reasonable possibility strips away any sort of humanity from Castile.

    Leave a comment:


  • Twitch Boy
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Jury deadlocked in Cosby case, mistrial declared. Prosecution to retry.

    Leave a comment:


  • dave122793
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by jerphisch View Post
    The system is the problem. If you shoot someone that is reaching for their wallet you won't be able to break out the "feared for your life" defense, cops use it every time and keep getting acquitted.
    Exactly. Once a cop gets on the stand and says the magic words ("I feared for my.....whatever") then it's all over. For you and I going on trial the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. For a police officer, it's beyond ALL doubt. And that's where the system fails us.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    That is kind of what you are saying.

    And the system followed the rules...saying it didnt "work".

    Just because the verdict was right based on the system doesnt mean the system is right or it worked. You are ignoring all nuance and context in order to flop around in the bottom of the boat.
    Fyp

    Leave a comment:


  • state of hockey
    replied
    Originally posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    This cop in Minnesota got away with manslaughter. Plain and simple. If prosecutors went after these cops with the same zeal they go after people who don't wear a badge, you'd find a lot more of them being convicted.
    Bingo.

    Leave a comment:


  • WeAreNDHockey
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    I'm coming from the angle that it was an out-and-out trial. That's how the system works. Those who are claiming the system "didn't work" are incorrect.

    I read in the Star Tribune that some protesters were ready to protest in case of a not guilty verdict "because the system is still broken." No, you didn't get the verdict you desired.
    The problem with "the system" is in the rare instance these cops are actually put on trial, the prosecution does a half as sed job prosecuting the accused. The majority of trials, both at the state and federal levels, end with a verdict of guilty.

    In some jurisdictions ten times more cases finish with a guilty verdict than a not guilty verdict. Yet we've seen case after case after case in police shootings end with hung juries or not guilty verdicts. When the odds are 5 and 10- to 1 in favor of the prosecution and yet you keep losing over and over that should tell anyone listening something. The fact is, the D.A.s trying these cases often do not try them with the same hell-bent to win fury they try most cases. Part of it is the cops usually have adequate defense, part of the time they are truly not guilty, and a lot of the time they get the benefit of a prosecutor who is not trying their best.

    Another issue is the presumption that allows jurors to be instructed in a very different manner than a civilian facing a similar charge. Judges charge jurors with what basically amounts to giving law enforcement far more benefit of the doubt due the "inherent" (and often mythically overblown) danger of their jobs. Never mind the fact most cops who are injured are killed on the job die from traffic accidents and no criminal conduct is involved or that decade by decade over the last 50 years at least, policing is statistically getting less and less dangerous. I mean really, never mind those facts because the system sure seems to.

    This cop in Minnesota got away with manslaughter. Plain and simple. If prosecutors went after these cops with the same zeal they go after people who don't wear a badge, you'd find a lot more of them being convicted.
    Last edited by WeAreNDHockey; 06-16-2017, 11:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    Wow. Okay, then.
    That is kind of what you are saying.

    And the system followed the rules...saying it didnt "work".

    Just because the verdict was right based on the system doesnt mean the system is right or it worked. You are ignoring all nuance and context in order to prove a point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    I don't trust Yanez's judgement.
    On the surface, I think the verdict was wrong.
    To make a truly educated opinion, I'd have to read all the court transcripts, see evidence, etc.

    However, the system worked. He was not investigated by a private counsel, nor Internal Affairs, etc. He was put on trial by a jury of his peers, and acquitted.

    Some folks say "justice" when they mean vengeance.
    In what universe did Philandro get justice? That is what we mean. Try again...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X