Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Eh as long as you dont look like a Black criminal you are fine...
Eh as long as you dont look like a Black criminal you are fine...
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Just because a system was used doesn't mean it worked. You may be on to something with the vengeance v. justice thing, but obviously people are frustrated that cops are routinely avoiding either.
Just because a system was used doesn't mean it worked. You may be on to something with the vengeance v. justice thing, but obviously people are frustrated that cops are routinely avoiding either.
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
That is a rather general statement. Castile informed the officer he had a gun. Didn't tell him about having a permit. That's just the start of it.
Again, on the surface, I think the verdict was incorrect, but we don't know all that went on in that courtroom.
That is a rather general statement. Castile informed the officer he had a gun. Didn't tell him about having a permit. That's just the start of it.
Again, on the surface, I think the verdict was incorrect, but we don't know all that went on in that courtroom.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Pilate followed procedure. I get that people are angry Jesus was convicted but the system worked.
Pilate followed procedure. I get that people are angry Jesus was convicted but the system worked.
state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Extreme example, of course.
The point is that yes, the system we have was used. Did it work? If any outcome is acceptable, yes. The system was implemented, and an outcome was reached. Yippee go us!
People are questioning if this is really the best we can do. Once "feared for my life" was muttered the badge protected him. I feel terrible for the family. The phrases "slap to the face" or "adding insult to injury" don't come close to it.
The fix was in.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
In what universe did Philandro get justice? That is what we mean. Try again...
In what universe did Philandro get justice? That is what we mean. Try again...
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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:
state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Bingo.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
dave122793
Registered User
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
Twitch Boy
Defacing this tagline is a MAX foul
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Jury deadlocked in Cosby case, mistrial declared. Prosecution to retry.
Jury deadlocked in Cosby case, mistrial declared. Prosecution to retry.
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Cops 4: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
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.
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.
- Status