Officer body cam shows imminent deadly shots

[bubbatime]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

It is not paranoia. I lost a good friend and a sizable chunk of my childhood to bad cops. I got off easy...it cost my friend his family, his life savings, his marriage, and his country.


So the cops found a perfectly upstanding citizen, a great contributor to society, planted evidence on him or otherwise lied to send an innocent man off to prison? Is that what you are saying? Doubt it. Tell your friend to stop breaking laws. So sick of people blaming "the man" when they really should be looking in the mirror and placing blame where it really should be, on them.

 

[bubbatime]

As far as cameras, when I was in patrol I would have gladly worn one. An arrestee filed a frivolous lawsuit against me that went through the courts for years before finally being thrown out. Had there been camera footage, the lawsuit would have been throw out on the first day with him laughed out of court.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
As far as cameras, when I was in patrol I would have gladly worn one. An arrestee filed a frivolous lawsuit against me that went through the courts for years before finally being thrown out. Had there been camera footage, the lawsuit would have been throw out on the first day with him laughed out of court.


Several examples of lawsuits against the police dropping by 80-90% once the body cameras became department equipment. It sure isn't tne cops that scatter like cockroaches when cameras are present....

 

[stockrex]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
As far as cameras, when I was in patrol I would have gladly worn one. An arrestee filed a frivolous lawsuit against me that went through the courts for years before finally being thrown out. Had there been camera footage, the lawsuit would have been throw out on the first day with him laughed out of court.


Amen, Cali did just that, why is the union trying to block it? does not make sense.
At the end, we, taxpayers, foot the bill for the lawsuits.

 

[stockrex]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

It is not paranoia. I lost a good friend and a sizable chunk of my childhood to bad cops. I got off easy...it cost my friend his family, his life savings, his marriage, and his country.


So the cops found a perfectly upstanding citizen, a great contributor to society, planted evidence on him or otherwise lied to send an innocent man off to prison? Is that what you are saying? Doubt it. Tell your friend to stop breaking laws. So sick of people blaming "the man" when they really should be looking in the mirror and placing blame where it really should be, on them.


Hard to believe, but it does happen, corruption/crime is present in the judiciary and law enforcement also.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

It is not paranoia. I lost a good friend and a sizable chunk of my childhood to bad cops. I got off easy...it cost my friend his family, his life savings, his marriage, and his country.


So the cops found a perfectly upstanding citizen, a great contributor to society, planted evidence on him or otherwise lied to send an innocent man off to prison? Is that what you are saying? Doubt it. Tell your friend to stop breaking laws. So sick of people blaming "the man" when they really should be looking in the mirror and placing blame where it really should be, on them.

Not trying to say you are a "bad cop", but this attitude above isn't very professional at best and could lead an officer to think they have to become judge and jury as well, to make sure someone "gets what they deserve" as the system doesn't always work. I can see how that's frustrating, but that's part of the job too.
I've got an acquaintance that has had run ins with police as well, he most definitely is no angel, but neither are the cops that he has recorded, I assume without their knowledge as they don't seem to be operating within the law, in their attempts to get information out of him using blackmail. Maybe that's how policing really works, or maybe that's how lazy investigators work, I don't know.

 

[Brian Barnhart]

Fortunately, my behavior has resulted in very little interaction with LE over the last 45 years. But I do know a few individuals that were, or are now, LEs. Those individuals were/are flagrant gross speeders, intoxicated drivers, and poachers.

Those represent the few I know. That coupled with their general lack of concern when they have wronged innocents, makes it hard for me to sympathize with their plight in their chosen profession.

That’s just my own personal view and experience. I’m not saying it’s a fair representation of all of LE.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

It is not paranoia. I lost a good friend and a sizable chunk of my childhood to bad cops. I got off easy...it cost my friend his family, his life savings, his marriage, and his country.


So the cops found a perfectly upstanding citizen, a great contributor to society, planted evidence on him or otherwise lied to send an innocent man off to prison? Is that what you are saying? Doubt it. Tell your friend to stop breaking laws. So sick of people blaming "the man" when they really should be looking in the mirror and placing blame where it really should be, on them.



Cop stole a tool box from his truck...he made the HORRIBLE mistake of reporting it. This resulted in a 2-month harassment campaign that culminated in them threatening his daughter. THAT DAY, he uprooted his family and left the area.

 

[javacontour]

Most cops I know don't want to be judge and jury. They want to issue the citation, or effect the arrest with a minimum of drama.

They become judge and sometimes jury when the situation escalates. If the suspect is not answering yes officer, no officer and not in compliance, their behavior forces the officer into the role of judge and jury.

If a suspect brandishes a weapon, they have escalated the situation and forced the hand of the officer who in most cases just wants to write the ticket or put the suspect in the back of the squad.

Think of Michael Brown. If he had just said, "yes officer" when instructed not to walk down the center of the street, how would things have been different.

Instead, the exchange was different. "We are almost home" as if that makes it ok to ignore the officer and continue to walk down the street.

If you don't want the officer to be judge and jury, it most cases, your compliance will ensure that. If you start dropping f-bombs or pull a weapon, your actions have elevated the officers role to exactly the one your words say you don't want him to have.

 

[ottotheclown]

Then you have as disturbing a video of Kajienne Powell being shot as the cops are getting out of the car 5 seconds later. This can be found on You Tube very graphic. This video and You Tube examples of a very disturbing facts and the summer is around the corner. In Cleveland a officer on duty who is not suited to be in that power position. Hired after getting fired from same post. Who can fix this??? Anyone, anyone, anyone???

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: gfh77665
Its heartbreaking. Al & Jessie and their "community" has a burning hatred of the police, and also otherwise more reasonable people want to hold the police to absolute perfection.

God bless and protect LE from the deranged and evil ones out on the streets.



That's because many, if not most blacks believe they should be able to do whatever they want, even breaking the law, without repercussions...

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
A felony? Really? Don't you think that's just a bit over the line?

Just to offer some perspective, he thinks any person that misuses 911 should be fined ONE MILLION DOLLARS.


Idiocy should be painful.


Clearly, it already is....

 

[Win]

Also, when video is available, it needs to be timely released, otherwise, it's not much good to the public.

Here is a troubling local incident, where some relevant video was available, but was not released to the public until after the police officer was sentenced, which might have contributed to a lighter sentence for the police officer than was warranted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Erin_Hamley_shooting_incident

It's fair to say that the Wiki was written in a biased manner, but it's mostly accurate with my recollection of the news accounts at the time.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Win
Also, when video is available, it needs to be timely released, otherwise, it's not much good to the public.

Here is a troubling local incident, where some relevant video was available, but was not released to the public until after the police officer was sentenced, which might have contributed to a lighter sentence for the police officer than was warranted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Erin_Hamley_shooting_incident

It's fair to say that the Wiki was written in a biased manner, but it's mostly accurate with my recollection of the news accounts at the time.


But the publcshouldnt necessarily have access to this. IMO it should be permanently deleted after 7 days without formal,request by the person interacting with the officer.

The cam recording evidence is a two edged sword too. Using that as verification makes it very clean, but also means that the public may have access, creating a privacy issue.

 

[Win]

There wasn't any interaction with the police officer who murdered him.

Decedent was on his back in the street. Police Officer drives up, shoots him within a minute of arrival.

This ^^^^ was an atypical event, fortunately, but the incidents where there is a bona fide privacy concern where public employees are involved are very limited, imo. They can be dealt with on a case by case basis. Those methods already exist.

double edit: maybe I misunderstood, are you concerned about the murderer's privacy, or the dead person's privacy in having their execution made public?

 

[Whitewolf]

Originally Posted By: daves87rs
A friend of mine was a Flint, MI cop (one of the most dangerous cities in the US)


I'm glad that you said that about Flint because I didn't know.

 

[Spazdog]

A relative of mine received a settlement of $150,000 from the City of Dallas.

The cop that beat him was fired.

There was an argument between his girlfriend and one of his friends. No physical violence. Just noise.

Now, he was carrying paraphernalia. The original officers that stopped him asked him and he owned up to it. They placed him in cuffs, retrieved the pipe right where he said it was, and further search found no other illegal items. They stated that he was cooperative and compliant. They were going to release the cuffs and write him a citation for the pipe.

Now comes officer number three. He's upset that my nephew didn't "defend" his girlfriend more vigorously. He called him a derogatory name usually reserved for homosexuals. Threw him to the ground and began to beat him. One of the original officers tried to intervene and officer number three takes a swing at him.

The original officers testified against officer three leading to his dismissal.

We need more cops like one and two to speak up against cops like three.



An Arlington Police officer ordered me to the ground face down, cross my ankles and lift my legs, spread my arms with palms up. I complied without question. I could not have been a threat in that position nor could I have run away quickly. She then stepped on my right arm and fell knee first into my neck. She had her weapon pressed so hard into my head that it could not have fired with the slide pushed back.

What prompted this brutal detainment?

Carry-out.

She found it suspicious that I was leaving a restaurant with a bag of food.

Her back-up was a complete professional. Assessed the situation. searched me while she dumped my food out onto the parking lot, and then walked back into the restaurant with me to politely ask the staff if they would mind re-making my order. He talked to the wait-staff and patrons like they were old friends.

The only thing he could have done better? Reported his co-worker.

 

[dnewton3]

It would be my desire that all cops were cameras and use them any time there is public interaction. However, we do need to realize that while generally reliable, there can be trouble such as loss of battery power, poor lighting, poor audio, etc. It is a great tool, but it's not a magic carpet ride, guys.

I would also agree that questionable interactions be reviewed by a select, unbiased body that is utilized for specific fact findings. Oh - wait - they have that already; it's called a Grand Jury. And they have ruled in such cases and people STILL want to play arm-chair quaterback after the fact, and the GJ typically gets access to ALL facts, and can call their own witnesses and ask their own line of questions. Now the Ferguson event did not have direct video, but the Garner one did. And I think I fully explained WHY the Garner GJ found no bill; because Garner was not "choked" to death despite the emotional, irrational public perception.

I'll agree to wear a camera; I want one to protect me more than anyone else. But I also want a Grand Jury to review the FULL facts, and not rely on public perception tainted by poor "news" reporting and inflamatory, sensationalized social media. I am confident that my actions will never fail to appease the law.

We have THE BEST LEGAL SYSTEM in the World. It is NOT perfect, not at all. It can be fine tuned as technology allows. But let's not pretend that it's ever going to be totally infallable.

 

[babbittd]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
As far as cameras, when I was in patrol I would have gladly worn one. An arrestee filed a frivolous lawsuit against me that went through the courts for years before finally being thrown out. Had there been camera footage, the lawsuit would have been throw out on the first day with him laughed out of court.


It sure isn't tne cops that scatter like cockroaches when cameras are present....


Right...

'Cops' (sic) regularly attempt to order (in the very least) non-'cop' observers to stop filming and stop taking photographs. And the 'cop' that started this thread, plainly stated that people shooting videos should be off in the distance of at least 30 yards.

Also, folks, take note of 'cops' that refer to 'civilians' (militarized terminology) as 'cockroaches'...

 

[Ryan]

You should take note that the "cop" was making the cockroach reference as a reply from a "civilian" that used it first.