The lights are out on 2 Officers, state of the nation.

[muttly]

We've seen plenty of cases where it's been conclusive and they still defended the action as justifiable.

What, exactly, did the DoJ politicize in Ferguson? The report was about as politically bland as it gets.

Justifiable because in most cases it is clear cut. Sometimes there are questionable incidents. we've seen not prosecuted or they have been acquitted. We've also seen officers, like one of the videos in a previous post, get kicked off the force because of a stupid decision.
No one is disputing there are a few bad apples in the police force, or that they can screw up at times. It's mostly this false narrative that the police are a widespread, systematic, racist organization, which is untrue.

Regarding the DOJ report being political.it is mostly their contention that the Ferguson police dept discriminated against their citizens because they were black.

 

[Turtle]

Justifiable because in most cases it is clear cut. Sometimes there are questionable incidents. we've seen not prosecuted or they have been acquitted. We've also seen officers, like one of the videos in a previous post, get kicked off the force because of a stupid decision.

Clear cut depends on your perspective. If it's truly clear cut, the conclusion would be overwhelming, but all too often it's clear cut only for those who want the cop exonerated of any wrong-doing. In another glaring example, a grand jury was steered by prosecutors in order to achieve a no-bill on the officer who shot and killed the mentally retarded Dallas man who was holding a screwdriver. The body cam video was clear cut, but it was interpreted to show that normal, non-aggressive and clueless moves by the dead guy (he stepped down onto the porch) was threatening and the officer feared for his life. It's a joke.

"Attorney Chris Livingston, who represents the officers involved, said once the video is slowed it shows Jason Harrison move toward officers and his arm rotate down into a stabbing motion as the first shots are fired."

No one is disputing there are a few bad apples in the police force, or that they can screw up at times. It's mostly this false narrative that the police are a widespread, systematic, racist organization, which is untrue.

No one is saying all cops are bad, but it's looking more and more that there is systemic unequal policing, with a ruler versus ruled authoritarian mindset within the police. If a cop says jump, and you don't say how high, you're impeding an investigation. Have you noticed how many people get a "resisting arrest" charge thrown in for good measure? You've got a guy face down on the sidewalk and getting cuffs put on, if the cuffs are painful and you wince, that flinch is considered resisting arrest even though you're not resisting at all. There are videos all over YouTube of cops, from all over the country (A.K.A., widespread) where they take a totalitarian approach to almost everybody.

Regarding the DOJ report being political.it is mostly their contention that the Ferguson police dept discriminated against their citizens because they were black.

I can't think of any other reason why they discriminated against their citizens. Not sure that's political in a left-right sense, though.

 

[muttly]

I can't think of any other reason why they discriminated against their citizens. Not sure that's political in a left-right sense, though.

It is political if the DOJ went into Ferguson with the mindset that officers discriminate against them. And then use a few racial texts and a municipality's desire to add revenue as proof positive that they were discriminated against because of being black.

 

[Turtle]

It is political if the DOJ went into Ferguson with the mindset that officers discriminate against them. And then use a few racial texts and a municipality's desire to add revenue as proof positive that they were discriminated against because of being black.

I'm sure that's what you believe, but there's no evidence that the DOJ went to Ferguson with a mindset that officers were discriminating. And they used far more than a few texts and a desire for more revenue as proof of anything. The looked at the data, including the Ferguson Police's own documentation, and interviewed a really lot of people. You can deny racism exists in law enforcement, in Ferguson and other places, all you want, and then say, "Well, they went in there looking for racism, so that's what they found," but that doesn't mean you're right. All you have to do is search for the truth, without you yourself wanting to find what you think the truth should be. When you do that, you can recognize those on both sides who are denying the reality.

 

[muttly]

I'm sure that's what you believe, but there's no evidence that the DOJ went to Ferguson with a mindset that officers were discriminating. And they used far more than a few texts and a desire for more revenue as proof of anything. The looked at the data, including the Ferguson Police's own documentation, and interviewed a really lot of people. You can deny racism exists in law enforcement, in Ferguson and other places, all you want, and then say, "Well, they went in there looking for racism, so that's what they found," but that doesn't mean you're right. All you have to do is search for the truth, without you yourself wanting to find what you think the truth should be. When you do that, you can recognize those on both sides who are denying the reality.

Just because they interviewed a lot of people who don't like the police, doesn't mean they're correct. They could be lieing for a number of reasons.( See some of the witnesses in the Michael Brown shooting.) You don't even know what the other side of the story was with many 'accounts' in the report. Did the DOJ thoroughly investigate each allegation or did they just believe what was told to them? Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle too.
Regarding the statistics and documentation, most of it can be explained without the determination that it is about discrimination.
One example is the statistic that Ferguson is 67% black. In 1990, Ferguson was only 25% black. The 67% is from the 2010 census. So Ferguson in 2014 could have been over 70% black considering the current trend. Take into account the documented 'white flight ' of middle income residents that occurred in Ferguson, it was left with an older white community that has mostly gotten older. Now, with most of the arrests, tickets, etc. in the DOJ report, it involved such things as jaywalking, loitering, speeding, drug offenses, as well as the more violent crimes. Given the demographic of these mostly older white people, are they likely to commit any of these crimes in any large numbers?
Regarding the statistic that blacks are twice as likely to be searched, but 26% less likely to have contraband. That DOJ figure is wrong. 30% of whites had contraband and 24% of blacks had contraband. The figure is 20%, not 26 % less likely. Consider also that figure when police make vehicle stops, blacks have substantially more warrants.(DOJ statistic )
All traffic stops run a check of the driver and vehicle. Having a warrant would automatically initiate a vehicle search. This would account for the discrepancy in the numbers. These are just a few examples of how the numbers can be misinterpreted by the DOJ as evidence of discrimination.

 

[Turtle]

See? You're working freaky, really hard to exonerate the cops, to give them every possible benefit of the doubt in every situation.

The interviews they did weren't to go out and collect allegations they were to confirm or refute the things they found in the police documentation. They found blatant discrimination in the police documentation that the Ferguson police didn't deny, and in fact tried to justify. As for the statistics, the DOJ didn't take statistics Abe then apply them to Ferguson, and they draw conclusions. They did the other way around.

You really should read the report. Not someone else's interpretation of the report but the actual report.

 

[muttly]

See? You're working freaky, really hard to exonerate the cops, to give them every possible benefit of the doubt in every situation.

The interviews they did weren't to go out and collect allegations they were to confirm or refute the things they found in the police documentation. They found blatant discrimination in the police documentation that the Ferguson police didn't deny, and in fact tried to justify. As for the statistics, the DOJ didn't take statistics Abe then apply them to Ferguson, and they draw conclusions. They did the other way around.

You said seek the truth. I gave some information that was dismissed because of what you believe. The Ferguson police dept isn't in any financial position to defend themselves from the accusations heaped on them from the DOJ. You ought to know that allegations against cities can't be defended because of this, don't you? Be honest. So they go ahead and accept the recommendations from the DOJ instead of going bankrupt with lawyer fees, fighting it in court.
You said seek the truth, but the DOJ report that you think is great, doesn't even provide statements from the four black officers on the force about allegations of discrimination and racism .
You said seek the truth. Here is an excerpt from someone seeking the truth about crimes in Ferguson that the DOJ didn't do FOR SOME REASON:
Article excerpt:
Of course, what the DOJ report leaves unmentioned is whysuch an approach is needed: the absence of a reliable tax base. And even so, these practices don’t necessary show “racial bias” on the part of the primarily white police force in now 70 percent black Ferguson.

And that brings us to the third element of the story, the actual crime rates. For all the MSM attention given to Ferguson, few supposed journalists have done any reporting other than repeating whatever hashtagswere held up by vapid celebrities.

So it was left to me. I called the Ferguson Police Department to obtain the crime reports sorted by race that extended back at least a decade. (Significantly the Justice Department examined only a sample size of the last three years—probably to avoid revealing systematic and long-standing black criminality). I was told by an officer that I was the firstjournalist to ask for this information.

I was told to consult The Missouri Uniform Crime Reporting Program (MUCRP), which allows anyone to pull reports—going back to the year 2001—for every city in Missouri.

You can search for various report types, including arrests by age, sex, crime with race.

So, doing what the Department of Justice and apparently every journalist in America is incapable of doing, I pulled those arrest reports on the MUCRP site for Ferguson going back to 2001.

In viewing the following, please remember that according to the 2000 U.S. Census, the city of Ferguson was only 52 percent black.

• Since 2001, 18513 people have been arrested inFerguson: 84 percent have been black
• Since 2001, 479 people have been arrested for burglary in Ferguson: 91percent of them have been black.
• Since 2001, 286 people have been arrested for weapons charges inFerguson: 89 percent have been black
• Since 2001, 18513 people have been arrested inFerguson: 84 percent have been black
• Since 2001, 9 people have been arrested for murder in Ferguson. 8 of the 9 have been black.
• Since 2001, there have been 28 people arrested inFerguson for rape. All have been black.
• Since 2001, 133 people have been arrested for robbery in Ferguson: 90percent have been black
• Since 2001, 146 people have been arrested for motor vehicle theft inFerguson: 93 percent have been black.
• Since 2001, 4,845 people have been arrested for larceny in Ferguson: 80percent have been black.

These numbers are nearly a complete match to the crime statistics I pulled from the City of St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department Annual Report to the Community, which breaks down the arrests rates for violent crime by race (you can research 1999-2012 at the site).

In other words, black criminality in and around Ferguson is systematic and long-standing. And as the proportion of blacks in Ferguson rose, the absolute amount of crime increased even more dramatically.

These figures make the MSM’s whining about Ferguson’s “racism” not just irrelevant, but offensive. Ferguson was burned out, businesses weredestroyed, and the city’s future was ruined because local governments were unable to maintain public order and because the MSM will not to do its job and report the truth about what’s going on.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/hands-up-dont-shoot-was-a-lie-data-shows-latest-doj-report-is-too

 

[Turtle]

Like I said, you're trying really, really hard. And seeking out other people's blatantly biased interpretations of the report is a strong indicator of that. Or, do you really believe Vdare is an unbiased news source?

For some reason you believe the allegations of racism in the Ferguson Police Department, and pretty much every other police department, are made up, despite racism clearly existing in every other facet of society.

 

[muttly]

Like I said, you're trying really, really hard. And seeking out other people's blatantly biased interpretations of the report is a strong indicator of that. Or, do you really believe Vdare is an unbiased news source?

For some reason you believe the allegations of racism in the Ferguson Police Department, and pretty much every other police department, are made up, despite racism clearly existing in every other facet of society.

Forget about what you think about Vdare. Do you dispute any of the statistics I posted ? I didn't say they were all made up . In fact I said in some instances, the truth lies in the middle of both sides. I will say discrimination and racism can occur in police departments, but it would be a small fraction( just like other facets of society)and there is no evidence of a pervasive problem.
Some community generated stories and allegations without both sides presented , arrests of blacks who statistically commit those crimes more anyway (also considering Ferguson's demographic of older whites not speeding, loitering, smoking dope, or jaywalking in noticeable numbers) all make up the DOJ's charge which is not about much else other than a city needing more revenue, and wanted their police dept. to be more aggressive in enforcing laws and ordinances, most of which were past when Ferguson was a majority white community.
Would the approach have been any different, if in 2014, Ferguson was 70 % white, and the city government dictated to the PD to write more tickets and enforce more laws to increase their revenue? Not really.

 

[Turtle]

Your agree with the Blogger. I get it. And no I won't forget about what I think about Vdare, because you aren't even making an attempt to seek out independent, unbiased reporting on it.

No I don't dispute any of the statistics you posted. One, because I didn't try to verify them, and two, because it's not about the statistics, it's about the conclusions drawn from those statistics and how they are drawn.

You say they'd no evidence of pervasive racial problems in police departments or society, yet the evidence is right there in your face, if only you'll look at it. The no question that is gotten worse since Obama became president, and no matter who you want to blame it on (and you will) it doesn't change the facts that is not only worse, but pervasive.

 

[muttly]

Btw, criticism of me for using a 'bias news source, while at the same time using a DOJ report compiled with the help of a integrity compromised civil rights division, the irony isn't lost on me.

 

[muttly]

Your agree with the Blogger. I get it. And no I won't forget about what I think about Vdare, because you aren't even making an attempt to seek out independent, unbiased reporting on it.

What part of- no other journalist inquired about Ferguson's crime/ arrest rate going back to 2001- do you not understand? Other journalists haven't looked at this and your telling me to seek out other journalists?

Regarding the interpretation of the statistics? Exactly...The DOJ interprets it about race, because that is what they THINK they see, ( a few racist texts, some questionable abuse) They put two and two together and arrive at the conclusion that has already predisposed. Racist cops discriminating against blacks. instead of taking a sober look at the WHAT TYPES of crimes are being committed and by whom. And why so many searches were conducted. (blacks have more warrants)

 

[Turtle]

Oh I think it is lost on you, because you aren't very often interested in the unbiased truth at all, you're far more interested in biased news and opinion that agrees with your own opinion.

 

[vandriver2]

This one is good. Guy complied, cops made up charges, then hid their own dash cam video so as not to get caught.

Wow

 

[muttly]

Oh I think it is lost on you, because you aren't very often interested in the unbiased truth at all, you're far more interested in biased news and opinion that agrees with your own opinion.

Actually it brought to light a couple of things I wasn't clear on by looking at certain '' biased' sites. It help explain the white flight phenomenon which happened in Ferguson and how the older white population wouldn't be committing most of the crimes that the police were enforcing with more vigor.( for more revenue)It also caught the mathematics error the DOJ used in determining the percentage of contraband found with blacks and whites. It also explained the reason for the high amount of searches. There were more warrants discovered during traffic stops. An officer would be derelict in their duty in not searching a person and their car after discovering the person had a warrant . But this DOJ extrapolated that officers were discriminating against them because of this. Their own police dept's policy and procedures required them to do so, but they are being penalized for it. You can't make this crap up.

On a side note, I can give you stories in my 80 % white city where my next door neighbor, who happens to be an elderly white women with no money, is being ticketed to paint her house again( I painted it before and the house is chipping again) or incurr a fine and have her lawn cut because her grass is too high. My neighbor across the street...same thing. She has no family and she is too old to do it, So I cut it yesterday., My city also used to ticket me yearly for parking my cube van in MY OWN DRIVEWAY when I had it a few years ago. I felt the city was nitpicking on the ordinances . There are other neighbors with similar stories. My point is all of these people were white residents being subjected to annoying ordinances at their own homes, and the person issuing the tickets didn't know the race of the homeowner. The officer still ticketed 100% of the occupants,who happened to be white, on my street.. It is just the way municipalities do things, and to get revenue.

 

[cheri1122]

Barkley: the fact that whites are also cited for violations does not negate the fact that poor people [particularly minorities, who are more likely to be poor], are the preferred target for revenue generation. For the same reason they are first in line for budget cuts: because they lack the resources to fight back.
No one thinks every cop is a bad guy, [many are wonderful human beings, on and off the job], but we all know how a 'culture' develops and spreads among coworkers until it's pervasive, whether it's good or bad. In too many police departments [and New Orleans was one where I saw it firsthand, being friends with a couple officers], the culture of "we are above the law" rules, and woe to anyone who dares to suggest [on the streets] that they're not.Their acquisition of military gear only exacerbates that culture, by making them feel they are 'at war' with citizens, most [if not all] of whom are certainly guilty of something.
Those are the departments that need a reality check.

 

[muttly]

Barkley: the fact that whites are also cited for violations does not negate the fact that poor people [particularly minorities, who are more likely to be poor], are the preferred target for revenue generation. For the same reason they are first in line for budget cuts: because they lack the resources to fight back.
.

They're not the preferred target. Munipalities are mostly interested in having the fine paid. Cities like Ferguson weren't able to obtain a lot of the money from the tickets they wrote against mostly lower income minorities. ( the DOJ report even makes note of this) Cities would much rather prefer, (there goal is to receive paid fines in full in a timely matter)citizens who were more likely to pay them. Most likely that would be older white people who had probably accumulated some money, while residing in Ferguson for many years. Unfortunately those older white people didn't do much jaywalking , speeding , loitering, smoke dope, or other younger persons law breaking crimes.
There's so many high lawn grass violations that the city could write.
BTW, the issue isn't whether the city of Ferguson decided to be more aggressive in enforcing their laws to get more revenue, they clearly did.
The issue is the accusation that citizens were discriminated against because they were black. The evidence isn't strong that this occurred in Ferguson ,if you were take an objective view of it . There may have been some instances of abuse,( like most depts who screw up sometimes )but the evidence doesn't support widespread,systematic discrimination or abuse.

 

[Turtle]

...if you were take an objective view of it .

That's funny right there. Everything you post about it makes the effort to put the police and law enforcement in the best possible light.

 

[muttly]

That's funny right there. Everything you post about it makes the effort to put the police and law enforcement in the best possible light.

I've commented and criticized the police officer in the South Carolina incident, Funny, everything you post makes the effort to put law enforcement in the worst possible light.

 

[Turtle]

I've commented and criticized the police officer in the South Carolina incident,

Yeah, mainly because it's an incident universally condemned by everyone and you really don't have a choice, but your comments also included the possibility that there was an encounter that we didn't see on the dash cam or the phone video that could explain the officer's actions, and tried to soften it by saying it's possible that it occurred because of the stress that may have been brought on of being in an altercation of which there is no evidence.

Funny, everything you post makes the effort to put law enforcement in the worst possible light.

That's not true at all, I merely refuse to ignore the reality and will acknowledge the facts, instead of trying every way I can to alter or mitigate those facts.