Cops Across The US Have Been Exposed Posting Racist And Violent Things On Facebook. Here's The Proof

[22lcidw]

Dark humor ... is a common coping mechanism for most first responders.

That being said, there are nearly a million sworn LEOs in America. How many have posted to these things on FaceBook?

Again, 99% are great guys..

The problem is the 1% who aren't... and how difficult it is to fire them.

It is not 99% that are nice guys. In those professions.....Honor, Integrity and Character means everything. It is pure power. Power to destroy another human being. And there have been many screwed over. Many screwed over who have not had justice and never will on those who did it. But if you say 99% are as clean as the driven snow, it is completely messed because when one of their own does bad they circle the wagons to protect him. To protect what I call a fiefdom. And their Honor, Integrity and Character is based on that. Which reduces the same from if they were individuals. Anyone walking down the street and having several cop cars surrounding them with dogs and weapons drawn knows what tyranny is. Or perhaps incompetence and ineptitude. Imagine that at least a few times and being stopped a dozen times and the person did nothing wrong. And that is just one encounter with those who are aid to protect but shove the yokel of tyranny out instead. There are people in their lives who have put their life on the line and received this treatment. BLM brought it to a head and whacked some of them. They got a taste of what they do to others. And es there are good officers. You have to catch them at their best if they are by themselves to be fair. And many are. With standards lowered and many more women on the forces it is worse. More people employed at a much higher cost with many never putting their lives on the line. Leaving those who do with more pressure on them. And they still protect the fiefdom. The pay, the benefits, the pensions...

 

[Godboy]

This article was published in collaboration with Injustice Watch, a nonprofit newsroom focused on exposing institutional failures that obstruct justice and equality.

CHICAGO — When an armed, would-be robber backed out of a liquor store after the clerk pulled a gun on him, the surveillance video was posted on Facebook with a comment: “Should have shot him.”

Another commenter responded, “I would of pulled the trigger.”

These comments weren’t from your everyday Facebook users. They were the words of Philadelphia police officers.

Local law enforcement departments across the country have grappled with officers’ use of social media, often struggling to create and enforce policies that restrict offensive speech.

The North Charleston, South Carolina, police department fired an officer for posting a photo of himself wearing Confederate flag underwear, days after a white supremacist killed nine black worshippers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church just miles away. He later settled a wrongful termination suit.

The Chicago Police Department has tried unsuccessfully to fire an officer whose own commander complained of his “bigoted views.” A Facebook page called Chicago Code Blue attracted attention for inflammatory comments — such as “Every Thug Deserves a Slug” — after an officer was found guilty in the death of Laquan McDonald.

Police officers saying bigoted and racist things online has been an issue since the beginning of social media. The behavior was especially scrutinized after the Black Lives Matter movement blasted into the national conversation — and that scrutiny has continued even after that movement began grappling with its future. What was never really captured was the scope of problematic online posts from police officers.

But a new review of police behavior on Facebook documents the systemic nature of the conduct across several departments. The Plain View Project, launched by Philadelphia lawyer Emily Baker-White, examined the accounts of about 2,900 officers from eight departments across the country and an additional 600 retired officers from those same departments. She compiled posts that represented troubling conduct in a database that is replete with racist imagery and memes, and in some cases long, vitriolic exchanges involving multiple officers.

The project sought to compile posts, comments, and other public activity that could undermine public trust in the police and reinforce the views of critics, especially in minority communities, that the police are not there to protect them.

Facebook
Various screenshots compiled by Plain View.
Of the pages of officers whom the Plain View researchers could positively identify, about 1 in 5 of the current officers, and 2 in 5 of the retired officers, made public posts or comments that met that threshold — typically by displaying bias, applauding violence, scoffing at due process, or using dehumanizing language. The officers mocked Mexicans, women, and black people, celebrated the Confederate flag, and showed a man wearing a kaffiyeh scarf in the crosshairs of a gun.

“Just another savage that needs to be exterminated,” wrote Booker Smith Jr., a Dallas police sergeant, about a homicide at a Dollar General store. “Execute all involved,” he wrote separately about a group of teens who were accused of killing a 6-year-old. (One defendant pleaded guilty to aiding in the kidnapping. The alleged shooter and another defendant’s trials are scheduled for later this year.)

Reuben Carver III, a Phoenix officer, proclaimed in a stand-alone post, “Its a good day for a choke hold.”

And in St. Louis, Officer Thomas Mabrey shared a false news report that distorted an incident in which a woman police officer was shot responding to a call from a Moroccan man in Lebanon, Ohio. “F these muslem turd goat humpers,” he wrote, one of numerous anti-Muslim posts.

The officers named in this article did not respond to attempts to contact them or declined to comment.

When contacted about the findings of the Plain View Project, some departments requested more details about the flagged posts. The Phoenix Police Department said it had opened an inquiry into Carver’s post, and submitted it to the Professional Standards Bureau for review. The same officer also made posts threatening lawbreakers with sexual assault and celebrating violence against “hippies.”

A spokesperson with the St. Louis police department said they had forwarded the information regarding the post disparaging Muslims to their Internal Affairs division. A spokesperson with the Dallas Police Department said they had forwarded Smith’s details to superiors for review.

Still, experts in race and criminal justice were alarmed at the data.

“This blows up the myth of bad apples, by the sheer number of images and numbers of individuals who are implicated,” said Nikki Jones, an associate professor of African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley.

David Kennedy, a criminology professor at John Jay College, said he considered the results “dire.”

"This is the kind of behavior that confirms the worst suspicions on the part of communities about the police," Kennedy said, adding that it “fuels and cements” the convictions of people in distressed communities have that the “police are not to be trusted.”

Still others said some posts need to be taken in the context of the job.

Peter Moskos, a sociologist and former Baltimore police officer, argued that among the police rank and file, such comments may just be expressions of officers who recognize the dangers of the profession.

“I think a lot of that language serves a purpose,” Moskos said. It implies, “We’re all in this together.”

Facebook

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ok-racist-violent-posts-comments-philadelphia​

Theres nothing racist about killing dangerous criminals. Its simply a good policy in my opinion.

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

This article was published in collaboration with Injustice Watch, a nonprofit newsroom focused on exposing institutional failures that obstruct justice and equality.

CHICAGO — When an armed, would-be robber backed out of a liquor store after the clerk pulled a gun on him, the surveillance video was posted on Facebook with a comment: “Should have shot him.”

Another commenter responded, “I would of pulled the trigger.”

These comments weren’t from your everyday Facebook users. They were the words of Philadelphia police officers.

Local law enforcement departments across the country have grappled with officers’ use of social media, often struggling to create and enforce policies that restrict offensive speech.

The North Charleston, South Carolina, police department fired an officer for posting a photo of himself wearing Confederate flag underwear, days after a white supremacist killed nine black worshippers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church just miles away. He later settled a wrongful termination suit.

The Chicago Police Department has tried unsuccessfully to fire an officer whose own commander complained of his “bigoted views.” A Facebook page called Chicago Code Blue attracted attention for inflammatory comments — such as “Every Thug Deserves a Slug” — after an officer was found guilty in the death of Laquan McDonald.

Police officers saying bigoted and racist things online has been an issue since the beginning of social media. The behavior was especially scrutinized after the Black Lives Matter movement blasted into the national conversation — and that scrutiny has continued even after that movement began grappling with its future. What was never really captured was the scope of problematic online posts from police officers.

But a new review of police behavior on Facebook documents the systemic nature of the conduct across several departments. The Plain View Project, launched by Philadelphia lawyer Emily Baker-White, examined the accounts of about 2,900 officers from eight departments across the country and an additional 600 retired officers from those same departments. She compiled posts that represented troubling conduct in a database that is replete with racist imagery and memes, and in some cases long, vitriolic exchanges involving multiple officers.

The project sought to compile posts, comments, and other public activity that could undermine public trust in the police and reinforce the views of critics, especially in minority communities, that the police are not there to protect them.

Facebook
Various screenshots compiled by Plain View.
Of the pages of officers whom the Plain View researchers could positively identify, about 1 in 5 of the current officers, and 2 in 5 of the retired officers, made public posts or comments that met that threshold — typically by displaying bias, applauding violence, scoffing at due process, or using dehumanizing language. The officers mocked Mexicans, women, and black people, celebrated the Confederate flag, and showed a man wearing a kaffiyeh scarf in the crosshairs of a gun.

“Just another savage that needs to be exterminated,” wrote Booker Smith Jr., a Dallas police sergeant, about a homicide at a Dollar General store. “Execute all involved,” he wrote separately about a group of teens who were accused of killing a 6-year-old. (One defendant pleaded guilty to aiding in the kidnapping. The alleged shooter and another defendant’s trials are scheduled for later this year.)

Reuben Carver III, a Phoenix officer, proclaimed in a stand-alone post, “Its a good day for a choke hold.”

And in St. Louis, Officer Thomas Mabrey shared a false news report that distorted an incident in which a woman police officer was shot responding to a call from a Moroccan man in Lebanon, Ohio. “F these muslem turd goat humpers,” he wrote, one of numerous anti-Muslim posts.

The officers named in this article did not respond to attempts to contact them or declined to comment.

When contacted about the findings of the Plain View Project, some departments requested more details about the flagged posts. The Phoenix Police Department said it had opened an inquiry into Carver’s post, and submitted it to the Professional Standards Bureau for review. The same officer also made posts threatening lawbreakers with sexual assault and celebrating violence against “hippies.”

A spokesperson with the St. Louis police department said they had forwarded the information regarding the post disparaging Muslims to their Internal Affairs division. A spokesperson with the Dallas Police Department said they had forwarded Smith’s details to superiors for review.

Still, experts in race and criminal justice were alarmed at the data.

“This blows up the myth of bad apples, by the sheer number of images and numbers of individuals who are implicated,” said Nikki Jones, an associate professor of African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley.

David Kennedy, a criminology professor at John Jay College, said he considered the results “dire.”

"This is the kind of behavior that confirms the worst suspicions on the part of communities about the police," Kennedy said, adding that it “fuels and cements” the convictions of people in distressed communities have that the “police are not to be trusted.”

Still others said some posts need to be taken in the context of the job.

Peter Moskos, a sociologist and former Baltimore police officer, argued that among the police rank and file, such comments may just be expressions of officers who recognize the dangers of the profession.

“I think a lot of that language serves a purpose,” Moskos said. It implies, “We’re all in this together.”

Facebook

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ok-racist-violent-posts-comments-philadelphia​

Theres nothing racist about killing dangerous criminals. Its simply a good policy in my opinion.

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Dark humor ... is a common coping mechanism for most first responders.

That being said, there are nearly a million sworn LEOs in America. How many have posted to these things on FaceBook?

Again, 99% are great guys..

The problem is the 1% who aren't... and how difficult it is to fire them.

It is not 99% that are nice guys. In those professions.....Honor, Integrity and Character means everything. It is pure power. Power to destroy another human being. And there have been many screwed over. Many screwed over who have not had justice and never will on those who did it. But if you say 99% are as clean as the driven snow, it is completely messed because when one of their own does bad they circle the wagons to protect him. To protect what I call a fiefdom. And their Honor, Integrity and Character is based on that. Which reduces the same from if they were individuals. Anyone walking down the street and having several cop cars surrounding them with dogs and weapons drawn knows what tyranny is. Or perhaps incompetence and ineptitude. Imagine that at least a few times and being stopped a dozen times and the person did nothing wrong. And that is just one encounter with those who are aid to protect but shove the yokel of tyranny out instead. There are people in their lives who have put their life on the line and received this treatment. BLM brought it to a head and whacked some of them. They got a taste of what they do to others. And es there are good officers. You have to catch them at their best if they are by themselves to be fair. And many are. With standards lowered and many more women on the forces it is worse. More people employed at a much higher cost with many never putting their lives on the line. Leaving those who do with more pressure on them. And they still protect the fiefdom. The pay, the benefits, the pensions...

What problems does having more women on the force present?

 

[fncceo]

Dark humor ... is a common coping mechanism for most first responders.

That being said, there are nearly a million sworn LEOs in America. How many have posted to these things on FaceBook?

Again, 99% are great guys..

The problem is the 1% who aren't... and how difficult it is to fire them.

It is not 99% that are nice guys. In those professions.....Honor, Integrity and Character means everything. It is pure power. Power to destroy another human being. And there have been many screwed over. Many screwed over who have not had justice and never will on those who did it. But if you say 99% are as clean as the driven snow, it is completely messed because when one of their own does bad they circle the wagons to protect him. To protect what I call a fiefdom. And their Honor, Integrity and Character is based on that. Which reduces the same from if they were individuals. Anyone walking down the street and having several cop cars surrounding them with dogs and weapons drawn knows what tyranny is. Or perhaps incompetence and ineptitude. Imagine that at least a few times and being stopped a dozen times and the person did nothing wrong. And that is just one encounter with those who are aid to protect but shove the yokel of tyranny out instead. There are people in their lives who have put their life on the line and received this treatment. BLM brought it to a head and whacked some of them. They got a taste of what they do to others. And es there are good officers. You have to catch them at their best if they are by themselves to be fair. And many are. With standards lowered and many more women on the forces it is worse. More people employed at a much higher cost with many never putting their lives on the line. Leaving those who do with more pressure on them. And they still protect the fiefdom. The pay, the benefits, the pensions...

What problems does having more women on the force present?

Props for reading far enough into that crazy diatribe to pick up an insult to women cops.

You have more stamina than I.

 

[fncceo]

This article was published in collaboration with Injustice Watch, a nonprofit newsroom focused on exposing institutional failures that obstruct justice and equality.

CHICAGO — When an armed, would-be robber backed out of a liquor store after the clerk pulled a gun on him, the surveillance video was posted on Facebook with a comment: “Should have shot him.”

Another commenter responded, “I would of pulled the trigger.”

These comments weren’t from your everyday Facebook users. They were the words of Philadelphia police officers.

Local law enforcement departments across the country have grappled with officers’ use of social media, often struggling to create and enforce policies that restrict offensive speech.

The North Charleston, South Carolina, police department fired an officer for posting a photo of himself wearing Confederate flag underwear, days after a white supremacist killed nine black worshippers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church just miles away. He later settled a wrongful termination suit.

The Chicago Police Department has tried unsuccessfully to fire an officer whose own commander complained of his “bigoted views.” A Facebook page called Chicago Code Blue attracted attention for inflammatory comments — such as “Every Thug Deserves a Slug” — after an officer was found guilty in the death of Laquan McDonald.

Police officers saying bigoted and racist things online has been an issue since the beginning of social media. The behavior was especially scrutinized after the Black Lives Matter movement blasted into the national conversation — and that scrutiny has continued even after that movement began grappling with its future. What was never really captured was the scope of problematic online posts from police officers.

But a new review of police behavior on Facebook documents the systemic nature of the conduct across several departments. The Plain View Project, launched by Philadelphia lawyer Emily Baker-White, examined the accounts of about 2,900 officers from eight departments across the country and an additional 600 retired officers from those same departments. She compiled posts that represented troubling conduct in a database that is replete with racist imagery and memes, and in some cases long, vitriolic exchanges involving multiple officers.

The project sought to compile posts, comments, and other public activity that could undermine public trust in the police and reinforce the views of critics, especially in minority communities, that the police are not there to protect them.

Facebook
Various screenshots compiled by Plain View.
Of the pages of officers whom the Plain View researchers could positively identify, about 1 in 5 of the current officers, and 2 in 5 of the retired officers, made public posts or comments that met that threshold — typically by displaying bias, applauding violence, scoffing at due process, or using dehumanizing language. The officers mocked Mexicans, women, and black people, celebrated the Confederate flag, and showed a man wearing a kaffiyeh scarf in the crosshairs of a gun.

“Just another savage that needs to be exterminated,” wrote Booker Smith Jr., a Dallas police sergeant, about a homicide at a Dollar General store. “Execute all involved,” he wrote separately about a group of teens who were accused of killing a 6-year-old. (One defendant pleaded guilty to aiding in the kidnapping. The alleged shooter and another defendant’s trials are scheduled for later this year.)

Reuben Carver III, a Phoenix officer, proclaimed in a stand-alone post, “Its a good day for a choke hold.”

And in St. Louis, Officer Thomas Mabrey shared a false news report that distorted an incident in which a woman police officer was shot responding to a call from a Moroccan man in Lebanon, Ohio. “F these muslem turd goat humpers,” he wrote, one of numerous anti-Muslim posts.

The officers named in this article did not respond to attempts to contact them or declined to comment.

When contacted about the findings of the Plain View Project, some departments requested more details about the flagged posts. The Phoenix Police Department said it had opened an inquiry into Carver’s post, and submitted it to the Professional Standards Bureau for review. The same officer also made posts threatening lawbreakers with sexual assault and celebrating violence against “hippies.”

A spokesperson with the St. Louis police department said they had forwarded the information regarding the post disparaging Muslims to their Internal Affairs division. A spokesperson with the Dallas Police Department said they had forwarded Smith’s details to superiors for review.

Still, experts in race and criminal justice were alarmed at the data.

“This blows up the myth of bad apples, by the sheer number of images and numbers of individuals who are implicated,” said Nikki Jones, an associate professor of African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley.

David Kennedy, a criminology professor at John Jay College, said he considered the results “dire.”

"This is the kind of behavior that confirms the worst suspicions on the part of communities about the police," Kennedy said, adding that it “fuels and cements” the convictions of people in distressed communities have that the “police are not to be trusted.”

Still others said some posts need to be taken in the context of the job.

Peter Moskos, a sociologist and former Baltimore police officer, argued that among the police rank and file, such comments may just be expressions of officers who recognize the dangers of the profession.

“I think a lot of that language serves a purpose,” Moskos said. It implies, “We’re all in this together.”

Facebook

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ok-racist-violent-posts-comments-philadelphia​

Theres nothing racist about killing dangerous criminals. Its simply a good policy in my opinion.

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

Unfortunately, cops are too far down on the food chain to profit from corruption. There just isn't enough graft to go around.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

This article was published in collaboration with Injustice Watch, a nonprofit newsroom focused on exposing institutional failures that obstruct justice and equality.

CHICAGO — When an armed, would-be robber backed out of a liquor store after the clerk pulled a gun on him, the surveillance video was posted on Facebook with a comment: “Should have shot him.”

Another commenter responded, “I would of pulled the trigger.”

These comments weren’t from your everyday Facebook users. They were the words of Philadelphia police officers.

Local law enforcement departments across the country have grappled with officers’ use of social media, often struggling to create and enforce policies that restrict offensive speech.

The North Charleston, South Carolina, police department fired an officer for posting a photo of himself wearing Confederate flag underwear, days after a white supremacist killed nine black worshippers at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church just miles away. He later settled a wrongful termination suit.

The Chicago Police Department has tried unsuccessfully to fire an officer whose own commander complained of his “bigoted views.” A Facebook page called Chicago Code Blue attracted attention for inflammatory comments — such as “Every Thug Deserves a Slug” — after an officer was found guilty in the death of Laquan McDonald.

Police officers saying bigoted and racist things online has been an issue since the beginning of social media. The behavior was especially scrutinized after the Black Lives Matter movement blasted into the national conversation — and that scrutiny has continued even after that movement began grappling with its future. What was never really captured was the scope of problematic online posts from police officers.

But a new review of police behavior on Facebook documents the systemic nature of the conduct across several departments. The Plain View Project, launched by Philadelphia lawyer Emily Baker-White, examined the accounts of about 2,900 officers from eight departments across the country and an additional 600 retired officers from those same departments. She compiled posts that represented troubling conduct in a database that is replete with racist imagery and memes, and in some cases long, vitriolic exchanges involving multiple officers.

The project sought to compile posts, comments, and other public activity that could undermine public trust in the police and reinforce the views of critics, especially in minority communities, that the police are not there to protect them.

Facebook
Various screenshots compiled by Plain View.
Of the pages of officers whom the Plain View researchers could positively identify, about 1 in 5 of the current officers, and 2 in 5 of the retired officers, made public posts or comments that met that threshold — typically by displaying bias, applauding violence, scoffing at due process, or using dehumanizing language. The officers mocked Mexicans, women, and black people, celebrated the Confederate flag, and showed a man wearing a kaffiyeh scarf in the crosshairs of a gun.

“Just another savage that needs to be exterminated,” wrote Booker Smith Jr., a Dallas police sergeant, about a homicide at a Dollar General store. “Execute all involved,” he wrote separately about a group of teens who were accused of killing a 6-year-old. (One defendant pleaded guilty to aiding in the kidnapping. The alleged shooter and another defendant’s trials are scheduled for later this year.)

Reuben Carver III, a Phoenix officer, proclaimed in a stand-alone post, “Its a good day for a choke hold.”

And in St. Louis, Officer Thomas Mabrey shared a false news report that distorted an incident in which a woman police officer was shot responding to a call from a Moroccan man in Lebanon, Ohio. “F these muslem turd goat humpers,” he wrote, one of numerous anti-Muslim posts.

The officers named in this article did not respond to attempts to contact them or declined to comment.

When contacted about the findings of the Plain View Project, some departments requested more details about the flagged posts. The Phoenix Police Department said it had opened an inquiry into Carver’s post, and submitted it to the Professional Standards Bureau for review. The same officer also made posts threatening lawbreakers with sexual assault and celebrating violence against “hippies.”

A spokesperson with the St. Louis police department said they had forwarded the information regarding the post disparaging Muslims to their Internal Affairs division. A spokesperson with the Dallas Police Department said they had forwarded Smith’s details to superiors for review.

Still, experts in race and criminal justice were alarmed at the data.

“This blows up the myth of bad apples, by the sheer number of images and numbers of individuals who are implicated,” said Nikki Jones, an associate professor of African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley.

David Kennedy, a criminology professor at John Jay College, said he considered the results “dire.”

"This is the kind of behavior that confirms the worst suspicions on the part of communities about the police," Kennedy said, adding that it “fuels and cements” the convictions of people in distressed communities have that the “police are not to be trusted.”

Still others said some posts need to be taken in the context of the job.

Peter Moskos, a sociologist and former Baltimore police officer, argued that among the police rank and file, such comments may just be expressions of officers who recognize the dangers of the profession.

“I think a lot of that language serves a purpose,” Moskos said. It implies, “We’re all in this together.”

Facebook

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ok-racist-violent-posts-comments-philadelphia​

Theres nothing racist about killing dangerous criminals. Its simply a good policy in my opinion.

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

Unfortunately, cops are too far down on the food chain to profit from corruption. There just isn't enough graft to go around.

Actually my response was more a dig at his "you people" comment than anything else although maybe you can clarify something for me. If the Supreme Court ruled that the police have no duty to protect any specific member of society per Castlerock v Gonzalez then how can the state of Florida determine than they can incarcerate someone for failing to act when there was no duty for them to do so?

I realize that the Castlerock case was civil and this is criminal but find it truly disturbing all of the rancor being piled upon this former office instead of on the kid who pulled the trigger the 17+ times.

We can say all day long, what we would do in a specific situation but until we're actually being fired upon or in a situation were our lives are at stake, most of us just don't really know. We know what we'd like to believe we would do but sometimes people panic and/or freeze.

This officer actually attempted to get Cruz committed under Florida's Baker Act which may have interrupted his criminal trajectory but the news reported that law enforcement had 37 contact with Cruz's family/home before the shooting so maybe it would not have made a difference. I wonder if it crossed Petersen's mind that maybe Cruz was gunning for him because he tried to have him committed.

 

[fncceo]

Theres nothing racist about killing dangerous criminals. Its simply a good policy in my opinion.

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

Unfortunately, cops are too far down on the food chain to profit from corruption. There just isn't enough graft to go around.

Actually my response was more a dig at his "you people" comment than anything else although maybe you can clarify something for me. If the Supreme Court ruled that the police have no duty to protect any specific member of society per Castlerock v Gonzalez then how can the state of Florida determine than they can incarcerate someone for failing to act when there was no duty for them to do so?

I realize that the Castlerock case was civil and this is criminal but find it truly disturbing all of the rancor being piled upon this former office instead of on the kid who pulled the trigger the 17+ times.

We can say all day long, what we would do in a specific situation but until we're actually being fired upon or in a situation were our lives are at stake, most of us just don't really know. We know what we'd like to believe we would do but sometimes people panic and/or freeze.

This officer actually attempted to get Cruz committed under Florida's Baker Act which may have interrupted his criminal trajectory but the news reported that law enforcement had 37 contact with Cruz's family/home before the shooting so maybe it would not have made a difference. I wonder if it crossed Petersen's mind that maybe Cruz was gunning for him because he tried to have him committed.

Civil suits are what departments fear the most. If a police officer violates criminal code, the department can throw said officer under the bus and avoid legal issues.

However, in a civil suit, the officer can follow department procedures and they have not scapegoat, the city takes a multi-million dollar hit. In fact, it's worse if they follow procedure and something bad happens ... 100% of the blame falls on the city (or more accurately, the city's wallet).

For example, person A calls police department B on a weekly basis threatening suicide. Everyone in the department knows A isn't going to do it, it's attention seeking. So, department B prioritizes other jobs over his welfare check, or worse doesn't attend the call at all.

But, this time, person A accidentally takes too many pills or slips in the tub and dies. Relatives C will sue department B for neglecting person A's 'cry for help' and walk away with payday D.

The result of this is ... police spend a lot of time dealing with attention seeking behaviour as a primary duty.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Do you even understand how our criminal justice system operates because it's not the job of the police to determine on the spot if someone deserves to live or die.

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

Unfortunately, cops are too far down on the food chain to profit from corruption. There just isn't enough graft to go around.

Actually my response was more a dig at his "you people" comment than anything else although maybe you can clarify something for me. If the Supreme Court ruled that the police have no duty to protect any specific member of society per Castlerock v Gonzalez then how can the state of Florida determine than they can incarcerate someone for failing to act when there was no duty for them to do so?

I realize that the Castlerock case was civil and this is criminal but find it truly disturbing all of the rancor being piled upon this former office instead of on the kid who pulled the trigger the 17+ times.

We can say all day long, what we would do in a specific situation but until we're actually being fired upon or in a situation were our lives are at stake, most of us just don't really know. We know what we'd like to believe we would do but sometimes people panic and/or freeze.

This officer actually attempted to get Cruz committed under Florida's Baker Act which may have interrupted his criminal trajectory but the news reported that law enforcement had 37 contact with Cruz's family/home before the shooting so maybe it would not have made a difference. I wonder if it crossed Petersen's mind that maybe Cruz was gunning for him because he tried to have him committed.

Civil suits are what departments fear the most. If a police officer violates criminal code, the department can throw said officer under the bus and avoid legal issues.

However, in a civil suit, the officer can follow department procedures and they have not scapegoat, the city takes a multi-million dollar hit. In fact, it's worse if they follow procedure and something bad happens ... 100% of the blame falls on the city (or more accurately, the city's wallet).

For example, person A calls police department B on a weekly basis threatening suicide. Everyone in the department knows A isn't going to do it, it's attention seeking. So, department B prioritizes other jobs over his welfare check, or worse doesn't attend the call at all.

But, this time, person A accidentally takes too many pills or slips in the tub and dies. Relatives C will sue department B for neglecting person A's 'cry for help' and walk away with payday D.

The result of this is ... police spend a lot of time dealing with attention seeking behaviour as a primary duty.

What kind of person seeks that kind of negative attention, especially from the police?

 

[fncceo]

Why are you people always defending violent criminals?

I don't defend the police, well not usually however I have defended this officer online:
Parkland resource officer charged with neglect, negligence related to school shooting

I hope you never become a target of a corrupt government official or LEO.

Unfortunately, cops are too far down on the food chain to profit from corruption. There just isn't enough graft to go around.

Actually my response was more a dig at his "you people" comment than anything else although maybe you can clarify something for me. If the Supreme Court ruled that the police have no duty to protect any specific member of society per Castlerock v Gonzalez then how can the state of Florida determine than they can incarcerate someone for failing to act when there was no duty for them to do so?

I realize that the Castlerock case was civil and this is criminal but find it truly disturbing all of the rancor being piled upon this former office instead of on the kid who pulled the trigger the 17+ times.

We can say all day long, what we would do in a specific situation but until we're actually being fired upon or in a situation were our lives are at stake, most of us just don't really know. We know what we'd like to believe we would do but sometimes people panic and/or freeze.

This officer actually attempted to get Cruz committed under Florida's Baker Act which may have interrupted his criminal trajectory but the news reported that law enforcement had 37 contact with Cruz's family/home before the shooting so maybe it would not have made a difference. I wonder if it crossed Petersen's mind that maybe Cruz was gunning for him because he tried to have him committed.

Civil suits are what departments fear the most. If a police officer violates criminal code, the department can throw said officer under the bus and avoid legal issues.

However, in a civil suit, the officer can follow department procedures and they have not scapegoat, the city takes a multi-million dollar hit. In fact, it's worse if they follow procedure and something bad happens ... 100% of the blame falls on the city (or more accurately, the city's wallet).

For example, person A calls police department B on a weekly basis threatening suicide. Everyone in the department knows A isn't going to do it, it's attention seeking. So, department B prioritizes other jobs over his welfare check, or worse doesn't attend the call at all.

But, this time, person A accidentally takes too many pills or slips in the tub and dies. Relatives C will sue department B for neglecting person A's 'cry for help' and walk away with payday D.

The result of this is ... police spend a lot of time dealing with attention seeking behaviour as a primary duty.

What kind of person seeks that kind of negative attention, especially from the police?

Believe it or not, there are a lot of them. People who are so desperate for attention and they truly can't distinguish in their minds good attention from the bad.

They are well known to police and paramedics and are a huge drain on time and resources.

If you ever wondered why cops aren't around when you need them ... it's not doughnuts, it's crazy people.