Ever since Ferguson I have scoured the internet daily. I have looked at innumerable videos ranging in length from a ten second one that showed the end of Tamir Rice to those lasting minutes as officers beat the hell out of people. (ala 'Rodney king) I have read hundreds of articles, from short incidents in the papers to the FBI reports on crime and reporting procedures. I have read studies on grand juries, their function, statistics on their indictments, and relationships to DAs . Reports on the function of internal affairs and their outcomes.
A few things stand out:
We have no idea of how many people are killed yearly by the police as they are not required to report them all. Reasonable estimates suggest the the number is at least double that reported and probably more.
Until recently the only "evidence" presented was that supplied by the officers themselves. That is changing with the ever present cell phone video.
As far as grand juries go it is evident that the DA and the cops have a symbiotic relationship where they must stay on good terms with one another or both will suffer the consequences of each others wrath. It is written that a DA can indict a ham sandwich and that is born out by the rates of indictment, well over 90% in general. The fact that convictions in regular trial are nowhere near that figure also bears out how tenuous the evidence may be for grand juries to indict.
Then there are the grand jury trials of police officers. Indictment rate? Less than 5%. Since it would seem that only the most egregious cases of police misconduct would even be presented to a grand jury this is a real killer figure and reinforces the (seeming) fact that a grand jury trial for a law office is not so much a search for cause as it is a defense trial for the officer. The Ferguson trial was a poster boy for that although it is far from being the worst example.
Is this racial? Yes, I think there is an element of that although not in every case as I have seen all colors of cops beating up all colors of citizens in whatever combination you can imagine. In what cases I have seen that a white person and a black have had similar encounters for similar causes the black man suffers far worse consequences.
One thing that stands out is the utter brutality and vulgarity of these encounters. I once said the academies must teach courses in these subjects as well as requiring proficiency in using the "F" word (and other vulgarities) as the major part of their language in dealing with the public. I realize that these videos are there because the exhibit bad behavior, and one can only hope that they are an exception but I wonder. So many of these are just stops of people who are simply impolite or who insist that their rights be observed. So often the cops threaten to find something, anything to "drag your sorry as to jail right now" Seriously, this is such a common phrase it become almost funny in a disgusting kind of way.
The physicality? I have seen no video of a one on one encounter. Most were two or three on one and so many were simply gang take downs where the (so called) criminal was simply overwhelmed by sheer numbers and beaten severely in the process. Many of these look like acts of sadism. (definitions 2 and 3) Often the beating does not stop with handcuffs.
Killings? Lord our cops are trigger happy. They shoot folks running away. When they stop running. Sometimes the very act of stopping running and turning around is enough to get one blown away. A twitch, a slight downward movement of the arms. One guy got it for turning his head while face down in handcuffs.
Well they say the cops are just protecting themselves in dangerous situations. Maybe but it sure looks like hell on the videos. Perhaps I would react this way but I am not a trained policeman. Surely in these"professionals" we have a right to expect more than knee jerk reactions to these situations. In far too many cases they just made a bad decision and they blame fear. Again, maybe so but they appear far too fearful in a job that requires them not to be.
Then there is always the excuse of inherent danger in the job. There is that but one must admit this danger is not omnipresent and that cops are far down the list of most dangerous jobs. In fact, statistically, although it will vary slightly on a year to year basis. a police officer is less likely to be killed by violence, on the job than the average civilian is to be killed by murder.
In house investigations and punishment? You will hear tales of how how the cops are their own best critics. That could be considered the lie of the century. Once again, up until now the evidence acted upon by internal affairs was primarily just the cop vs the victim. We know who wins there. These "investigations", for the simplest of cases will typically drag on for months, only to be settled by a slap on the wrist (if that) long after the public has forgotten the circumstance. Very likely the result will never see the light of day.
Millions on dollars are awarded in civil trials to police victims where the cop has been exonerated by the force. Apparently some juries are not so charitable.
Here we depart from what I have learned to what I think, opinion if you will, and it it is harsh criticism of the "good cops". Not for the job they are doing as they deserve every credit imaginable for doing a difficult job well. My criticism is for their tolerance of the "bad" cops. The sadists the control freaks, the power geeks, the ones that should be booted out immediately and never should have been allowed on the force to begin with. I realize the difficulty as they might have to depend on these assholes for protection some day. Kicking them out would take real courage. It may well be the most dangerous thing they could ever do but until it is done, and it must have the full cooperation of the administration, these guys will deserve no better than the ones they protect.
You either serve the public or you serve your buddy. You can't do both.
A few things stand out:
We have no idea of how many people are killed yearly by the police as they are not required to report them all. Reasonable estimates suggest the the number is at least double that reported and probably more.
Until recently the only "evidence" presented was that supplied by the officers themselves. That is changing with the ever present cell phone video.
As far as grand juries go it is evident that the DA and the cops have a symbiotic relationship where they must stay on good terms with one another or both will suffer the consequences of each others wrath. It is written that a DA can indict a ham sandwich and that is born out by the rates of indictment, well over 90% in general. The fact that convictions in regular trial are nowhere near that figure also bears out how tenuous the evidence may be for grand juries to indict.
Then there are the grand jury trials of police officers. Indictment rate? Less than 5%. Since it would seem that only the most egregious cases of police misconduct would even be presented to a grand jury this is a real killer figure and reinforces the (seeming) fact that a grand jury trial for a law office is not so much a search for cause as it is a defense trial for the officer. The Ferguson trial was a poster boy for that although it is far from being the worst example.
Is this racial? Yes, I think there is an element of that although not in every case as I have seen all colors of cops beating up all colors of citizens in whatever combination you can imagine. In what cases I have seen that a white person and a black have had similar encounters for similar causes the black man suffers far worse consequences.
One thing that stands out is the utter brutality and vulgarity of these encounters. I once said the academies must teach courses in these subjects as well as requiring proficiency in using the "F" word (and other vulgarities) as the major part of their language in dealing with the public. I realize that these videos are there because the exhibit bad behavior, and one can only hope that they are an exception but I wonder. So many of these are just stops of people who are simply impolite or who insist that their rights be observed. So often the cops threaten to find something, anything to "drag your sorry as to jail right now" Seriously, this is such a common phrase it become almost funny in a disgusting kind of way.
The physicality? I have seen no video of a one on one encounter. Most were two or three on one and so many were simply gang take downs where the (so called) criminal was simply overwhelmed by sheer numbers and beaten severely in the process. Many of these look like acts of sadism. (definitions 2 and 3) Often the beating does not stop with handcuffs.
Killings? Lord our cops are trigger happy. They shoot folks running away. When they stop running. Sometimes the very act of stopping running and turning around is enough to get one blown away. A twitch, a slight downward movement of the arms. One guy got it for turning his head while face down in handcuffs.
Well they say the cops are just protecting themselves in dangerous situations. Maybe but it sure looks like hell on the videos. Perhaps I would react this way but I am not a trained policeman. Surely in these"professionals" we have a right to expect more than knee jerk reactions to these situations. In far too many cases they just made a bad decision and they blame fear. Again, maybe so but they appear far too fearful in a job that requires them not to be.
Then there is always the excuse of inherent danger in the job. There is that but one must admit this danger is not omnipresent and that cops are far down the list of most dangerous jobs. In fact, statistically, although it will vary slightly on a year to year basis. a police officer is less likely to be killed by violence, on the job than the average civilian is to be killed by murder.
In house investigations and punishment? You will hear tales of how how the cops are their own best critics. That could be considered the lie of the century. Once again, up until now the evidence acted upon by internal affairs was primarily just the cop vs the victim. We know who wins there. These "investigations", for the simplest of cases will typically drag on for months, only to be settled by a slap on the wrist (if that) long after the public has forgotten the circumstance. Very likely the result will never see the light of day.
Millions on dollars are awarded in civil trials to police victims where the cop has been exonerated by the force. Apparently some juries are not so charitable.
Here we depart from what I have learned to what I think, opinion if you will, and it it is harsh criticism of the "good cops". Not for the job they are doing as they deserve every credit imaginable for doing a difficult job well. My criticism is for their tolerance of the "bad" cops. The sadists the control freaks, the power geeks, the ones that should be booted out immediately and never should have been allowed on the force to begin with. I realize the difficulty as they might have to depend on these assholes for protection some day. Kicking them out would take real courage. It may well be the most dangerous thing they could ever do but until it is done, and it must have the full cooperation of the administration, these guys will deserve no better than the ones they protect.
You either serve the public or you serve your buddy. You can't do both.
