An insiders view of race relations

[pcuser]

Here is a great piece describing race issues in this country. He also exposes hypocrisy within the debate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-hansen/white-ignorance-at-the-co_b_6288168.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

[Lipripper93561]

Nothing like a hit piece on whitey!!!
Renewable energy half the cost of carbon based fuels.......what a crock.
All I see in that article are excuses, excuses for bad behavior. I have a close
relative that's well lets say, "on the other side of the law", meaning he's spent more time in
jail the last ten years than time at home.
He has been woken up in his bed by cops, only
to be knocked out by them, while he is still under the covers. Verified by parents, they will no
longer let law enforcement in without a warrant.
Been bitten by the "dog", with nice puncture wound scars to show for it.
Has been beaten in custody. Any many more I'm sure he doesn't share with me.
He is white, race has nothing to do with it, he is the human punching bag for cops, and canines.
But he constantly puts himself in these situations, and therefore must accept the responsibility for his actions. Of course, he has yet to do this.

Google Kelly Thomas......... and please tell me, why there are no protest, why Al Sharpton, why the other race baiters, did not champion his fight.
This man was beat to death, blow by blow, screaming for mercy, while offering no resistance. And the cops cleared of all wrong doing.
This is not a black versus white instance, this is lack of justice, lack of respect of life, and a result of the police, policing themselves.

[DarkShadow]

And the cops cleared of all wrong doing.
This is not a black versus white instance, this is lack of justice, lack of respect of life, and a result of the police, policing themselves.

So it's a cop problem, not a race problem, is what you're saying.

[Lipripper93561]

Exactly! I understand, officers have a tough job, one that I would almost never take.
But mistakes happen and must be addressed. I have a feeling, that this has gone on
for decades, if not longer but technology is bringing this issue to light, as in the past
it was always the officers words against the "criminals" and the judge almost always
believes the cops over the one being prosecuted. Film has brought this to the attention
of the masses. There needs to be a bit of leeway (sp) but, the officers should be held
to the same standards the general public are held to. Meaning, just because someone
resists arrests, it does not give a pass for a #$&@@ beating.
Police review boards should consist of elected official's, at least in this sense, when rulings
are not correct, new reviewers can be elected to ensure integrity in future incidents.

[DarkShadow]

...but technology is bringing this issue to light, as in the past
it was always the officers words against the "criminals"

What about the Eric Garner situation where there was actual video of what happened?

I used to think that video cameras would solve the problem, but when a grand jury doesn't even decide that a trial by jury is necessary, then apparently you can have 4 different angles, 4 commentators, and Jimmy Johnson drawing on the monitor and it still won't change things.

What about the incident that you have mentioned with Thomas Kelly? The murder was caught on video, and once again, no trial.

I seriously doubt video taping the incident will fix things. As you said, it's a cop problem, not a lack of video evidence problem.

[DEVOREFLYER]

Actually DS there was a trial. http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/13/local/la-me-ln-kelly-thomas-trial-not-guilty-verdicts-20140113 And I am more than shocked that they got acquitted, especially when they had audio/video of the one cop saying I'm gonna F**k you up.

[DarkShadow]

Actually DS there was a trial. http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/13/local/la-me-ln-kelly-thomas-trial-not-guilty-verdicts-20140113 And I am more than shocked that they got acquitted, especially when they had audio/video of the one cop saying I'm gonna F**k you up.

Ahh, my bad.

There you go, even with video evidence, AND a trial by jury by peers, it seems there is still a perception that certain individuals should be held to different standards than others. It's hard for a prosecutor to turn against witnesses that they use to prosecute offenders. Perhaps that is why the prosecutor in the Ferguson case sounded more like the cop's defense attorney, instead of the prosecutor for the government. With a prosecutor like that, the cop didn't even need a defense attorney.

[pcuser]

Exactly! I understand, officers have a tough job, one that I would almost never take.
But mistakes happen and must be addressed. I have a feeling, that this has gone on
for decades, if not longer but technology is bringing this issue to light, as in the past
it was always the officers words against the "criminals" and the judge almost always
believes the cops over the one being prosecuted. Film has brought this to the attention
of the masses. There needs to be a bit of leeway (sp) but, the officers should be held
to the same standards the general public are held to. Meaning, just because someone
resists arrests, it does not give a pass for a #$&@@ beating.
Police review boards should consist of elected official's, at least in this sense, when rulings
are not correct, new reviewers can be elected to ensure integrity in future incidents.

I'm not race baiting anything. I'm using this issue as it's what's in the news at this moment. For what it's worth, I agree with you that it is a cop problem. Also, it's a sad history how we have treated minorities. I will say that blacks are wildly disproportionately hurt by this justice 'regime' we have. The disproportion is far more than one would expect given any statistics concerning crime. I also have a brother who was on the wrong side of the law for a time in his youth. He's straightened out his life much to my relief. He was badly beaten by cops at the end of a foot chase. I agree he was wrong and deserved to be arrested. He, however wasn't supposed to be judged and punished at the discretion of those cops. Once he's in custody and is hit by a cop, it's assault and battery, period. We also have a growing problem with 'civil forfeiture' by cops. We need to rethink many things in our justice system, not just how minorities are treated. That should give you a better idea where I'm coming from.

[DEVOREFLYER]

If you have never been on a criminal or civil jury or as a court approved expert witness as I have then you don't understand how the system works or the Judges instructions to a jury. It's far from perfect by any means and have you ever heard of jury nullification. It only takes one in a criminal case.

[pcuser]

Ahh, my bad.

There you go, even with video evidence, AND a trial by jury by peers, it seems there is still a perception that certain individuals should be held to different standards than others. It's hard for a prosecutor to turn against witnesses that they use to prosecute offenders. Perhaps that is why the prosecutor in the Ferguson case sounded more like the cop's defense attorney, instead of the prosecutor for the government. With a prosecutor like that, the cop didn't even need a defense attorney.

I agree that the video in New York was ignored by the authorities. However, all the statistics I've seen regarding cops wearing visible cameras has shown huge decreases in police brutality claims and far more civil behavior on both sides. It also protects cops from false accusations from criminals. It appears to facilitate more peaceful arrests as the criminal knows he or she will have a day in court if it's warranted and the cop knows if he or she doesn't follow policy, he or she will get in trouble as there is a taped record of the events. I'm sure I haven't seen all the results, but what I've seen seems very promising. The police are often the ones who don't want it.

[pcuser]

If you have never been on a criminal or civil jury or as a court approved expert witness as I have then you don't understand how the system works or the Judges instructions to a jury. It's far from perfect by any means and have you ever heard of jury nullification. It only takes one in a criminal case.

You're right about these things in court. However, we must start somewhere and try to improve an antiquated system...

[DEVOREFLYER]

You're right about these things in court. However, we must start somewhere and try to improve an antiquated system...

Shakespeare was right "Kill all the lawyers"........ I kid, I kid.....

[DarkShadow]

If you have never been on a criminal or civil jury or as a court approved expert witness as I have then you don't understand how the system works or the Judges instructions to a jury.

Are you referring to a juror sitting on a grand jury, or a juror sitting on an actual trial?

[DEVOREFLYER]

Either one and they are both different and similar in certain aspects. Or you could make the case for the difference Superior Court and Federal Court again different and similar.

[pcuser]

Shakespeare was right "Kill all the lawyers"........ I kid, I kid.....

Yeah, that sounds good at times, but the problem with it is, as you know, we have an adversarial system. So we need the lawyers...

[DEVOREFLYER]

Here is the real deal in Civil Cases:

96% of all the law suits filed in the world are in the USA.

25% of all Californians with income over $50,000 will be sued in their lifetime.

Every business in California will be sued in it's lifetime.

And you wonder why goods and services and insurance is expensive.

[Bucket]

The ones who make a big deal out of it are the racist ones. Eg protestors,rioters,looters,al sharpton,and liberals. Did you know most elected officials in the south prior to 1962 were democrats. The president who attacked mexico in the mexican war was democrat.and the confederacy was made up of democrats.whose the racist one now.oh yea and that racist president of yours obama who legalizes immigrants from a specific demographic instead of making it fair by picking a equal amount from every ethnic background is racist

[pcuser]

the ones who make a big deal out of it are the racist ones. Eg protestors,rioters,looters,al sharpton,and liberals. Did you know most elected officials in the south prior to 1962 were democrats. The president who attacked mexico in the mexican war was democrat.and the confederacy was made up of democrats.whose the racist one now.oh yea and that racist president of yours obama who legalizes immigrants from a specific demographic instead of making it fair by picking a equal amount from every ethnic background is racist

lmfao.....

[HawgZWylde]

The ones who make a big deal out of it are the racist ones. Eg protestors,rioters,looters,al sharpton,and liberals. Did you know most elected officials in the south prior to 1962 were democrats. The president who attacked mexico in the mexican war was democrat.and the confederacy was made up of democrats.whose the racist one now.oh yea and that racist president of yours obama who legalizes immigrants from a specific demographic instead of making it fair by picking a equal amount from every ethnic background is racist

Divide and conquer. Electioneering through sociology at it's best...

[Tom]

I agree that the video in New York was ignored by the authorities. However, all the statistics I've seen regarding cops wearing visible cameras has shown huge decreases in police brutality claims and far more civil behavior on both sides. It also protects cops from false accusations from criminals. It appears to facilitate more peaceful arrests as the criminal knows he or she will have a day in court if it's warranted and the cop knows if he or she doesn't follow policy, he or she will get in trouble as there is a taped record of the events. I'm sure I haven't seen all the results, but what I've seen seems very promising. The police are often the ones who don't want it.

My Opinion on cameras is that all Cops should wear them
Their is another side to that...do the cops have a right to any privacy on the job at all ??
many Cops feel that a camera invades their privacy..do cops have a right to Privacy ??

another can of worms
and as already mentioned in the New York case...the cameras did not change the Point of view of Juror
Now i think in Fergesun had the cop had a camera..the overall outcome might be different in the view of the people and maybe in the way the situation unfolded

[pcuser]

My Opinion on cameras is that all Cops should wear them
Their is another side to that...do the cops have a right to any privacy on the job at all ??
many Cops feel that a camera invades their privacy..do cops have a right to Privacy ??

another can of worms
and as already mentioned in the New York case...the cameras did not change the Point of view of Juror
Now i think in Fergesun had the cop had a camera..the overall outcome might be different in the view of the people and maybe in the way the situation unfolded

Actually, the loss of privacy discussion around these cameras is about the general public doing no interacting with police. However, it isn't really an issue as the cameras only need to be turned on when police are directly interacting with the public. As to the right of privacy of the cop, it's not as if they are being filmed off duty or in the bathroom. Many jobs are done on camera. It's legal and constitutional.

[DockRat]

The bottom line is that in Ferguson and NY both guys were breaking the law.
I worked with several black guys today. They ALL work full time, drive nice cars, own houses and don't get hassled by cops.
DR