Indict a Ham sandwich but not a cop

[Rupert Pupkin]

Al Sharpton and all the race baiters are like the boy who cried wolf. They lost almost all their credibility by making a big deal of the Ferguson case and other cases that have no merit. Now there is finally this case in New York that may have some merit but the majority of the population probably won't pay much attention because Sharpton has no credibility left. When a guy cries racism and/or police brutality every two seconds, even when there is none, who is going to pay attention to him when there is finally a legitimate case? Everyone will just assume he is full of it like usual.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Al Sharpton and all the race baiters are like the boy who cried wolf. They lost almost all their credibility by making a big deal of the Ferguson case and other cases that have no merit. Now there is finally this case in New York that may have some merit but the majority of the population probably won't pay much attention because Sharpton has no credibility left. When a guy cries racism and/or police brutality every two seconds, even when there is none, who is going to pay attention to him when there is finally a legitimate case? Everyone will just assume he is full of it like usual.

Sharpton lost any credability 27 years ago.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

Sharpton lost any credability 27 years ago.

There still is hope....

But Gurley’s relatives told Sharpton to stay away rather than turn the somber ceremonies into a spectacle.

“It’s been a nightmare,” Gurley’s aunt, Hertencia Petersen, told The Post. “He just wants to take credit for this when he’s never even contacted my sister [Gurley’s mother].

“Who made you the spokesperson of our family? We just want to bury our nephew with dignity and respect.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ms_family.html

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

There still is hope....





http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...ms_family.html

Glad someone thinks so

[Crown@club]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

too uncommon.
i really hope one of the things that comes out of these stories is the DOJ requiring info on all police shootings-who polices the police?

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...ck_on_job.html

just saw this on slate.


It was with significantly less fanfare on Nov. 24 that the mayor of Hammond announced he'd reinstated the officers to regular duty because they'd been "cleared" by an FBI investigation—only for the FBI to respond that it had done no such thing. From NWI.com:


"The matter is still under investigation," said Bob Ramsey, FBI Supervisory Special Agent with the Merrillville office of the law enforcement agency. He declined to put a timeline on the completion of the examination.


also:

One of the Hammond officers involved, Patrick Vicari, has previously been named as a defendent in five other lawsuits alleging inappropriate behavior. One was dismissed, one is pending, and the three others were settled out of court for a total of $181,850.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/i...rence-27411871

What is the answer to this? In our criminal justice system, you are presumed innocent unless there is strong evidence that shows you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

When a police officer kills someone and the officer says that he feared for his life, and there is no evidence disputing the officer's testimony, how can you find him guilty? How can you even find probable cause to put him on trial?

[OldDog]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

What is the answer to this? In our criminal justice system, you are presumed innocent unless there is strong evidence that shows you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

When a police officer kills someone and the officer says that he feared for his life, and there is no evidence disputing the officer's testimony, how can you find him guilty? How can you even find probable cause to put him on trial?

I have to agree. While the headline Indicting a Police Officer Is Uncommon Occurrence might lead one to believe that the piece is going to be a scathing indictment of the justice system, the article actually gives examples of officers who were indicted, and gives good reasons why so many aren't.

Philip Matthew Stinson, a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio, who has been studying a database of 10,000 police arrests for various types of misconduct, said judges and juries are perfectly willing to throw the book at an officer ? if they did something that went beyond their official duties, like robbing a drug dealer or using the authority of their badge to settle a personal score.

"If the jury is sitting there thinking, 'Oh my God. A split-second decision like that? What would I have done? Would I have shot the guy?' you're not going to get an indictment," he said.

Second-guessing an officer's judgment can get even harder if there are conflicting accounts about what happened. That was the case in the death of Michael Brown, the unarmed 18-year-old shot to death in Ferguson, Missouri.