F*ck The Police, Part LXXIV

13

  Comments


  • TheKindCromangTheKindCromang 1,463 Posts
    pcmr said:

    Will a cop have to be filmed repeatedly running over an elderly white senator in broad daylight before some justice is served?

    ^^^ THIS ^^^ and also, who are these people serving on the jury who let this shit slide?

  • FrankFrank 2,370 Posts
    makes you want to buy a sniper rifle... this shit is beyond disgusting.

  • Options
    It's no surprise when cops get away with atrocities.

    I wonder if they'll keep their jobs.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    This wasn't covered up or swept under the rug.

    The NYC brass spoke out against these officers and they will pursue their legal termination as stated by the Chief's office.

    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

  • SnagglepusSnagglepus 1,756 Posts
    So we're expected to believe this ...

    chas said:
    he did so to check on her, at her request, and to counsel her about drinking.
    and this (from the NYT article) ...

    "he cuddled with the drunken woman in her bed while she wore nothing but a bra".

    Interesting way to counsel her about her drinking.

    Disgusting. At the very least, they were terminated from NYPD.

  • HorseleechHorseleech 3,830 Posts
    Rockadelic said:
    This wasn't covered up or swept under the rug.

    The NYC brass spoke out against these officers and they will pursue their legal termination as stated by the Chief's office.

    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    They will almost definitely lose their jobs - aside form these charges they did a number of other things wrong. The senior officer had heroin in his locker (probably to frame people with) and they faked a 911 call among other things. And the Policeman's Union will fight their termination in court at a cost of hundreds of thousands to taxpayers.

    I would like to hear the instructions from the judge before I blame the jury for this shitty verdict, I suspect that had a lot to do with them getting off.

  • Options
    Snagglepus said:
    At the very least, they were terminated from NYPD.

    Not yet. And of course the union is likely to fight against termination.

    By the way, they were suspended with pay, so they've been collecting paychecks for 2 years while this has been going on.

  • eliseelise 3,252 Posts
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Snagglepus said:
    At the very least, they were terminated from NYPD.

    Not yet. And of course the union is likely to fight against termination.

    By the way, they were suspended with pay, so they've been collecting paychecks for 2 years while this has been going on.

    SO F*CKED UP.

  • HarveyCanalHarveyCanal "a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
    Par for the course.

    b/w

    Can't believe that our thread of indignance from 2 years ago didn't help change the game.

  • Options
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

  • DB_CooperDB_Cooper Manhatin' 7,823 Posts
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

    That would require the collaboration of the prosecuting attorney.

  • Options
    DB_Cooper said:
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

    That would require the collaboration of the prosecuting attorney.

    In theory, but not in practice. Jury pools tend to lean in that direction anyway, for a variety of reasons.

  • DB_CooperDB_Cooper Manhatin' 7,823 Posts
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    DB_Cooper said:
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

    That would require the collaboration of the prosecuting attorney.

    In theory, but not in practice. Jury pools tend to lean in that direction anyway, for a variety of reasons.

    I hear what you're saying.

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    DB_Cooper said:
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

    That would require the collaboration of the prosecuting attorney.

    In theory, but not in practice. Jury pools tend to lean in that direction anyway, for a variety of reasons.

    Would this be because "Law & Order" types actually show up to Jury Duty?

    I agree with HL that knowing the Judge's comments to the jury could reveal a lot.

    With the facts that have been made public it's hard to believe that even "Law & Order" types wouldn't recognize their guilt.

  • Garcia_VegaGarcia_Vega 2,428 Posts
    Horseleech said:
    I would like to hear the instructions from the judge before I blame the jury for this shitty verdict, I suspect that had a lot to do with them getting off.

    The same "beyond reasonable doubt" business the cops get off on all the time. Because there was no DNA evidence it became a he said/she said thing, and so the jury acquitted (probably because they were convinced by the defense of possibly sending two "innocent" cops away for 25+), conveniently before the long weekend. Same reason the judge can't reverse the verdict. I can't believe it wasn't even a hung jury, what a fucking travesty.
    Jonny my heart goes out to you, the victim, and all her friends and family. This is beyond fucked.

  • Options
    Rockadelic said:
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    DB_Cooper said:
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    Rockadelic said:
    The real question today is how and why did a jury of 12 people come to this verdict.

    Fill up a jury with conservative law'n'order types and they'll let the cops go almost every time.

    It worked in Simi Valley and it works in most places. It's not much of a mystery.

    That would require the collaboration of the prosecuting attorney.

    In theory, but not in practice. Jury pools tend to lean in that direction anyway, for a variety of reasons.

    Would this be because "Law & Order" types actually show up to Jury Duty?

    I agree with HL that knowing the Judge's comments to the jury could reveal a lot.

    With the facts that have been made public it's hard to believe that even "Law & Order" types wouldn't recognize their guilt.

    Not really, because they're cops.

    And yes, part of it is that law'n'order types are more likely to show up for jury duty.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    "The NYC brass spoke out against these officers and they will pursue their legal termination as stated by the Chief's office."

    Now I feel better. I wonder why the NYC brass didn't pursue termination 2 years ago.
    Well I am sure the brass' pursuit of legal termination will be as rigorous as was the districts attorney pursuit of their conviction.

  • HorseleechHorseleech 3,830 Posts
    LaserWolf said:
    "The NYC brass spoke out against these officers and they will pursue their legal termination as stated by the Chief's office."

    Now I feel better. I wonder why the NYC brass didn't pursue termination 2 years ago.

    They couldn't until the trial was over.

    LaserWolf said:
    Well I am sure the brass' pursuit of legal termination will be as rigorous as was the districts attorney pursuit of their conviction.

    If you'd actually followed the trial you would have seen that the prosecution was hell-bent on convicting these guys. It doesn't always go as planned, though.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    I'm in a foul mood now.
    This thread, which I slept on before, plus the recent revelation that Portland-Police-Recruits-in-training who complain about police misconduct are forced out of the force.
    One Portland police officers has complained of excessive force by other officers. He was reassigned to non-job in a warehouse.

    Here is a pic of Portland Police Officers marching while wearing t-shirts and holding signs saying "I Am Christopher Humphreys"

    Here is a picture of Christopher Humphrys standing over James Chasse Jr who he beat to death. (And never prosecuted for.)

    Here is officer Christopher Humphrys shooting a 12yo girl in the leg while she is being held down.


    I am sure that most, or at least many, cops are good and honest and hard working most, or at least much, of the time.
    But I am not going to go out of my way to praise them for solving crimes and getting the bad guys. That is their job. That is why I pay them. Not so they can get free coffee and donuts from the convenience store, or to rape, beat and murder people. They are supposed to be doing good. It's their job, and I pay them.

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    Thanks Roberto.

    We're all devastated.

    Then again I always had the fear that it would end this way.

    The officers' testimony was a farce; for whatever it's worth, the defense attorneys radiated sleaze and the judge was not on their side (he publicly and vocally admonished them a number of times for their behavior & tactics). I attended the trial and had faith that the jury would find in our favor. That they didn't is profoundly disappointing. The officers weren't even convicted for falsifying records, which they admitted on the stand to doing.

    The police are above the law; interact with them at your own risk.

  • Options
    This quote from the NY Post story is bothering me:

    "The verdict, read in an almost triumphant voice by the middle-aged jury forewoman, left the two cops looking stunned beyond any visible display of emotion."

    What in the world is she feeling "triumphant" about?

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/rape_cops_found_not_guilty_of_mauin_dyjpBhDMYmWjb4WBAivmiL

  • HarveyCanalHarveyCanal "a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
    Yep, JP, it's a sorry state for sure. And what gets me is whenever stuff like this happens, which is all the time, there's always a bunch of people bending over backwards to give the cops in question the benefit of the doubt. I mean, how close to home does this stuff have to hit before perceptions are changed enough to recognize this bs as a systematic issue? In other words, it's not just bad seeds...it's the whole rotten orchard...from writing traffic tickets instead of preventing actual crime, to selling drugs, to beating/raping/killing and getting away with it 99.999999999999999% of the time, to railroading relative innocents into jails, etc. Like many things within this society, a complete overhaul is in order.

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    NomoreGarciaparra said:
    This quote from the NY Post story is bothering me:

    "The verdict, read in an almost triumphant voice by the middle-aged jury forewoman, left the two cops looking stunned beyond any visible display of emotion."


    It's my hunch and fear that this wasnt the right jury- middle aged women and young men. Judgmental of the victim in the former, empathetic with the defendants in the latter.

  • AlmondAlmond 1,427 Posts
    I hope her triumphant attitude isn't matched by that of the rest of jury.

    I understand the rape acquittal based on lack of DNA evidence (despite the circumstantial evidence), but the false 911 call, possession of an illicit substance and the gross exploitation of authority could have been grounds for something. Doesn't add up. The defense prob made some easy, low blows; she was drunk, passed out, can't take her seriously, etc. Rape used to be a capital crime in the US. I don't think we should go back to that, but the amount of sexual violence against women and children that goes unpunished is saddening. Maybe it wouldn't be so rampant if the punishment was more than a slap on the wrist and mandatory registration on a sexual offender listing.

  • funky16cornersfunky16corners 7,175 Posts
    Jonny_Paycheck said:


    The police are above the law; interact with them at your own risk.

    This X 100...

  • luckluck 4,077 Posts
    Absolutely revolting. There are no words to aptly describe this, save "atrocity." There was ample proof of premeditation, as well. Fuck everyone on the wrong side of this crime against the city of New York.

  • fuck em

  • "Another juror, Eric Casiano, 33, said a tape of Officer Moreno and the woman recorded a few days after the alleged rape played a big role in the jury???s deliberations. At a meeting between the two outside a police precinct house, known as a ???control meet??? in police parlance, the officer told the woman, who was wearing a recording device, that he had used a condom.

    ???To me the ???control meet??? played a main factor,??? Mr. Casiano said. ???You need to hear the ???control meet.??? You need to read it. He wasn???t trying to confess anything. He was trying to get away from her outside his precinct. She was trying to attack him.??? "

    HUH??

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    I really overestimated the intelligence of the jury. That is monumentally moronic.

  • HorseleechHorseleech 3,830 Posts
    Jonny_Paycheck said:
    I really overestimated the intelligence of the jury. That is monumentally moronic.

    How do you feel about the job the prosecution did?
Sign In or Register to comment.