Cop in America doing a bad job, again

[WI_Red]

You're just not being reasonable. These situations can't be sorted out by consulting a flow chart. We ask cops to make guesses all the time and part of that is the knowledge that they will sometimes get it wrong. That's why there are laws to try and sort out if it was malicious or an honest error, but it will never be perfect.

In every job there are guesses and GUESSES. An investor who gambles and loses on a stock for a couple grand is going to be fine. If they gamble and lose a billion dollars they will not be.

Making a decision to pull someone over because they appear to be weaving is a guess. Shooting someone because you think they are going to shoot you, but you don't see a gun, is a GUESS. By letting LEO's off for getting those guesses wrong we are passively saying we value their life more than the person who died, because I guarantee you the same defense would not have worked if the Chicago kids mom had been there and shot the cop to protect her child.

 

[Grinner]

In every job there are guesses and GUESSES. An investor who gambles and loses on a stock for a couple grand is going to be fine. If they gamble and lose a billion dollars they will not be.

Making a decision to pull someone over because they appear to be weaving is a guess. Shooting someone because you think they are going to shoot you, but you don't see a gun, is a GUESS. By letting LEO's off for getting those guesses wrong we are passively saying we value their life more than the person who died, because I guarantee you the same defense would not have worked if the Chicago kids mom had been there and shot the cop to protect her child.

He isn't being let off. He's currently suspended while a rigourous investigation takes place.

 

[calodo2003]

The law is usually very specific. It has to be REASONABLY believed that life is in IMMINENT danger. We had that drilled into us when I was on a jury and the accused claimed self-defence. Still that leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

To me, a lot of the intransigence to look at redefining this & perhaps narrowing its scope smacks of those who do not want to see one more restriction on guns.

We can & should make a concerted attempt to redefine this concept of ‘reasonably / imminent’ as well as reducing the scope of or eliminating qualified immunity.

Readjusting the scope of both the requisite danger & qualified immunity won’t suddenly create an environment that will be immediately anti-police, just like readjusting the scope of gun control won’t radically adjust the reduction in gun violence, but both would become a bit less visceral & offer a bit of fairness (for lack of a better word).

We simply can’t keep maintaining the status quo. That’s been proven on both these fronts. Right now things are unfairly skewed to the maintenance of the status quo.

 

[WI_Red]

He isn't being let off. He's currently suspended while a rigourous investigation takes place.

It's Chicago, we'll see how "rigorous" the investigation is. Don't ever forget they desperately tried to cover up Laquan McDonald's murder.

 

[calodo2003]

He isn't being let off. He's currently suspended while a rigourous investigation takes place.

This ‘rigorous investigation’ just might not be that rigorous.

Rarely seems to have been before the camera footage age.

 

[calodo2003]

It's Chicago, we'll see how "rigorous" the investigation is. Don't ever forget they desperately tried to cover up Laquan McDonald's murder.

Remember the kid in Texas, the one the nutters are somewhat rightly trying to equivocate with Floyd, Timpa? The kid who has coke in his system & the cops laughed at him as & after he died & the one cop had the audacity to say on body cam footage that ‘they tried to save him’ or some shit right before he cut the cam off?

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/body-camera-footage-in-tony-timpa-death-released-tuesday/209946/

It took years before the footage was released due to dubious police intransigence.

At least we are seeing a positive trend towards immediacy of footage being released. That’s a major step

 

[Skizzo]

This ‘rigorous investigation’ just might not be that rigorous.

Rarely seems to have been before the camera footage age.

It’s basically gonna boil down to the investigation and the video and hammering out what’s factual or not. The things they’ll be wading through..

Why were the called? Shot spotter going off 8 times and reports of two people firing Guns at passing vehicles.

Was that a legit call? Before they took off, they huddled together and looks like something was handed off. The older male has gun shot residue on his hands. Shell casings match the firearm later found by Toledo.

what happened next? Foot pursuit and ignoring or commands. Right before Toledo stops and turns you see what’s believed to be a firearm in his right hand. He looks back at the officer, can he interpreted as acquiring a target. You lose sight of his hand as he turns and begins to raise his hands. A split second life or death decision was made.

in that moment with that information, was it reasonable or not?

That’s not taking into account the fact it was in Latin Kings territory, and reported that Toledo had a fresh Latin Kings Tattoo. After the shooting the Latin Kings advised their members to shoot at passing unmarked PD vehicles.

To lower it down to “look at this split second freeze frame, he was unarmed” isn’t reasonable for judging someone’s ability to make that call. People talking about military being better trained and having better engagement restrictions, this officer was a Marine who went to Afghanistan.

 

[WI_Red]

It’s basically gonna boil down to the investigation and the video and hammering out what’s factual or not. The things they’ll be wading through..

Why were the called? Shot spotter going off 8 times and reports of two people firing Guns at passing vehicles.

Was that a legit call? Before they took off, they huddled together and looks like something was handed off. The older male has gun shot residue on his hands. Shell casings match the firearm later found by Toledo.

what happened next? Foot pursuit and ignoring or commands. Right before Toledo stops and turns you see what’s believed to be a firearm in his right hand. He looks back at the officer, can he interpreted as acquiring a target. You lose sight of his hand as he turns and begins to raise his hands. A split second life or death decision was made.

in that moment with that information, was it reasonable or not?

That’s not taking into account the fact it was in Latin Kings territory, and reported that Toledo had a fresh Latin Kings Tattoo. After the shooting the Latin Kings advised their members to shoot at passing unmarked PD vehicles.

To lower it down to “look at this split second freeze frame, he was unarmed” isn’t reasonable for judging someone’s ability to make that call. People talking about military being better trained and having better engagement restrictions, this officer was a Marine who went to Afghanistan.

Thank you for the breakdown.

I am wondering if this is going to come down to that stupid strobe light. Would improper use (if it is deemed as such) of that light be enough to call into question what the officer based his decision on? Not asking you to know the answer, just talking out loud.

 

[Beachryan]

It’s basically gonna boil down to the investigation and the video and hammering out what’s factual or not. The things they’ll be wading through..

Why were the called? Shot spotter going off 8 times and reports of two people firing Guns at passing vehicles.

Was that a legit call? Before they took off, they huddled together and looks like something was handed off. The older male has gun shot residue on his hands. Shell casings match the firearm later found by Toledo.

what happened next? Foot pursuit and ignoring or commands. Right before Toledo stops and turns you see what’s believed to be a firearm in his right hand. He looks back at the officer, can he interpreted as acquiring a target. You lose sight of his hand as he turns and begins to raise his hands. A split second life or death decision was made.

in that moment with that information, was it reasonable or not?

That’s not taking into account the fact it was in Latin Kings territory, and reported that Toledo had a fresh Latin Kings Tattoo. After the shooting the Latin Kings advised their members to shoot at passing unmarked PD vehicles.

To lower it down to “look at this split second freeze frame, he was unarmed” isn’t reasonable for judging someone’s ability to make that call. People talking about military being better trained and having better engagement restrictions, this officer was a Marine who went to Afghanistan.

Good post.

 

[calodo2003]

It’s basically gonna boil down to the investigation and the video and hammering out what’s factual or not. The things they’ll be wading through..

Why were the called? Shot spotter going off 8 times and reports of two people firing Guns at passing vehicles.

Was that a legit call? Before they took off, they huddled together and looks like something was handed off. The older male has gun shot residue on his hands. Shell casings match the firearm later found by Toledo.

what happened next? Foot pursuit and ignoring or commands. Right before Toledo stops and turns you see what’s believed to be a firearm in his right hand. He looks back at the officer, can he interpreted as acquiring a target. You lose sight of his hand as he turns and begins to raise his hands. A split second life or death decision was made.

in that moment with that information, was it reasonable or not?

That’s not taking into account the fact it was in Latin Kings territory, and reported that Toledo had a fresh Latin Kings Tattoo. After the shooting the Latin Kings advised their members to shoot at passing unmarked PD vehicles.

To lower it down to “look at this split second freeze frame, he was unarmed” isn’t reasonable for judging someone’s ability to make that call. People talking about military being better trained and having better engagement restrictions, this officer was a Marine who went to Afghanistan.

Appreciate your post.

I don’t think you can reduce it down to a split second call, but the totality of the event should be reviewed vigorously. There is culpability on the young man, this is unfortunately irrefutable. There is also culpability on the cop. Where that demarcation line falls will be key.

Questions about Shot Spotter - is it fixed or mobile? Does there need to be multiple SS deployed to be able to triangulate location? Could backfires, fireworks, & other sharp retorts be mistaken for the snap of gun fire, especially when taking into account the retort of different weapons? Is its evidence admissible in court or is it just for tactical use?

e - Not that it will potentially matter legally, but did Toledo have residue on his hands?

e2 - We need SS here. I estimated between 15 & 20 rounds were fired within earshot of my place last night.

 

[Skizzo]

Thank you for the breakdown.

I am wondering if this is going to come down to that stupid strobe light. Would improper use (if it is deemed as such) of that light be enough to call into question what the officer based his decision on? Not asking you to know the answer, just talking out loud.

It’s something to consider and something they can certainly try and take into account as to if changed his perception. That’s gonna be the biggest issue I think, and what they should really establish. With a strobe light going in, people are able to move their arms a good amount of distance if done slowly. It throws your perception off. I think that’ll be what opens him up to acting in a negligent manner. However, even with a split second of full light, if you see a gun before he turns towards you and raises his hands, I dont know if his decision would have changed with such minimal time to interpret what’s happening.

 

[Skizzo]

Appreciate your post.

I don’t think you can reduce it down to a split second call, but the totality of the event should be reviewed vigorously. There is culpability on the young man, this is unfortunately irrefutable. There is also culpability on the cop. Where that demarcation line falls will be key.

Questions about Shot Spotter - is it fixed or mobile? Does there need to be multiple SS deployed to be able to triangulate location? Could backfires, fireworks, & other sharp retorts be mistaken for the snap of gun fire, especially when taking into account the retort of different weapons? Is its evidence admissible in court or is it just for tactical use?

Other things can activate shot spotters. Fireworks in close proximity etc, I don’t see them trying to refute the use of that here though, since the officers were there in less than a minute, saw the two males, saw them huddle and hand something off, and take off.

 

[calodo2003]

Other things can activate shot spotters. Fireworks in close proximity etc, I don’t see them trying to refute the use of that here though, since the officers were there in less than a minute, saw the two males, saw them huddle and hand something off, and take off.

Are they fixed or are they mobile / on cop cars? Do there need to be multiple ones hearing the same sound or can a single unit determine location of a shot?

 

[Skizzo]

Are they fixed or are they mobile / on cop cars? Do there need to be multiple ones hearing the same sound or can a single unit determine location of a shot?

The ones we have here are fixed. They don’t give an exact address, but they’ll pinpoint you to X street at Y street

 

[calodo2003]

The ones we have here are fixed. They don’t give an exact address, but they’ll pinpoint you to X street at Y street

Just one unit could pinpoint it that definitively?

That’s amazing if so, at least to a technological lay idiot like me.

 

[Skizzo]

Just one unit could pinpoint it that definitively?

That’s amazing if so, at least to a technological lay idiot like me.

no they have multiple set up in an area that helps to pinpoint based on acoustics etc

 

[Skizzo]

@calodo2003

https://www.shotspotter.com/system/content-uploads/SST_FAQ_January_2018.pdf

 

[calodo2003]

no they have multiple set up in an area that helps to pinpoint based on acoustics etc

Okay, that makes total sense.

What a device that would be if it could, though.

Is its evidence admissible? Seems like an argument could be made both ways.

 

[calodo2003]

@calodo2003

https://www.shotspotter.com/system/content-uploads/SST_FAQ_January_2018.pdf

Thanks, brother.

Amazing that it can pick up the sound of suppressed fire, even inadvertently.

 

[Skizzo]

Okay, that makes total sense.

What a device that would be if it could, though.

Is its evidence admissible? Seems like an argument could be made both ways.

Its one of those things that by itself probably wouldn’t lead to a conviction on anything, but world definitely be damning if added to other evidence.

 

[calodo2003]

Its one of those things that by itself probably wouldn’t lead to a conviction on anything, but world definitely be damning if added to other evidence.

It discussed how the evidence is used in that propaganda literature.

I can’t see how someone’s privacy would be violated through the recording / triangulation for gunshot location, but I am sure it probably has been argued as potentially a 1A & 4A violation.

 

[WI_Red]

It discussed how the evidence is used in that propaganda literature.

I can’t see how someone’s privacy would be violated through the recording / triangulation for gunshot location, but I am sure it probably has been argued as potentially a 1A & 4A violation.

I could just see how the discussion would go in my old neck of the woods:

Bubba: I don't want no guberment 5G tech invading my rights.
Sales Rep: If you install it in the right neighborhoods you can use it to send black people to jail.
Bubba: Sign us up!

 

[calodo2003]

I could just see how the discussion would go in my old neck of the woods:

Bubba: I don't want no guberment 5G tech invading my rights.
Sales Rep: If you install it in the right neighborhoods you can use it to send black people to jail.
Bubba: Sign us up!

Sounds an awful lot like...

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Sounds an awful lot like...

gets me every time.

 

[Synco]

Firstly, I apologise if my understanding of English is off (which would be embarassing given I lack any alternatives) but whitewashing for me has very clear racial tones - especially in this area - rather than general. I misread your claim in that sense.

Well, I've only learned the language later in life, that's why I made clear it was merely based on my grasp of it. Wiki says: "Metaphorically, whitewashing refers to suppression or "glossing over" (...) of potentially damaging or unwelcome information." I guess the use you mention would probably be a pun on this?

I'm happy to share stats that I've found interesting, my point was more that the appetite expressed by some isn't for those stats - it is for large scale political statements.

For example, in the last 5 years of WaPo police data, about 5% of fatal police shootings were involving an unarmed suspect. I was shocked by this, given the 'media narrative' you'd think that it's at least 50%. And knowing this does, for me, drastically change the resulting policies that shoudl be implemented. I dig that there should obviously be a desire for that figure to be 0%, but knowing this frames things differently for me.

I always find it okay to discuss statistics, depending on how the discussion is framed. What I objected to were the far-reaching statements and charges in your post.

But as for statistics, I think they're a tricky subject. I'm wary of them, even when they support my views or expectations. They seem a quite heavy-handed tool to me, and too often they're used without the necessary context or caveats.

In that sense, three questions/thoughts on the one you cite (I take the 5% number at face value):

1) How is 'armed' defined in this statistic? Is it relevant if the weapon poses an imminent threat to the police or others, or is mere possession of a weapon at the time of the shooting enough? Depending on the answer, it changes what these 5% and 95% represent. In the latter scenario, the shooting of a "statistically" armed person may still be reckless or criminal.
2) How reliable are the police reports, insofar the stats are based on them?
3) According to studies, the risk of being shot while unarmed rises dramatically when you're Black. So the percentage is far higher than average for some minority populations, and with this the perception of the issue among them logically changes. The results from a survey using the same WaPo data from 2015-2020:

This study shows that the rate of fatal police shootings for Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) is constant from 2015 to 2020. Further, BIPOC have significantly higher death rates compared with Whites in the overall victim pool (Native American RR=3.06, Black RR=2.62, Hispanic RR=1.29) and among unarmed victims (Black RR=3.18, Hispanic RR=1.45). Native American (RR=3.95), Black (overall RR=3.29, unarmed RR=3.49) and Hispanic (RR=1.55, unarmed RR=1.55), victims had similarly high rates of YLL relative to Whites.

https://jech.bmj.com/content/75/4/394

(RR = relative risk compared to White population, YLL = years of life lost.) Of course numbers like that need to be dissected and contextualized themselves. Which is beyond my abilities and also not my aim here (it has probably been done many times over on the Caf). This is just to give examples for what I meant with necessary caveats & context before drawing conclusions.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

One major actionable item I see is:
How much stress training does every department undergo and how much more could they undergo?

There are proven psycho-physiological effects at play here. People can undergo training to reduce the intensity of flight or flight responses and increase the likelihood of a measured response. Here is a good article on the science behind it:

Once a potentially dangerous stimulus is perceived, sections of a person’s brain called the hypothalamus and brain stem are activated. That activation leads to the person becoming alert and attentive to the environment. This is analogous to the prehistoric heightened period in which a gazelle assesses the situation after seeing a lion approach.

The more threatening the stimulus is perceived, the more the sympathetic nervous system is activated. This activation causes the adrenal glands to release the hormone epinephrine (adrenaline) into the blood stream. Once this occurs, there are a number of physiological cascades that happen almost immediately. As you will see, they may be great for the gazelle that is now forced to escape the lion, but the list below can be destructive for high-level performance that requires thinking, fine technique and control for 15 minutes or multiple matches throughout a day.

When I examined the process of and responses from the Adrenaline Dump, I realized two important things. First, the event is triggered by our own perception. This tells me that it is our own mind that is in control of the fact the event is going to occur or not. So, our perception does create our own reality and, therefore, the event is something we can learn to control. Second, once this biochemical event is triggered, there is little we can do to stop it. This means that we want to prevent the event from happening in the first place. The facts that we don’t know exactly what may trigger the adrenaline dump and that there is difficulty in replicating “high stress” situations in training makes controlling this event a challenge. They do not, however, stop us from training to keep our “inner Hulk” at bay.

Through my study of this response, I found a number of potential concepts to help prevent this event from occurring. Although none is foolproof, you must still commit to working on the mind as much as you do on the body.
-
All too often, we don’t like to put ourselves in bad positions during training. But then when they happen during a fight, we are completely unprepared on how to handle them. A great way to be ready for worst-case scenarios in a match is to have placed yourself in those situations many times in training! Make sure you repeat these situations many times so that you can have confidence in tight situations. This confidence will allow you to stay relaxed even when the going gets tough.

https://www.graciemag.com/en/2019/0...adrenaline-from-screwing-up-your-performance/

I've heard of a few examples of this before. From people being put in protective suits and having dogs charge at them biting and barking to desensitize the response to Federal agencies that used complex obstacle courses to try to familiarize field agents with what circumstances might (sort-of) be like. As mentioned in the article, training is never perfect but it absolutely helps reduce the fight or flight adrenaline rush and helps a person stay more in a high-performance state of flow.

I think a lot of departments could use a lot more of this type of training (as opposed to billions of dollars of military hardware). Many situations are, of course, extremely difficult, but that doesn't mean that changes can't be implemented to update training methods for the 21st century. From my own interactions and talking to friends in different roles, I have definitely encountered officers that had very little (if any) internal control over this fight or flight responses and would have massively benefited from such training (and thereby reducing their own chance to get into a jam and make the wrong choice).

It's definitely not as simple as none of these situations could possibly be different if variables had changed.

 

[calodo2003]

Police ‘means testing’ for federal funding needs to be more thoroughly enforced as well.

Certain credible standards of policing need to be met & maintained in order to reap the federal dollar benefit.

 

[Carolina Red]

One major actionable item I see is:
How much stress training does every department undergo and how much more could they undergo?

That’ll take money coming into the training budget from somewhere. Whether moved from something else or added new

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

That’ll take money coming into the training budget from somewhere. Whether moved from something else or added new

That's one less armored personnel carrier for every department, you know!

 

[Carolina Red]

That's one less armored personnel carrier for every department, you know!

I know the militarized departments can cut from
that part, which is why I said “moved from somewhere”, but in smaller departments that don’t have those anyway and/or are cash strapped, that will be/is a real issue to overcome.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I know the militarized departments can cut from
that part, which is why I said “moved from somewhere”, but in smaller departments that don’t have those anyway and/or are cash strapped, that will be/is a real issue to overcome.

I'd offer to buy some of their AR-15s but they won't let me have any more of those

 

[WI_Red]

I know the militarized departments can cut from
that part, which is why I said “moved from somewhere”, but in smaller departments that don’t have those anyway and/or are cash strapped, that will be/is a real issue to overcome.

this one is easy. Put them in a room with 5 of the old school callers from Feinbaums radio show and if they all come out alive they are fit for duty.

 

[Carolina Red]

I'd offer to buy some of their AR-15s but they won't let me have any more of those

RIP: Dwayne’s gun stash

 

[Carolina Red]

this one is easy. Put them in a room with 5 of the old school callers from Feinbaums radio show and if they all come out alive they are fit for duty.

RIP: The Auburn trees

 

[calodo2003]

I'd offer to buy some of their AR-15s but they won't let me have any more of those

There’s a limit to gun humping up there?

 

[calodo2003]

this one is easy. Put them in a room with 5 of the old school callers from Feinbaums radio show and if they all come out alive they are fit for duty.

What a fecking twat Finebaum is.

 

[WI_Red]

RIP: The Auburn trees

I lived through the great tree massacre of 2013. I am still shocked to this day that no one was killed.

Remember this one? Girl who chased him down was badass.

Woman called ‘hero’ after chasing man who set fire to Auburn’s... (ajc.com)

 

[The Firestarter]

I don’t remember exactly what commands he gives. Usually don’t have a gunman turn to face you. I really don’t know what exactly was going through his mind and reason for shooting. I probably would not have shot, but then again I’ve never been in that tense shoot/no shoot situation.

Side question, what percentage of your colleagues have been in such situations?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

There’s a limit to gun humping up there?

We're not allowed to acquire or use them anymore and may have to turn them in in 2022. Same for my CZ Scorpion EVO 3

 

[calodo2003]

We're not allowed to acquire or use them anymore and may have to turn them in in 2022. Same for my CZ Scorpion EVO 3

All your guns or just the ones that pew pew pew fast?