In case anyone is interested

Posted by: fileboy2002

In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 12:33 PM

Below is a link to a recent and very thorough investigationsinto police brutality in the US. It is titled, "Sheilded From Justice: Police Brutality and Accountability in the United States" and was conducted by Human Rights Watch.

http://www.hrw.org/reports98/police/index.htm
Posted by: JasonM

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 12:44 PM

Wasn't the other thread locked? And you trying to start another heating thread?
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 12:54 PM

Not at all. I just put this up in case anyone was interested.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 01:04 PM

File -

We can agree that police abuse is a problem everywhere around the world, including here. But even this report notes that most of the acts are perpetrated by a minority of officers. There will be problem people in any kind of job. As far as everyone else not turning them in? Again, not making excuses, but this is human condition not to question authority. Look at WW2.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 01:21 PM

The report does say that, but the important point is what it states right afterwards. Here is the entire quote:

"officers who repeatedly commit human rights violations tend to be a small minority who taint entire police departments BUT ARE PROTECTED, ROUTINELY, BY THE SILENCE OF THEIR FELLOW OFFICERS AND BY FLAWED SYSTEMS OF REPORTING, OVERSIGHT, AND ACCOUTABILITY." [my emphasis]

Of course most police officers are not ACTIVELY engaged in misconduct. However, unless officers are willing to PASSIVELY overlook misconduct, they cannot easily remain on the job. This suggests an internal police culture where officers feel intense pressure to tolerate and, in some cases, cover up misdeeds by their fellows.

This cuts against the classic "bad apples" arguement by pointing out bad apples can only flourish in an environment poisoned by secrecy and tolerance for bad behavior. The problem is systemic, not just individual.
Posted by: Fletch1

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 06:23 PM

The reality is that these alleged incidents and others like them are generally committed by a minute minority of officers supporting the "bad apple" theory. To paint the silent ignorance of the remainder of the force as some sort of cospiracy/cover-up/blue wall of silence/corrupted system is more than a little short sighted. It smells strongly of someone looking desperately for a story and we all know... nothing sells news like the notion of police impropriety.

Civil Rights Watch groups have a vested interest in promoting stories that justify their mission and often distort and manipulate information one way just as YOU might accuse Law Enforcement of spinning it the other.

Ultimately, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The truth in this case will not see justice in court due to Statutes of Limitations. That unfortunately, is not the end. It is just the begining as the public will forever debate what really happened. The topic will remain polarized with some saying there is a cover up and the criminal justice system as a whole is corrupt and officers are all bad apples/unfit guardians.

Personally, I am tired of the debate. Being on the inside and having my opinions dismissed because of my "bias" gets irritating.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 07:05 PM

I do not claim the so-called "code of silence" is a conspiracy. Nor have I heard anyone else make that claim.

The truth, I suspect, is simpler. Officers erect a wall silent out of loyalty to their fellows, because they need to turn a blind eye to avoid discord on the job, or (occasionally) because they agree with the misconduct.

I disagree with your view that civil rights groups are mostly biased and untrustworthy. However, if you read the whole report--and I realize it is a long read--you will find it is quite sympathetic to police officers. Most of the authors' criticism falls on public officials who either draft bad policies or fail to act to protect the public.
Posted by: BrianRVanCise

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 07:37 PM

Most officer's that I personally know and have worked with are good, decent, hard working people who try to do a good job in a demanding and quite often a difficult work place.

Officer's commiting these acts are obviously few and far between. Do thing's happen? Yes and thing's happen in any workforce. Still bad apples are generally a small minority and eventually get weeded out in any group.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 07:53 PM

Well, the point of the report is that too often, bad cops do NOT get weeded out unless a major scandal hits the press and draws enough public attention to generate political pressure.

For example, one Oakland police officer racked up 34 complaints aginst him for brutality; in fact, his conduct was so bad his own supervisor recommended he be confined to desk duty on the grounds he was a "cowboy."

Yet, he applied for and got another job as a police officer in San Francisco, where he again ran into trouble for his bad conduct.. Only after a great public outcry was he fired (on the grounds he hid information about his prior problem when he applied to the SFPD).

His case was not unique; it was typical.

This does not happen much in other professions. Can you imagine a doctor with 34 malpractice suits on his or her record being hired w/o a thorough background check?
Posted by: oldman

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/02/08 10:55 PM


Now I realize this Doctor only had 33 malpractice payouts...


http://forums.techguy.org/history/t-345445.html


Quote:


NEW YORK -- A 42-year-old Irish woman reportedly died after undergoing cosmetic surgery in Manhattan, N.Y.

Kay Cregan, an apparently healthy mother of two, went into cardiac arrest the morning of March 15, while in the recovery room of a Central Park South doctor's office where she had received a nose job and face lift.

The New York Daily News reported that she was taken to Saint Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital, where she was pronounced brain-dead. Her sister, Agnes Kelly of Boston told the News that she was taken off life support on March 17.

The state Health Department was investigating Cregan's death. An initial autopsy was ruled inconclusive.

Kelly identified the doctor who performed the surgery as Dr. Michael Sachs. A lawyer for Sachs, Jay Butterman, said the doctor was not responsible for Cregan's death.

The attorney said it was a terrible tragedy. But it was not attributable to anything that Dr. Sachs or his staff did. It's not clear if the family planned to take legal action.

Last year, Sachs was ordered not to perform any "complex nasal procedures" -- involving more than one treatment -- without the supervision of another physician, according to a document posted on the Web site of the state Board of Medical Conduct.

The order was issued after he was found to have mistreated a patient and failed to keep appropriate records.

The News reported that Sachs is the plastic surgeon with the state's worst malpractice record. The News reported that Sachs has for years been one of the most sued doctors in New York, and that current records show the surgeon's malpractice standing hasn't improved.

During the past decade, Sachs' official physician profile shows he has made 33 malpractice payments during the past decade, more than any other doctor in the state, the News reported.




Now I realize this Doctor only had 33 malpractice payouts...

If you are looking for evidence for evidence of systems and organizations that don't protect their own intrests I wouldn't start with medicine, or education.

If you read the link you will see the same discussion. Just substitute "bad cop" for "bad doctor".

I have to wonder, were you just sitting around one night thinking "I don't have much to do so I think I'll go find a place one the internet where there might be a few of LEO's and talk about how corrupt they and there profession is".

If you have any time left in you posting schedule you could
go to ...

http://www.nea.org/index.html

And talk about how educators get away with sleeping with students and keep their or find new positions.

Or you could go to...

http://www.scouting.org/

To discuss pedophile pack leaders

I mean, if you have enough passion and enough time on your hands. The list is endless.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/03/08 01:13 AM

oldman,

When people criticize doctors or educators (and I am an educator), most of us readily admit we have problems in our professions. We are also quick to denounce members of the profession whose actions disgrace us.

But when someone criticizes LEOs, their tendency is to deny everything, denounce the critics, and rally around the worst members of their profession.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/03/08 11:26 AM

Quote:

But when someone criticizes LEOs, their tendency is to deny everything, denounce the critics, and rally around the worst members of their profession.






Dude, do you KNOW any cops? That statement is total bullsh1t. Good cops HATE bad cops. Much of the "blue silence" or whatever you want to call it, actually comes from the administrative level, not the rank and file. Administrative level does not want the publicity or lawsuits that result from trying to fire bad apples unless they have an air-tight case. Similar to how, say....... pedophile teachers get shuffled around school districts by admins wanting to keep it quiet. But I guess that makes YOU complicit, huh?
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/03/08 12:25 PM

Actually, I know a lot of cops.

Most do condemn bad cops--in the abstract. However, every time a copper is actually accused of anything, I notice they quickly rally to his or her defense.

However, you are absolutely right to put most of the blame on public officals and supervisors. After all, the most a fellow officer can do is report misconduct. It is up to the powers that be to take action and they often do not.
Posted by: laf7773

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/04/08 02:55 AM

Quote:

Most do condemn bad cops--in the abstract. However, every time a copper is actually accused of anything, I notice they quickly rally to his or her defense.




That's the thing, no one here "rallied" to Burge's defense. The thing you’re not getting about the "silent" observers is this, when cops commit these sort of crimes they aren't going to do it in plain view of the department. They are going to do it when no one else is around. Since officers have a good understanding of how easy it is for people to get off when there is no hard evidence to prove they did it they are less inclined to point fingers unless they KNOW something happened and can prove it. The administration isn't going to pursue something without evidence. I'm not making excuses for anyone; i'm telling you how it is. It's a cop’s job to understand probable cause and evidence and with that understanding they know they can't accuse someone of misconduct just because they think something is going on. Even if you witness it unless the victim is willing to come forth it's your word against theirs.

Like i said before it's obvious you have a thing against law enforcement since they are the only ones you are harping on. This post proves it.
Quote:

When people criticize doctors or educators (and I am an educator), most of us readily admit we have problems in our professions. We are also quick to denounce members of the profession whose actions disgrace us.

But when someone criticizes LEOs, their tendency is to deny everything, denounce the critics, and rally around the worst members of their profession.




There are a few "bad apples" in law enforcement and no we don't rally around them. We do however understand what unfounded accusations can do to a persons career and how it can effect their freedom. This is why i'm not going to throw anyone under a bus unless i know i can prove it. Same goes for anyone not in law enforcement, i'm not going to make accusations toward them unless i know i can prove them.

Get over it...there is no conspiracy.

Posted by: JasonM

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/04/08 04:08 AM

Well said Laf. I was going to comment but feel your covered my response..:)
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/05/08 01:31 PM

Part of the reason the Burge case was such a scandal is that he and his men DID torture people openly. The basement of Area 2 was converted into a de facto torture chamber, complete with a hand-cranked electrical for administering electrical shocks. Unless the coppers at Area 2 were blind and deaf, there was no one way they could not known what was going on. Complaints about Burge's activities were received by both the CPD Office of Professional Standards and State's Attorney's office. Nothing was done.

I could also point out that I went out of my way to make clear I did NOT beleive there was a conspiracy, but what is the use? I have said my piece, and if I don't either shut up or get pro-cop pretty quick the moderator will probably lock down this thread.
Posted by: laf7773

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/06/08 02:34 AM

It's not a matter of being "pro-cop", it's a matter of you blindly convicting people (in your own mind at least) that you don't know for a FACT witnessed anything. How can you say that you KNOW other officers witnessed anything? Have you been to the basement of area 2? Do you know it's proximity to the general population of the building? Is the area transited frequently by other officers? Or is this a remote location in the building where the only way you would find yourself there is intentionally? The problem with your "argument" is you have no real facts. You are basing your entire argument on the opinions you have formed from news articles. I'm sure i'm neither the first nor the last to tell you that the media is rarely ever a reliable source for information. You believe these actions were covered up by their fellow officers because you have a personal issue with LEOs. You can try to deny it all you want but it's obvious in your previous comments regarding your perceived contempt for the general public LEOs have and how "racist" they are. You accuse us of being biased when you are the one who is blanketing cops into one group. Unless you have something new i'm sure you are done.
Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: In case anyone is interested - 02/06/08 02:22 PM

Well, I probably did poison the waters with some rash statements earlier. However, I have not done so on this thread, and that does not seem to have made much difference. As I told someone who PMed me, I think some people here would find almost ANY criticism of LEOs biased and unfair.