fileboy,

I disagree with your statement re "support by whitepeople"

I just worked the MLK JR parade and was overwhelmed by the support that was shown to the police department.

I am a white officer and over 99 % were black and the majority were very supportive and friendly.

There were some "thug" types and "gangsta" types that were young and did not wave....or smile.

Maybe you should change your statement to, "uncritical support by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS" !

Dont make it a race issue (it shows YOUR prejudices)

K

Were the police who passively stood by and did nothing while their fellow officers committed torture for two decades "law abiding citizens?"

And please do not give me the "it's not a racial thing" routine. You're white, I'm white, and we both know what is really going on here. It is not racist to admit racism exists.

No reasonable person would say all cops are bad--that is not the point.

The real question is whether police misconduct is a matter of "a few bad apples," or whether law enforcement's internal culture adds to the problem.

If we accept the bad apples scenario, then we would expect certain things to happen when police misconduct occurs. For one thing, we would expect a dirty policeman's fellow officers to show outrage at the misconduct. We would expect them to side with the public against the officer whose misdeeds had given their whole profession a bad name.

But this is NOT what happens. Instead, a bad cop's colleagues often rally around their corrupt fellow officer and take a belligerent attitude towards anyone who criticizes him or her.

This suggests an internal law enforcement culture where people learn they need to tolerate or even cover up each other's mistakes. We see this kind of thing happen in business and government all the time; I see no evidence the police are an exception.

Once you have proof that the other officers knew what was going on and ignored it you will have an argument. Until then it's nothing but an assumption fueled by your contempt for law enforcement.

If they did KNOW with out a doubt it's one thing, but it's not always easy to make accusations against people in your own department if you don't have proof to tie them to it. Especially since these are the guys you have to rely on to save your life. I don't condone this type of behavior but everything in life isn't as black and white as you would like to think. Yes there is an "internal culture" within law enforcement, there has to be because of the work that is being done. These officers have to depend on each other in a true life and death situation and yes sometimes their views are skewed because of this. It's not an excuse but it happens none the less. Just like in families where a parent is abusing others in the household either physically or sexually, the other parent tends to not say anything. It's not right but it happens.

Is there racism in law enforcement? Yes, but there is racism everywhere. Should LEOs be held to a higher standard? Very much so. Does it always happen? No, but for you to lump all law enforcement together based on the actions of the few is ignorance. Before you back peddle and say you don't lump us all together lets recap your previous statement...

Quote:

---

I recommend anyone who has the opportunity to drink at cop bars--i.e. taverns frequented by police officers--to so so. There are several cop bars in my neighborhood in Chicago. Take your most paranoid fantasy about how bad cops can be--how racist, how contemptuous towards the public--multiply it by a favor of 60, and that is what you come accross in cop bars.

My favorite cop quotes: "You can take them out of the jungle but you can never take the jungle out of them."


"Chicago's finest" indeed.

---

I'll have to agree w/Laff on this.

Fileboy,

besides giving us your "opinion" on how the LEO world works, can you supply any proof reference your allegations?

There was misconduct/corruption in my PD for years. We knew about it from a "word of mouth" type thing. There was never any proof that was solid and incontovertible, but, we had all heard about certain things going on...

It did reach a point where the transgressions of those officers and admin types was brought into the open and they answered for it.

Thing is (unlike a civilian that sits behind a desk and might suffer a papercut) an officer can't go around and make allegations that cannot be proven against other officers.<-For legal, ethical, and self-preservation type considerations.

Further, I don't know why; but it seems like when posters such as yourself come on this forum and make blanket statements reference law enforcement (or really, any other group) they always seems to have an "issue" with themselves or their past behavior.

Please don't come on here and try and spread your agenda-we don't do that here-we don't hate LEOs, non-LEOs, (we even like firemen), the LEOs on here know that people make mistakes (and most learn from them) and some pay the price for those mistakes...

Feel free to discuss anything that you would like to discuss, I think most people on this forum are open minded and willing to talk about the short comings of human beings in general....let's just not put large groups into one category.

respectfully,
Kel

As these officers in Chicago have not actually been charged criminally, there appears to be some disparity in the standards of proof involved in their accusations. If they are to enjoy the same standard/ burden of proof as the community they serve, then it needs to meet that required by a grand jury for purposes of prosecution and a level of beyond a reasonable doubt for purposes of conviction. These accusations have officially met neither.

There could be several reasons for this...

"the system is crooked and biased toward police officers for these cops are obviously dirty."

or

"there actually isn't enough evidence to legitimately incarcerate them regardless of what the public/media, thinks."

Whatever the reason, we can't forsake or dismiss the system because we don't like it's actions or inactions. It is what it is.

It is hard to know who to respond to first or where to begin.

Maybe here:

laf7773, I do not have "contempt for law enforcement." The fact you think so says more about your biases than mine. Sorry, but the police are a public institution subject to public scrutiny and criticism. Sure it is tough job. But that does not mean corrupt or even crinimal behavior should be accepted.

hunterkell, you imply I might have some kind of criminal history. I don't. Again, that you would make such an insinuation without evidence shows the kind of knee-jerk, pro-cop bias that afflicts many people.

As far as the Burge case, an independent investigation found the police in the case WERE criminally liable, but that the statute of limitations had passed. In other words, yes they committed unspeakable acts of torture, but it was a long time ago, so never mind. Pretty neat deal, if you ask me.

File,

The statute of limitations apply to EVERYONE not just cops. As much as that obviously bothers you it is simple fact.

Also, you say "independant investigation" who did the investigation? and who were they funded by? Do you even know...

What about civil liability? I believe the statute supplies a longer time to recupe losses AND also requires a much smaller burdon of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt as opposed to 51%)?

Again, let me point out that you are writing a lot, but. providing very little (if none) evidence reference the discussed case...

Please establish a link providing evidence that supports your conclusions (I'm not saying you are not telling the truth, or that you are wrong; I'm simply stating you are not providing any evidence).

I'm not one to take someone's word for something, again I don't doubt your veracity; it just seems sometimes people have agendas (for instance your racist comments during the beginning of this thread reference blacks and whites).

Again, please point out where I said you had a "criminal history", I think you are reading too much into what I wrote. Or maybe you are projecting because I am a police officer...

You have made quite a few unwarranted statements concerning police officers (and also about me), unlike you, I can quote your statemnets and they directly apply.

I reject your statement that I am "pro cop" if anything I consider myself unbiased (please go back and read other posts in different threads), I even wrote in my above post issues that happened at my P.D and that they were dealt with accordingly.

I am not pro police (no one person or groups of persons are perfect) or anti police (obviously), but, I would like to see some evidence (besides your opinion) reference the allegations you have made.

K

You implied I might have a criminal history when you said the following:

"when posters such as yourself come on this forum and make blanket statements reference law enforcement (or really, any other group) they always seems to have an "issue" with themselves or their past behavior."

What else could you have meant by "past behavior?" My six months as an alterboy?

If you want to find a good source for information about the Burge case, start here:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/policetorture/

The Chicago Reader is an independent weekly that originally broke the story.