Reconciliation for Police Force Mistakes?

[dscath]

What does ‘love your neighbor’ look like, in concrete terms,

Was my first question for you, especially (and forgive me if I am reading you wrong) the two beliefs you professed that is what it will take to stop rioters and looters:

1. George Soros and/or the democratic party calls them off, because I believe it’s planned rioting to further their agendas, and

1. Military and police force making them stop.

Now, this is only an opinion, so don’t take offense, its not offered as criticism, but unlike your I don’t believe for a moment is:

because we don’t agree (apparently) on why they’re really doing it.

I can only speak for myself, but “why they’re really doing it” isn’t as important as my faith and belief in Catholic teachings, which lead me to believe that darkness can only begot more darkness, and only love will provide the light that St. John the Evangelist tells us is all that can overcome darkness.

 

[Poet]

I can only speak for myself, but “why they’re really doing it” isn’t as important as my faith and belief in Catholic teachings, which lead me to believe that darkness can only begot more darkness, and only love will provide the light that St. John the Evangelist tells us is all that can overcome darkness.

I ask again: in concrete terms, what are you going to do to demonstrate love to those who riot, loot, and set fire to people’s homes and businesses?

Why they’re doing it does matter, because if you think they’re doing it ‘to end racism’ when they’re really doing it because George Soros paid them to cause social havoc or because they want to cause chaos–then ending racism isn’t going to stop the rioting and looting.

Simply put–if you’re mistaken about the cause of the illness, you may prescribe the wrong medication that harms rather than heals.

But I want to know: what concrete actions are you going to take to show love to looters, rioters, and arsonists?

If you’re right, then we all need to know so we can all do likewise.

 

[otjm]

In the UK, the public came first.

In the UK, they did not have a Second Amendment; and if my memory serves me, the U:K was the source of the US getting a Constitution, and the war we had with them provided the grounds for that Amendment.

Anyone who actually follows up on crime reports where criminals use guns while committing their crimes will find that that vast majority of them did not go through a background check and buy the gun from a gun store. The get them off the black market, as in guns which have been stolen.

If you want to change the Second Amendment, have at it; The liberals have removal of guns as their soundbite, but make no move to change the Amendment.

 

[otjm]

Well, the trial(s) of the officers is going to be interesting.

As to Chauvin, there appear to be two autopsies - from NPR:
" The autopsy report from Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office concludes the cause of death was “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.” That conclusion, death due to heart failure, differs from the one reached by an independent examiner hired by the Floyd family; that report listed the cause of death as “asphyxiation from sustained pressure.”

So there will be a war of words from the medical examiner, and whoever did the second autopsy.

I read an analysis of the charges of the other three officers, and unless a jury is impaneled who come in with a preconceived notion of what the law should say and judge based on emotion rather than on facts, it is going to be somewhere between difficult and extremely difficult to get convictions of them.

As a point of law, a police person does not have to intervene in general; and in fact if you call for police when you have a burglar in your house, they do not legally have to respond. One officer was so new to the force that the ink wasn’t really dry on his application.

According to one autopsy, Floyd died of a heart attack; according to the other (independent) report, he died of strangulation. It is going to be a donnybrook unless the State and the defense come to a plea agreement for Chauvin.

Considering the language used by a number of people in this thread, they appear to have already decided on the guilt/innocence of Chauvin in spite of apparently not reading the conflicting autopsies - all of which supports my concern of trying to impanel an unbiased jury.

 

[Welshrabbit]

What’s your take on the prosecution upping the charges to Murder 2 from Murder 3.

My understanding is that in MN, the state will have to prove he intended to kill Mr. Floyd.

 

[otjm]

I have no take on the matter; I practiced in Oregon.

Since my early adulthood, I have known 4 cops whom I would categorize as somewhere between bullies and out-and-out bad. Two were eventually convicted of false arrests on drug cases as they worked as a team of narcotic detectives and a bunch of folks had their cases overturned; I couldn’t prove it and it was probably 6 months or a year before someone was able to put a case together in defending someone they set up to blow the game open. Bot police were sent to prison.

The first was a local police officer; I had graduated from college and he ticketed me for speeding 45 in a 35 area and proceeded to brow beat me way beyond anything necessary. In short, a bully with a “mouth”.

The last was a police officer who testified in a resisting arrest case, and I was on the jury; interestingly the DA left me on the case in spite of asking me if I had done criminal defense work; the defense attorney had originally been a police officer who went to night law school and whom I knew by sight; we probably said “hello” a couple of times. The jury took about as long as it takes to drink a cup of coffee to come back “not guilty”, and I suspect the defense attorney went down stair and filed a case against the officer and the city police force for excessive use of force.

I have little doubt that Chauvin will be convicted of something; whether it is murder or not I cannot say, but the law may well provide for at least a manslaughter case, if it is established that the cause of death was not primarily a heart attack. Keep in mind that Medical examiner found four other things; evidence of Covid 19 (which is known to affect the lungs in at least some cases) plus three different drugs in his system, so cause of death could very easily be the great majority of the case. If asphyxiation is well established, then some form of murder charge is likely to be proved. Certainly it should be very easy to establish excessive use of force, and that may be sufficient to establish murder 3; murder 2 - not so sure but possible - I don;t have a copy of the statute and case law, nor am I interested in pursuing those items. As has been said elsewhere, it appears the officer had a backlog of claims of excessive use of force. Had either the DA or the police force itself attended to those, we would not be having this chat.

But common sense is not all that common.

 

[petra22]

Do you know how many people in the U.S. own firearms? Who is going to forcibly go into all those residences and take their guns away?

Just wanted to add LEGAL guns… who will take their LEGAL guns away???

 

[Welshrabbit]

Exactly. Who takes the LEGAL guns away when they become illegal overnight?

 

[ATraveller]

The best way forward is to change how police are trained in America. I had no idea since the 1970’s officers were trained to treat everyone as threats. This is not how police are usually trained elsewhere.
Where racism is a problem, that’s much harder to fixed.
But the biggest fix would be racial economic inequalities, which is outside the domain of policing. More black men get killed, according to a black officer, is due to poverty. Black men are more willing to take risks to survive, which means officers are more likely to be involved in incidents involving black men.
The radio show is 23 minutes long but worth listening to the entire thing because it’s very informative.

BBC World Service - The Inquiry, Why do US cops keep killing unarmed black men?

 

[PapyrusDouay]

The best way forward is to change how police are trained in America. I had no idea since the 1970’s officers were trained to treat everyone as threats. This is not how police are usually trained elsewhere.

I agree training needs to change, but I would also say that it has been changing, and continues to change. I went through a police academy before embarking on my current journey. When I went through, they didn’t teach us everyone “is a threat”, but to always consider the possibility that they “could be”. It’s a subtle but importance difference. We also had quite a bit of training in communications, police/ first responder mental health, mental illnesses in the community taught by social workers, even a class devoted entirely to autism and working with those diagnosed with autism taught by an officer who had a child with autism, and strategies for working with, in, and as part of a community (I.e. community policing). We were taught the importance of “community caretaking” as well, and ways to help people get the services they need. Not to the extent of a social worker, but enough to be a bridge to the social worker. First Responder training is pretty standard at police academies, but we were also afforded the opportunity to attach EMT training onto our police training.
Anyway, my point is it’s not all militarized and violent, and while that is part of a police officer’s job, it’s not the totality of it. That said, there’s no national standard, and while all academies will have similar elements, they’ll also have slightly different elements and different emphases.

I think adding more “community policing” and “community caretaking” type classes would be ideal. More classes on human behavior would also be important. But also more training in “officer Mental health” programs. Most police enter the profession for the right reasons (many even look at it as a “calling”, similar to a vocation in a sense), but given what they see and have to deal with, it’s common for them to become jaded and cynical. Several fatal car accidents, investigating heinous crimes, and similar things will have a toll on an officer’s mental health. An excellent book about it is “Emotional Survival for Law Enforcement” by Kevin Gilmartin. If I was a police chief, I would make that book mandatory reading, and perhaps bring social workers onto the police payroll to help officers implement those changes into their lives… things like maintaining a circle of friends outside work, learning how to talk about the bad things witnessed in the line of duty so they don’t “build up” being proactive against PTSD, having healthy lifestyles, having a strong faith and spirituality, etc. these things also contribute to officer mental health, and as a result impact the way they view the world and interact with the public.

Just my two cents.

 

[ATraveller]

I would also say that it has been changing, and continues to change. I went through a police academy before embarking on my current journey. When I went through, they didn’t teach us everyone “is a threat”, but to always consider the possibility that they “could be”. It’s a subtle but importance difference.

Yes. The radio program mentioned there’s no quick fix and depressingly, the results of real solutions will take decades to materialize.
I greatly appreciate what you’ve shared. It provides great insight.

 

[otjm]

The best way forward is to change how police are trained in America.

I would suggest that the best way forward is to find out how police are trained now in America. There is a virulent lie out and about that police agencies are systemically racist; there has not been a scintilla of evidence to back that; but because Democrats, particularly those in office - have been repeating this ad nauseum and the liberal news agencies have been repeating it like a mantra, that is what people believe.

As of Wednesday, April 8th, there have been a reported 550 shootings in Chicago. That is not to make light of nor denigrate the death of George Floyd. But no one marches in the streets to protest the gang violence which has caused the majority of the shootings. No one is rioting in protest.

Something here is skewed.

As to the BBC radio show, according to the Washingtone Post, in 2019:

229 individuals killed by police, race identified.

904 individuals killed by police, identified as Hispanic.

1,298 inidividuals killed by police, identified as black

2,478 people killed by police, identified as white.

Several years ago the FBI did a survey of prisoners to try to identify common characteristics among incarcerated men. The single most common element among, having no racial bias: there was no father in the home when they were growing up.

When the statistics above are put in a ratio to total population, blacks as a percentage of black population are 31 per million; Hispanics 23 per million, and whites 13 per million. But in raw numbers, whites are 1.9 times more likely to be shot.

 

[BornInMarch]

One idea that is gaining traction is to dissolve police departments then reform them, forcing the police to reapply for their jobs so that those with violations can be kept out. This will also break the police unions, which many want because said unions have went out of their way to protect bad actors. Additionally the new police departments will have less funding and will be demilitarized so that resources can be allocated elsewhere - one of the problems in police departments is that they’re required to take on duties they aren’t trained or qualified for as other social services are cut away. It’s not an insult to police officers to say that they can’t do a firefighter’s job as well as a firefighter could.

More immediately the protesters want justice. If a civilian is caught on camera strangling a man to death in cold blood then he goes to prison for it, but when a police officer does it he receives a slap on the wrist at worst. That’s not good; with great power should come great responsibility, not no responsibility.

 

[otjm]

One idea that is gaining traction is to dissolve police departments then reform them, forcing the police to reapply for their jobs so that those with violations can be kept out.

First, those proposing this are assuming that those who were on the force will apply. That is an idea cooked up by Pollyannas. Second, those who have violations which should have resulted in dismissal/firing need to be treated as such and dealt with; if nothing else (as in, firing might not be legally sustainable) they could be given desk jobs and other work where they are not out in the street carrying a gun.

Additionally the new police departments will have less funding and will be demilitarized so that resources can be allocated elsewhere

when there is an active shooter, a SWAT team is far more likely to be trained in how to handle the situation than a typical non-trained officer. The work that police do puts them at risk every day they go out on patrol. Some consider that even providing them a sidearm and/or a shotgun is “militarization”. Take the approach; see how many officers are willing to risk their life on the street.

so that resources can be allocated elsewhere -

You appear to have never sat down with a police officer and talked with them about their duties and the risks attendant to them. Sending out social workers on their own is putting those social workers’ lives at risk. Right now we have a whole raft of “suggestions” which sound good, mostly because no one is having a conversation with those who have to do the work.

More immediately the protesters want justice. If a civilian is caught on camera strangling a man to death in cold blood then he goes to prison for it, but when a police officer does it he receives a slap on the wrist at worst.

While this chaos was going on after Mr, Floyd’s death, people were seeking to charge another officer in a different jurisdiction with excessive use of force when he slammed the suspect’s head onto the hood of the car. The officer had cuffed an individual and was in the process of starting to pat him down, when the suspect ducked down slightly and grabbed the officer by the scrotum, and the officer’s reaction was to slam the suspect’s head down.

Decision - no excessive use of force.

(continued)

 

[otjm]

(continued)

The use of dash and body cameras will go a long, long way to sorting out the great majority of issues. You are welcome to do a Google search on “officer shot” to see what the police face on a regular basis.

None of which is to in any way imply that what happened to George Floyd was within reason; there will be a trial.

And the Minneapolis city council has determined to pursue a “community based model” of changing the police force; no one is indicating that those in the community have the faintest idea of what police are required to do, or what changing to a “community based model” is going to result in.

However, Darwin’s law has not been repealed, and there are a multitude of people who have not the faintest concept of the law of unintended consequences.