| Poster | Message |
|---|---|
| Ignorant_FloristDaycare Manager Pipebomb Monkey P: 02/07/2021 10:21 | https://youtu.be/vI7fkYqEilQ Watch this video, so that you can see the difference in perspective between where you are and the department you work for, and what's going on where I'm at, and why we don't trust the police here. I'm not bashing police everywhere, and you've always maintained that your department is on the up and up. But it's shit like this that put guys like you in danger, because they are corrupt as shit. If you ask me, the Supreme Court really fucked up when they decided that police can lie to you with no repercussions, in order to secure a conviction. It's no longer about "justice" and "law and order".... it's about making money for the police departments and the prison system. |
| Ignorant_FloristDaycare Manager Pipebomb Monkey P: 02/07/2021 10:48 | Also, this lawyer talks about the whole "legally lying" that takes place: https://youtu.be/3z-qOJeKZ68 |
| Jesus_is_King P: 02/07/2021 16:14 E: 02/07/2021 16:17 | We might speculate this should have nothing to do with the trial anyways, weather or not the police are lying. Let lying take place. Apart from this, if we have a conviction, then lets bring in the 'eye witnesses' for testimony and identifying the accused. Perhaps, unless, I'm missing something about what is being expressed in the thread here. I may have to re-examine my thinking or what we're talking about. |
| Matt_tfcSuper Regular Shotgun Quick Draw P: 02/07/2021 16:58 | The movie My Cousin Vinny always reminds me of eyewitnesses. Although witnesses can often be *very confident* that their memory is *accurate* when identifying a suspect, the *malleable nature* of human memory and visual perception makes eyewitness testimony one of the most *unreliable* forms of evidence. |
| Prelude to AgonySuper Regular Sniper Harassment Duty P: 02/08/2021 18:24 | Ignorant_Florist wrote: Stuff you said.... That first video didn't tell me anything. It was more of a 'this is why we think police suck, here's proof', however, the 'proof' is pretty lacking. It just wasn't a real 'gotcha' thing to convince me of anything. Understanding that there's no way they'll get information from the drug team or sheriff's office or DA or whatever, so we're to rely on this lady as giving facts. What I struggle with is, aside from Chief trying to change how policing is done in this town and the drug team doesn't like that, all of their side bars with her just seem out of the blue and out of place. I don't know, it's just weird to me. Keep in mind also, the lady admits to her crime, but I've no reason to trust her, either. Plus, reading the comments didn't help. Basically, after reading the comments, if there's no good police, why are we supposed to care about the Chief here? He's a cop, so no better than the rest... I'd probably have to watch the documentary now to really get some answers to questions I have. --------- I worked dope for 2 years. Where I worked, there were no major hauls...if there was forfeiture, it wasn't because we sought it out, it was an after effect of the investigation, and usually low dollar. We just worked tips that came in though, or with a CI, and never had a 'target' based on forfeiture, either. I know things are different elsewhere. In Michigan, they keep changing forfeiture law, but haven't done away with it. It's getting better, in a sense...putting more of a burden on PD/PA to prove it, versus just taking things and putting the burden on the subject it was taken from. I'm not a fan personally, lots of paperwork and it's a pain in the ass. Still, it's no different than anything else, there's a means to fight it, and I've heard of it being fought successfully and people got their stuff back. Real criminals, not little Jimmy selling dime bags on the corner, shouldn't profit off of other peoples misery or stupidity. It'd be better, IMO, to find a way to tie forfeiture into crime victim reimbursement, but what do I know... I don't know what the answer is for what to do with it...I see the other side of it too, which probably drives me not being a fan. I'm sure some drug teams do go after a person for their assets...not sure how you start that and succeed without some reason to begin an investigation though. Hinky shit seems like more work than just doing the job right, to me. As far as lying...depends on the lie. If I'm working U/C and go up to you, a known drug dealer, to buy coke, and you ask if I'm a cop and I say no....too bad for your luck. If you're that suspicious and you still sell to me after that, you are a fucking tard. The claims this lady is making in the video...if they're trying to get her to say something happened with the Chief, even though it did not, to better her situation and then drum up fake evidence on the Chief? Yeah, that is fucked up...we put people in jail for shit like that. Finally...I don't trust anyone that I don't 'know'. That includes cops. |
| Ignorant_FloristDaycare Manager Pipebomb Monkey P: 02/08/2021 23:40 | Uh, PTA... would you mind telling me your first name? Just seems weird always addressing you as "PTA", given the educational reference, as well as the fact that the thread title won't allow more than one capital letter. I don't want any actual personally identifying info... just a first name. Hell, you can feel free to lie to me and say "Bill", if you want. Just a way to address you, not involving your "handle", ya know? Anyway... I'll take this piece by piece... "That first video didn't tell me anything. It was more of a 'this is why we think police suck, here's proof', however, the 'proof' is pretty lacking. It just wasn't a real 'gotcha' thing to convince me of anything." To a point, I agree. She's giving "her" side of the story, and we all know there are 3 sides to every story... "My" side, "Your" side, and the truth, which is somewhere in between. But, I think "her side" is something to take into consideration. Even if only parts of it are true, that's some serious shit being alleged. "Understanding that there's no way they'll get information from the drug team or sheriff's office or DA or whatever, so we're to rely on this lady as giving facts. What I struggle with is, aside from Chief trying to change how policing is done in this town and the drug team doesn't like that, all of their side bars with her just seem out of the blue and out of place. I don't know, it's just weird to me." Of course it seems weird to you.... you're not used to that kind of corruption in your department. However, it has been proven here that multiple departments were corrupt, even though many officers "got away with it"(either got off scott free, or with very light sentences). That said, I can easily see how this claim could be valid. Officer comes in vowing to "clean up a corrupt department", starts doing so, and gets targeted to get him out of the way. Money is a fucker of a motivator. Start plugging up the cash pipeline, and you're going to meet resistance. Remember the old adage about corruption, "follow the money trail". "Plus, reading the comments didn't help. Basically, after reading the comments, if there's no good police, why are we supposed to care about the Chief here? He's a cop, so no better than the rest..." Taken out of context, plus, it's a YouTube comment. That's like.... oh, nevermind. Still, out of context. If anything, it proves the point the commenter was trying to make. Which is "if someone comes along and disrupts the corruption(cop or not), they gang up on him because he is, by definition, "not one of their own". If you don't toe the blue line/code of silence, it's your ass, because you're not a "real cop". If you DO toe the line.... you're part of the problem. As far as civil forfeiture goes... it should depend on a conviction. No conviction, no forfeiture. Period. Of course, then you have the whole "do whatever it take to GET the conviction" problem. The whole damned system is corrupt, from top to bottom. While there are some decent people with the right intentions within it, they either get squashed for not going along with it, or they are so few and far between that they are powerless to stop it. I don't know what the answer is either, my man. I just know that the system is broken, and doesn't look to be in the process of being fixed anytime soon. |
| Prelude to AgonySuper Regular Sniper Harassment Duty P: 02/13/2021 03:01 | Not ignoring you man...Valheim. Way too much fun. Ray. Conviction first, then settle forfeiture with a hearing (shouldn't be automatic as there's still burden of proof), I agree. If no conviction, no forfeiture...sound logic IMO. It's all just odd shit to me...here, we don't step on local toes. Even when I was in narco, we didn't do anything without at least letting the locals know. Just makes things better when you are trying to solve a crime to have everyone on the same team. Especially since we don't have the same report writing systems, you rely on good communication/mutual support to solve B&E's and larcenies and such. Hell, even our relationship with MSP has gotten better, because they finally realized public service was the end goal, and not fighting for some imaginary spotlight so you can look good. Yeah, that was thing a few years ago. |
| Ignorant_FloristDaycare Manager Pipebomb Monkey P: 02/13/2021 19:15 | Yeah, I like Ray better than PTA, which where I'm from is short for Pain in The Ass. ;) It sounds to me like you and I are on the same page a lot. I just see a lot of things you don't (have to) deal with where you are. You're in Michigan, right? Do you know of Steve Lehto? He's a lawyer who does Consumer Protection law, but has a YouTube channel where he explains other legal issues that people bring to his attention. He mentioned something about the courts may be about to roll back some of those Civil Asset Forfeiture laws. He also covered one about "Police need to stop lying to citizens". Cops(in general) oppose that change, as they consider it a "tool in their arsenal". I mean, it's one thing to say "No, I'm not a cop" when someone is, say, looking to buy drugs from you. There's a difference between a "Sting" and "Entrapment". Lying to a suspect to get a confession out of them, that's stepping into questionable territory, in my opinion. Where is the lie line drawn? But subjects like these are part of what's turning communities against the local PD. When you see cops literally plant evidence(like we saw here in Baltimore)... and the cop isn't held accountable? How CAN you trust the police? That whole Freddie Gray thing a few years ago... sure, he was a petty criminal. But none of his crimes deserved the death penalty, and that's pretty much what he got. |
| Prelude to AgonySuper Regular Sniper Harassment Duty P: 02/13/2021 20:52 | Don't know the guy. But, yeah, I'm in Michigan. Forfeiture law keeps changing. I don't see it ending, but I do see it changing to something more...'fair', I guess. Just like you said with following the money trail, sometimes the best tool is to hurt the perp in the pocketbook. I'd still advocate for that money to be used for crime victims, who oftentimes never see a recovery or restitution. Lying is a tool, no doubt. Fighting fire with fire, as they say. Still, apart from the obvious question when doing hand to hands, I've never put it to use otherwise. I don't need some BS to make a case...I either have evidence, or I don't. I'm not going to put additional work on myself by trying to justify bullshit. My integrity is not for sale, and it's really all we have. It's much like my union stuff. It's there, or it's not, and my role is to gather information and present it. My role is not to present my opinion, because it isn't relevant to the matter. I'm qualified to give my opinion in traffic crashes, since I'm an 'expert' according to the local courts, lol. Still, I'm nearly done. Made some calls this week, getting some things in order. I have to wait til I'm 50, but I'm also waiting to see if a particular job opens up before then. Just not the same person, and the job isn't the same, since I last worked the road. I don't see this job getting better and I don't see the 'improvements' they are trying to bring on as lasting. Hell, we have 3 or 4 openings now, can't recall, and having a bitch of a time getting applicants, let alone someone good to fill them. What's going to the academy is not good man.... |
| Ignorant_FloristDaycare Manager Pipebomb Monkey P: 02/13/2021 22:59 | Again, Ray, I think we are more on the same page than maybe either of us think. I'm okay with a convicted drug dealer losing anything related to his "business"(be it cash, or property). But the key word there is "convicted". I should also point out that the whole "defund the police" movement is more about removing funds for things like military vehicles(except for well trained units, like SWAT), military level weapons, and other unnecessary things, and putting that money towards "departments"(for lack of a better term) that are specially trained to deal with specific people who may cross the law. Such as drug addicts, people with mental issues, etc. That way the officers who aren't specifically trained for interacting with those people, can be better served(as can the person with the problem) by being elsewhere, or maintaining crowd control, if they are involved at all. That includes moving "civil forfeiture" money to where it will do some actual good, rather than just pad someone's pocket. As I said, the whole "lying" thing needs a line that shouldn't be crossed. The argument is that if an officer is allowed to lie to someone who hasn't been convicted, in order to GET a conviction, what really is to prevent them from lying in court to secure that conviction? Especially when many officers will lie to cover the lie another tells. Like you said, things in departments are changing, and not for the better. That's why you want out. I don't blame you. Filling in the positions that are already open... and not having qualified applicants... that's bad. Very bad. Because you and I both know that those positions WILL be filled with people who shouldn't be in that job. Either because they have some deep seeded issues, or because they want to be a "bully with a badge and the law behind them". It's a cycle that's been going on for a while, and sadly, it doesn't show any signs of changing any time soon. That is part of the underlying problem. |
| Prelude to AgonySuper Regular Sniper Harassment Duty P: 02/14/2021 03:07 | So...with defunding police...when you mention military vehicles or even weapons, generally those a given free from the military as surplus stuff they can't use. My department got rifles and Hummers that way, eventually giving back the rifles when we were able to budget for rifles we could service ourselves. We weren't going to send someone to become an armorer for an M-16 or M-14. Also, the Hummers we have are for parades, but mainly to get us into areas patrol cars and ambulances can't go. We had a flood two years ago, and that thing was perfect for getting people evacuated and such. Used them a few times to get patients out of wooded areas...we have the basket stretcher in ours. I get what you're saying about it, but the issue lies, in part, in misconception and misinformation. Too many people talk about it, but they don't know what they're talking about. Part of it is they don't care to be informed...I've had peeps yell at me about shit that just simply wasn't true, but they didn't care to listen. That said, having read up on some of the defund stuff...it was pretty clear. Reduce law enforcement presence, divert money to other programs, or potentially get rid of police in certain areas altogether and start over. It just depends on who is shouting the loudest in the area on what 'defunding' really means. Mental health, primarily, has been a sore spot for us. Mental Health doesn't give a fuck....they're supposed to, but when we get a situation calmed, we'll call them and they blow us off. Resources needed are more than just people. Facilities make getting people help that much harder. If they voluntarily go to the hospital and get medically cleared, there's no guarantee they'll get help beyond that. Unless petitioned by us or the family through the court, I'd say 80% or more of the time, Mental Health just sends them home. Of course, I'm not a professional in that area, but it really feels like they hang us out to dry, and do little to help those who need it. Obviously, if they don't want the help, forcing it upon them doesn't do much. I think a broader approach with the family/friends would be helpful....but what do I know. Civil Forfeiture here does not line pockets...not supposed to anyway. It has to go into a special account and can only be used for certain things. Can't supplement budgets for wages or whatever....generally it's used for equipment and perhaps training. Still, unless it's a drug or vice team, forfeiture is a pain in the dick for departments like mine. I can't say anymore on officers lying to perps...simply because it's not my thing. As a supervisor, watching body cam...if it's on camera, it needs to be in the report. If it's in the report, they'll need to explain that in court. If it's not in the report, they'll have to explain it to me. If it's a clear integrity/honesty issue, that raises a whole new deal in Prosecution, where the PA is supposed to disqualify the officer as a witness and report to the defense in every case that the officer had previously lied in court or lied to get a warrant. Lying as in manipulating or misrepresenting the facts of the case to obtain a charge, that was evident was a lie, especially when no crime was committed (I'm tired, so excuse the structure there). If that happens, they're fucked, really. I know of two guys here that fell under that. They're no longer employed, and rightfully so. No longer in law enforcement either. When I say we're getting shitty peeps in the academy....dude.... The people we've washed out were the total opposite of 'bully'. These fucks are...dumb. Weak, cowardly...they lack common sense. It's like...'fuck man, I saw an episode of Cops and that shit looked like fun, so I went to the academy', when the reality is, they had no fucking business there. But, as I said before, that shit is business, and unless the academy is part of a department, like Detroit, Flint or MSP, they just want that cheddar. It's not about being 'tough', but you have to be assertive, and you have to be able to take peoples shit and not get upset by it. These kids....fuck...they crumble when a citizen yells at them. Or they take it personal....can't do that shit man. Kinda like that line from Roadhouse...it's not personal, it's business, so be nice. No different. I mean, honestly, if people want change, the best way to change a culture is to do it from within. That's my opinion...sign up to do the job, and change the job over time. Some changes have to be made from the outside, certainly, but a lot of good can be done from the inside too. |