Do we have a police brutality/violence problem in the US of A?

[joeyc77]

Well I agree.

Never said there was, yet. We don't have all the facts. Assumptions are dangerous.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

What are you talking about? The jury heard ALL the facts and they found him not guilty. The only one making an assumption is you. That police corruption exists, so it must exist here.

[lol, please]

What are you talking about? The jury heard ALL the facts and they found him not guilty. The only one making an assumption is you. That police corruption exists, so it must exist here.

We aren't talking about the same here. I'm taking about the cop that made the dude crawl on his hands and knees before running him down like something out of Contra. What incident are you talking about? [emoji848]

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

[joeyc77]

We aren't talking about the same here. I'm taking about the cop that made the dude crawl on his hands and knees before running him down like something out of Contra. What incident are you talking about? [emoji848]

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

The same one. 1:30 minute video. Cop acted like an idiot. Jury heard all the facts and found him not guilty of murder. You assume there’s police corruption but have no actual facts or evidence of it in this case. What am I missing?

[Dugmet]

The same one. 1:30 minute video. Cop acted like an idiot. Jury heard all the facts and found him not guilty of murder. You assume there’s police corruption but have no actual facts or evidence of it in this case. What am I missing?

FWIW, having served for 4 months on a grand jury in Massachusetts, all 20 of us took our responsibilities very seriously. Cant speak for every jury but when the stakes are high I think 9 of 10 or better people genuinely try to apply the law fairly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lol, please]

The same one. 1:30 minute video. Cop acted like an idiot. Jury heard all the facts and found him not guilty of murder. You assume there’s police corruption but have no actual facts or evidence of it in this case. What am I missing?

I never said there was police corruption with this particular incident lol.

My point was that corruption in police departments in the US happens.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

[joeyc77]

I agree this cop was an idiot. But saying he should be convicted of murder only based on one minute and 30 secs is not what this country’s legal system is based on. Without looking into it previously, I’m sure there was other evidence and testimony as part of the trial for the jury to find him not guilty.

I also don’t disagree that cops having a bad day can lead to someone losing their lives but the same can be said for a few professions, including doctors. More people die from doctors having a bad day than cops except those cases are settled by malpractice suits. I’m not saying I don’t sympathize with the victim here but there’s a reason juries find it difficult to convict cops. That’s the problem.

The reason they find it difficult is because of influence and corruption.

How can you compare medical malpractice to dumping rounds out of an automatic weapon into a defenseless person on the ground? Just lol. Of course one is settled by a suit and the other goes to trial.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

I never said there was police corruption with this particular incident lol.

My point was that corruption in police departments in the US happens.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

Above is the first thing you said to me regarding this case. It was in response to my comment regarding this case. Again, the only one making an assumption is you.

[joeyc77]

FWIW, having served for 4 months on a grand jury in Massachusetts, all 20 of us took our responsibilities very seriously. Cant speak for every jury but when the stakes are high I think 9 of 10 or better people genuinely try to apply the law fairly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. Most jurors take their responsibility seriously. They may not get it right 100% of the time but they are the ones who hear all the evidence and are best suited to make those decisions.

[Hawkeye15]

The same one. 1:30 minute video. Cop acted like an idiot. Jury heard all the facts and found him not guilty of murder. You assume there’s police corruption but have no actual facts or evidence of it in this case. What am I missing?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...208-story.html

this video?

The cop got away with murder. That is murder dude.

[joeyc77]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...208-story.html

this video?

The cop got away with murder. That is murder dude.

Yes that video. The jury, who heard all of the evidence, disagreed and acquitted the cop. That is fact.

We can sit here and debate that video, but our opinions don’t matter. It’s like Star Wars fans arguing over TLJ.

[lol, please]

Above is the first thing you said to me regarding this case. It was in response to my comment regarding this case. Again, the only one making an assumption is you.

Ok well this is a convo that seems to have gone over a week, you'll have to excuse me for not being on top of what feels like several discussions at once.

My first post, I say something about corruption, maybe relating to a lack of evidence at the time.

I only watched the video that day, and haven't followed up at all on the aftermath.

Corruption in law enforcement exists. In this particular situation? I don't know for certain.

I've maintained two constant ideas here and won't backtrack on them:

1. Police corruption is absolutely a thing.

2. That cop murdered a defenseless man on his hands and knees.


If you have a problem with either of those two statements, I'll be here defending them.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

[valade16]

Yes that video. The jury, who heard all of the evidence, disagreed and acquitted the cop. That is fact.

We can sit here and debate that video, but our opinions don’t matter. It’s like Star Wars fans arguing over TLJ.

Why are you acting like that is definitive? You are aware that hundreds and thousands of cases are overturned correct?

Is your argument that a juries decision is infallible and correct every time?

In regards to the video, it's painfully obvious the suspect was trying to comply with the instructions of the officer and was noticeably terrified. The officer deciding to shoot him there seems pretty F-d up.

[lol, please]

Yes that video. The jury, who heard all of the evidence, disagreed and acquitted the cop. That is fact.

We can sit here and debate that video, but our opinions don’t matter. It’s like Star Wars fans arguing over TLJ.

Who cares about the judge decision here (here being, the acknowledgement of this being a murderous act.)

Just because you get acquitted by law doesn't make it not murder. There just wasn't enough for a conviction.

Don't confuse legal / illegal with right / wrong.

We murdered many people over OIF and OEF. I would know. Just because we as soldiers were protected by (shady) government officials and the Geneva convention, doesn't make it not murder.

I've asked this question to peoples face before and never get a response worth contemplating: what separates men like me from men like the guy who shot up the theater during the Batman movie? The flag on my shoulder? Don't be naive. If the victims were innocent, and the pleasure or fulfillment was the same, there is no difference. That's something I will toil with internally all my life. One man's patriot is another man's terrorist and vica versa.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

[Hawkeye15]

Yes that video. The jury, who heard all of the evidence, disagreed and acquitted the cop. That is fact.

We can sit here and debate that video, but our opinions don’t matter. It’s like Star Wars fans arguing over TLJ.

the jury is wrong. The ****ing cop murdered him. Convictions are overturned every day.

When police are allowed to walk after committing acts like that, it's no wonder people lose more faith in cops by the day.

[lol, please]

the jury is wrong. The ****ing cop murdered him. Convictions are overturned every day.

When police are allowed to walk after committing acts like that, it's no wonder people lose more faith in cops by the day.

Well said. Good post.

Sent from my Note 8 using Tapatalk

[joeyc77]

Why are you acting like that is definitive? You are aware that hundreds and thousands of cases are overturned correct?

Is your argument that a juries decision is infallible and correct every time?

In regards to the video, it's painfully obvious the suspect was trying to comply with the instructions of the officer and was noticeably terrified. The officer deciding to shoot him there seems pretty F-d up.

It’s funny how juries are only wrong when you seem to think they are wrong. Yes, on occasion, juries get it wrong. But in most cases they get it right.

My point is, that the jury is more well informed and unbiased than anyone, especially on this forum, to make a decision and they did. Their decision may not be infallible but it certainly carries enough weight that this dude cannot be tried for murder again.

Nothing is painfully obvious in the video, hence 12 complete strangers disagreeing with your outlook.