Darren Wilson's Side of the Story

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

As for "for profit law enforcement," for the most part, lawmakers devise such schemes, not police departments.

Nevertheless, the practices of the Ferguson PD and municipal courts appear to be illegal.

http://www.npr.org/2014/08/25/343143...ees-fuel-anger

John

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

There's little doubt about a forthcoming civil case. As for "for profit law enforcement," for the most part, lawmakers devise such schemes, not police departments. They can't get (re)elected by raising taxes, so they devise other ways (e.g., traffic cameras).



Many have. Here's a snapshot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_...-case_analysis

And law enforcement keep the politicians in their hip pockets. How else could police unions ever negotiate such employment contracts? In the real world these contracts would be a laughing matter.

Ask Bill de Basio how he feels about his PD. In a private industry they would all be shit canned for insubordination. But can he? I will bet that the entire police force in this country will go on strike regardless what is stipulated on their contracts.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Because it's easy. The case of one rotten cop in Texas proves nothing outside of the particulars proven in the case.

It is easy only if you make a slap-dash piece of shit job of it....

And yes, the Tulia example is meaningless, if you are determined not to care.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Why? Such a procedure would require new legislation and, as such, the funding for such investigations could come from any bin in the government's cash drawer. Also, the proceedings would be in lieu of the "traditional" grand jury investigation, not in tandem with it. The money spent by the Special Prosecutor would be spent instead of the money the DA would have spent.

These lawyers and their staffs bill at many hundreds of dollars per hour. This is in addition to the salaries being earned by the career prosecutor and his staff. As noted above, the outside counsel for the defense of the Virginia governor (because his AG was implicated in the same mess) cost an additional $1million.

And yes it would require additional legislation and funding. How many states do you know looking for additional places to spend their scarce resources? And how many politicians do you know who will run (and win) on a platform to spend untold millions on routine special prosecutors?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

And yes, the Tulia example is meaningless, if you are determined not to care.

No, it's meaningless because the extrapolation of one incident of police corruption to the broader national issue picture is a big stretch.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by BeamOn

And law enforcement keep the politicians in their hip pockets. How else could police unions ever negotiate such employment contracts? In the real world these contracts would be a laughing matter.

Ask Bill de Basio how he feels about his PD. In a private industry they would all be shit canned for insubordination. But can he? I will bet that the entire police force in this country will go on strike regardless what is stipulated on their contracts.

That's why I oppose public sector unions.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Nevertheless, the practices of the Ferguson PD and municipal courts appear to be illegal.

http://www.npr.org/2014/08/25/343143...ees-fuel-anger

John

The practices suck to be sure. I didn't read anything about illegality in the cited article though. It may well be immoral, unethical, wrong-headed and downright shitty, but I'm not sure it's yet been found to be illegal. I'd be thrilled if it did, along with the feckin' traffic cameras around here.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

And yes it would require additional legislation and funding. How many states do you know looking for additional places to spend their scarce resources? And how many politicians do you know who will run (and win) on a platform to spend untold millions on routine special prosecutors?

Again, it requires new legislation and, sadly, would probably require a permanent staff of lawyers employed for the purpose by the states. While this will certainly involve expenditure of public funds, it will also reduce the expenditures by prosecutor's offices by relieving them of the necessity of investigating cases of possible police abuse.

As for electability of a politician running on such an issue, the WaPo poll seems to indicate that said issue enjoys strong bipartisan support.

And the whole idea that we "can't afford" justice for people abused or even murdered by the police is one I find reprehensible.

John

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

No, it's meaningless because the extrapolation of one incident of police corruption to the broader national issue picture is a big stretch.

Bill Cosby only raped one woman at a time.

So I guess by your logic, each rape by itself was meaningless

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

That's why I oppose public sector unions.

You and I have been agreeing on two three many points lately.
I will get in trouble here at this rate.