This BB post is incredibly misleading/confusing. It reads “Ferguson cops…” and then talks about a FOIA to the MSHP. The “Ferguson” is referencing the place and is not being used as an adjective for “cops.” And looking at the helpful pictures posted here, you can see that the MSHP were the ones doing the arresting (in the photos). The author left out context that was in their head.
2 Likes
Oh, please, all signs point to corruption and a habit of covering stuff up. People like you really get under my skin, because even as the evidence mounts, you must remain neutral, or wiffly-waffly (“hesitates”). Fuck that. Let’s condemn this disgusting behavior.
Maybe I’m just one of those people who condemns when the evidence is pretty fucking obvious.
2 Likes
Mea culpa, but…the thick blue line.
Because they’re not under any obligation to do things by the book. Yes, they’re being called out on it here, but that’s not going to make a difference. The old rule about not starting an argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel doesn’t apply here, and hasn’t since a dozen barrels of ink were donated to covering “violent protestors”.
That’s cool, I hope it feels good. In this particular case, I haven’t seen a lot of mounting evidence yet, and there’s a plausible explanation for records that haven’t turned up yet. Also, even if I raged and tore my clothing, it would matter like a fart in a hurricane.
First - see the following on problems with public records in this case.
They are intentionally not complying fully and faithfully with the law:
How #MikeBrown Incident Report Unlawful, how it was withheld, and how it was produced - here http://wp.me/p2SbBy-8y1 #ferguson”
On this - because there are so many agencies out there - rather than start with a request to the law enforcement agency, unless you know for certain WHO made the arrest, I’d start with the jail records - to see if you can find out the arresting agency. Other than that - send the same request to ALL agencies that were called out.
Their policies require them to file, at minimum, an Incident Report - if they made an arrest. (Of course - in at least one case (the shooting) - we can see the game they are playing - again - see story linked above - which includes all related documents).
They don’t care. They are used to not facing consequences and they expect, rightly, to not face any now.
Exactly - we need to disabuse them of that. Thus - I am working to bring not just one lawsuit - but a strategic series of them - to prove not just a particular violation of law - but a “pattern and practice” of “knowing and willful violations”.
1 Like
Also court records - because they will usually have a first appearance before a judge for bail or ROR.
So the Missouri Highway Patrol says they don’t have any records, and suggest a request to the local police. And the request to the local PD says… ?
Seriously, this sounds much more like a mistakenly filled request rather than any grand conspiracy. Know your bureaucracies people!
Words like “arrest” can have a very specific legal meaning. This can all need some sort of lawyer to make a document request that the cops cannot weasel out of. And I recall a pattern of people being detained, held overnight, and booted out the door come morning. The cynical British phrasing is “helping the Police with their enquiries”. You can help the Police a lot without any arrest. There are always staircases needing inspection…
1 Like
The problem with that argument is that the Highway Patrol did arrest at least one of the people mentioned in the information request. And the problem with the information request is that it is very poorly written and by its own terms only applies to arrests made by Captain Johnson, who may have ordered the arrest of at least one person but didn’t actually do the arresting. The Highway Patrol response sounds as though they interpreted the request broadly, however, which raises the third problem of why they don’t appear to have records of the arrests (even if they didn’t result in charges).
Great pix!
The department appears to believe that with appropriate manipulation of the record they can “make it didn’t happen.” They may be right. I fully expect to see a certain group of journalists repeating the story that no journalists were arrested in Ferguson, and that any evidence to the contrary must be a fabrication, and any testimony to the contrary must be a lie. Because the records don’t lie, and there are no records of an arrest.
“I am in receipt of your request for reports regarding the arrest and detention of Mr. Neil Munshi, Mr. Robert Klemko, and Mr. Rob Crilly.” Change your FOIA request by removing the word ‘arrest’ and just seek documents regarding the ‘detention’.
Hell, go with “interaction” or simply any document that mentions them. That might even turn up some things that you didn’t know you wanted.
1 Like
And just to add another potential layer of LEO fuckery here:
Any detentions/arrests that took place during the briefly declared state of emergency may have been unencumbered by the requirements of habeus corpus.
Since when did habeas corpus become relevant to what is happening in Ferguson? Nobody is being secreted away in jail, being kept from appearing before judges in court.
I’m not raging, but you better believe I’m angry, and I am angry that people like you can’t even see blatant patterns and facts. Anger isn’t always a negative emotion, and the tone argument doesn’t really get you very far, if you’re also ignoring every. single. other. point. You don’t really go into your reasons, you just say it as if I should say, “OKAY! i believe you! And I promise to be so much nicer next time!”
Nahhhhhhhhh.
1 Like
Just saying things like “It’s obvious! And blatant!” isn’t a very good way of convincing people. Especially since you seem to be conflating two different levels of police. What exactly is the other evidence that shows the Highway Patrol has a pattern of corruption and covering things up?
