I haven’t read the indictment (which the cops accepted in its entirety from my understanding, as part of this leniency/plea deal) but for all I know, it may have included such a charge.
I think there are legit reasons to have an off button (and maybe to be able to delete footage). Protecting the identity of undercover cops. Protecting the home addresses of various people. Getting witnesses to at least give off the record statements. Many valid things.
On the other hand I think we have seen enough lies from cops that we should stop deciding they are reliable witnesses, or at the very least we should treat testimony about what happened when body cameras were disabled or intentionally not worn and other similar situations as unreliable.
1 Like
If i bribe you so i can get a contract, that is corruption related bribing. If i bribe you so i am allowed to get out of the ghetto and am not sent to the camps, that is survival (coercion) related bribing.
There is a definite moral difference between the two.
8 Likes
The cynic in me – what? no, never – can easily imagine one court case for rape where they claim it was a bribe, followed shortly thereafter bya case where they claim it shouldn’t be called a bribe, because they clearly raped her.
2 Likes
I would hope that now being convicted felons would prevent them from becoming police again, but…
1 Like
Store the footage on two secure servers, one under police control and one under the control of someone in the judicial system (the DA’s office perhaps?) Record everything, but restrict heavily who is allowed to view it. If anything needs to be redacted before being released to the DA, defense attorneys, the police, a judge, etc. one of that small subset of people with access (who’s making the copy to be released) needs to explain the exact reason that the released copy is lacking information the master copy still has.
“Skipping 2 minutes while officer was in the restroom.”
“Redacted 3 minutes 45 seconds to protect confidential informant’s identity.”
That sort of thing. The copy NOT under police control is a backup, in case the police department deletes something incriminating their officers in wrongdoing.
3 Likes
I got so excited and happy until I re-read the headline and saw the “Zero” at the front.
Apparently my brain is so fed up with this world that it’s started automatically editing things so they actually make sense.
1 Like
5 Likes
3 Likes
As far as I’m concerned, she could have been 35 and it would still have been rape.
4 Likes
All possible ethical arguments against pursuing vigilante justice and personal vendettas are predicated on the existence of a justice system that generally works, and maintaining the peace that that system provides vs people taking things into their own hands.
In the case of police and government officials in this country, that is manifestly not the case, so the only remaining arguments that people shouldn’t take justice into their own hands in when it comes to cops are practical, not ethical, and they are exactly the same as the arguments against fighting back against a powerful local gang; that being that you’ll probably get killed if you try it.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
