Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly..... | Page 227 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 22 21.6%
  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 31 30.4%
  • I like turtles

    Votes: 49 48.0%

  • Total voters
    102

hdsomeday

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I saw a report not long ago that actually claimed the opposite. Police are more likely to hesitate when its a person of colour. Not sure what statistics he's referring to.

He showed you his, now show him yours.
 

Mad Mike

Well-known member
Not especially loaded, given that there's sufficient evidence that a Black man with a knife is statistically far more likely to be shot than is a White man with a knife, in the US.
This is a complicated debate, you should look deeper into your conclusions.

The use of stats to prove, disprove, illuminate, downplay or distort a perspective isn’t new. This is a complex social issue that is hard to understand, and even harder to compare.

I’m not going to argue that a black male is 2.8 times more likely to be killed by police - that’s a fact. Where is gets tricky is when you factor in homicide, violent crimes, and rates of violent interactions by race.

This doesn’t diminish the 2.8 number - but your position seem to be that if cops see a black bad guy, he’s 2.8 times more likely to be killed than a white guy in the same situation. I don’t think stats back that up.

I think if you look further, law enforcement is called to respond to violent situations disproportionately to population mix. Further, white interactions are more often with armed criminals, many submitting weapons thereby reducing threats. Black interaction have a much higher incidence violence due to drug impairment which needs more force to deescalate.

Then you have the biggie... in the US blacks represent 13% of the population but are convicted in more than half of all homocides.

My point is it’s a complicated socio economic issue that doesn’t boil down to simple stats. Wading into a debate on the matter requires a lot of research.
 
Last edited:

Rob MacLennan

Well-known member
Moderator
Site Supporter
This is a complicated debate, you should look deeper into your conclusions.

The use of stats to prove, disprove, illuminate, downplay or distort a perspective isn’t new. This is a complex social issue that is hard to understand, and even harder to compare.

I’m not going to argue that a black male is 2.8 times more likely to be killed by police - that’s a fact. Where is gets tricky is when you factor in homicide, violent crimes, and rates of violent interactions by race.

This doesn’t diminish the 2.8 number - but your position seem to be that if cops see a black bad guy, he’s 2.8 times more likely to be killed than a white guy in the same situation. I don’t think stats back that up.

I think if you look further, law enforcement is called to respond to violent situations disproportionately to population mix. Further, white interactions are more often with armed criminals, many submitting weapons thereby reducing threats. Black interaction have a much higher incidence violence due to drug impairment which needs more force to deescalate.

Then you have the biggie... in the US blacks represent 13% of the population but are convicted in more than half of all homocides.

My point is it’s a complicated socio economic issue that doesn’t boil down to simple stats. Wading into a debate on the matter requires a lot of research.
First it's "show me the proof." The it's "confirmation bias." Now "it's complicated." Stop moving the goal posts and there might actually be a debate to be had.
 

Mad Mike

Well-known member
First it's "show me the proof." The it's "confirmation bias." Now "it's complicated." Stop moving the goal posts and there might actually be a debate to be had.
It’s not a debate at this point, it’s a discussion, and no goal posts have been moved.

The point us simple, you can’t make your conclusion based on the stats you provided - too simplified.

If you think you’re ready for a debate I’m game. Open a Romper Room thread and state your hypothesis.
 

Rob MacLennan

Well-known member
Moderator
Site Supporter
It’s not a debate at this point, it’s a discussion, and no goal posts have been moved.

The point us simple, you can’t make your conclusion based on the stats you provided - too simplified.

If you think you’re ready for a debate I’m game. Open a Romper Room thread and state your hypothesis.
If you're going to stick with the "it's complicated" point then consider that Blacks are disproportionately convicted, or hit with higher sentences than are Whites, because of economic disadvantage. In other words they can't afford the "good" lawyers. Drug and alcohol use is also heavier among those with lower incomes. Crime is heavier in neighbourhoods that have a lower average income. Police stop minorities more than they stop whites (as the statistics showed when the practice of "carding" was banned).

If you're going to get "complicated", then that's the "complication"; minorities are systematically set up to lose the "game."
 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Best SIU press conference I have seen. They are improving. They included a timeline, a decent description of the players and events and what is currently happening.

Best wishes to the officer in their recovery and condolences to the childs family.

 

raginduck

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Best SIU press conference I have seen. They are improving. They included a timeline, a decent description of the players and events and what is currently happening.

Best wishes to the officer in their recovery and condolences to the childs family.


It's obvious the cops shot the 1 year old boy... Don't get why they don't just come out and say it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J_F

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
It's obvious the cops shot the 1 year old boy... Don't get why they don't just come out and say it.
Hopefully that is not the case but it is obviously a possibility. Lots of paths could end up at the terrible conclusion. If it was a police bullet, there is no way in hell that will be released prior to autopsy, balistics, etc. being rock solid with no other possibilities. After that notify family and then we see whether SIU is interested in truth or politics.
 

raginduck

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Hopefully that is not the case but it is obviously a possibility. Lots of paths could end up at the terrible conclusion. If it was a police bullet, there is no way in hell that will be released prior to autopsy, balistics, etc. being rock solid with no other possibilities. After that notify family and then we see whether SIU is interested in truth or politics.

Watch this stuff as closely as I do and for as long as I have.. and you know how to read between the lines.
The fact that they knew the kid was in the car... and that makes in that much worse IMO.
 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Another winner here. Cop leaves prohibited magazines (not issued by the service) and ammunition in the trunk of his cop car.

As always PSA charges on hold until criminal charges are complete. Frustrating when there should be more than enough information already to fire him now (assuming they have a reasonable tie between cop and magazines). Why not pay the moron a few hundred thousand more from the public purse when he has no prospect of working as a cop again?

 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Link to livestream of Dafonte Miller verdict (Michael and Christian Theriault accused of beating the crap out of him with a pipe).

TL: DR (DW)

MT (off-duty cop) guilty of assault (assault with a weapon not before the court so using the weapon will be considered an aggravating factor at sentencing)
CT (cops brother) not guilty of assault
MT and CT not guilty of obstruction of justice (probably did, but there is reasonable doubt)
July 15 court date to discuss court dates for scheduling. (the system is broken, wtf).


EDIT:
Damn that was dry but interesting.
Chase lasted more than 10 seconds (140m run), MT stuck with "I didn't have time to identify myself", "I didn't have time to state he was under arrest"

Discussion on credibility of witnesses:
Michael Theriault: Accepted some of his testimony. Rejected main points (intent, how pipe appeared, what happened during the fight, etc)
Christian Theriault: Accepted some of his testimony. Rejected main points (how pipe appeared (4' long pipe from DM pants), 911 call sounds like a vigilante not self-defense)
Dafonte Mille: Credibility problems. Significant points are false even in the face of contrary evidence. Accepted some of his testimony (GG: Interesting that judge reversed the order here with bad before good vs cops good before bad).
Mr Jack: Rejected most or all of his evidence
Mr Good: Credible witness
James Silverthorn: Honest, objective, logical

Factual findings:
They were likely breaking into cars.
DM changed testimony re: breaking into cars, smoking pot, seeing MT and CT drinking,possession of a flashlight, gloves, etc. Basically he tried to present himself as a choir boy when he was clearly taking part in illegal activities. DM was in possession of CT's sunglasses.
MT and CT heard break in from inside garage and went out to investigate.
Metal pipe cannot be tied to MT garage. DM was not running with the pipe. Reasonable possibility that it came from MT garage. Also reasonable that it came from the fight area. MT evidence on how the pipe appeared (DM grabbed it as he was tackled) was completely rejected.
MT and CT collusion not proven.
Crown argues that MT and CT were administering street justice and only attempted to arrest once DM called 911 well into the beating. Judge is very unhappy with MT delivering a beatdown with no attempt at identification. DM tries to get help at a house. MT grabs a metal pipe and chases DM down, no attempt to call for help. "I am satisfied MT was not attempting to effect an arrest, he was delivering retribution".
DM had been caught in the act and was running. He didn't want to get caught for fear of a beating or arrest. Possibility that DM had the pipe at some point.
CT piled in and put DM in a headlock while MT was hitting DM "as hard and as fast as he could". After that DM was basically helpless and getting a two-man beatdown. The eye/nose injury happened after this beatdown (no blood where initial struggle happened). Injury happened as DM was trying to get away. MT and CT re-engaged DM and popped his eye (likely by a punch even though punches, kicks and pipe hits were likely happening).
MT and CT chased DM down and hit him with the pipe when he got to the front door of a house and was trying to get help. They continued to hit him multiple times with the pipe while at the door.

Findings:
MT initial hit was probably an assault but cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt
Reasonable doubt as to origin of pipe. No finding with respect to introduction.
DM reasonably thought he would be assaulted as there was no indication that an arrest was happening. There may have been a self-defense component on either side.
Fight quickly turned one-sided with MT and CT possessing the pipe.
Reasonable doubt about first stages of fight. Judge clearly states they were beating him on purpose but he can't convict on his thoughts.
After DM runs away and is attacked again, self-defense is out and it was a clear assault. Eye injury probably happened in the section of the fight that could possibly be self-defence.

Police did a pretty crap job questioning MT and CT. Cursory questioning with little detail.

TL: DR

MT guilty of assault (assault with a weapon not before the court so using the weapon will be considered an aggravating factor at sentencing)
CT not guilty of assault
MT and CT not guilty of obstruction of justice (probably did, but there is reasonable doubt)
Even after a criminal conviction and absolutely scathing tongue lashing by the judge, MT pleads not guilty at police tribunal.

I guess the upside is they have no choice but to fire his ass now. If he plead guilty, they could have argued that he felt bad for vigilante justice/lying to police/lying to the court and let him return to his duties as a paid skull basher.

 

Mad Mike

Well-known member
Seven more veteran cops hit with corruption charges related to towing. Still more under investigation.

Pisses me off that the Crown knows these guys are under investigation yet they are still prosecuting folks given trumped up tickets.

These are the dirtbags I mentioned earlier - 7 of the OPPs finest.

I wonder if this opens the door for claims to cover impounding fees related to illegal charges.
 

bitzz

Well-known member
Pisses me off that the Crown knows these guys are under investigation yet they are still prosecuting folks given trumped up tickets.

These are the dirtbags I mentioned earlier - 7 of the OPPs finest.

I wonder if this opens the door for claims to cover impounding fees related to illegal charges.
These officers are charged with giving preferential treatment to tow truck operators that paid them graft, commonly called racketeering.
No illegal charges. No trumped up charges.
If there were illegal impound fees or charges, that would be on the tow company.

...so ya understand what you're ****** at....
 

GreyGhost

Well-known member
Site Supporter
These officers are charged with giving preferential treatment to tow truck operators that paid them graft.
No illegal charges. No trumped up charges.
If there were illegal impound fees or charges, that would be on the tow company.

...so ya understand what you're ****** at....
It's really hard to prove trumped up charges unless you caught them in the act. If a tow truck driver paid the cop on a 172 charge, the validity of that charge should be seriously questioned as the cop was in a clear conflict of interest. The only safe way for the justice system to proceed is for every charge laid by the bad cops that required a tow should be shredded. No trials required, just shredded. The second part of what happens to the money that people were charged is slightly harder to deal with as the whole system is fighting tooth and nail to avoid any cracks in their legal extortion ring.
 

backmarkerducati

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I ain't no lawyering school law talking dude but....

Even if you are found not guilty on a 172 you don't get your costs back, this includes tow and impound. So at best, anyone these crooked cops have dinged will not get those costs back but they may have a good case to get the conviction reversed if they can reopen it.... Even if the charge is legit the related charges to the officers will call into doubt all previous cases.

My best guess, costs would require a tort case against the crown or the force, I doubt it will work. Maybe there needs to be a class action...
 
Last edited:

Mad Mike

Well-known member
These officers are charged with giving preferential treatment to tow truck operators that paid them graft, commonly called racketeering.
No illegal charges. No trumped up charges.
If there were illegal impound fees or charges, that would be on the tow company.

...so ya understand what you're ****** at....
The first OPP charged (last year) was falsifying racing tickets to get the tow/impound kickbacks. All the tickets he wrote are thrown out.

In my friends case the prosecutor kept delaying the trial - Points guy had a feeling there was something up with the cop, he had same delay on another client, same cop.

Some cops aren’t too bright, a little math exposed his method.
 

Top Bottom