Police Shootings / Possible Abuse Threads [merged] (3 Viewers)

Here's a thought. This might not be a cure, but it may serve to reduce these kinds of fatalities.

If a suspect dies in custody, the arresting officers (and/or jail employees responsible for that area) are put on UNPAID leave during an investigation. If it's found that they didn't call paramedics or were otherwise neglectful, that unpaid leave becomes permanent. Maybe charges are filed, maybe not. That's up to the DA. But as a condition of employment, if someone dies under your care and you're at fault? You're fired, period. The investigating panel would be made up of local ER doctors, chosen at random like a jury pool.
 
Here's a thought. This might not be a cure, but it may serve to reduce these kinds of fatalities.

If a suspect dies in custody, the arresting officers (and/or jail employees responsible for that area) are put on UNPAID leave during an investigation. If it's found that they didn't call paramedics or were otherwise neglectful, that unpaid leave becomes permanent. Maybe charges are filed, maybe not. That's up to the DA. But as a condition of employment, if someone dies under your care and you're at fault? You're fired, period. The investigating panel would be made up of local ER doctors, chosen at random like a jury pool.

I agree with all except the unpaid leave before judgement part. That approaches the the problem from a presumption of guilty perspective. I'd rather start with the innocent until proven guilty, so as to not hurt those who are actually innocent.
 
Here's a thought. This might not be a cure, but it may serve to reduce these kinds of fatalities.

If a suspect dies in custody, the arresting officers (and/or jail employees responsible for that area) are put on UNPAID leave during an investigation. If it's found that they didn't call paramedics or were otherwise neglectful, that unpaid leave becomes permanent. Maybe charges are filed, maybe not. That's up to the DA. But as a condition of employment, if someone dies under your care and you're at fault? You're fired, period. The investigating panel would be made up of local ER doctors, chosen at random like a jury pool.

The unions would never let that happen
 
I agree with all except the unpaid leave before judgement part. That approaches the the problem from a presumption of guilty perspective. I'd rather start with the innocent until proven guilty, so as to not hurt those who are actually innocent.

The unpaid part is essential because that's a deterrent to letting anyone die in custody. It's QED that someone died under your care, guilt for that is already established.
 
I agree with all except the unpaid leave before judgement part. That approaches the the problem from a presumption of guilty perspective. I'd rather start with the innocent until proven guilty, so as to not hurt those who are actually innocent.


I get what you're saying but people are often put on unpaid leave
 
The unpaid part is essential because that's a deterrent to letting anyone die in custody. It's QED that someone died under your care, guilt for that is already established.

Not it's not. If someone in my care drops dead of a heart attack or drug OD during or after he/she has been apprehended, I'm not responsible for causing that. And why should my family and I suffer because of the irresponsibility of other cops? Litigation and investigations into those type of incidents can take months. A cop supporting his family and not being able to do that for months on end even when he did nothing wrong is an untenable proposition imo.

That said, I'm all for holding bad cops accountable in other ways. You can always claw back that pay if the cop is eventually proven guilty of wrongdoing.
 
Or, you could fix the qualified immunity laws so that they can be held responsible via civil suit.

Yep, this is where I would put my chips in so to speak. Removing qualified immunity would have a bigger impact than temporarily suspending pay. And as far as suspending pay pending the outcome of litigation, that would not hold up to legal challenges anyway, imo.
 

Video

 
maybe someone can explain how he was supposed to put his hands out the window AND open the door at the same time? I feel like that's one of those.commands they use so they can shoot first.then say we thought he was reaching for a weapon. if his hands are out of the window and he reached back in to open the door, he's dead...
 
maybe someone can explain how he was supposed to put his hands out the window AND open the door at the same time? I feel like that's one of those.commands they use so they can shoot first.then say we thought he was reaching for a weapon. if his hands are out of the window and he reached back in to open the door, he's dead...
I believe you are supposed to open it from the outside handle. Forgot where I pulled that info. I vaguely recall an episode of cops or some such where the officer was calm and explained the order better.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom