Cops are rarely convicted of crimes (in my opinion) because cop crimes rarely come to court. Even when there’s prosecution, everyone — judge, jury, prosecutors, defense, witnesses, certainly any reporters — walks in with a background of respect and admiration for police. They watched Hawaii Five-O and all the iterations of Law & Order, and listened to hysterical Republicans screaming about crime, and watched channel 7’s coverage of cops heroically hunting for some axe murderer on the subway. Everyone comes to the courtroom eager to give cops the benefit of every doubt.
It takes a truly egregious cop-crime and some sharp lawyering to get past the lifelong-ingrained “Cops are always the good guys” belief.
And of course, ‘qualified immunity’ has nothing to do with anything in criminal court.
The laws are written to give cops the ability to do their job. This is a good thing if you had good cops. The downside is when you have a bad cop since the same law will protect the cop.
What is reasonable force? The force another officer would use in the same situation. How much force can you use? Enough to make an arrest, as such a refusal to comply, the next step can be a cop using a taser and taking you into custody. On paper, that sounds good until you see it used in the real world, where a 90 year old woman is tased over something trivial. It is an excuse to use force when a few minutes of conversation could have settled the matter or an ego check could have solved the issue.
Basically, you can’t charge a cop when they are complying with the law and the law gives broad rights to make an arrest and the amount of force used to make an arrest is broad as well.
It’s why I support reform. I see too much punching over stupid shit. I would rather see less physical striking and more joint manipulation. Punching to the face should be considered deadly force. Distraction strikes are supposed to be hits to distract the person and not beat the shit out of them. We needs cop who can think and say, he littered, should I beat him into submission over that?
It is a pet peeve of mine when people don’t understand what they want to change.
Qualified immunity isn’t as big a deal as people think. While it needs to be changed, it isn’t why cops are not convicted of crimes.
Cops are rarely convicted of crimes (in my opinion) because cop crimes rarely come to court. Even when there’s prosecution, everyone — judge, jury, prosecutors, defense, witnesses, certainly any reporters — walks in with a background of respect and admiration for police. They watched Hawaii Five-O and all the iterations of Law & Order, and listened to hysterical Republicans screaming about crime, and watched channel 7’s coverage of cops heroically hunting for some axe murderer on the subway. Everyone comes to the courtroom eager to give cops the benefit of every doubt.
It takes a truly egregious cop-crime and some sharp lawyering to get past the lifelong-ingrained “Cops are always the good guys” belief.
And of course, ‘qualified immunity’ has nothing to do with anything in criminal court.
The laws are written to give cops the ability to do their job. This is a good thing if you had good cops. The downside is when you have a bad cop since the same law will protect the cop. What is reasonable force? The force another officer would use in the same situation. How much force can you use? Enough to make an arrest, as such a refusal to comply, the next step can be a cop using a taser and taking you into custody. On paper, that sounds good until you see it used in the real world, where a 90 year old woman is tased over something trivial. It is an excuse to use force when a few minutes of conversation could have settled the matter or an ego check could have solved the issue.
Basically, you can’t charge a cop when they are complying with the law and the law gives broad rights to make an arrest and the amount of force used to make an arrest is broad as well.
It’s why I support reform. I see too much punching over stupid shit. I would rather see less physical striking and more joint manipulation. Punching to the face should be considered deadly force. Distraction strikes are supposed to be hits to distract the person and not beat the shit out of them. We needs cop who can think and say, he littered, should I beat him into submission over that?