31–40 of 543 posts
Thank god 1st amendment works. But it should not get paid from taxpayer money, instea the offending officer ahould pay it
And to say the least, I doubt the officer has $800K.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The system needs to change so pursuing frivolous or weak charges doesn't work. We also need to reform bail, which has gone way outside of historical/constitutional norms. Turning it into an escalating back and forth of each side trying to imprison the other, is not conducive to the kind of change we need. To take a recent example, while I don't particularly like James Comey or Letitia James, I don't think they should…
> The system needs to change so pursuing frivolous or weak charges doesn't work. Agreed. Cases this knowingly frivolous, for example, should be treated as the criminal kidnapping or false imprisonment it would be if any other citizen perpetrated it.
Changing the system means removing the potential for abuse of power, not punishing abuse of power after the fact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes I feel like I live in an alternative reality because I very clearly remember thousands of people saying shit like that.
Are you sure they weren’t ironically referencing the Pelosi case to make a point about the double standard?
Poe’s law and all.
Thank god 1st amendment works. But it should not get paid from taxpayer money, instea the offending officer ahould pay it
I know it gets more complicated, especially with larger cities--and doubly so where states have control over police departments or similar. But in general, in a great number of cities and localities, this judgment alone would have a big impact on oversight and governance of the department, probably even if the governing body also disliked the plaintiff's political views. $835k is almost 3 mills of property tax revenue in my city. So, that's my $0.02.
I did not expect to read that the victim was a retired law enforcement officer. This whole case is weird. I’m glad he won a settlement but I would like to see some actual accountability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The system needs to change so pursuing frivolous or weak charges doesn't work. Agreed. Cases this knowingly frivolous, for example, should be treated as the criminal kidnapping or false imprisonment it would be if any other citizen perpetrated it.
How is that an example? Whatever you do now doesn't work retroactively. Changing the system means removing the potential for abuse of power, not punishing abuse of power after the fact.
The point of such a thing is to deter similar conduct in the future.
The fact that this isn't a crime, and that qualified immunity typically means they can't even be held responsible civily, is part of what encourages police to commit misconduct like this.
The only folks punished here were the local taxpayers footing the bill.
The path to solving a culture that overincarcerates is not by incarcerating those involved in perpetuating that culture. We need to tame the impulse to throw people in jail for doing things we dislike, not just point it at different targets. I see several comments saying that criminal charges should be brought over this. That is not the way.
If you don't hold people accountable for removing the liberty of others without just cause, those who abuse their power will continue to run rampant.
Nobody should have this power, and then abuse of power wouldn't be an issue.
The sheriff that arrested him should face criminal charges for misuse of authority. That he doesn't reflects a structural weakness in US law. In most European legal systems a law enforcement officer overstepping his legal authority would face criminal charges for it.
The sheriff that arrested him should face criminal charges for misuse of authority. That he doesn't reflects a structural weakness in US law. In most European legal systems a law enforcement officer overstepping his legal authority would face criminal charges for it.