Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

fire.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 543 posts

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#431

Post by FireBeyond »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #93
Arubis wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a sane, fair, and (crucially) long-term stable system, persons given privilege and authority over others are subject to a higher standard for their own behavior. The long-running US trend of the inverse (additional legal protections for positions of authority) is incredibly destructive. This is a moral and values judgment, yes, but it's not just that -- it communicates to the population at large that they should f…

One of the worst examples in the US is the consequence asymmetry for speech. Law enforcement and federal agents can lie as much as they like with impunity when dealing with citizens, but (a) it's a federal crime to lie to a federal officer (18 US Code § 1001, up to 8 years imprisonment), and (b) truly, anything you say to law enforcement when under any suspicion can and will be used against you in a court of law, eve…

Absurdities in US case law:

1. You do not assert the right to remain silent - you must state verbally that you are doing so. Otherwise the prosecution can describe your communication as "refused to cooperate with or answer questions from law enforcement" which is a "negative" finding, whereas the right to remain silent is at least meant to be interpreted neutrally.

2. Beware anything beyond the simplest statement: "Yo, I want a lawyer dawg" can be successfully argued in the (state) Supreme Court as "Defendant asked for a canine attorney. Law enforcement were unable to find one, but had fulfilled their obligation to attempt to provide counsel for the defendant. Therefore, any statements he made after his were done knowing he had no counsel and were as a result admissible."

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#432

Post by FireBeyond »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #238
freediddy wrote: post #155

The fact that taxpayers and not the police themselves have to pay the settlement is the worst part of this. Every settlement against the police should be taken from their pension fund. This is something I've been advocating for decades now, because it creates an incentive not to do things like this. Right now, good cops don't patrol bad cops because it won't affect them. By aligning the incentives right, it will mean…

That's a lot of liability for police. They would likely buy insurance against it.

So be it. I was a firefighter/paramedic. One of my state's laws about operating emergency vehicle in "emergency mode" (i.e. lights and sirens) is that the vehicle operator is permitted to disobey any and all road laws[1] provided they are doing so with due regard and with a presumption of fault in the event of any incident, i.e. you are default assumed to be at fault unless demonstrable otherwise. Such liability can transcend department or agency into personal liability against the operator.

How is that hedged against, in practice? Most departments have their SOPs for emergency mode driving, for example mine said "You can exceed the speed limit by no more than 20mph, and subtract 5mph for any confounding condition, such as fog, rain, nighttime without streetlighting" and "You must come to a stop or to a sufficiently slow speed that you can affirmatively clear your passage through an intersection without incident." Stay within those guidelines and the department and their insurer agrees to indemnify your personal liability. Outside of those, you're on your own.

That's tangential. I have no problem saying "police pension funds are responsible for these compensation claims". Then the fund itself can decide whether they want to police themselves better, seek insurance coverage at their expense, or (ideally!) both.

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#433

Post by FireBeyond »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #206
sidewndr46 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This distinction doesn't make sense. A police officer's job is to lie to you. Are we expecting jailtime for doing their job?

Then it shouldn't be a crime to lie to the officer. I genuinely don't think certain charges relating to preserving one's freedom should even be a crime in of it self. Unless you endanger others in an extreme manner, things like "resisting arrest", running from police, or attempting to escape prison shouldn't be charges within themselves. People love the phrase "you can beat the rap, not the ride", but that essentiall…

I believe in certain Scandinavian or northern European countries, there is no crime or additional punishmented meted out for attempting to or escaping from prison, as "the desire to be free is inherently human". You will be looked for, and retrieved and returned, to be sure, but you won't then be charged with escaping from custody.

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#434

Post by IAmBroom »

bmitch3020 wrote: post #313
IAmBroom wrote: post #199

Just a note to the many commentors hear gnashing their teeth that "the sheriff should have to pay, not the taxpayers!"... The article makes it pretty clear that the settlement was against the sheriff and others involved. Digging further[0]: "Morrow and Weems have been sued in their personal capacities and could “be on the hook for monetary damages,” a press release from Bushart’s legal team at the Foundation for Indi…

The sheriff isn't paying the settlement, the local government is (just about always does). The settlement comes with the agreement to drop the lawsuit.

Cite?

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#435

Post by hgappit »

Manuel_D wrote: post #106
okeuro49 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Linehan was arrested for making this post: > If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls This seems like a straightforward call to violence to me. And he was released after police ascertained that he had no intent to act on these statements. If someone made posts along the lines of "Christians…

[flagged]

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#436

Post by ericmay »

tialaramex wrote: post #427
ericmay wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Catchy, I suppose, but ultimately without much meaning.

Huh? It's a widely recognised proverb, you might as well say that "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" is without much meaning. You could insist it's wrong if you like, or that it somehow doesn't apply but meaning is its whole thing.

I would say that goose phrase is also without much meaning. It's just a phrase. Like ok, you said a phrase? So what?

Let's bring up the Iran war - you could say a few things about how it's wrong or something and I can just reply de oppresso liber.

Ok? That's not a discussion, it's a drive-by, feel good zinger.

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#437

Post by FireBeyond »

breezybottom wrote: post #353
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it shouldn't be a crime to lie to the officer. I genuinely don't think certain charges relating to preserving one's freedom should even be a crime in of it self. Unless you endanger others in an extreme manner, things like "resisting arrest", running from police, or attempting to escape prison shouldn't be charges within themselves. People love the phrase "you can beat the rap, not the ride", but that essentiall…

It's not. You might be thinking of perjury, which is lying under oath.

[flagged]

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#438

Post by FireBeyond »

hamdingers wrote: post #365
aeturnum wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right - but you are not considering that it's possible for a police department to be so bad as to be uninsurable. Even if the police continue to do misconduct, bad departments would get into situations where no insurer will cover them, and they are forced to make changes. It's not a perfect fix at all , but it would be a nice end-around for qualified immunity.

Then the state may do what it has done for habitually dangerous drivers and either make it illegal for private insurance to deny them or create a public option that hemorrhages taxpayer money (so back to where we are now, with extra steps). Just fire them after the first fuckup. It does not need to be this complicated.

There is actually a federal register for LEOs that have been terminated for cause or resigned to avoid termination.

The police unions that operate in the jurisdictions that employ 70% of US police have negotiated into their CBAs that the register “cannot be used for hiring or promotional decisions”. Read into that what you will.

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#439

Post by dhosek »

Terr_ wrote: post #403
solenoid0937 wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively: Make the insurance come out of the collective pensions of the police department.

The trick is to somehow ensure all the other officers (A) care about avoiding the cost while (B) are not motivated to collectively lie for one-another. It's not hard to imagine: Officer X does something bad through incompetence, Officer Y tells the truth about it, and then all the other officers take revenge on Y for "being a snitch" and "screwing our pensions." Once that pattern is in place, it continues even when O…

Except that’s how cops already act even without that incentive.

Re: Tennessee man jailed 37 days for Trump meme wins settlement after lawsuit

#440

Post by vitally3643 »

elicash wrote: post #71

I’ll cut against the grain here and say it’s ABSOLUTELY appropriate for taxpayers to pay the bill here. It’s pretty toxic that people don’t want to take responsibility for their own government in a democracy. In this case, it’s especially bad, given the sheriff is elected by the people directly. But I’d go even further and say even where control is less direct, we need incentives for voters to take this stuff serious…

Police aren't elected. Nor are judges in most cases.

There is literally no legal mechanism for anyone to hold a police officer responsible for anything. This is enshrined in the highest levels of the law and there is literally no way to undo it without a constitutional amendment or a supreme court decision. Citizens also have no influence over either of those mechanisms. Literally nobody has influence over the supreme court.

This isn't a matter of voting. The police are literally outside of the law and above consequence. This was set up by a panel of unelected judges without any possibility of influence by the people.

Do you seriously not undersrsnd how any of this works? This is not a problem that can be fixed with votes. This problem exists outside of the law and out of control of any and all elected officials. A constitutional amendment is the only conceivable way in which the people could overturn this decision.

Post reply on HN