Criminology and Police Problems
2 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Beck: Police need more leeway to explain disciplinary decisions

Beck: Police need more leeway to explain disciplinary decisions | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Police departments should have "greater leeway" for disclosing the disciplinary measures meted out against officers, Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said Wednesday.

The chief was responding to questions related to the confidentiality rules that have left the public in the dark about what discipline will be meted out to the officers involved in the fatal shooting of Ezell Ford, the unarmed black man whose story has echoed many others in recent years amid a growing movement nationwide to highlight and combat excessive use of force by police.

"I did not create the confidentiality laws that I'm bound by," Beck said. "I think that there should be greater leeway for the police department to make not only the decisions known, but the rationale behind the decision."

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

I agree with him for the most part as well.  At times like this I think it’s important for the public to know the reasons for certain decisions.  Providing that reason might help shed light on the situation, as well as ease the controversy.   To be required to remain silent about the situation doesn’t seem like the best decision, especially when tensions are so high. 

more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, June 18, 2015 3:46 PM

For the most part, I agree with Beck.  The chief needs to be able to report that he/she has acted responsibly.

JonHochendoner's comment, June 22, 2015 12:39 AM
These laws were designed to hide the disparity in justice between those in the law and those outside of it. Those opposed to greater transparency are fearful of these differences coming to light. I agree with Beck.
Montana Lee Nolan's comment, June 22, 2015 1:06 AM
I agree with him for the most part as well. At times like this I think it’s important for the public to know the reasons for certain decisions. Providing that reason might help shed light on the situation, as well as ease the controversy. To be required to remain silent about the situation doesn’t seem like the best decision, especially when tensions are so high.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

NYPD sergeant acquitted of drunken driving charge

“If he wasn't a cop, I would have said that he was not above the legal limit,” Nielson, of NYPD Highway District No. 2, told the prosecutor, according to court papers.

A law enforcement source said that Nielson was apparently trying to articulate that Stewart's inebriation was a close call, and he didn't want to appear to be showing favoritism.

Stewart was arrested on April 18, 2014, after he allegedly struck a parked car in Brooklyn. Nielson videotaped him refusing to take a Breathalyzer and passing the physical coordination test.

“He (Nielson) tanked the case,” the source said.

Nielson's unusual statement was not disclosed to defense lawyer Eric Sanders until after the sergeant had pleaded guilty to the DWI charge last March. Sanders successfully argued that his client should be allowed to withdraw the plea in light of the new evidence.

“I have argued from the outset that the client is guilty of nothing more than being a police officer,” Sanders told the Daily News.

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

Cops shouldn’t be given breaks.  It is a part of their job to represent proper behavior, and if an average citizen could get a dui under the same exact circumstances then so should a cop.  If not, then that reflects badly on all cops in general fueling more to the idea that they can get away with anything they want.  At the same time, the highway patrol man saying that he didn’t want to show favoritism shows that even law enforcement agents are concerned with how they are viewed by the public.  The patrol officer was afraid that he would be criticized for not giving him a dui, but also stated that if he wasn’t a cop we wouldn’t have done it in the first place.  This is a great example of how difficult it is for officers to deal with other officers who have made a mistake that many average Americans make, while trying to maintain an image that no one is exempt from the law.

more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, June 19, 2015 5:10 AM

Yeah, in my experience, this is the new normal.  We don't give breaks to fellow cops.  It's a good way to stop your career in its tracks.

Montana Lee Nolan's comment, June 22, 2015 12:48 AM
Cops shouldn’t be given breaks. It is a part of their job to represent proper behavior, and if an average citizen could get a dui under the same exact circumstances then so should a cop. If not, then that reflects badly on all cops in general fueling more to the idea that they can get away with anything they want. At the same time, the highway patrol man saying that he didn’t want to show favoritism shows that even law enforcement agents are concerned with how they are viewed by the public. The patrol officer was afraid that he would be criticized for not giving him a dui, but also stated that if he wasn’t a cop we wouldn’t have done it in the first place. This is a great example of how difficult it is for officers to deal with other officers who have made a mistake that many average Americans make, while trying to maintain an image that no one is exempt from the law.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Video: Santa Ana police raid pot shop, then eat its edibles, attorney says

Video: Santa Ana police raid pot shop, then eat its edibles, attorney says | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
A video that appears to show a Santa Ana police officer eating a pot-laced edible after raiding a pot shop has prompted a police investigation.

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

With the video being edited and released by the lawyer actually suing, it’s hard for me to actually make an opinion.  I can’t help but think that there is more to the story, as there usually is with videos that are released showing police brutality, but it really looks like they are behaving wrongfully.  With the video showing one officer eating what seems to be an edible and then showing another playing darts and then proceeding to play audio of other officers distastefully talking about the disabled woman, it all piles up into a view that doesn’t look too good.  I’m glad the Santa Ana Police Department acted so quickly with review of this investigation as well as making their officers take drug tests, and I really hope that the tests come back clean and they get their hands on the whole entire video.  However, if it comes to show that what seems to be true is in fact true then actions will need to be paid.  No officer, ever, should act this way.  Although marijuana has been normalized, officers are still not permitted to smoke or consume it – especially not on raids of marijuana dispensers.  Playing darts and smack talking like that is also distasteful.  We don’t want cops who disrespect us and treat us this way.  Officers shouldn’t act this way.  It’s just not right.  But I can see how the power factor of being in a position like this can make someone act like this.  It seems as if these officers are so high on their power that they are giving no care to the world about how they should actually be acting.  They are supposed to be responsible, however they aren’t.  Hopefully what we see isn’t the full story.

more...
Vincent Zamora's comment, June 21, 2015 4:32 AM
This video and type of behavior by police makes me sick to my stomach and is exactly why people like myself have such a huge amount of disrespect for cops and disregard for their so called services. i literally get sick to my stomach and start to sweat. These cops knew what they were doing and its obvious they have done this before. It's clear they had no good intentions with this "raid" as they thought they had dismounted and turned off all the video cameras. They stole, they bullied, and they consumed food knowing it was laced with marijuana. The only thing that is confusing about this story is that they are calling it an investigation. The worst that I fear will happen in this case is that they will just loose their jobs with no jail time. What they did was wrong morally and ILLEGAL. It doesn
Vincent Zamora's comment, June 21, 2015 4:35 AM
matter that this video was edited by the lawyer what the police were doing is are things they shouldn't have been doing in the first place. the only reason it was edited was due to time. This is a poor display of police work and doesn't give any encouragement to those that already do not have much confidence for them in the first place.
Yarima Lopez Rodriguez's comment, June 23, 2015 3:43 AM
The Santa Ana police department says an internal investigation dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power. Police corruption is a form of police misconduct in which law enforcement officers break their social contract and abuse their power for personal or department gain. This is our new police force across the nation. This is exactly what they have become. Police break the very laws they are supposed to up hold. Whenever you have a segment of the population, ie; police, who hold themselves as above the law, they will always abuse the rights of the ones they consider below them.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

New Mexico police officer fatally shot; person in custody

New Mexico police officer fatally shot; person in custody | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
By Russell Contreras Associated Press RIO RANCHO, N.M.€” A suburban Albuquerque police officer was shot and killed during a traffic stop, the first time a Rio Rancho officer was fatally shot in the

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

This is just terribly sad.  I feel like lately with the news blowing up about police brutality, racism, and mistreatment, that many people have forgotten that these men and women literally put themselves in constant danger in order to protect us.  Yes, there are many bad eggs out there that shouldn’t be officers, but not every single officer in this country abuses his/her badge.  The role of a police officer is a very dangerous one, and you never know exactly what will happen.  Gregg Benner, the officer who was killed, literally made one decision that cost him his life – one extra simple routine traffic stop.  The shooter that killed him, Andrew Romero, had already served jail time for manslaughter and illegal weapons use, and has been in constant battle with law enforcement and criminal justice agencies.  In court he stated that he shot the officer because he was afraid.  However, considering the vehicle was registered to Romero’s girlfriend, Benner didn’t even know about Romero’s presence while approaching the vehicle.  Benner didn’t shoot first, he didn’t draw his gun, and he didn’t threaten the shooter.  He simply walked up to the vehicle as if it was any other normal traffic stop, and was shot because of who he was – a police officer.  It’s just so sad.

more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, May 26, 2015 1:22 PM

At some point, the same leadership that gave lip service to the "righteous indignation" must wake up that this can't continue.  

Montana Lee Nolan's comment, May 30, 2015 4:13 PM
This is just terribly sad. I feel like lately with the news blowing up about police brutality, racism, and mistreatment, that many people have forgotten that these men and women literally put themselves in constant danger in order to protect us. Yes, there are many bad eggs out there that shouldn’t be officers, but not every single officer in this country abuses his/her badge. The role of a police officer is a very dangerous one, and you never know exactly what will happen. Gregg Benner, the officer who was killed, literally made one decision that cost him his life – one extra simple routine traffic stop. The shooter that killed him, Andrew Romero, had already served jail time for manslaughter and illegal weapons use, and has been in constant battle with law enforcement and criminal justice agencies. In court he stated that he shot the officer because he was afraid. However, considering the vehicle was registered to Romero’s girlfriend, Benner didn’t even know about Romero’s presence while approaching the vehicle. Benner didn’t shoot first, he didn’t draw his gun, and he didn’t threaten the shooter. He simply walked up to the vehicle as if it was any other normal traffic stop, and was shot because of who he was – a police officer. It’s just so sad.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

The Horrifically Racist Photo That Led to the Firing of a Chicago Cop | VICE | United States

The Horrifically Racist Photo That Led to the Firing of a Chicago Cop | VICE | United States | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Chicago Police Officer Timothy McDermott was fired last year for misconduct, and an old photo where he and another officer are holding rifles over a black man wearing antlers explains why.

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

After reading the article I scrolled down and read the comments posted by other readers across the internet (not classmates).  The majority of the comments talk about whether or not the black man on the ground with the antlers was in on the picture or not, arguing that he isn’t hog tied and he is purposely sticking his tongue out to be silly.  In all honesty, the picture is just horrible. I don’t understand how anyone could constitute this as being okay because of a joke.  A police officer is supposed to be a reliable individual that the community trusts to protect and serve them.  Joke or not, this photo does not show reliability or trust.  McDermott, the officer in question, made the poor decision to be a part of this photo.  Even if it was a joke his participation does not reflect well on the Chicago Police Department, and because of that I think the department was just in firing him.  The article states that the photo was taken after McDermott was hired as an officer, and that McDermott doesn’t really remember the photo but at the time he was just trying to fit in and get along with other officers.  The article also states that the status of the man on the ground is unknown (whether or not he was under arrest).  Either way this photo could be viewed as if the officers were making an arrest in a horribly unjust manner – and since the identity of the man on the ground is unknown, how could the department simply trust the word of McDermott?  In the end however, it’s all about public perception.  The public saw this photo of an officer mistreating an arrestee (assumedly) and because of that public perception and trust in police was negatively affected.  

more...
Rob Duke's comment, May 30, 2015 12:52 AM
Montana, yes, context is everything. We don't know what may have been happening (and I've seen some weird bonding go on in warrior cultures); but, as you note, none of this matters in the end because it is all about public opinion at this point. They also don't get the liberty that say Mel Brooks had with the Klu Klux Klan scene in Blazing Saddles (for context in case I'm dating myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=493pL_Vbtnc ).
Rob Duke's comment, May 30, 2015 1:01 AM
p.s. Montana: you caught me. The most important reason for using scoop.it (besides connecting you to real world issues relevant to the class as the events unfold) is that you're exposed to the entire world of experts (and non experts). The discussion board is constrained and, in my view, a dead petrie dish, but these forums have the potential to be so much more.
Dorothy Retha Cook's curator insight, June 7, 2015 5:11 PM

MISCONDUCT, FIRED  WHY WAS THERE NO CHARGES FILED AND CRIMINAL ACCOUNTABILTY?! THESE ARE ACTIONS THAT REVEAL TO THE POLICE THAT RACIAL TORMENT IS OK!  WHEN ITS DONE THE RESULTS ARE FIRED/RETIRED WITH OR WITHOUT PAY!

Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

'Spice' is a deadly ingredient

'Spice' is a deadly ingredient | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Veronica Eckhardt bent over the hospital bed, sponging paint onto the sole of her son's left foot.

Via Rob Duke
more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, July 31, 2014 10:17 AM

Heartbreaking why she's painting his foot...

Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

Rand Paul: 'Fight for justice now' on unfair sentencing

Rand Paul: 'Fight for justice now' on unfair sentencing | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Sen. Rand Paul announced a bill aimed at eliminating criminal sentencing rules that adversely affect minorities.

Via Rob Duke
more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, July 25, 2014 1:23 PM

What do you think?  Is he more right or more wrong?

Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 2:18 AM

I like what he is saying. How to implement this into our government and get all sides to agree will take a lot of prayer. By not giving people the support they need after they have served their time we only open the door for them to walk back in to prison. We must encourage true reform for these once criminal, so they stay just that once criminals not still criminals. Education is the key along with the support and skills to get and keep a job. If these people can’t take care of the demands we set on them such as child support or the fines and cost of lawyers they will slip into what comes easy to them. They will achieve what they need by any means possible. They will continue to sink lower in the economical class which in turn entrenches them even deeper into deviant and criminal behavior. If we let them keep the crime in the pass with hope of a better tomorrow. I believe most would strive for the better, cleaner, healthier, crime free life. Ran Paul goes on to talk more on education and on how the numbers of blacks and browns flood the jail and prisons. This is a major disadvantage for the ones in jail or prison but also for the woman left behind and the children left without a parent. All of these things add to the perpetuation of criminals from generation to generation. Let’s hope people that are saying these things and the people hearing them take action to improve them.
Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 2:18 AM

I like what he is saying. How to implement this into our government and get all sides to agree will take a lot of prayer. By not giving people the support they need after they have served their time we only open the door for them to walk back in to prison. We must encourage true reform for these once criminal, so they stay just that once criminals not still criminals. Education is the key along with the support and skills to get and keep a job. If these people can’t take care of the demands we set on them such as child support or the fines and cost of lawyers they will slip into what comes easy to them. They will achieve what they need by any means possible. They will continue to sink lower in the economical class which in turn entrenches them even deeper into deviant and criminal behavior. If we let them keep the crime in the pass with hope of a better tomorrow. I believe most would strive for the better, cleaner, healthier, crime free life. Ran Paul goes on to talk more on education and on how the numbers of blacks and browns flood the jail and prisons. This is a major disadvantage for the ones in jail or prison but also for the woman left behind and the children left without a parent. All of these things add to the perpetuation of criminals from generation to generation. Let’s hope people that are saying these things and the people hearing them take action to improve them.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

Muslim Extremist Arrested for Murder of Gays in Seattle | Clarion Project

Muslim Extremist Arrested for Murder of Gays in Seattle | Clarion Project | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Opposing Islamism isn’t just about terrorism and national security. Two Americans were killed on American soil due to Islamic ideology.

Via Rob Duke
more...
Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 7:14 PM
Not wanting to publicize or classify this crime as a hate or a terrorist act seems to be a running trend with the media in not reporting Muslim extremist crimes. In some failed sense of being politically correct we fail to report anything that could paint a negative light on these religious extremist, while the extreme and fanatics of other faiths are displayed at regular intervals. In some twist of events we have set the Muslim faith on an untouchable alter. Here is my state the common core is set to teach one year of world history completely dedicated to understanding the history and peace behind Muslims while Judaism and Christianity has been omitted from teaching curriculum. Several years ago seventh-graders at a San Francisco-area school were required to “become Muslims” for two full weeks as part of California’s world history curriculum. This included professing as “true” the Muslim belief that “The Holy Quran is God’s word,” reciting the Muslim profession of faith — “Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger” —and chanting “Praise be to Allah.”( http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/joseph-klein/islamizing-the-public-schools) Our own laws of separation of church and state turn a blind eye to this religion out of fear, but out of fear of what? If there is a group known for hating blacks and it has moved into a black populated area flags are raised and the situation is watched so why is the same not being when a known religious group continues to inflict harm on homosexual? People of the U.S.A have the right to know what is on our streets from the KKK to the Extreme Muslims. To give one more negative air time then another only gives strength to extreme cause of the one you fail to report on. It gives them a sense of strength and a belief that they are untouchable. For this man who killed these two Seattleites in WA the big failure is not getting him on his sex charges. I think this article bring into light the issue that we have a known group that openly preached hate towards several types and groups of people yet we do not suppress their negative action like we have with the KKK or the Black Panthers. The government needs to start supporting the American culture as a whole that treats all its people under the same law.
Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 7:14 PM
Not wanting to publicize or classify this crime as a hate or a terrorist act seems to be a running trend with the media in not reporting Muslim extremist crimes. In some failed sense of being politically correct we fail to report anything that could paint a negative light on these religious extremist, while the extreme and fanatics of other faiths are displayed at regular intervals. In some twist of events we have set the Muslim faith on an untouchable alter. Here is my state the common core is set to teach one year of world history completely dedicated to understanding the history and peace behind Muslims while Judaism and Christianity has been omitted from teaching curriculum. Several years ago seventh-graders at a San Francisco-area school were required to “become Muslims” for two full weeks as part of California’s world history curriculum. This included professing as “true” the Muslim belief that “The Holy Quran is God’s word,” reciting the Muslim profession of faith — “Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger” —and chanting “Praise be to Allah.”( http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/joseph-klein/islamizing-the-public-schools) Our own laws of separation of church and state turn a blind eye to this religion out of fear, but out of fear of what? If there is a group known for hating blacks and it has moved into a black populated area flags are raised and the situation is watched so why is the same not being when a known religious group continues to inflict harm on homosexual? People of the U.S.A have the right to know what is on our streets from the KKK to the Extreme Muslims. To give one more negative air time then another only gives strength to extreme cause of the one you fail to report on. It gives them a sense of strength and a belief that they are untouchable. For this man who killed these two Seattleites in WA the big failure is not getting him on his sex charges. I think this article bring into light the issue that we have a known group that openly preached hate towards several types and groups of people yet we do not suppress their negative action like we have with the KKK or the Black Panthers. The government needs to start supporting the American culture as a whole that treats all its people under the same law.
Elizabeth Sheppard's comment, July 27, 2014 1:53 AM
Nicholas, good points on this issue. Everyone wants to be "politically correct" and like you said, turns a blind eye to certain issues.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Amnesty: U.S. doesn't meet international standards for deadly police force

A 41-page report released by Amnesty International on Thursday found that states lack statutes that require officers to use deadly force only as a last resort to protect officers or others against imminent threat of death or serious injury.

The report also found that 13 states have laws that don't comply with U.S. constitutional standards and that all states lack specific accountability mechanisms for officer-involved killings, including obligatory reporting that a firearm has been used and prompt, impartial investigations into killings.

"Police have a fundamental obligation to protect human life," said Steven Hawkins, executive director of Amnesty International USA. "Deadly force must be reserved as a method of absolute last resort. The fact that absolutely no state laws conform to this standard is deeply disturbing and raises serious human rights concerns."

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

With police brutality playing a major role in recent media spotlight, it’s not surprising that Amnesty International did an investigative report.  With it being released however, it’s basically he said vs. she said.  In my opinion, Amnesty overstepped in essentially saying that the whole country isn’t up to standards on when to use lethal force and when to not.  I feel like that’s clearly not true, and while this is definitely a huge problem that needs to be addressed immediately, it is also important to note that the majority of departments out there do teach that lethal should only be used as the absolute last resort in a crisis.  However, I do think that it would be beneficial to actually write these words down as an official guideline (if not already).  With public opinion being influenced by media and one-sided reports (arguably one-sided; I actually believe that there is some truth in Amnesty’s report even though it seems to me that it’s a bit biased (at least from what I can gather from this article)), it would probably be in the best interest of departments to just watch their backs.  Why not make an official “lethal as last resort” clause? It would probably make a whole lot of people happy in the end.

more...
Montana Lee Nolan's comment, June 22, 2015 12:49 AM
With police brutality playing a major role in recent media spotlight, it’s not surprising that Amnesty International did an investigative report. With it being released however, it’s basically he said vs. she said. In my opinion, Amnesty overstepped in essentially saying that the whole country isn’t up to standards on when to use lethal force and when to not. I feel like that’s clearly not true, and while this is definitely a huge problem that needs to be addressed immediately, it is also important to note that the majority of departments out there do teach that lethal should only be used as the absolute last resort in a crisis. However, I do think that it would be beneficial to actually write these words down as an official guideline (if not already). With public opinion being influenced by media and one-sided reports (arguably one-sided; I actually believe that there is some truth in Amnesty’s report even though it seems to me that it’s a bit biased (at least from what I can gather from this article)), it would probably be in the best interest of departments to just watch their backs. Why not make an official “lethal as last resort” clause? It would probably make a whole lot of people happy in the end.
Jessica Leigh's comment, June 22, 2015 4:02 PM
I think that this article is slightly biased and sort of beats around the bush telling people what they think they already know. The general public is already convinced that police don't abide by the rule that lethal force should be used as a last resort. The article says that there are only 13 out of our 50 states that don't have the lethal use law, but they do not say whether or not each individual police department has that policy. The article makes it sound like it is the general policy of every department. Because this isn't an official law it sends people into an uproar. It would be greatly beneficial to these states to create these laws to calm the public down a bit. However, the absence of these laws do impede on human rights discussed in a report on Michael Brown. I think that this article could go both ways. It supports different sides, but in the long run decisions should be made to concrete human rights to ensure victims/offenders/police are all legally protected.
Yarima Lopez Rodriguez's comment, June 23, 2015 3:33 AM
What really needs to change is the police mentality of constant paranoia. The American police force today assumes every person they meet is a homicidal maniac with a gun (regardless of age, though they certainly have a soft spot for white people). Thus, almost every confrontation ends with brutality and in many cases, murder. Only by changing the police manual and the way the police perceive common citizens this overwhelmingly gloomy situation be fixed.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Suspect likely killed after attack on Dallas police headquarters

Suspect likely killed after attack on Dallas police headquarters | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
A man suspected of attacking Dallas Police headquarters early on Saturday, spraying it with gunfire and leaving explosive devices around the building, was shot and likely killed by snipers a few hours

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

I actually saw this on the news last night.  They covered the story and played a clip of an interview with the suspect’s father.  His father stated that his son was furious with the fact that he lost custody of his child and he had set his mind into the planning of this attack.  The suspect, James Boulware, had bought a ‘zombie assault vehicle’ of off craigslist the week before that was equipped with tiny windows that one could shoot guns out of.  An event like this just shows how officers are at risk all the times, even when they least expect it.  It wasn’t the police’s fault for Boulware’s loss of custody; it was his own.  Yet the police represent everything he hates and he took it out on them.  Many officers could have died that day.  This shows that not only are they always at risk, but they represent the system as a whole.  Those who have distaste for police probably do so because they have had a negative run-in with them.  It’s just sad this is what came of it. 

more...
Montana Lee Nolan's comment, June 14, 2015 10:32 PM
I actually saw this on the news last night. They covered the story and played a clip of an interview with the suspect’s father. His father stated that his son was furious with the fact that he lost custody of his child and he had set his mind into the planning of this attack. The suspect, James Boulware, had bought a ‘zombie assault vehicle’ of off craigslist the week before that was equipped with tiny windows that one could shoot guns out of. An event like this just shows how officers are at risk all the times, even when they least expect it. It wasn’t the police’s fault for Boulware’s loss of custody; it was his own. Yet the police represent everything he hates and he took it out on them. Many officers could have died that day. This shows that not only are they always at risk, but they represent the system as a whole. Those who have distaste for police probably do so because they have had a negative run-in with them. It’s just sad this is what came of it.
Rob Duke's comment, June 15, 2015 4:54 PM
Yes, this is a huge point that cops feel very personally: "we don't care how you tweek the law within the Constitution: just set the rules by which we may enforce the law and then let us do our work." It's an absurdity to cops that the rules are ok for one group, but not to another; or that this rule applies today, but not tomorrow. If you don't like the law or the system, fine: change it. We'll enforce whatever you want, but if you make the law vague, quit bitchin' when we use discretion. Of course, the Paradox of the Condemned Prisoner is that: if my life's on the line, I get a last request--even prisoners get as much--so, I'm going to do it my own way. The idea here is that I'd rather be tried by a jury of 12 than carried by 6 pallbearers. Circling back: cops believe that if you go against the law, you're going against society's laws, but that's not how the world seems to portray or perceive it--the world seems to think that these become disgreements between cops and the individual involved. I've been there 3 times and, I didn't personally know or have any animosity towards the people attacking me. Once guns were drawn, I took exception to those suspects, but not before. Cops see this as being extremely unfair for society to not take responsibility for their laws and the outcome of those laws.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

After Ezell Ford ruling, LAPD chief's video upsets Police Commission

After Ezell Ford ruling, LAPD chief's video upsets Police Commission | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Los Angeles police Chief Charlie Beck stared into a camera Tuesday shortly after the Police Commission condemned an officer's fatal shooting of a mentally ill black man to offer words of encouragement to his rank-and-file cops.

Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

I can see why the Police Commission is upset with the release of this video.  However, I am kind of on the fence on whether or not I believe that he was insinuating that the Commission doesn't support L.A. Police officers as a whole.  This was released after a huge and final decision was made that impacted the lives of many officers as well as civilians affected by Ford's death.  From what the L.A. police officers believe and know is that the officer in question shot Ford under the belief that his life was in jeopardy, and in their minds there should be no question as to whether or not the officer had rightfully acted.   Because of this belief, a majority of the officers were thrown off by the fact that the Commission stated the shooting wasn’t committed within L.A.P.D.’s policy.  From that I can’t help but believe that the intention of this video was to perk up the moral of the officers.  The ruling was made based off of one person’s words against another’s.  In situations such as these people tend to get upset and hurt, and from that I can see how the Police Commission views this video as the Chief implying ‘that although the Commission doesn’t support you, I do’.  They could either be right, or they could just be seeing what they want to see.  In the end I think the Chief was justified in making this video. 

more...
Montana Lee Nolan's comment, June 14, 2015 7:39 PM
I can see why the Police Commission is upset with the release of this video. However, I am kind of on the fence on whether or not I believe that he was insinuating that the Commission doesn't support L.A. Police officers as a whole. This was released after a huge and final decision was made that impacted the lives of many officers as well as civilians affected by Ford's death. From what the L.A. police officers believe and know is that the officer in question shot Ford under the belief that his life was in jeopardy, and in their minds there should be no question as to whether or not the officer had rightfully acted. Because of this belief, a majority of the officers were thrown off by the fact that the Commission stated the shooting wasn’t committed within L.A.P.D.’s policy. From that I can’t help but believe that the intention of this video was to perk up the moral of the officers. The ruling was made based off of one person’s words against another’s. In situations such as these people tend to get upset and hurt, and from that I can see how the Police Commission views this video as the Chief implying ‘that although the Commission doesn’t support you, I do’. They could either be right, or they could just be seeing what they want to see. In the end I think the Chief was justified in making this video.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Police tactics when dealing with the possible: "Suicide by Cop".

Police tactics when dealing with the possible: "Suicide by Cop". | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it

Lyons contacted the police non-emergency dispatcher on May 11 after catching Way drinking and lying on their bed holding a large knife. She said Way, a recovering alcoholic, “had a setback” after losing his job but did not threaten her with it.

“The only person Justin threatened was himself and I honestly don’t think he wanted to die,” she said, adding that the two St. Johns County sheriff’s deputies who responded to her call, 32-year-old Kyle Braig and 26-year-old Jonas Carballosa, who were carrying assault rifles, looked like they “were going into war” when they entered the residence.


Via Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

This is a very interesting and serious topic, and never before did I realize that instances like this even happen.  First, I would like to say that this article is very one sided giving the fact that none of the facts provided in the report come from the actual police department – they all come from the mourning family.  So with that in mind, I can’t help but to automatically feel as if there is an important chunk of the story missing.  Of course the family is angry with the officers – they’re in mourning.  However, at the same time I want to acknowledge that their thoughts could be completely justified.  The officers could have possibly responded in a different manner that would have resulted in Justin Way living.  If we had more information, maybe it would be easier to form a completely defensible opinion.  Still, like I said before, I just can’t help but believe that the officers did what they believed to be the right action.  They are trained a certain way, and if they thought that Justin Way was in danger to other people involved in the situation, then they most likely acted in what they believed to be the best possible way to handle that specific situation.

At the same time, the fact that it is standard to send an officer into a suicidal situation with an armed weapon, but not with a mental health professional, is definitely something that needs to be addressed.  In my opinion, it should be standard procedure to require a mental health professional to an emergency situation involving a suicide (or really any type of mental disturbance that could possibly be talked down).  However, I understand that this is not 100% realistic considering budgets and availability, but suicide by cop is not the answer.  Law enforcement is supposed to protect the people in the community, even if that constitutes as protecting them against themselves.

Officers all over our country definitely need to be trained more effectively on how to deal with situations such as these, and from the prospective of the public opinion (which matters considering public opinion really effects overall citizen trust in law enforcement, as well as law enforcement effectiveness) the current training and tactics are simply not good enough.  The officers might have acted in what they believed to be the best response, but, if the facts are true, this response was clearly not the most effective one. 

more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, May 29, 2015 5:27 AM

It's an interesting problem.  I came across this many times in my career, and was fortunate to always be able to talk these people down or have some tactical advantage over them.  Once my partner, Tony, and I had a similar situation and I, frankly, don't know how it would have gone had not Officer Tony crossed the room quickly and snatched the knife out of the women's hand as if she were merely a naughty child.  As I recall, he caught some heat for being John Wayne, but we didn't yet have Tasers, so had he not reacted, we might have been forced to shoot her.  A few weeks later, another partner did just that with a domestic violence suspect who turned towards him and racked a 12 gauge shotgun.  Two officers shot him only to find out that he was holding an empty gun.

I had just been in a shooting myself and one of these officers and I came back to work 72 hours later following our mandatory after-shooting legal and psychological screening.  Our first call back was a woman holding her ex at gun point threatening murder/suicide.  We responded and talked her out of the plan, took the gun, and escorted to a local mental ward.

This all happened within a month at one police department in the Los Angeles metro area.

So, how do we evaluate these incidents?

Montana Lee Nolan's comment, May 30, 2015 2:56 PM
This is a very interesting and serious topic, and never before did I realize that instances like this even happen. First, I would like to say that this article is very one sided giving the fact that none of the facts provided in the report come from the actual police department – they all come from the mourning family. So with that in mind, I can’t help but to automatically feel as if there is an important chunk of the story missing. Of course the family is angry with the officers – they’re in mourning. However, at the same time I want to acknowledge that their thoughts could be completely justified. The officers could have possibly responded in a different manner that would have resulted in Justin Way living. If we had more information, maybe it would be easier to form a completely defensible opinion. Still, like I said before, I just can’t help but believe that the officers did what they believed to be the right action. They are trained a certain way, and if they thought that Justin Way was in danger to other people involved in the situation, then they most likely acted in what they believed to be the best possible way to handle that specific situation.
At the same time, the fact that it is standard to send an officer into a suicidal situation with an armed weapon, but not with a mental health professional, is definitely something that needs to be addressed. In my opinion, it should be standard procedure to require a mental health professional to an emergency situation involving a suicide (or really any type of mental disturbance that could possibly be talked down). However, I understand that this is not 100% realistic considering budgets and availability, but suicide by cop is not the answer. Law enforcement is supposed to protect the people in the community, even if that constitutes as protecting them against themselves.
Officers all over our country definitely need to be trained more effectively on how to deal with situations such as these, and from the prospective of the public opinion (which matters considering public opinion really effects overall citizen trust in law enforcement, as well as law enforcement effectiveness) the current training and tactics are simply not good enough. The officers might have acted in what they believed to be the best response, but, if the facts are true, this response was clearly not the most effective one.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

The Hidden Ways Urban Design Segregates The Poor

The Hidden Ways Urban Design Segregates The Poor | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
There's a name for uncomfortable benches, hard-to-reach parks, and ubiquitous surveillance: disciplinary architecture.

Via Anita Woodruff, Jocelyn Stoller, Rob Duke
Montana Lee Nolan's insight:

It’s sad to think about how much effort has been put into architecture and design with the intent of pushing away the homeless and “less desired” low income segment of our population.  All of this effort could have been used towards helping these homeless and lower income people of our country by finding them housing, starting jobs, health care, etc.  These designs are only positively affecting the appearance of more well off neighborhoods, making them seem even more “desirable”.  It might be keeping crime rates down in these neighborhoods, but it is also pushing those crime rates into other less “nourished” neighborhoods that are already facing bad crime and hard times.  Besides the irritating design of inconvenient bus stops, benches, and public areas, the whole idea of “Poor Doors” also boggled my mind.  This separating of entrances is unnecessary segregation.  (The opening paragraph intrigued me to read more about “Poor Doors”, so I followed that link and read more on the subject).  This method of hiding the affordable housing inhabitants is disgusting and degrading.  There are other, as well as better-off and well-mannered ways, to provide affordable housing, that doesn’t make its inhabitants feel unworthy.

more...
Montana Lee Nolan's comment, August 18, 2014 11:09 PM
It’s sad to think about how much effort has been put into architecture and design with the intent of pushing away the homeless and “less desired” low income segment of our population. All of this effort could have been used towards helping these homeless and lower income people of our country by finding them housing, starting jobs, health care, etc. These designs are only positively affecting the appearance of more well off neighborhoods, making them seem even more “desirable”. It might be keeping crime rates down in these neighborhoods, but it is also pushing those crime rates into other less “nourished” neighborhoods that are already facing bad crime and hard times. Besides the irritating design of inconvenient bus stops, benches, and public areas, the whole idea of “Poor Doors” also boggled my mind. This separating of entrances is unnecessary segregation. (The opening paragraph intrigued me to read more about “Poor Doors”, so I followed that link and read more on the subject). This method of hiding the affordable housing inhabitants is disgusting and degrading. There are other, as well as better-off and well-mannered ways, to provide affordable housing, that doesn't make its inhabitants feel unworthy.
Anita Woodruff's comment, August 19, 2014 12:25 AM
I agree, Montana. The political climate in this country is so ugly right now. At least we can bring these problems to light through social media and try to shame those who want to criminalize being poor.
Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

Alleged burglar charged with murder after homeowner shoots accomplice

Alleged burglar charged with murder after homeowner shoots accomplice | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
A 26-year-old man accused of breaking into a Long Beach home was charged with murder Friday in the death of his accomplice, who was shot by the 80-year-old homeowner.

Via Rob Duke
more...
Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 2:01 AM
Here is a view into how laws are set up to discourage individuals from committing a crime. Here is also a case to show how not everyone can be swayed from committing a crime due to the possible implications. I really do agree and am impressed that the law that ties you to the murder of your associate in crime when he or she is killed by the victim. It not only adds a level of deterrence for some criminals but it also frees the victim legally to defend themselves. Criminals need to be held accountable for the actions of their crime partners. In this story the criminal that was killed would be on the right side of the dirt today if they just passed on the opportunity to rob that house. If one or the other just said pass the outcome would have differed tremendously but since none of them did one is dead and the other is now paying for it. I am happy to read this article not because a person died of because of the burglary but because I see a law that can be effective if they only increase the visibility of it. Till now I had never heard of such a law. These laws are the ones us everyday Joes need to hear. In part to sway the criminal but also to give the knowledge to the populist empowering them to not second guess themselves when the moment comes.
Nicholas Bessent's comment, July 26, 2014 2:01 AM
Here is a view into how laws are set up to discourage individuals from committing a crime. Here is also a case to show how not everyone can be swayed from committing a crime due to the possible implications. I really do agree and am impressed that the law that ties you to the murder of your associate in crime when he or she is killed by the victim. It not only adds a level of deterrence for some criminals but it also frees the victim legally to defend themselves. Criminals need to be held accountable for the actions of their crime partners. In this story the criminal that was killed would be on the right side of the dirt today if they just passed on the opportunity to rob that house. If one or the other just said pass the outcome would have differed tremendously but since none of them did one is dead and the other is now paying for it. I am happy to read this article not because a person died of because of the burglary but because I see a law that can be effective if they only increase the visibility of it. Till now I had never heard of such a law. These laws are the ones us everyday Joes need to hear. In part to sway the criminal but also to give the knowledge to the populist empowering them to not second guess themselves when the moment comes.
Dorothy Retha Cook's curator insight, July 29, 2014 3:30 PM

Well if you can be charged as a accomplice if you are a passenger in a car that runs over someone and cause serious bodily injuries in NC so why not charge a person with the death of a person he or she is committing a crime with. I wonder how many will be charged in white collar crimes!  or the crimes where mega money is cheated and stolen and placed in untouchable swiss or other bank accounts where the government cant touch and then they may or may not go to pent house jail living in the semi lap of luxury while doing not hard but easy time almost like they were free well they are!!! lets see who gets charged for white collar crimes and all those involved get to go down to!!

Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

How a Simple Dispute Between Two Neighbors Ended in Death

How a Simple Dispute Between Two Neighbors Ended in Death | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
Click through to see how a simple dispute over brush and trees between neighbors John Upton and Michael Vilkin ended in death.

Via Rob Duke
more...
Rob Duke's curator insight, July 25, 2014 12:38 AM

Another case study to support cops training in Alternative Dispute Resolution.

Rescooped by Montana Lee Nolan from Criminology and Economic Theory
Scoop.it!

Detroit police: Sleeping boy, 8, shot and killed

Detroit police: Sleeping boy, 8, shot and killed | Criminology and Police Problems | Scoop.it
DETROIT (AP) â€" An 8-year-old boy who was sleeping early Wednesday died after a bullet fired from outside went through the home's wall and into his bedroom, hitting him, Detroit police said. The child was struck once about 1:15 a.m. Wednesday at the Brewster Homes complex on Detroit's east side, Officer Adam Madera said, and pronounced dead about 45 minutes later at Children's Hospital of Michigan. An autopsy is scheduled Thursday, Wayne County medical examiner's office spokeswoman Mary Mazur said. The boy's name wasn't released by police, but The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press identify him as Jakari Pearson. Neighbors and passers-by started a makeshift memorial of stuffed bears, dogs and other toy animals on the front porch of the home. Late Wednesday morning, police still were at Jakari's home, a corner unit of several attached row houses.

Via Rob Duke
more...
No comment yet.