Police Problems and Policy
10.6K views | +7 today
Follow
 
Scooped by Rob Duke
onto Police Problems and Policy
Scoop.it!

Civil suit against GoDaddy: Revenge porn should be criminal

Civil suit against GoDaddy: Revenge porn should be criminal | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
The civil lawsuit is going to fail. The actions of those sick ex-boyfriends and ex-husbands who posted the content should be criminal.
Rob Duke's insight:

Should this be illegal?  If the photos are given freely, who owns them?  Is this just a license for certain uses?  Are people ever pressured into taking these type of photos?

more...
Jenna Alatalo's comment, January 28, 2013 1:51 AM
I think it should be illegal as well, but I also want to raise the issue of how responsible these women (or men) are being when they are creating these images. Technology today is outstanding and so very available--it give us available information, makes us available at all times, etc. If I take a photo of my naked body and present it to my fiance, I would say that he owns the photo now. If we were to divorce, I could only hope that those photos were not shared.

This also brings light to teen bullying. I think along with our media's perception of "sexy" combined with the technology bit, young girls feel way too comfortable with posing in front of their Instagrams and taking naked photos to pass onto their boyfriends. It makes them feel sexier which makes them feel older and more powerful, but combining that with the immaturity that is actually present makes for an awful situation. Are people pressured? They very well could be--especially those in young relationships.

I definitely think that people need to be cautious when sending these types of pictures out to anyone. A good general rule of thumb is--would you want your boss or grandma to see these? If not, you should probably put your clothes back on.
Joshua Congleton's comment, January 28, 2013 4:49 PM
This is definitely an ethical issue. While these pictures are often given "freely," they are obviously not given out for the whole world to see, otherwise the woman would send the pictures to a website herself. They are given out in confidence that the recipient will keep them private. Then again, text messages CAN be public record, and can be used in the court of law. This is really a hard case to crack! I do not think that people SHOULD share this pictures, but I know it does happen, and sometimes unintentionally. It is hard for people to not share these images sometimes. Intimacy in a couple is one thing that is soley theirs to share. These images show how close they are, and are meant to draw them closer. When that privacy is breached, though, it can be hurtful, embarrassing, and even deadly. Should cases such as this be prosecuted? I say yes, but the circumstances as to whether or not the images were originally coerced should be carefully examined. If the images were shared freely, it should be more accepted as public domain. When sharing these types of images, people should assume that they could be intercepted, and/or accidentally viewed by someone other than the intended purpose, or could be shared by the recipient. It should be assumed private, but the sender still should be careful.
Robert Tompkins's comment, January 29, 2013 10:46 PM
I feel that this should not be made illegal. I agree that it is not nice to put photos of people on websites without their consent, but they gave their consent the minute that they gave the photo's to another person. There was nothing stopping someone in the old days of taking a polaroid and passing it around. This is the new version of that.

If people have a problem with someone else seeing them naked, dont allow it in the first place. Dont give your husband/boyfriend any photo's. dont allow them to take them, and you wont have a problem. If you put it on a digital media, there is nothing stoping anyone else from accessing it and putting it online.

The only part that i believe should be illegal is the posting of name and personal information with the picture without the consent of the person. The posting of name and other information by itself is a mute point because anyone with the want will find that information anyhow.
Police Problems and Policy
Examining the possibilities of abuse of power without the constraint of New Public Administration.
Curated by Rob Duke
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Young boy sets up doughnut stand for his police superheroes

Oliver Davis, 6, wants to be a police officer when he grows up. He says police officers are his superheroes. Oliver set up a doughnut and lemonade stand on Friday and invited police to stop by for refreshments.
Rob Duke's insight:
I want to be mad, but he has donuts....
more...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, Today, 1:48 PM
Haha to your comment Rob. This is so sweet. My son one time insisted he gave a can of soda to all the ambulance crew when they came to take me away one time. He said they needed their energy for taking care of his mommy. This little boy seems so adorable. To already have such a strong sense of what he wants to do at the age of 6 is wonderful. I just hope our school system and our culture of police violence doesn't soil him before he becomes an adult.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

LA Sheriff Calls for Forensic Specialists to Analyze Videos

LA Sheriff Calls for Forensic Specialists to Analyze Videos | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
David McNew/Getty Images
FILE - Unlike US Attorney General Jeff Session, Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell says there are benefits to federal agreements mandating reforms at law enforcement agencies
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has proposed hiring forensic video specialists to analyze deputy-involved shootings and other critical incidents.
The request for 32 specialists is part of a $55 million-a-year body camera proposal that Sheriff Jim McDonnell sent to the LA County Board of Supervisors on Friday, reports NBC4 media partner KPCC.
Analysts would look for glitches caused by things like video compression, which could fail to capture or misrepresent critical fractions of a second, said Sheriff's Capt. Chris Marks, adding that even a quarter of a second could be critical in an officer-involved shooting because of the speed with which a person could turn toward or away from an officer.
Parris Ward, an outside consultant to the Los Angeles Police Department who reviews videos for them on an as-needed basis and who has been an expert witness for the sheriff's department in cases involving dash cam and security video, said compressed video rarely makes or breaks a case.
Rob Duke's insight:
We thought storage was going to be the big cost item for body cams, but personnel to manage the unit are proving to also be costly.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

ESTATE OF LOPEZ v. GELHAU | 149 F.Supp.3d 1154... | 20160121774| Leagle.com

ESTATE OF LOPEZ v. GELHAU | 149 F.Supp.3d 1154... | 20160121774| Leagle.com | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Christian Fabian Pereira, Arnoldo Casillas, Casillas, Moreno & Associates, A Professional Law Corporation, Montebello, CA, for Plaintiffs.

Steven Corson Mitchell, Geary Shea O'Donnell Grattan & Mitchell, P.C., Santa Rosa, CA, James V. Fitzgerald, III, McNamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Walnut Creek, CA, Jesse F. Ruiz, Robinson & Wood, Inc., San Jose, CA, Robert Wayne Henkels, Office of the Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, United States District Judge.

Defendants' motion for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on December 9, 2015. Plaintiffs Estate of Andy Lopez, Rodrigo Lopez, and Sujay Cruz ("plaintiffs") appeared through their counsel, Arnoldo Casillas. Defendants Erick Gelhaus and County of Sonoma ("defendants") appeared through their counsel, Steven Mitchell. Having read the papers filed in conjunction with the motion and carefully considered the arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On October 22, 2013, at approximately 3:15pm, 13-year-old Andy Lopez ("Andy") was walking along a sidewalk in Sonoma County, carrying a toy rifle. See Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"), ¶ 20. According to defendants, the rifle was designed to look like a real AK-47 assault rifle, and the orange tip used to distinguish toy rifles had been removed. See Dkt. 63 at 6-7.

Two Sonoma County Sheriff's deputies, Erick Gelhaus and Michael Schemmel, were patrolling the area at the time. Though the deputies had not received any reports about an individual carrying a weapon, they noticed Andy on their own, and decided to approach him. SAC, ¶¶ 23-24.

The deputies stopped their patrol car and activated its siren and emergency lights. Dkt. 63 at 4. At that time, Andy was approximately 35-40 feet away from the deputies, with his back facing towards them. SAC, ¶¶ 24-25. Either one or both of the officers (the parties dispute this fact) drew their weapons and pointed them at Andy, and at least one of the deputies shouted out a command to Andy (defendants claim that Gelhaus gave a command to "drop the gun!"). See SAC, ¶¶ 24, 26; Dkt. 63 at 5. In response, Andy turned towards the deputies. SAC, ¶ 27. There is no dispute that, up until this point, Andy was holding the rifle in one hand, at his side, pointing down. Dkt. 63 at 5. Defendants claim that, as Andy turned towards the deputies, they observed the barrel of the rifle "come up and towards them," while plaintiffs allege that "[t]he toy gun was at his side." See Dkt. 63 at 5; SAC,
[149 F.Supp.3d 1157]
¶ 27. As Andy turned, Gelhaus fired his pistol, hitting Andy and sending him to the ground. SAC, ¶ 30. Gelhaus continued to fire at Andy while he lay on the ground, and Andy ultimately died while on the sidewalk. SAC, ¶¶ 30, 34.

Andy's parents, Rodrigo Lopez and Sujay Cruz, filed this suit on November 4, 2013, on behalf of themselves and the Estate of Andy Lopez. The operative second amended complaint was filed on June 20, 2014, and asserts five causes of action: (1) unreasonable seizure under section 1983 against defendant Gelhaus, (2) municipal liability for unconstitutional customs/practices under section 1983 against defendant Sonoma County, (3) interference with familial integrity (styled as a substantive due process violation) under section 1983 against defendants Gelhaus and Sonoma County, (4) wrongful death against defendants Gelhaus and Sonoma County, and (5) a "survivorship" claim against defendants Gelhaus and Sonoma County.
Rob Duke's insight:
Here's the 9th Circuit case that I discuss below.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

NOPD officer killed in New Orleans East shootout

NOPD officer killed in New Orleans East shootout | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
-
A gunman killed a New Orleans police office overnight on Friday morning in eastern New Orleans.

The officer was patrolling the area of Tower Lane and Lake Forest Blvd. when he saw something suspicious, according to NOPD Superintendent Michael Harrison.

When the victim got out of his car, the perpetrator fired on him. The officer fired back. Both men were hit in the shootout. The officer collapsed at the scene, while the perpetrator ran to a nearby apartment complex. Harrison said the shooter is believed to be a 30-year-old man.
more...
Daniel Heppeard's comment, October 15, 11:40 PM
My condolences go out to the police officer whose life was ended abruptly. It saddens me to see that people are so much against the police that they are willing to take another man's life away from him. May this police officer rest in peace.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

State Supreme Court to decide if L.A. County sheriff can give names of problem deputies to prosecutors

State Supreme Court to decide if L.A. County sheriff can give names of problem deputies to prosecutors | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it

Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell is seeking to give prosecutors the names of deputies with histories of dishonesty and similar misconduct. (Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)
Maya LauContact Reporter
The debate over a secret list of 300 Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies with histories of dishonesty or similar misconduct is now before the California Supreme Court.

In an order filed Wednesday, the court said it would consider an appeal made by Sheriff Jim McDonnell in his attempt to reveal to prosecutors the names of deputies whose past wrongdoing could call into question their credibility as witnesses in criminal proceedings.

The announcement is the latest turn in a closely watched case pitting the privacy rights of law enforcement officers against the rights of criminal defendants. The issue has inspired an unusual alliance between professional associations representing some public defenders and prosecutors in California — as well as state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California — all of whom are publicly supporting McDonnell’s position in the case.

The legal battle began a year ago when the union that represents rank-and-file deputies in L.A. County went to court to block McDonnell from giving the list to prosecutors, arguing that doing so would violate state officer confidentiality laws and cast an unfair light on deputies whose mistakes were long ago.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Family of man killed by Seward police officer makes public call for answers

The family said they were able to view Micah McComas’ body this week, but that only raised more questions about the Oct. 1 shooting.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

How the Mental Health Industry Fails the Mentally Ill

How the Mental Health Industry Fails the Mentally Ill | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
A new book argues that mental health authorities’ failure to address the public safety challenge posed by individuals with serious mental illness unfairly shifts the burden to police and the courts. DJ Jaffe, the author, explains why in a conversation with The Crime Report.
Rob Duke's insight:
Combine this with David Rothman's "The Discovery of the Asylum: Order and disorder in the new republic" and you've got a good Winter break reading list.
The how did we get here and why isn't it working....
more...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 14, 4:38 AM
This sounds like a really good read, and actually a topic I covered for a project a couple of years back. I'll have to look for David Rotman's book as well. Thanks for the tip! I am very open about the fact I spent three weeks in a mental institution for severe anxiety and mood swings due to my physical health problems. One thing that I think pushes the negative stereotype associated with the mentally ill is the fact that we are not taught the brain as an organ the same way we are taught about other organs. Growing up you learn that people sometimes have a bad heart and need to take heart medication or that someone has cancer and needs chemo. But you I was never taught that the brain is an organ just like any other, and just like any other, sometimes it gets sick and you need to take medication for it. This is one of the reasons I get offended at the idea of not wanting to work under someone who was on Prozac as you were talking about in class. I myself am on Prozac and another psych drug. Anyone with my list of medical complications is bound to have some mental problems to go along with it! Going back to the article, I think people forget the whole "the brain is an organ" thing because we lock up people sometimes, a lot of times, who have mental illnesses. We don't lock up people with bad hearts or failing livers. It makes people with mental illnesses seem dangerous. And yes, of course there are many who are, but not all of them. All of us. Psych wards and mental institutions feel almost prison like. You sleep on matrices on cement blocks, you can't have your door closed, they tell you when to eat and when to take medications, they require you to take classes, they limit what you're exposed to from the outside world, and they basically strip you of your identity. To me, that's the mental healthcare industry basically saying people with mental illnesses are closer o prisoners than patients.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Troopers confirm Seward officer shot and killed man during traffic stop

The new information was the first acknowledgement by investigators that McComas was handcuffed just before he was killed.
more...
DS's curator insight, October 11, 11:48 PM

"Controlling Street level Police Discretion is a high priority. "Developing measures of Police discretion that matter to the Police, the public, and administration is important. "Coping with "situational exigencies" can lead to discretion control problems. Studies show how the suspect responds affects the officers use of discretion. "Democratic police accountability means little without the capacity to control officer discretion." - Mastrofski. The Reasonable Officer standard encourages practical policing. The search of the suspects wallet was not for weapons. The use of lethal force in the line of duty should be subject to a stricter standard. The manner in which Police came to handle this incident will be reviewed.  

Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Could scrapping gang list have unintended consequences?

Could scrapping gang list have unintended consequences? | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Could scrapping gang list have unintended consequences?, Local News, Portland local News, Breaking News alerts for Portland city.
more...
DS's curator insight, October 12, 12:24 AM

The Consequences of Labeling are an excessive use of force. The persons self-image is damaged as a result of their reflected appraisals; their self-image changes as a result low-esteem leads to increased secondary deviance. The poor and powerless get labeled as they are unable to defend themselves against the negative consequences of labeling. The persons identity is transformed stigmatizing offenders and contributing to the dramatization of evil. Social Reaction theory. -Lemert.

 

This Legislation is a good way to Control Street Level Police discretion, hard/soft profiling, and the use of Force. Unchecked discretion can lead to excessive force. Officers repeatedly placed in "situational exigencies" may experience stress, decreasing their capacity to control crime. There is a value trade-off, public safety vs. individual liberties. This will influence the evidence available in a field setting. Unintended Consequence Imminent.

Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

LAPD pressured murder confession from teenager, court rules in overturning conviction

LAPD pressured murder confession from teenager, court rules in overturning conviction | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
LAPD pressured murder confession from teenager, court rules in overturning conviction
more...
Riley Westfall's comment, October 9, 11:12 PM
Westfall's Insight: They should have allowed him his rights to see a lawyer.
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 12, 12:23 PM
This short article did not mention if there was a child social worker in the room while the then-14-year-old was being questioned. It does sound like his rights were violted and, even if he did do the crime, officers should not be allowed stall tactics while waiting for a lawyer or promising to go easy on them if they skip the lawyer and tell the truth. His rights ere for sure violated.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Police bodycam shows officer fatally shoot a man who ran. Prosecutors say it was justified.

The authorities in Salt Lake City have cleared a police officer in the fatal shooting of a man they accused of turning towards them with a knife, ruling that the use of deadly force was justified despite video that appears to show the man running away.
Rob Duke's insight:
Right at 31 seconds you see the man turn and open a folding knife.
more...
Sam Unruh's comment, October 9, 12:24 AM
I agree with the prosecutors about the shooting being justified. Going off of the 21-foot-rule, the officers were well within range of being stabbed if the suspect decided to charge after pulling the knife.
Krista Scott's comment, October 12, 4:55 PM
Okay, I can see why the shooting was justified. My question I have is why do we instantly use deadly force? Couldn't the have subdued the perp via using a taser?
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

President Johnson's Crime Commission Report, 50 Years Later

President Johnson's Crime Commission Report, 50 Years Later | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
1. The Commission said there was no reliable research about crime, so it collected data on an unprecedented scale.

Legacy: The creation of the first national Crime Victimization Survey. Today, the Bureau of Justice Statistics samples households every year to collect information about crimes that are both reported and not reported to police.

2. The Commission called for improved training and professionalization for law enforcement

Legacy: Many police departments, especially in large cities, have training departments.

3. The Commission recognized and said there must be ways to lessen the tension between police and communities

Legacy: The development of the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program

4. The Commission recommended that Congress create a new office in the Justice Department devoted to assisting state and local law enforcement departments

Legacy: The creation of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, the federal agency provides federal funds to state and local law enforcement for local crime initiatives and education

Although, the Johnson Report focused on actions government could take, the Commission stated that controlling crime was the business of every American and American institution. It called for taking steps beyond cooperating with police or accepting jury duty and declared that citizens must respect the law, refuse to cut corners and reject the cynical argument that "anything goes as long as you don't get caught."
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Officers Not Charged For Fatal Shootings - By Imojadad - October 5, 2017 - SF Weekly

Officers Not Charged For Fatal Shootings - By Imojadad - October 5, 2017 - SF Weekly | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Two fatal officer-involved shootings have been found legally justified, the district attorney’s office announced today. San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón declined to filed criminal charges against police officers in two fatal shootings.  The oldest shooting in the bunch dates back to Sept. 25, 2014 involved a car crash at California and Battery streets. Giovany …
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

A hurricane came, so where did all the cops go? The sheriff is investigating

A group of Monroe County Sheriff’s Office employees could be fired after failing to report for duty during Hurricane Irma.

Seven people already have quit the agency, Sheriff Rick Ramsay said last week.

Another nine or 10 employees, mostly detention deputies, are being investigated by the Sheriff’s Office’s Internal Affairs department for their actions when the decision was made to send 458 inmates from the Stock Island detention center to Palm Beach County on Sept. 9, the day before the Category 4 storm arrived.
Rob Duke's insight:
I don't know what happened, so here's commentary that is more general and not directed directly at this particular situation.

The way you ensure that cops show up to work during a hurricane or other disaster is to first take care of their families....that means having a plan to pick up family and take them to something like the command post or the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).  If cops know their families are safe, then they'll be focused on the job.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Texas fast food worker fired for refusing to serve officers

A worker at a popular Texas-based fast food chain has been fired after refusing to serve two police officers.

Denison Police Chief Jay Burch says in a Facebook post that his officers were trying to get something to eat at the Whataburger early Saturday when an unidentified female employee declined to serve them. Burch says the employee cursed at the North Texas officers and alleged "cops beat up my boyfriend and are racists."
Rob Duke's insight:
Not the same thing, but cops do know a tiny bit about discrimination.
more...
Daniel Heppeard's comment, October 15, 11:28 PM
This kind of reaction towards cops is just sickening to me. Granted, there are some police officers who have suffered from the corrupt side of the police force, but not all of them are like that. You are completely correct, Rob, in saying that cops do know about discrimination. Just because one cop beat up the employee's boyfriend does not mean that all of them had this same course of action in mind.
Jessica Obermiller's comment, Today, 1:53 PM
I know that cops face discrimination, everyone does really if you look hard enough. This was not an okay way for this woman to react. If she had a problem with a customer, she should have gone to her boss or simply asked someone else to take his order. I know we talk more in class about when cops are the ones being discriminatory, and as I have stated in class, I've been on the brunt end of that one. Once during my headscarf research and a few times in my youth (before Alaska so prior to 1995) when I was discriminated against or my family was because we were a mix-raced family or because I'm a "half-breed Mexican". But no one deserves discrimination. And I know what it is like to become scared or upset with one or two specific officers and try hard not to lump everyone together. Just because, if it really did happen, this happened to her by some officers, does not mean all officers are the same. Even I have to remind myself that some days.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Nebraska Supreme Court agrees that sheriff's deputy has immunity in arrest of elderly woman

Nebraska Supreme Court agrees that sheriff's deputy has immunity in arrest of elderly woman | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
A lower court was correct when it said a Lancaster County sheriff’s deputy has immunity from a lawsuit over a no-knock search warrant and the arrest of an elderly woman in 2012, the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled Friday.

A majority of judges said that while they don’t condone the type of behavior Marilyn Waldron said she experienced, dismissing the lawsuit was appropriate.

Deputy Sheriff James Roark and his partner entered Marilyn Waldron’s Lincoln home in February 2012 to serve a warrant on her grandson. Roark was wearing jeans, a sweat shirt and a hat.

Waldron later said that she was taught by her late husband, a Nebraska State Patrol captain, to always ask for an officer’s identification.

Lancaster County Sheriff Terry Wagner said Roark did display his ID badge — on a lanyard around his neck — during the incident. Roark also contended that Waldron physically obstructed his attempts to arrest the grandson and then resisted when he tried to handcuff her.

Waldron argued that Roark violated the knock-and-announce rule. She also argued that her arrest was unreasonable and unconstitutional because there was no probable cause to arrest her and because Roark used excessive force in handcuffing her.

Waldron, who was 78 at the time, said that as she was put in handcuffs, her glasses broke and her rotator cuff was torn. She filed the lawsuit more than a year later.

An internal Sheriff’s Office investigation found that Roark followed policy and procedures, and he was not disciplined.

The high court agreed with the lower court that Roark was entitled to qualified immunity on Waldron’s knock-and-announce claim and on her unlawful arrest claim.

Two judges disagreed with Friday’s ruling. Waldron blocked the deputies because she thought they were intruders, Judge John F. Wright wrote.
Rob Duke's insight:
This case and the one below from California are likely to be bundled up and heard together at the Supreme Ct.  The 9th Court of Appeals ruled that a California officer was not entitled to qualified immunity....so we'll see what happens.
more...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, Today, 1:59 PM
It sounds a lot to me like things were not handled the way they should have been handled. They had the warrant but did not execute it properly. We have no way of knowing what kind of condition Waldron was in at the time, but I would like to think that most 78 year old women do not need to be so roughly put in cuffs that it tears her rotator cuff. Personally, I am glad to hear the high court agreed that Roark was qualified immunity on Waldron's knock-and-announce claim and on her unlawful arrest claim. Officers need to follow the rules, all of them, if we want a society that is controlled by a governing force, such as the police. We have to be able to trust them as a community and a culture. Things like this is why we are looking at possibly sliding into the Homeland Security Era of policing and we will if we are not careful.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Guest column: It’s time to end our discriminatory jury rule in Louisiana

Guest column: It’s time to end our discriminatory jury rule in Louisiana | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Arrested at 17, Kia Stewart spent 10 years in prison, working the fields of Angola, for a crime he did not commit. A jury convicted him by a vote of 10 to 2 based on the testimony of one lone — and mistaken — eyewitness. The Innocence Project of New Orleans conducted an investigation and uncovered 18 witnesses who either saw the crime and said that Kia was not the shooter, heard the real perpetrator confess, or confirmed his alibi.

Today, Kia is a free man. But only in Louisiana or Oregon would Kia ever have been convicted by a vote of 10 to 2 and sentenced to life in prison. In all other 48 states and in the federal courts, felony convictions must be unanimous. These jurisdictions place a burden on prosecutors to prove their cases beyond all reasonable doubts. In Louisiana and Oregon, that burden of proof is diminished because a person can be convicted even though some jurors have reasonable doubts, as the two jurors in Kia’s case did.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear arguments about the unconstitutionality of non-unanimous verdicts in Dale Lambert v. State of Louisiana. Mr. Lambert, like Kia Stewart, was convicted of second-degree murder by a jury vote of 10-2. The framers of the U.S. Constitution intended that juries in felony cases be unanimous, but the architects of the Louisiana Constitution had other ideas. In 1898, Louisiana changed its constitution to allow for non-unanimous jury verdicts in our criminal justice system. According to constitutional convention delegate Thomas Semmes, the mission of the convention was “to establish the supremacy of the white race in this state.”
Rob Duke's insight:
Leadbelly's song about the "Midnight Special" is about Angola Prison (you've likely heard this song in the Credence version).  The legend was that if a prisoner dreamed of walking on the tracks and the Midnight Special coming towards them, then they'd get paroled sometime within the next year: thus, Ledbetter wants the Midnight Special to "shine it's light on me".
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Dubai police test out hovering motorbikes to join future patrol fleet  

Dubai police test out hovering motorbikes to join future patrol fleet   | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Dubai police are testing out futuristic hovering motorbikes which they hope will one day from part of its hi-tech patrol fleet.
more...
Brianne Frame's comment, October 15, 11:13 PM
Looks like something from Star Trek. Like all technology however could be useful, but can also be misused.
Daniel Heppeard's comment, October 15, 11:32 PM
Well, isn't this a total advancement in technology? They didn't get the hover-board from Back to the Future right, but they did manage to create a hover-bike! I believe that this kind of technology could be beneficial to the force, but it could also lead into despair, just like Brianne noted above.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

DASHCAM: Officer Shoots at Actor Holding Prop Gun - Calibre Press

DASHCAM: Officer Shoots at Actor Holding Prop Gun - Calibre Press | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
Officers arrived just in time to stop a masked gunman trying to flee from the bar he’d just robbed.

“Drop the gun! Drop the gun now!” the police officer yells.

The man turned toward the police and an officer fired a shot that missed hitting the man wearing a ski mask.

Jim Duff, an actor, dropped the fake gun and pulled off the mask while telling the officers, “This is a movie set,” The Associated Press reported.

The entire scene, which took place in Crawfordsville, Indiana, was caught on the officer’s bodycam released by Indiana State Police, the Miami Herald reported Tuesday.

It’s unknown what movie was being filmed.

No one was hurt on the scene.

Turns out, on Sept. 26, someone had called 911 in the western Indiana town to report an apparent armed robbery in progress at Backstep Brewing Co., according to WXIN-TV in Indianapolis.

Police say the production company and the brewery didn’t notify them or other businesses before filming, the AP reported.
Rob Duke's insight:
so, so lucky....
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Utah officer fired for handcuffing nurse who defied him

Utah officer fired for handcuffing nurse who defied him | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
A Utah police officer has been fired after he forcibly arrested a nurse who refused to let him draw blood from an unconscious patient in July.
Rob Duke's insight:
Share your insight
more...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 12, 12:19 PM
I followed this story closely. That nurse was doing what was best for her patient AS ACCORDING TO THEIR LAWS. I'm sure, since it is a job requirement, she could have pulled out a code book and shown the officers where it said they were not allowed to take the man's blood. I truly believe the officers over reacted and need to be taught hospital rules a little bit better. They should have known the law going in.
Krista Scott's comment, October 12, 4:45 PM
I think that the sanctions given to the officer was appropriate. The nurse didn't deserve the treatment given to her since she wasn't doing anything wrong but her job and from my understanding hospital policy. He also deserved to be fired due to unlawfully trying to retrieve and take blood from an unconscious patient. I see a civil lawsuit coming to Utah PD...
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Police shooting deaths: 80 percent threatened cops

The once-secret reports shed light on what happens when police confront violent subjects
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Why some say Las Vegas mass shooting proves LA law enforcement should use drones

Why some say Las Vegas mass shooting proves LA law enforcement should use drones | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
A terrorist expert says a drone could help law enforcement find mass shooters quicker, to prevent more deaths.
more...
Riley Westfall's comment, October 9, 11:02 PM
Westfall insight: Drones are a good way to get eyes on something higher up. They are a good way to get information without people getting shot.
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 12, 12:42 PM
I have likes and dislikes when it comes to drones. It takes up air space, some people like to cause trouble and 'shoot' them out of the sky with things, and over ll, they are just a personal reminder of Big Brother and I'm not ready for Newspeak. I can also understand how drones may be helpful. They can, as Westfall points out, get eyes int he sky and try to solve situations more peacefully. But to me, drones are just Big Brother more than anything and that is kind of scary. As someone who grew up before people had cell phones or even cordless phones for that matter, technology seems to get bettering out of hand. I remember when I had to tell someone where I was going and if I wanted to call anyone, finding a payphone with a phone book to look up the number. So to know we not have the ability to monitor someone without them knowing is just strange to me. And just bit too 1984.
Krista Scott's comment, October 12, 4:51 PM
I could agree that drones could have a positive effect for high tourist cities such as LA and Las Vegas. It would be good because there would be cops walking the streets patrolling and their would be an eye in the sky also watching to prevent such things from happening in the future.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Law enforcement pushes back against bills to allow privatized police forces

Law enforcement pushes back against bills to allow privatized police forces | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
WEST MICHIGAN (NEWSCHANNEL 3) - Law enforcement officials statewide are pushing back against a pair of bills that would privatize police agencies.Area sheriffs are calling this proposed legislation dangerous and saying it doesn't have enough oversight, and
more...
Sam Unruh's comment, October 9, 1:02 AM
I agree with Koops. It seems like having the privatized police forces would pretty much be reinventing the wheel.
Rob Duke's comment, October 12, 2:13 AM
Yes, but it's a way to quickly transfer a new work force to a reduced benefit package. The problem is that any under-funded retirement system then either collapses or relies on taxpayers for survival...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 12, 12:34 PM
This one hits close to home. My father worked for 35 years for the FAA and, if you can remember, when Bush was re-elected he privatized the FAA making it Lockheed-Martin. MANY people lost their jobs, pensions, and more. All of a sudden we had people who were at least 18 with a GED in control of all the planes over America. Of course there aren't all teens, but my father spent 4 years in the Air Force to learn his job. I agree with Rob, the system would collapse or fall back onto the tax payers. I personally am against privatizing LEOs. I feel that if they did that salary would decrease and more would be asked of them, just the same as Lockheed-Martin. (Thankfully Alaska was the only state exempt from the privatization because of all the bush pilots. So my dad wasn't one of the ones who lost their jobs.) It also sounds like they would be buying new equipment, and that would fall on the tax payers.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Calif. becomes 'sanctuary state' as governor signs bill

Calif. becomes 'sanctuary state' as governor signs bill | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it

California Gov. Jerry Brown signed "sanctuary state" legislation Thursday that extends protections for immigrants living in the United States illegally — a move that gives the nation's most populous state another tool to fight President Donald Trump.

Brown's signature means that police will be barred from asking people about their immigration status or participating in federal immigration enforcement activities starting Jan. 1. Jail officials only will be allowed to transfer inmates to federal immigration authorities if they have been convicted of certain crimes.  

California is home to an estimated 2.3 million immigrations without legal authorization.

"These are uncertain times for undocumented Californians and their families, and this bill strikes a balance that will protect public safety, while bringing a measure of comfort to those families who are now living in fear every day," Brown said in statement.

The Trump administration said the bill will make California more dangerous.

Rob Duke's insight:
Unless things changed a lot since 2011 when I retired, we never worried about immigration.  Sometimes we'd call on a predator who had committed a felony and we were faced with the decision of whether to release him or to hand him over to ICE, but that was rare.  This law is a solution in search of a problem; or it's just political theater.
more...
Jessica Obermiller's comment, October 12, 12:37 PM
I agree Rob, I've never known immigration to be a horrible "virus", even in places close to the Mexican boarder. Hell, I'm a 3rd generation Mexican myself (50% - My mother was Mexican) and the first people who came over did so illegally.I am glad to hear that there are people int he government who are standing up to Trump and protecting people who have the right to be protected. For me, being a complete Utilitarian, it doesn't matte who someone is or how they got to our country, even has the right to be safe and protected. A person is a person, human is a human.
Scooped by Rob Duke
Scoop.it!

Video appears to show NISD officer slamming student to ground following fight

Video appears to show NISD officer slamming student to ground following fight | Police Problems and Policy | Scoop.it
A Northside Independent School District officer has been placed on administrative leave after a video posted to Facebook appears to show the officer forcing a student to the ground after breaking u
Rob Duke's insight:
I don't know Texas law, but what we see here isn't necessarily illegal.  It looks like he may have had his hands full and just lost his grip on both boys--one who slipped away standing and the other one who he then "slams", but I'm not sure he's assaulting the kid.  When he jerks the kid up, we also should consider that he may have told the other kid to come to the office, too, but that's the use of force that I think might be more questionable....

Let me know what you think.  What other social and cultural factors may have been at work?
more...
Brianne Frame's comment, October 7, 7:10 PM
I got curious so I actually looked up the Texas school district policy on force. “when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is necessary to further the special purpose or to maintain discipline in a group.' A professional employee may be disciplined for violating a district’s policy relating to corporal punishment, but may not be disciplined for using reasonable force for such actions as breaking up a fight." this would specify that he was not unjustified in his actions of breaking up the fight. From personal experience working in the school district here however, I think the definition of reasonable is what comes into question in this situation. In the North Star Borough District I was taught CPI (Crisis Prevention Intervention) which are moves to deescalate/prevent disruptive and assaulting behavior from individuals. With these select moves you learn to restrain violent students without causing harm to them or others. That being said I would agree with the officers right to grab this or even both students in this fight I think the issue becomes when he forced him to the ground. This action was not necessary and could have seriously hurt the child involved. Also, has you said Duke it is also important to consider what happened afterward with the other student, even if he did not go right then likely hood would be they would both be called in to sort out the reason for the fight in the first place.