As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

1312 incidents of [Police Brutality] and counting

HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
This is the thread for discussing acts of police brutality, like the title says. We hit 100 pages on the last one, so forum law says we get a new one.

Please put all videos and images of as aforementioned brutality behind spoilers with content warnings. This stuff is hard enough to talk about, let alone see.

«13456759

Posts

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Well, let's start this thread with some genuine evil:



    The author is a freelance reporter.

    Well, fuck. In a just world, this would end careers.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    It's gross and I honestly would have just expected it to be a thing that was already happening.

    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • CalicaCalica Registered User regular
    I got fingerprinted after reporting my carjacking. I just assumed police collect biometric data on everyone they can, just because.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Calica wrote: »
    I got fingerprinted after reporting my carjacking. I just assumed police collect biometric data on everyone they can, just because.

    Which is stupid, counterproductive, and tells you everything you need to know about how they view the public.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero The new film by Quentin Koopantino Registered User regular
    Kim Potter the cop who shot and killed Daunte Wright was sentenced to a slap on the wrist and 16 months prison plus 8 months supervised release. The standard sentence is 86 months but the judge wanted to send a strong message to cops everywhere that if you murder innocents and by some miracle are held accountable, you won't be held that accountable.

    https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/daunte-wright/kim-potter-sentenced-for-shooting-death-of-daunte-wright/89-7330c69c-52b0-4f09-a1f9-7c2531adcb4f

    cs6f034fsffl.jpg
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    That was reported as a 2 year custodial sentence abroad, though the BBC also highlighted the standard 7 years and that the family were not happy.

  • HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq. Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    "Before issuing her ruling, Judge Chu called this case one of the saddest cases she's dealt with in her 20 years on the bench."

    Yeah okay, sure. The sentence you handed down really communicates the depth of your feelings on this matter, judge. We see you.

  • cncaudatacncaudata Registered User regular
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    "Before issuing her ruling, Judge Chu called this case one of the saddest cases she's dealt with in her 20 years on the bench."

    Yeah okay, sure. The sentence you handed down really communicates the depth of your feelings on this matter, judge. We see you.

    No, it exactly communicates what she's sad about. She's sad that a cop made a mistake and has consequences. She is much less concerned that an innocent person was killed.

    PSN: Broodax- battle.net: broodax#1163
  • WhiteZinfandelWhiteZinfandel Your insides Let me show you themRegistered User regular
    On the one hand, she arguably would have been justified in intentionally shooting Wright: he had an outstanding arrest warrant for a weapons charge, was driving erratically and intoxicated w/o a license, and resisted lawful arrest to try to initiate a car chase with a civilian passenger in the car (the then-unidentified female, potentially the one who had a restraining order against him in the cops' eyes) plus two cops partially in the car. That risks GBH or death of said cops and others.

    On the other hand, you really can't be having cops shoot people by accident, irrespective of whether intentionally doing so would be justified, just as a standard of competence. If she'd successfully tazed him there very likely would have been no further injury on anyone's part.

    On the gripping hand, some right-leaning lawyer commentators I've listened to seem confident the conviction will be appealed (or would be if the courts could move fast enough) on the grounds that the jury instructions were insufficient or outright misleading regarding the fact that (according to them) "recklessness" as pertaining to 1st degree manslaughter, in legal terms, necessitates that a person know what they're doing and disregard the risk of it. Per the judge, "everybody agrees" that she never intended to use her firearm and didn't even know she had it in her hand until after firing it... so she shouldn't meet the recklessness requirement. I'll be interested to see if anything comes of that.

    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    DarkPrimus on
  • WhiteZinfandelWhiteZinfandel Your insides Let me show you themRegistered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

  • knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    It's not excessive to hold a police officer accountable when her negligence results in a death.

    In fact, since she's given so much extra training and responsibility as a LEO, she should be held to a higher standard, not a lesser one.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    Re: the rape kit DNA case, I swear there was a Law and Order episode several years ago where they did that exact thing by accident and everyone on the show was all "wtf you absolutely cannot do that."

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    But one wrong, consistently applied to a group of people, and not applied to another group of people, is tyranny

    wbBv3fj.png
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    But one wrong, consistently applied to a group of people, and not applied to another group of people, is tyranny

    Only way we see real calls for change from people who usually oppose it (see Republicans re jail/bail conditions) is when middle/upper class white people are subjected to it.

    As long as it's just the poor and/or minorities suffering, they at best couldn't give a shit, at worst, they're actively cheering it on.

    Want to see police reform? Have police treat middle/upper class white people the same as they do poor minorities, and it'll be changed in weeks.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    More specifically, five years for casting a provisional ballot after the probation officer signed paperwork saying parole was up. The judge basically just decided she had lied to him in some way and was thus guilty, absent any evidence. It's egregious even in the context of a racist as fuck system.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

    Yeah, 16 months versus 86 for the standard (or 180 for the maximum), is incredibly light.

    There's a difference between lenient, just, and harsh, and you might not agree with the 15 year maximum, or the 7 year average, but less than two for the taking of a life, especially by a law enforcement officer, is in no way just.

  • HacksawHacksaw J. Duggan Esq. Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Power without accountability is the definition of tyranny. In the case of cops, they can ruin your life with a simple, wrongful arrest and never face consequences for it, nevermind shooting you dead in your own home while executing a no-knock warrant on the wrong address in the dead of night. Cops are tyrants. Every last one of them. The fact that we can point to individual cops who have faced consequences for their actions are the notable exceptions that prove the rule.

  • WhiteZinfandelWhiteZinfandel Your insides Let me show you themRegistered User regular
    edited February 2022
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

    Excuse me for assuming. If I've missed the point, it's because you haven't actually made one. Also, I don't think you're advocating for an excessively long sentence. I don't think you've advocated for anything at all so far in this thread. You're welcome to do so.
    MorganV wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

    Yeah, 16 months versus 86 for the standard (or 180 for the maximum), is incredibly light.

    There's a difference between lenient, just, and harsh, and you might not agree with the 15 year maximum, or the 7 year average, but less than two for the taking of a life, especially by a law enforcement officer, is in no way just.

    What duration of time would you consider appropriate? The disparity with the 7 year average is because 1st degree manslaughter generally involves malice, as Judge Chu noted. It's also, though Judge Chu said nothing about factoring this in, generally not committed in an attempt to apprehend a criminal who is presently endangering the lives of both civilians and law enforcement.

    WhiteZinfandel on
  • HefflingHeffling No Pic EverRegistered User regular
    Kim Potter the cop who shot and killed Daunte Wright was sentenced to a slap on the wrist and 16 months prison plus 8 months supervised release. The standard sentence is 86 months but the judge wanted to send a strong message to cops everywhere that if you murder innocents and by some miracle are held accountable, you won't be held that accountable.

    https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/daunte-wright/kim-potter-sentenced-for-shooting-death-of-daunte-wright/89-7330c69c-52b0-4f09-a1f9-7c2531adcb4f

    I think it is also worth noting that the police officer who killed Duante in April 2021 has spent, in the last 9 months, less than 2 of those in jail.

  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

    Excuse me for assuming. If I've missed the point, it's because you haven't actually made one. Also, I don't think you're advocating for an excessively long sentence. I don't think you've advocated for anything at all so far in this thread. You're welcome to do so.

    Nah, the point being made is that white supremecy means cops upholding white supremecy gets lighter sentences than other people. The fact you refuse to acknowledge or at least recognize that point isn't on DarkPrimus, it's all on you

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Heffling wrote: »
    Kim Potter the cop who shot and killed Daunte Wright was sentenced to a slap on the wrist and 16 months prison plus 8 months supervised release. The standard sentence is 86 months but the judge wanted to send a strong message to cops everywhere that if you murder innocents and by some miracle are held accountable, you won't be held that accountable.

    https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/daunte-wright/kim-potter-sentenced-for-shooting-death-of-daunte-wright/89-7330c69c-52b0-4f09-a1f9-7c2531adcb4f

    I think it is also worth noting that the police officer who killed Duante in April 2021 has spent, in the last 9 months, less than 2 of those in jail.

    Which is a proper and just state, because people shouldn't serve a substantial sentence before they're convicted absent strong flight risk or imminent danger to the public. As long as she's not wearing a badge, the latter doesn't apply. Holding people for the bulk of a year pre-trial...often as part of a tactic to force a plea deal...is an injustice that should be fixed.
    Veevee wrote: »
    Nah, the point being made is that white supremecy means cops upholding white supremecy gets lighter sentences than other people. The fact you refuse to acknowledge or at least recognize that point isn't on DarkPrimus, it's all on you

    While potentially true, we should at least try to acknowledge that the proper outcome may be the more lenient one. I'm not sure that arguing for harsher, less fair outcomes for everybody will actually get us the result we want. Pointing to injustice as an argument in favor of more injustice, rather than less, is pretty fucked up, IMO.

    Demanding an eight year sentence for what seems to be a legitimate mistake made in the course of a job we asked her to do, carrying weapons that we gave her to carry, seems excessive to me. Eighteen months, arguably, seems a little light. We can hang her from a gibbet it won't bring Duante Wright back. And I can't imagine that two or three years of incarceration (because again, I agree eighteen months is light) is insufficient deterrent to encourage cops to, you know, learn to use their weapons properly.

  • MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    They won't learn any lessons until it happens to them.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    Mayabird wrote: »
    They won't learn any lessons until it happens to them.

    I agree the pace of change is frustratingly slow, but I guess I remember a time when this never sees a trial, let alone a conviction and custodial sentence.

    mcdermott on
  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero The new film by Quentin Koopantino Registered User regular
    How many months of freedom did Daunte Wright lose? I think the sentence this cop got was a fucking steal.

    cs6f034fsffl.jpg
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    How many months of freedom did Daunte Wright lose? I think the sentence this cop got was a fucking steal.

    Well by that logic every single act of negligence or recklessness that results in a death should result in a life sentence. All of them. Car accident? Somebody dies? Life.

    I guess that's a marginally less obscene justice system than the one from that bad Wesley episode of Star Trek. But only marginally.

  • reVersereVerse Attack and Dethrone God Registered User regular
    So, do they fire the cops when they go to prison or does it get written down as paid leave?

  • zepherinzepherin Russian warship, go fuck yourself Registered User regular
    If this considered a job mistake that kills a person then let’s treat it as such.

    Truckers who accidentally kill someone while driving routinely get 5-10 years for manslaughter. No malice, malice intent just a mistake or imcompetence. Why are we treating a cop different than another person who accidentally kills someone doing their job.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    zepherin wrote: »
    Truckers who accidentally kill someone while driving routinely get 5-10 years for manslaughter. No malice, malice intent just a mistake or imcompetence. Why are we treating a cop different than another person who accidentally kills someone doing their job.

    Absent specific aggravating factors (intoxicated, texting, or specifically reckless actions) I would agree that those sentences are excessive too. Especially since a typical sentence for vehicular manslaughter in most states is like 5 years or less. It still comes down for me to "which is the right answer," not "let's make it fair." If "fair" is actually the wrong answer, and unreasonably retributive. I'm surprised to hear that 10 year sentences are typical for truck drivers who aren't intoxicated, driving beyond their daily limits, overloaded, or otherwise specifically negligent. If true, that is also a thing we should change.

    mcdermott on
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    How many months of freedom did Daunte Wright lose? I think the sentence this cop got was a fucking steal.

    Well by that logic every single act of negligence or recklessness that results in a death should result in a life sentence. All of them. Car accident? Somebody dies? Life.

    I guess that's a marginally less obscene justice system than the one from that bad Wesley episode of Star Trek. But only marginally.

    If I thought a possible life sentence for recklessly driving and killing someone would actually make the roads safer, I'd consider it. Since it wouldn't do anything though, because no one driving 55 through a residential 25 is thinking about the possible long term impact of their action otherwise they wouldn't be doing something so stupidly dangerous. Maybe it'd give the driver the actual proper weight of responsibility driving should have.

  • zepherinzepherin Russian warship, go fuck yourself Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    mcdermott wrote: »
    zepherin wrote: »
    Truckers who accidentally kill someone while driving routinely get 5-10 years for manslaughter. No malice, malice intent just a mistake or imcompetence. Why are we treating a cop different than another person who accidentally kills someone doing their job.

    Absent specific aggravating factors (intoxicated, texting, or specifically reckless actions) I would agree that those sentences are excessive too. Especially since a typical sentence for vehicular manslaughter in most states is like 5 years or less. It still comes down for me to "which is the right answer," not "let's make it fair." If "fair" is actually the wrong answer, and unreasonably retributive. I'm surprised to hear that 10 year sentences are typical for truck drivers who aren't intoxicated, driving beyond their daily limits, overloaded, or otherwise specifically negligent. If true, that is also a thing we should change.
    Daunte Wright Is dead. Kim Potter is the only reason he is dead. How does society balance that? What is the punishment for dead? 86 months seams fairly reasonable. It wasn’t intentional it is unlikely Kim Potters would reoffend, but she killed a person. And part of prison is punishment.

    zepherin on
  • WhiteZinfandelWhiteZinfandel Your insides Let me show you themRegistered User regular
    Veevee wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    At the end of the day Potter made a serious error that can't go unanswered. Merely ending her career in law enforcement and taking away her ability to own a firearm ever again would be unacceptably lenient, but I don't think the actual sentence is.

    Maybe, unless you compare the actual sentence to, y'know, other sentences for ostensibly lesser offenses.

    Five years for casting a provisional ballot while on parole, because you were incorrectly told you could do so.

    Twelve years for attempting to sell $31 worth of pot - a first offense.

    I could go on, but I feel the point has already been made.

    Those are quite fucked. Don't you think excessively long sentences are an issue in America? Two wrongs don't make a right.

    Well you've missed the point entirely if you think that I'm advocating for an excessively long sentence for this former police officer killing someone.

    Excuse me for assuming. If I've missed the point, it's because you haven't actually made one. Also, I don't think you're advocating for an excessively long sentence. I don't think you've advocated for anything at all so far in this thread. You're welcome to do so.

    Nah, the point being made is that white supremecy means cops upholding white supremecy gets lighter sentences than other people. The fact you refuse to acknowledge or at least recognize that point isn't on DarkPrimus, it's all on you

    Nope. I do appreciate you spelling it out, but you're wrong. DP couldn't be bothered to make a point. All he said was that Potter's sentence was lenient compared to certain other wildly excessive sentences, which... yeah, duh. All non-excessive sentences are lenient in comparison to excessive sentences. That's axiomatic. The implication I guessed he was attempting to make (since his apparent discomfort with ever stating a thesis means I have to guess) was that he felt Potter's sentence should be more like those aforementioned wildly excessive sentences. Is that so unreasonable an interpretation? There was nothing about white supremacy in his post, nothing about Potter upholding white supremacy, and nothing about her being rewarded for it. Y'all seem to hold as an article of faith that white supremacy is at play every time anything bad happens between cops and black people. I don't share that paradigm. If he'd said what you did, I would have nodded along. He didn't.
    How many months of freedom did Daunte Wright lose? I think the sentence this cop got was a fucking steal.

    Given his pending aggravated robbery charge, the warrant for his arrest on a separate case also involving a pistol, the accusation against him of shooting a young man in the head, his repeatedly fleeing the police, his willingness to drive high without a license, his willingness to get into a car chase with the police, and the fact that he was stupid enough to make incriminating videos of himself underage drinking and playing with a pistol at the scene of said aggravated robbery charge... I'm going to guess six.

  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Heffling wrote: »
    Kim Potter the cop who shot and killed Daunte Wright was sentenced to a slap on the wrist and 16 months prison plus 8 months supervised release. The standard sentence is 86 months but the judge wanted to send a strong message to cops everywhere that if you murder innocents and by some miracle are held accountable, you won't be held that accountable.

    https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/daunte-wright/kim-potter-sentenced-for-shooting-death-of-daunte-wright/89-7330c69c-52b0-4f09-a1f9-7c2531adcb4f

    I think it is also worth noting that the police officer who killed Duante in April 2021 has spent, in the last 9 months, less than 2 of those in jail.

    Which is a proper and just state, because people shouldn't serve a substantial sentence before they're convicted absent strong flight risk or imminent danger to the public. As long as she's not wearing a badge, the latter doesn't apply. Holding people for the bulk of a year pre-trial...often as part of a tactic to force a plea deal...is an injustice that should be fixed.
    Veevee wrote: »
    Nah, the point being made is that white supremecy means cops upholding white supremecy gets lighter sentences than other people. The fact you refuse to acknowledge or at least recognize that point isn't on DarkPrimus, it's all on you

    While potentially true, we should at least try to acknowledge that the proper outcome may be the more lenient one. I'm not sure that arguing for harsher, less fair outcomes for everybody will actually get us the result we want. Pointing to injustice as an argument in favor of more injustice, rather than less, is pretty fucked up, IMO.

    Demanding an eight year sentence for what seems to be a legitimate mistake made in the course of a job we asked her to do, carrying weapons that we gave her to carry, seems excessive to me. Eighteen months, arguably, seems a little light. We can hang her from a gibbet it won't bring Duante Wright back. And I can't imagine that two or three years of incarceration (because again, I agree eighteen months is light) is insufficient deterrent to encourage cops to, you know, learn to use their weapons properly.

    My issue here is that it's a little annoying that the injustices always get "fixed" when it applies to rich, white people or cops, and somehow it doesn't ever seem to extend beyond that. And this happens again and again, and every time we go "they are barely getting a slap on the wrist" people go "but don't you think the justice system should be fixed, that sentences are unfair and too long? This should be a good thing, that we want everyone to see!"

    And then it happens again in a few months/year. Repeat.

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular

    The problem is that if the consequence is only fair for the white supremacists, nothing changes.

    Equality under Law. If they want fair sentences, everyone should get fair sentences. Otherwise it's just out and out oppression.

  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    The problem is that if the consequence is only fair for the white supremacists, nothing changes.

    Equality under Law. If they want fair sentences, everyone should get fair sentences. Otherwise it's just out and out oppression.

    Yup. There's a reason to call for changes to the judicial system, across arrests/prosecutions (what a black or brown person will be arrested/prosecuted for is often harsher than a similar crime by a white person), sentencing, and the treatment and reformation of prisoners.

    Happy to discuss that. But until things get changed on a grand scale, no, the middle aged, middle class white people shouldn't be the first ones getting it, because they're the only ones getting it. 10% of the maximum sentence, 20% of the average, is ridiculously lenient, given how the law treats other people.

    And I'll stand by my position that as a law enforcement officer, and a field training officer at that, she should be held to a higher standard than a regular member of the public. Not a lower one.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    While potentially true, we should at least try to acknowledge that the proper outcome may be the more lenient one. I'm not sure that arguing for harsher, less fair outcomes for everybody will actually get us the result we want. Pointing to injustice as an argument in favor of more injustice, rather than less, is pretty fucked up, IMO.

    Sorry, but this is the same gooseshit argument used to defend Aaron Persky giving a sweetheart deal to an unrepentant rapist, and it's just as gooseshit here.
    Demanding an eight year sentence for what seems to be a legitimate mistake made in the course of a job we asked her to do, carrying weapons that we gave her to carry, seems excessive to me.

    Not to me. The power to end a life should weigh heavily on someone, and the consequences for fucking up with it should be severe.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    zepherin wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    zepherin wrote: »
    Truckers who accidentally kill someone while driving routinely get 5-10 years for manslaughter. No malice, malice intent just a mistake or imcompetence. Why are we treating a cop different than another person who accidentally kills someone doing their job.

    Absent specific aggravating factors (intoxicated, texting, or specifically reckless actions) I would agree that those sentences are excessive too. Especially since a typical sentence for vehicular manslaughter in most states is like 5 years or less. It still comes down for me to "which is the right answer," not "let's make it fair." If "fair" is actually the wrong answer, and unreasonably retributive. I'm surprised to hear that 10 year sentences are typical for truck drivers who aren't intoxicated, driving beyond their daily limits, overloaded, or otherwise specifically negligent. If true, that is also a thing we should change.
    Daunte Wright Is dead. Kim Potter is the only reason he is dead. How does society balance that? What is the punishment for dead? 86 months seams fairly reasonable. It wasn’t intentional it is unlikely Kim Potters would reoffend, but she killed a person. And part of prison is punishment.

    I mean, I generally don't believe in retributive justice at all as a concept, personally. All justice should be trying to achieve something constructive, or to the benefit of society, and punishment for its own sake isn't either of those things, in my view.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    zepherin wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    zepherin wrote: »
    Truckers who accidentally kill someone while driving routinely get 5-10 years for manslaughter. No malice, malice intent just a mistake or imcompetence. Why are we treating a cop different than another person who accidentally kills someone doing their job.

    Absent specific aggravating factors (intoxicated, texting, or specifically reckless actions) I would agree that those sentences are excessive too. Especially since a typical sentence for vehicular manslaughter in most states is like 5 years or less. It still comes down for me to "which is the right answer," not "let's make it fair." If "fair" is actually the wrong answer, and unreasonably retributive. I'm surprised to hear that 10 year sentences are typical for truck drivers who aren't intoxicated, driving beyond their daily limits, overloaded, or otherwise specifically negligent. If true, that is also a thing we should change.
    Daunte Wright Is dead. Kim Potter is the only reason he is dead. How does society balance that? What is the punishment for dead? 86 months seams fairly reasonable. It wasn’t intentional it is unlikely Kim Potters would reoffend, but she killed a person. And part of prison is punishment.

    I mean, I generally don't believe in retributive justice at all as a concept, personally. All justice should be trying to achieve something constructive, or to the benefit of society, and punishment for its own sake isn't either of those things, in my view.

    Absolutely, and with no consequences or very mild consequences for ending lives by mistake constantly, the Police have no incentive to reform the way they serve warrants or other procedures that increase the risk to both the Police, and the public at large, as well as people who are only suspects and not convicted by anyone but the officers fears.

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
  • ButlerButler 89 episodes or bust Registered User regular
    How many months of freedom did Daunte Wright lose? I think the sentence this cop got was a fucking steal.

    Given his pending aggravated robbery charge, the warrant for his arrest on a separate case also involving a pistol, the accusation against him of shooting a young man in the head, his repeatedly fleeing the police, his willingness to drive high without a license, his willingness to get into a car chase with the police, and the fact that he was stupid enough to make incriminating videos of himself underage drinking and playing with a pistol at the scene of said aggravated robbery charge... I'm going to guess six.

    Daunte Wright is dead. He has been robbed of the freedom to be alive, which is the most fundamental freedom and the freedom AZ was referring to.

    But you already knew that. I've read quite a few of your posts over the years, you're a literate person, there's nothing wrong with your reading comprehension. You made a conscious choice to misinterpret AbsoluteZero's question as "how much of Daunte's life was he going to spend outside of prison anyway?" so that you could do a Top 10 Reasons Daunte Wright Was No Angel countdown, and then reach up your arse and around your head to yank out the figure of six months.

    I'm not going to get through to you and I'm not trying to. Why would I? You are a racist and you argue in bad faith. I only hope more people will realise this and stop replying to you.

Sign In or Register to comment.