Shhhh...Seattle Cops Can Hide Misconduct Now

Submitted by: kitteh9lives 6 years ago in

Police win the ability to hide their identities when accused of misconduct. Should they give citizens the same right?
There are 35 comments:
Male 729
SilverThread - "Let the Police all take 1 Month on Furlough. No Cops Anywhere."

Yeah... take all the crime off the streets for a month, then put it back... that ought to make people feel GREAT about having cops around.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Just one more reason why public employee unions should be abolished.
0
Reply
Male 411
ridiculous... so if someone breaks the law can their info be kept out of reporters hands too?
0
Reply
Male 3,431
You know, I have an idea how to quell all the negative press the Police are receiving.

Let the Police all take 1 Month on Furlough. No Cops Anywhere. Now at the end of that one month period, all of the Police will be glad to be back at work and will surely be on their best behavior and of course those who survive the lawlessness that will ensue, will be ecstatic to have someone around to maintain Law and Order.

Really it`s a perfect Plan.
0
Reply
Male 38,511

big dratting deal
After the investigation, if he is found guilty of misconduct they can release the name. Just not before he`s guilty of it.

Suppose they release the name and he`s found innocent?
After his car`s been vandalized the News has published his photos and everyone thinks he a scumbag.

this isn`t that big of a deal people
0
Reply
Male 904
Just what we need. Another brick in the blue wall of silence.
0
Reply
Male 2,424
What`s that sound? Oh... just another freedom dying. Welcome to Amerika in the 21st century. Oh yeah, pat act renewed too.

Want cheap and free energy? Just hook up a couple cables to George Orwells corpse, as it`s sure to be spinning at high capacity about now.
0
Reply
Male 260
WTF
0
Reply
Male 2,553
1:00-1:07
Please point out faults in my argument, but it sounds like Seattle didn`t reveal identities of office, but that this was against state law. How the hell can police "agree" to do anything, when what they agree on is against the law? Furthermore, how can it be concluded, in court, that they, because of their illegal agreement with themselves, have to stay true to that agreement? That they now can`t work according to state law all of a sudden?
0
Reply
Male 3,076
drating criminals!
you country is full of corruption, you should seriously fight the corruption in your own justice system!
0
Reply
Male 359
How much are we going to take?
0
Reply
Male 21
If you work for the city you`re beholden to the public and public scrutiny. If you want to beat the piss out of someone go work for private security. It should be a contract item for police to know that if they accept a job with the police service they will be under scrutiny since they work for us and our tax dollars pay their salary.
0
Reply
Male 1,793
the police state continues...
0
Reply
Male 2,868
@Angelmassb- I love how anyone can write that and everyone immediately knows exactly what that means.
0
Reply
Female 3,598
"an officer that makes a mistake, and you know we`re all human we`re gonna make mistakes; that they could have that just plastered all over the news... ya know to haunt the officer forever. i don`t think that`s a good idea" -guy from video

soo... he`s calling excessive force a "mistake" that could haunt an officer forever? how about we should not be having any officers in place that will make these "mistakes" and misjudgements that can negatively affect so many in the public? how about the citizens that make "mistakes" and "accidentally" assault somebody on the street? what about them? should it be that they don`t have to be "haunted" by their actions forever? no. they will have their names blasted everywhere for all the people to see, but we have to protect our always innocent and in the right police force, cuz they are just oh so privileged and need to be protected. this is bullpoo.
0
Reply
Male 2,384
the police state is upon us its fuc.king here, one day we will wake up and the police will be monitoring every public place
0
Reply
Male 554
Welcome to the new police state people, NWO perhaps?
0
Reply
Male 182
a mistake is one thing but clear abuse of authority and excessive force such as kicking a suspect whose already down and given up is not a mistake. all there doing is giving these cops the freedom to be as abusive and corrupt as they want. you let these cops run around doing whatever the drat they want dont you dare ever ask me to feel sorry for them when some gang member kills one of them.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
`merica
0
Reply
Male 2,868
@Gerry1of1- The things that cops get investigated for at work would get them arrested if they were members of other professions. I`m going into nursing. If I`m being suspected of making a medication error, that`s one thing. The error would be investigated internally to determine the problem, and I`d get retrained. But if I beat the poo out of a patient because they started raising their voice at me, I`d be arrested- and rightfully so. Nurses have to deal with violent patients frequently in some settings- and they have to do so unarmed. If any nurse lost their cool as easily as the cops that this decision will protect, they wouldn`t stay nurses very long.

Personally, I think the solution is to use internal investigations for true errors, and criminally prosecute cops for assault when they use excessive force. Then I`d be OK with keeping the identities of subjects of internal investigations private.
0
Reply
Male 57
Figures it`s the unions doing.
0
Reply
Male 684
so they don`t have their names announced, that doesn`t mean they wont get investigated and prosecuted.This is very much like the law proposed to change the terminology from victim to accuser in sexual assault trial. It is to protect the rights of officers accused of misconduct falsely, also, think about who will be accusing them of misconduct most often, the crappy part of society none of us want to deal with, that`s why we pay them to.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
only in america
0
Reply
Male 875
if they don`t want to see the consequences of there actions, maybe they shouldn`t be doing them
0
Reply
Male 143
Slot me some identification chummer.
0
Reply
Male 670
Gerry1of1 they aren`t talking about clerical errors here when they say mistakes. Misconduct is a legal term meaning a wrongful, improper, or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated or intentional purpose or by obstinate indifference to the consequences of one`s acts. (thankyou websters)
Minor misconduct is seen as unacceptable but is not a criminal offense, BUT if the conduct IS a criminal offense it SHOULD be made public. In the video they show assaults on hand cuffed civilians...don`t we deserve to know if a cop crosses THAT line? This ability to cover `all` misconduct they have now is a blanket rule and covers every infraction no matter how small or how big.

0
Reply
Male 38
Mr. O`Neill says that there are times when officers will "make mistakes"; I wasn`t aware that kicking a suspect in the head or side while they`re handcuffed and lying on the ground face down was considered a "mistake" now.

These cops conducting themselves in this manner make choices to either do the right thing or the wrong one, just like the rest of us. And if they choose the wrong one? Well, like the rest of us, the should suffer the consequences. Were I to beat someone within an inch of their lives, for example, I would have effectively ruined my own life as a result of my choice to do so. Why shouldn`t cops suffer the same, if not even more so, as they are the ones who not only are supposed to be setting the example of upholding law, but VOLUNTEERED to do the job in the first place?
0
Reply
Male 38,511

@ sbeelz

good point. I`ll have to consider that.
Although they are not actual paralell.
a person is arrested and accused of a crime but a cop just being acused of misconduct is not the same. If the cop is arrested and accused of a crime fine, but do you want your name published if you mess up at work?
0
Reply
Male 2,868
@Gerry1of1-
I would agree, if the same were true for people who have been arrested for, but not convicted of, crimes. Until that`s the case, cops should not receive more protections than everyone else.
0
Reply
Male 670
I agree with Pheeshy5 > "1:55-2:08 What a load of BS. So officers are allowed to "make mistakes" and abuse people anonomously to the public, but if a civilian "makes a mistake" their face is plastered everywhere. If anything the officers should be made examples of since they are the ones who are supposed to be upholding the law."

They DO plaster `accused` drug dealers, robbers and rapist up on the news all the time, LONG BEFORE proven not guilty. Why the double standard?
When a cop does anything it`s a `mistake`...if I do it it`s assault AND a crime!
0
Reply
Male 38,511

"accused" is not the same as "proven"
the accusation can ruin a guys life so until they are found guilty of something I`m okay with it.

but they should release the name if they are found guilty.
0
Reply
Male 1,312
1:55-2:08 What a load of BS. So officers are allowed to "make mistakes" and abuse people anonomously to the public, but if a civilian "makes a mistake" their face is plastered everywhere. If anything the officers should be made examples of since they are the ones who are supposed to be upholding the law.
0
Reply
Male 3,745
they should but they wont
0
Reply
Male 7,611
like everybody else, if you do something wrong you should be punished for it. if a man assaults someone on the street, his name might make it to the news that night. same should go for an officer who does the same thing.
0
Reply
Female 8,044
Link: Shhhh...Seattle Cops Can Hide Misconduct Now [Rate Link] - Police win the ability to hide their identities when accused of misconduct. Should they give citizens the same right?
0
Reply