I suppose I have been very naive about the relationship between prosecutors and police. I didn't understand what has been happening each time a police officer is charged with an on-duty crime, such as unnecessary violence against a suspect, or shooting a suspect. Somehow, I always thought that a suspect, whether a police officer or a civilian would get the same treatment by prosecutors and grand jury made up of citizens. I have recently, finally, understood what has been happening. This editorial in USA Today has an excellent explanation of the problem, and what needs to be done to solve the problem.
Reform prosecuting police misconduct: Our view
I didn't understand how the police in the Rodney King situation could be excused for their action. It appeared to me that the chokehold killing in New York, on video certainly had enough evidence to go to trial. In the Ferguson case, there is now way that the police officer needed to fire so many shots into the suspect. The officer had clearly lost control of himself. He may have not been guilty of a crime, but he should have stood for a trial.
I can now see that we probably have the exact same conflict of interest between the FBI, Homeland Security, Border Patrol, DEA, and other Federal police agencies and their Federal prosecutors. I'm sure there is misconduct at times within those organizations, and I wonder how the independence between prosecutors and the federal agencies is maintained.
My thoughts on recent articles concerning issues of justice and fair play in the United States
Monday, December 29, 2014
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
How far will cop unions go to halt reform? | UTSanDiego.com
Steven Greenhut wrote about how police unions will "bend the law" in order to protect or increase their pay and benefits. How far will cop unions go to halt reform? | UTSanDiego.com. This is just another example of how by giving police-type agencies additional power and tools, it could be used for political purposes.
The contractor hired by the police union tried to set up a candidate whom the union didn't like for an embarrassing DUI situation. The contractors have been charged by the Orange County prosecutor, however it could be possible that the prosecutor could have a conflict of interest in the situation
The contractor hired by the police union tried to set up a candidate whom the union didn't like for an embarrassing DUI situation. The contractors have been charged by the Orange County prosecutor, however it could be possible that the prosecutor could have a conflict of interest in the situation
Trampling of Rights at Immigration Checkpoints
Peter Rowe wrote an article in Sunday's Union Tribune about what has been happening at immigration checkpoints.
At Border Patrol checkpoints, these critics have nothing to declare | UTSanDiego.com
There are a lot of articles and videos on the web describing the encounters. The article points out that the Supreme Court approved immigration checkpoints. They may have, but as is typical, the police forces will take maximum advantage of every "tool" that they are given. The Border Patrol checkpoints have now become checkpoints not just for immigration, but are also used as part of the "war on drugs." So, instead of just verifying citizenship, they are searching vehicles for drugs. They could search for any so-called contraband under the same guidelines -- which could be harassing political rivals, for example. I'm not sure that the Supreme Court intended that to happen. Apparently the Border patrol sometimes does allow "silence" as an answer: http://www.texasobserver.org/border-patrol-takes-no-for-an-answer-at-internal-checkpoints/. But apparently not always.
I'm critical of the value of the checkpoints -- Since they aren't open all of the time, pilot cars can warn drug or human smugglers. Meanwhile it violates the rights of all Americans, the Border Patrol causes all citizens who have to pass through the checkpoints long time delays each day.
At Border Patrol checkpoints, these critics have nothing to declare | UTSanDiego.com
There are a lot of articles and videos on the web describing the encounters. The article points out that the Supreme Court approved immigration checkpoints. They may have, but as is typical, the police forces will take maximum advantage of every "tool" that they are given. The Border Patrol checkpoints have now become checkpoints not just for immigration, but are also used as part of the "war on drugs." So, instead of just verifying citizenship, they are searching vehicles for drugs. They could search for any so-called contraband under the same guidelines -- which could be harassing political rivals, for example. I'm not sure that the Supreme Court intended that to happen. Apparently the Border patrol sometimes does allow "silence" as an answer: http://www.texasobserver.org/border-patrol-takes-no-for-an-answer-at-internal-checkpoints/. But apparently not always.
I'm critical of the value of the checkpoints -- Since they aren't open all of the time, pilot cars can warn drug or human smugglers. Meanwhile it violates the rights of all Americans, the Border Patrol causes all citizens who have to pass through the checkpoints long time delays each day.