Printable View
So a friend was reading this to me earlier. I missed which country it was happening in so I just sort of shook my head in despair at the state of third world justice systems.
Anyways, as it turns out it was Pennsylvania, USA
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29142654/
It is amazing how we as humans can justify such atrocities and not actually think we were doing something wrong.
I'm surprised this actually came up. Since this goes on all the time. There is direct relation to quality of education and incarceration. Prison lobbyist fluff politicians to dumb down the public school system. I'm glad at least some portion of this is getting media attention.
Kailen, I don't understand your point. Are you suggesting that Public Schools are intentionally undereducating children so that they end up in the prison system to make profits for judges and prisons?
Supporting evidence to back this statement up will be required to further this discussion into something other than a flame war or trolling. Please provide your sources.Quote:
Originally posted by Kailen
Since this goes on all the time. There is direct relation to quality of education and incarceration. Prison lobbyist fluff politicians to dumb down the public school system.
This is basically a (largely) minority-based conspiracy theory. It does a whole lot of harm to the people who carry this kind of idea around with them, IMO (ie minorities who think society at large is out to get them).Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
Kailen, I don't understand your point. Are you suggesting that Public Schools are intentionally undereducating children so that they end up in the prison system to make profits for judges and prisons?
Quote:
Originally posted by Vidare
Supporting evidence to back this statement up will be required to further this discussion into something other than a flame war or trolling. Please provide your sources.
Uh no trolling. You are newly fresh to being an American. Thus some concepts might be uneasy for you to accept.
I'm out of town right now. Once I get home. I can toss you a few life lines.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jyn
This is basically a (largely) minority-based conspiracy theory. It does a whole lot of harm to the people who carry this kind of idea around with them, IMO (ie minorities who think society at large is out to get them).
Show me stats that this is largely a minority conspiracy theory? IMO, You think that politicians do not fall to greed. In America, Everything is a business.
I am not an American. I am Canadian, who is living in the United States. There is a difference. Regardless, your comment regarding my status has no bearing on this discussion.Quote:
Originally posted by Kailen
Uh no trolling. You are newly fresh to being an American. Thus some concepts might be uneasy for you to accept.
I'm out of town right now. Once I get home. I can toss you a few life lines.
I don't think this theory makes a lot of sense in terms of benefiting capital. A productive, tax paying, commodity purchasing member of society is more profitable in general than a lumpen who is no good to anyone but the people who own the jails, and the judges who get payoffs for ruining their lives.
Mind you, something is needed need to explain the plethora of private jails in the US and now in Australia.
The moment that prisons were privatised they became a business, and modern business cares only about profit.
Marx argued that creating and maintaining a perpetually unemployed lower class is intrinsic to capitalism. It allows for maximum exploitation of the working class by ensuring that someone will always be willing to sell their labor for less.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
I don't think this theory makes a lot of sense in terms of benefiting capital... something is needed need to explain the plethora of private jails in the US and now in Australia.
Prisoners work for pennies an hour.
(If we want to consider a theoretical explanation).
The prison system has also been heavily criticized for exploiting its captive consumer base. It (so the argument goes) underfeeds its inmates and then sells overpriced supplements (cup o'soup, soft drinks, etc) that prisoners can buy with money sent to their accounts by their families on the outside.
There's a 2006 price list of items in Michigan prisons here ->
http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=291273
To be honest, those prices aren't high, but I have heard Georgia inmates claim that a cigarette lighter costs them $4 (about 5 times what I'd pay for a disposable lighter at most stores).
Pelic, but a public school system that's role was to create prisoners would make more lumpen than could ever be used in that manner. Capitalism also requires an educated working class. If public schools are prison preschool, then where do the workers and middle class (in the US sense) come from?
I think with Kailen's comment and some of the responses, some lines are being blurred - the why/how of private prisons vs. the role of the public education system.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
[B]Pelic, but a public school system that's role was to create prisoners would make more lumpen than could ever.../B]
The basic criticism against the public school system (in terms of this discussion, in the US) is that their function (not necessarily their intention) is to reproduce the existing power structures and social conditions.
I'll give an example, and try to keep it short.
When I was 5 and starting school, I took an aptitude test that decided which level class I would be put into (A, B, C). Once put into a level, it was very hard to move. You needed teacher recommendation and school adminstration approval. You stay in the same level (with a few rare exceptions) until you graduate high school - which had three types of diplomas: college prep, general, and technical (technical meaning you took classes in car repair, welding, etc instead of higher level maths, sciences, etc).
So, as a 5 year old, it was already decided whether I would go to college or take a working class job (again, with a handful of rare exceptions). And, it was decided largely on the basis of the resources my parents were able to make available to me as a 5 year old (based on their wealth, education, etc) - was "school" important to them, did they have the money to buy me Big Bird's Learn to Read books, etc.
You might make the argument that generational frustration at being poor working class could lead to a higer crime rate and therefore "produce" prisoners - but I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that it's intentional.
And, not all schools in the US use "tracking" like mine did.
Right, I think we basically agree.
again off the mark. Soon as I get home. I'll fully respond.Quote:
Originally posted by Pelic
I think with Kailen's comment and some of the responses, some lines are being blurred - the why/how of private prisons vs. the role of the public education system.
The basic criticism against the public school system (in terms of this discussion, in the US) is that their function (not necessarily their intention) is to reproduce the existing power structures and social conditions.
I'll give an example, and try to keep it short.
When I was 5 and starting school, I took an aptitude test that decided which level class I would be put into (A, B, C). Once put into a level, it was very hard to move. You needed teacher recommendation and school adminstration approval. You stay in the same level (with a few rare exceptions) until you graduate high school - which had three types of diplomas: college prep, general, and technical (technical meaning you took classes in car repair, welding, etc instead of higher level maths, sciences, etc).
So, as a 5 year old, it was already decided whether I would go to college or take a working class job (again, with a handful of rare exceptions). And, it was decided largely on the basis of the resources my parents were able to make available to me as a 5 year old (based on their wealth, education, etc) - was "school" important to them, did they have the money to buy me Big Bird's Learn to Read books, etc.
You might make the argument that generational frustration at being poor working class could lead to a higer crime rate and therefore "produce" prisoners - but I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that it's intentional.
And, not all schools in the US use "tracking" like mine did.
I'm not going to get into some pseudo-intellectual argument with trolls. You haven't said anything on this thread except your original outrageous claim and "You're wrong - I'll post when I get home".Quote:
Originally posted by Kailen
again off the mark. Soon as I get home. I'll fully respond.
Kailen, quoting someone's entire post only to say "I'll respond to this later" doesn't really help. Just abandon the thread till you can respond to it - much more useful.
This is a tangent, but it really upset me. Everyone here should know my position on the state, and state violence, but I still sometimes get taken aback. If this sort of shit happens to a pretty, middle class white girl, then how deep is the problem, how endemic?
http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/9049Quote:
Check out the video below, where WKYC investigative reporter Tom Meyer spoke with Greg Steffey, whose wife, Hope Steffey called 911 after she was assaulted by her cousin. Things took a turn for the worst when the police arrived and treated Hope as the perpetrator. She was arrested, taken to jail, and subjected to a humiliating full-body strip search by both male and female officers, violating the sheriff department's own policy that a strip search be conducted by an officer of the same sex. Hope was then left naked in a cell for six hours.
This video came out a while back, so I tried to find an update. This is the best I could do.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
This is a tangent, but it really upset me. Everyone here should know my position on the state, and state violence, but I still sometimes get taken aback. If this sort of shit happens to a pretty, middle class white girl, then how deep is the problem, how endemic?
http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/9049
http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_...91848&catid=45
Now, tell me, what exactly was the wrong-doing in the video that upset you? The fact that she was screaming hysterically while they stripped her? Because that is all that is shown. She is not being beaten or verbally abused. There are no sexually deviant things being said by the male officers. There is no force being used beyond that which is needed to safely restrain a raving woman.
Everything that is happening there is in line with how police deal with frantically resistant people. She is a suburban white woman. This does not mean she gets special treatment and can avoid this. We don't know the whole story, but some of the facets of the case that have emerged are:
There was drinking involved. Hope Steffey and the cousins involved were drunk during the dispute/assault that called the police to the scene.
Hope Steffey gave an ID that was not hers to a police officer (because she was distraught and/or drunk). This is obviously a huge no-no, and will wave a big-ass red flag to any officer. The truth about the ID belonging to her dead sister is irrelevant. The officer does not and cannot know this for truth at the time.
So, why was Hope Steffey arrested when she called for help? Besides giving an ID that wasn't hers to an officer for processing, my guess is that she was the most drunk. She was the most obnoxious and belligerent towards the officer. She probably couldn't keep her story straight. That is my opinion, but the bottom line is that she was the most suspicious.
The strip search was not a strip search according to the court-findings. Instead, it was suicide prevention as dictated by an on-duty doctor (there is no male/female officer requirement attached to this preventative measure). I couldn't find anything on it, but I presume said doctor was interrogated and testified at the trial that found the department not guilty.
So, back to the video. Where was the wrongdoing? All I see are officers (male and female), very professionally, stripping a hysterical, resistant (still drunk?) woman.
From what I know (I come from an entire family of cops), everything in that video and that story is concurrent with having to deal with a person who is resistant from Step 1.
Remember, people, not everyone goes along with the police. When someone says "no", the police are authorized to (and have to) use force. People watch these videos and get upset when they see such displays, but they are necessary to enforce the law.
All of your statements about how the situation went down are contested; the deputies visit, the nurses interview, the suicide threat.
Probably the stripping of the woman would also be contested if it hadn't been filmed.
What I find upsetting is that the police are called to assist a woman in distress (who may have been drinking in her own home) who claims to have been assaulted. They arrive, they turn off their cameras, a gang of pervs, including men, strip off her clothes, stare at her vagina, leave her naked for six hours, while she's screaming in obvious outrage and terror. You don't think there's a reason why every fucking single 'civilized' country in the world bans people from the opposite gender doing strip searches?
You're a fucking enabler. I swear, sometimes I post stories like this because they're so obviously disgusting, that I hope that even people I normally disagree with can reach some bridge of common humanity. It shits me no end that every time I do this I am shocked to discover that there are people who can't see a problem with my story.
I can't be bothered going into what should be FUCKING OBVIOUS about why this is a FUCKING CRIME. And why if this is happening to this woman, who is merely a tiny tip of a huge iceberg that includes at least five other women from this police office, and more generally prostitutes, minorities and other disenfranchised women across the country, it speaks to the inhumanity of many people who are given legal power over normal citizens.
I think this quote is apt:
Quote:
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them.
Frederick Douglass
I was tempted to heavily edit your post, but I will settle for this:Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
All of your statements about how the situation went down are contested; the deputies visit, the nurses interview, the suicide threat.
Probably the stripping of the woman would also be contested if it hadn't been filmed.
What I find upsetting is that the police are called to assist a woman in distress (who may have been drinking in her own home) who claims to have been assaulted. They arrive, they turn off their cameras, a gang of pervs, including men, strip off her clothes, stare at her vagina, leave her naked for six hours, while she's screaming in obvious outrage and terror. You don't think there's a reason why every fucking single 'civilized' country in the world bans people from the opposite gender doing strip searches?
You're a fucking enabler. I swear, sometimes I post stories like this because they're so obviously disgusting, that I hope that even people I normally disagree with can reach some bridge of common humanity. It shits me no end that every time I do this I am shocked to discover that there are people who can't see a problem with my story.
I can't be bothered going into what should be FUCKING OBVIOUS about why this is a FUCKING CRIME. And why if this is happening to this woman, who is merely a tiny tip of a huge iceberg that includes at least five other women from this police office, and more generally prostitutes, minorities and other disenfranchised women across the country, it speaks to the inhumanity of many people who are given legal power over normal citizens.
You need to take a deep breath. Jyn provided well constructed commentary that called into question the verifiability of the facts at hand, and your response is simply to start calling people with dissenting opinions "fucking enablers", labeling the police a "gang of pervs", inventing and then exaggerating the series of events, and generally just getting bent at everybody.
The woman was drunk and uncooperative. She was put on suicide watch. She was given the option to remove her own clothes, but seemed far too incoherent to understand what was happening. Belaboring the "strip search" terminology is pointless redundancy - there wasn't one. Her clothes were removed to prevent her from doing harm to herself.
And every single statement you've made in both posts is also contested/a matter of opinion. What is your point? I know I'm at least speaking from a point of view with actual knowledge of police proceedings and practices. Are you? As far as I can tell, your reaction is purely emotional and contains no actual, rational thought.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
All of your statements about how the situation went down are contested; the deputies visit, the nurses interview, the suicide threat.
Probably the stripping of the woman would also be contested if it hadn't been filmed.
...and was arrested for the reasons I mentioned. At least 1 definitely, the others probably. The fact that she was assaulted does not mean she did nothing wrong and did not deserve to be arrested. We do not have all the details, but the grand jury did. The grand jury did not find the officers guilty, so we are going to have to assume (yes, assume) that, based on the verdict, Mrs. Steffey was the one in the wrong.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
What I find upsetting is that the police are called to assist a woman in distress (who may have been drinking in her own home) who claims to have been assaulted.
Every bit of this is conjecture. Turn off their cameras? There may or may not have been a reason for that. It may or may not have even happened at all in that way. Again, the grand jury knows.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
They arrive, they turn off their cameras, a gang of pervs, including men, strip off her clothes, stare at her vagina, leave her naked for six hours, while she's screaming in obvious outrage and terror.
Gang of pervs? Staring at her vagina? That entire stripping was completely professional. She was hysterical and obviously uncooperative. Force was necessary. There was no inappropriate or deviant touching. No one said, "Oh, man. Look at that. I'd love to get me a piece of that." Being naked is far from the worst thing in the world. Being naked in front of other people is far from the worst thing in the world. She was not sexually assaulted, get over it.
First off, this wasn't a strip search. It was suicide prevention. Gender is a moot issue. Secondly, a doctor advised it. She was left naked for 6 hours because she was deemed too dangerous to herself still. If you have a problem with the call, you'd have to take it up with the doctor. If there was any planned vagina ogling, it came from him/her. The police listened to the advice of a professional, and acted on the advice in a professional manner.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
You don't think there's a reason why every fucking single 'civilized' country in the world bans people from the opposite gender doing strip searches?
All that aside... ah yes, you're right. "Every fucking 'civilized' country in the world" also bans doctors of the opposite sex from seeing patients and... oh wait. Never mind. They don't. IMO, sex should not matter when law enforcement entities are performing their duties. It is a professional situation. Regardless of my opinion, it would have been an issue had it actually been considered a strip search, but that matter was already dealt with. What don't you get about the fact that the officers in the video were acting in a professional manner?
And you seem to simply be blindly anti-establishment. I mean really? You want to go back and forth like that? Come on. As far as reaching a 'bridge of common humanity' goes, do you really think I wouldn't want justice done if there was actual wrongdoing on the department's part? What I posted before was not enabling. It was offering a viewpoint (with more insight and a more personal perspective than your own, unless you care to contradict me on this) that differed from yours. It was offering a viewpoint purely based off of what we both saw in that video and read online. Those are our only sources of information. You saw horrible wrongdoing. I saw a normal, necessary police procedure.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
You're a fucking enabler. I swear, sometimes I post stories like this because they're so obviously disgusting, that I hope that even people I normally disagree with can reach some bridge of common humanity.
What was shown in that tape in and of itself was not a crime. That is a fact you are going to have to accept, like it or not. A grand jury agreed, and that was with a lot more info than just a tape.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
It shits me no end that every time I do this I am shocked to discover that there are people who can't see a problem with my story.
I can't be bothered going into what should be FUCKING OBVIOUS about why this is a FUCKING CRIME.
Big surprise. More women came forward. Do you immediately assume they're all telling the truth? They're not simply trying to get in on this or maybe even just trying to "help" Hope Steffey? Even if it turns out that every one of them actually was treated in similar fashion, strip searching and suicide prevention stripping happens. It's a part of police work. Of course it's going to have happened before.Quote:
Originally posted by Malacasta
And why if this is happening to this woman, who is merely a tiny tip of a huge iceberg that includes at least five other women from this police office...
If there *is* anything actually fishy going on in the department, you're going to have to start with the doctor who advised them to do this. You're also going to have to count on the unlikely occurrence that it was the same doctor who recommended this action for every one of those other women. Then, you'd work your way up from there.
Mal, I've got nothing against you, but you're simply going about this the wrong way. You can't believe that every single person who claims to be a victim is the actual victim. If this "bridge of common humanity" you wrote about actually existed, where do you think we'd be as a society? If everyone shared your views on such matters, things would completely fall apart. Institutions would crumble the moment anyone yelled, "Rape!", whether it's true or not. Calm yourself down and, if you feel like it, reply when you're not so emotionally charged.
EDIT:
I would just like to reiterate that every single fact and opinion I've posted are based purely off of what I've seen and read about in the currently available resources. We have different backgrounds, and therefore we have different views on what happened.
But who knows? Maybe they WILL look (or are looking) into the doctor who advised their actions. Maybe they WILL find that there is a horrible mess of despicable motives surrounding said doctor and/or the department. If that turns out to be the case, I will obviously eat every word I've posted here. I have no problem admitting my viewpoint may be wrong.
Malacasta, you need to be willing to acknowledge that you may be wrong about this as well. You need to be willing to eat your words if you're wrong. I do not think this has even occurred to you regarding this subject, so I am suggesting it... not only to maintain fairness and the spirit of "agreeing to disagree" that should exist on these boards, but also for your own peace of mind.
I think maybe you are shocked that people don't agree with your assessment of various stories because you lack worthwhile assessment capabilities.
You see horror and atrocity where every other person sees the arrest of an overly drunk woman who was probably assaulted. Her interactions with the cops resulted in her arrest. Is it enabling? Yes. It is enabling a law enforcement official to make a judgement in a situation to arrest the loudest, drunkest, likely most hostile and potentially physical person at the scene.
I admit to enabling my police officers to carry out their duties.
Moderator Note: Minor edit to remove, uh, wildly inflammatory language.
Let's leave aside the police for the moment. I am very troubled that a doctor would think it's at all helpful or appropriate for a suicidal woman to be left naked in a cell. I am willing to believe this is "normal" police policy for a suicide watch, but I still find it shocking, and I still don't see any ethical way a doctor could be involved. I'm not a doctor or mental health professional, but I haven't been able to find any evidence online that this is how mental health professionals normally treat suicidal patients.
I would also say, again leaving the police aside, a grand jury not indicting them doesn't mean the woman was guilty of anything. She could still be completely innocent, and the victim of a terrible experience, even if the police did nothing wrong.
I tend to think the problem is with the department's policy regarding potentially suicidal suspects, especially women. It's all fine and good to say women shouldn't react to forced nudity with such terror and trauma, as long as the person stripping them is a detached professional. No, being naked isn't the worst thing in the world. Yes, it is sexist and heteronormative to assume that a male officer would be less professional than his female colleague when dealing with a naked woman. However, we have to reflect the real world. Women are sexualised and victimised much more frequently by men, and American women live in a culture with a strong nudity taboo. It isn't unreasonable to expect male officers NOT to participate in this activity, whether it's a suicide strip, a strip search, or whatever you want to characterise it as. I would have thought most reasonable people would agree it would be a good idea if male officers weren't forcibly stripping female suspects a doctor has already identified as emotionally vulnerable.
General practice(at least in an institutional setting), from what I remember from school (I have a degree in Corrections), is that when a person is brought in, they are assessed by staff who are trained to assess a person's suicide risk, through use of a suicide risk assessment (I have both seen and done these, and they are certainly -not- something that someone could do without the proper educational training), and based on that assessment they are assigned a risk factor of small, medium or high risk for suicide.Quote:
Originally posted by Graeblyn
Let's leave aside the police for the moment. I am very troubled that a doctor would think it's at all helpful or appropriate for a suicidal woman to be left naked in a cell. I am willing to believe this is "normal" police policy for a suicide watch, but I still find it shocking, and I still don't see any ethical way a doctor could be involved. I'm not a doctor or mental health professional, but I haven't been able to find any evidence online that this is how mental health professionals normally treat suicidal patients.
At a medium or high risk for suicide, the person is secluded from everything. Their belongings, other people, clothing, and anything else that they may use to harm themselves. They are then put in a cell with a surveillance camera that is never supposed to be turned off, with nothing more than a bed, and an extremely heavy-weight, tear resistant fabric blanket and "gown" as seen HERE . The person is then placed on suicide watch for a minimum 12-24hrs, and until the institution's mental health professional can be brought in to further evaluate the person.
Bear in mind that the above mentioned comments are SOP for -institutions- and not a police station, though I would imagine that they would be similar. Why she was not given a gown, I cannot say.
EDIT: It is also SOP for institutions that unless it is -absolutely- necessary (due to a lack of available and appropriate personnel, though in those cases at least ONE member of the person's sex must be present), a female officer will NEVER partake in a search(strip or pat down) or clothing removal of a male, and vice-versa.
Here is a real (in my opinion) police abuse of power situation to be concerned about. Big difference in the way officers in each respective circumstance react proportional to the situation.
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/s...ves/163025.asp
No they aren't.Quote:
Originally posted by Jyn
People watch these videos and get upset when they see such displays, but they are necessary to enforce the law.
I really wish more information was available about this, so I could have an informed opinion. Was it neccessary for male officers to be present? What evidence is there that she appeared to be suicidal? How about the rest of the video evidence?
I guess what I can say is that if that was by the book, the book needs to be rewritten. It really shouldn't have went down the way it did. The procedures Vidare described seem pretty reasonable. I guess it's possible that there were too few female officers available to handle it. But leaving her naked in a cell for 6 hours? That's ridiculous.
To some degree, I do. I believe it is EXTREMELY important to monitor agents of the state for abuses of their power. To assume everything the state does is on the up and up is an invitation for it to trample all over the rights of the public. In the absence of contradictory evidence, I tend to believe the accusations of members of the public over the word of the state.Quote:
Originally posted by Jyn
Big surprise. More women came forward. Do you immediately assume they're all telling the truth?
So, yes, I believe these women for the time being. It's alot less dangerous to believe them and be proven wrong than it is to believe the police and be proven wrong.
One thing that seems to happen a LOT in today's society is the Court of Public Opinion acting as though it knows better than the official courts, even though the former is basing its judgement on one, often deliberately slanted, news report or video - while the latter has a wealth of other evidence from which to work. I'm not saying that the police are necessarily right just because they're police, but I am saying that they're not necessarily wrong just because some video makes them appear in a bad light. The courts aren't perfect either, but at least they have a lot more information.
This woman may and may not have done anything wrong. The police may and may not have acted unprofessionally. But whichever way it is, I think the big kerfuffles over small amounts of information are wrong. If you want to solve problems of corruption, unprofessional activity, abuse of power, etc, the best way to do it is to get all the facts - court transcripts, etc - and then make a calm and reasoned publication. Forums threads like this, while they may be entertaining, are not going to solve anything. Skim over this thread, and ask yourself: If I were the Chief Commissioner of Police, would this strike me as a trustworthy account of what's going on in the department?
I'd say the answer is No.
I agree. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, that is not an option in this case. It went before a grand jury, and the proceedings of a grand jury are secret, from what I understand. Thus the facts can't be gained via court transcript, and the accused don't seem to be putting their evidence out there into the public either.Quote:
Originally posted by Rosuav
If you want to solve problems of corruption, unprofessional activity, abuse of power, etc, the best way to do it is to get all the facts - court transcripts, etc - and then make a calm and reasoned publication.
I agree that it definitely would be nice to have more information. For all we know, though, that bit of information is that the stripping initially *did* begin with only female officers. For all we know, Hope fought like a raving lunatic and the female officers were forced to call in more help. Or, maybe it went down just like Mrs. Steffey said.Quote:
Originally posted by leira
I really wish more information was available about this, so I could have an informed opinion. Was it neccessary for male officers to be present? What evidence is there that she appeared to be suicidal? How about the rest of the video evidence?
I guess what I can say is that if that was by the book, the book needs to be rewritten. It really shouldn't have went down the way it did. The procedures Vidare described seem pretty reasonable. I guess it's possible that there were too few female officers available to handle it. But leaving her naked in a cell for 6 hours? That's ridiculous.
So, some people will initially take the individual's side over that of the department's. That's fine. That part of the public opinion will help to drive the investigations. Other people will initially trust in the department.
I think one of the problems in these situations is that a lot of us are jaded. Some of us have seen far too many abuses of power. Others have seen far too many people getting out of their mistakes by pinning the blame on the bigger target.
Part of my stance is that our entire judicial process is, supposedly, based on the assumption of innocence until proven guilty. There is no reason for this not to be extended to the sheriff's department in this case. Is abuse of power a possible issue? Of course, but it's no more or less common than any other crime. These officers are no more or less likely to be guilty of this crime than anyone else accused of some other crime, and so they should receive all the same protections under the law.
Except the the absence of evidence in this case came from the citizen's side, not the state's. This case went before a grand jury and failed. This means that not only was there not enough evidence to convict the department of a crime (had it been a criminal trial), but also there wasn't enough evidence of her claims to even hold the criminal trial in the first place.Quote:
Originally posted by leira
In the absence of contradictory evidence, I tend to believe the accusations of members of the public over the word of the state.
That was a jury of Hope Steffey's peers who decided this.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, because I may be misremembering, but aren't you of the shameless "fuck the police" mentality? Either way, you're either being intentionally ignorant, or legitimately ignorant. Which is it, so I know how to respond?Quote:
Originally posted by Rilthyn
No they aren't.
LOLWUT!?Quote:
Originally posted by Jyn
Forgive me if I'm wrong, because I may be misremembering, but aren't you of the shameless "fuck the police" mentality? Either way, you're either being intentionally ignorant, or legitimately ignorant. Which is it, so I know how to respond?
http://homepage.mac.com/jatticusryan/.Public/nwa.jpgQuote:
Originally posted by Jyn
"fuck the police"
Approves.