Just yesterday, I put up an article on this blog titled 'If police want our trust, they must prove themselves to be trustworthy'. In it, I noted:
Any normal, sane, law-abiding person wants to like and trust them. We want to believe that they truly are protecting and serving us . . . but then something like this happens, and we have to ask: Why? Why does the steady drip, drip, drip of scandal, abuse of power, malfeasance of office, etc. continue?
Twenty-four hours later, what's the latest headline?
Seven Baltimore cops are caught on body cameras 'planting drugs in a car' days after another video was released 'showing an officer placing evidence'
I guess the 'good cops' of my acquaintance (of whom, thank God, there are several) must think it's not worth getting out of bed some days, because they can't win for all the losing that their less honest and scrupulous 'brothers in blue' do without compunction.
I guess we can chalk this one up as a win for body cameras. Now, if we could just stop (some) officers from switching them off or 'forgetting to switch them on' at critical moments . . .
Peter
11 comments:
Why would anyone think that police officers are any different than any other cross-section of society. They are no more virtuous or corrupt than any other in your society. The only reason why your, or anyone's friends and associates might be (slightly) different is due to the selection criteria imposed upon those chosen to be included within an individual's social circle. You pick those that you believe to be a certain "quality".
Humans are depraved by nature; that anyone is not as bad as they could be does not obviate this fact. Police officers, bakers, politicians, plumbers, carpenters...does not matter. Humans are intrinsically evil; that is a basic fact of Christian theology.
Anonymous above-
I cannot fault your truth, but there is one thing to bear in mind-
Corruption in a carpenter or a baker does far less harm than corruption in those we trust to administer our laws. Even a criminal may break our arm or steal from us, or at the extreme, kill us- but a corrupt public servant does far worse- they betray us. So not only is the crime planting evidence, it is betrayal of the public trust. Treason, in other words.
Get out of bed? Hell, at the rate you're owing, eventually they won't show up for work at all. It's like being a gun club duffer, and having liberal morons blaming you for the work of mass muderers. Or holding your feet to the fire for the actions of pedophile priests.
Fact is it's already starting. The good cops I know - all, to a man - retired the SECOND they were eligible. Further, they flat out refused to see their kids follow in their footsteps. The public, the judiciary, and the media is making the job so unpleasant that only dummies will do it.
More is n the way.
It's Bal'more... no surprise... sigh
Axon (formerly TASER) has a switch (Signal Sidearm) that attaches to the firearm holster which will activate any Axon-brand camera within 30-50 feet. It's not ideal, but it's a start. Tie that into all of their cruiser systems so that ANY camera can signal any other camera nearby to start recording.
I'm not sure we want the body cams on all the time. Cruiser cams aren't (yet). They mostly trigger on lights, door opening or a manual trigger. Always-on bodycams raise some privacy issues too, like bathroom time, or private conversations.
"Now, if we could just stop (some) officers from switching them off or 'forgetting to switch them on' at critical moments . . ."
I have a simple solution that crooked cops would HATE; create the legal presumption that any time there should be video of an event involving cops, and for some reason there isn't, the cops are lying. No bullshit about "We confiscated the witness's cell phone as evidence but - oops! - the video got deleted". No "We forgot to turn on the body cams.". No video where there should be video? Then the cops may not testify. Period.
Some time back, Ken White at the Popehat blog mentioned a conversation he had where he stated that he believed cops testifying in a court case were just as likely to lie under oath to obtain a conviction as a gang banger was to lie under oath to avoid one.
Police work has become its own enemy; cops are notoriously incestuous, associating - and, as a result, trusting - only other cops. A cop will trust another cop he works with closely, but, importantly, not trust that cop completely - something is always held back regarding trust. He will trust another cop in his agency, but to a lesser degree, and trust cops with other agencies to a still lesser degree.
"You're not born until you're sworn" is the mantra, and anyone not a long-term sworn LEO with on-the-job cred is an "other," which includes non-sworn members of his own department. Look up "Untermenschen."
It's no surprise that some cops plant evidence, create false testimony and lie under oath, and to think that Baltimore PD is substantially more corrupt than any other LE agency is viewing the situation through the proverbial rose colored glasses. Trust them at your peril because the honest ones protect the dishonest ones, and since they all wear the same outfit you cannot tell them apart.
You may hate being right, but could you stand being left?
Where I live cops have had body cams for a year now I think.
Then one day a defense council requested some body cams for a related case. Turns out the cops had left their cams on while talking to confidential informants. The same 3 confidential informants who turned up dead within a week of the body cam request.
There was actually a debate about leaving cams on or not because the COPS actually wanted to leave the cams on so they can prove their side of the story if something happens.
I don't think I heard what the resolution to that debate was. But I just post this to remind people that there are unintended consequences to everything. And if you want to find an honest cop, find one that is in favor of the body cams and wants to keep theirs on.
In jurisdictions with body cams, justified police shooting increase.
Apparently, if the cop knows the camera will justify it, he is more likely to shoot.
The left should be careful what it wishes for.
The current euphemism for these badged criminals is "Bad actors". They used to call them "Bad apples", until someone recalled the full saying: One bad apple spoils the bunch.
I don't know a single good cop, Peter. I don't know any good ones either. I try to avoid them, because they are as fallible as everyone else, but as Raven said, they can arbitrarily decide whether I live, die, or languish in the system. Why should I take that risk?
I know a few retired cops who are good guys, like my father-in-law. But just as the police regard a "civilian" like me as "the other", I have to regard them as potentially dangerous. Officer Friendly is nearly extinct.
Post a Comment