Time to Revisit this: The Supreme Court does not bow to Public Pressure.

Laura Coates, Joey Jackson, we the people need to tell the old stodgy and political hacks at SCOTUS that their cop brutality-enabling decisions need to be revisited before civil war is unleashed thanks to their shortsightedness.

Let's have a layman's look at the two top decisions.

Graham v. Connor

The court said that "the reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. [This and other legal material is taken from a post on PoliceOne.com]

That's right SCOTUS, leave it up to the 'reasonable' officer. I, like you, am positive that the officer would admit to the use of excessive force..AND BE FIRED or imprisoned. It, of course, would never come to that because by the time the shit is even thinking of hitting the fan, the police union representatives have begun to coach the reasonable officer. In the Michael Brown case, even the FBI came to the cop's defense with total BS.

In the George Floyd case, will the courts now ask the reasonable officer if he thought Mr. Floyd had the physical strength to break his handcuffs. "Yes, your honor. the perpetrator was still able to speak even as I applied all the pressure I could summon to his trachea and carotid. Waddus dat tel u? ...er, your Onna." [my apologies to the Floyd family if I have offended them in any way with my writings]

Tennessee v. Garner

"When a police officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may NOT use deadly force to prevent escape UNLESS [emphasis mine] the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

To be fair to SCOTUS, they were overturning a Tennessee law that allowed a cop to shoot first and ask questions later. However, this is another case where the police union representative can tweak the story to show compliance with v. Garner. Does SCOTUS even know about police unions and how they are the best unions in the world vis-a-vis their members? Of course not, they live in a gilded edifice surrounded by all the trappings of luxury while we live in a corroded edifice with all the trappings of injustice. If the court had a godly share of decency, they may have instead said, "no shooting unless the suspect is or has aimed a true weapon at any person. Barring that, use the f___ing technology you have to find the suspect where he can be apprehended with the non-deadly tools of the trade. This isn't the wild west where the perp can take off to the hills never to be seen again."

Scotus is not going to revisit--they are cowards, but I think they can be made to acquiesce to our demands if we show up en masse; but alas, with covid around, I can't ask anyone to join me at this edifice of injustice.

The quickest response is to demand that fellow cops intervene in cases of overt brutality or risk punishment to whatever measure is given to the abusive cop. Also, I'd prevent police unions from seeing their member until after he or she has provided a signed statement.

I'd like to take this opportunity to comment on Carroll v. U.S. quoting from above-mentioned website:

        In Carroll, the Court established the "automobile exception" to Fourth Amendment             protections against warrantless searches. In this Prohibition-era case, the Court                    noted the inherent difference between buildings and vehicles – buildings remain                 stationary while cars and other vehicles can be moved and hidden before a warrant            can be issued. The Court held that if officers have probable cause that an automobile         contains evidence of a crime, the vehicle in question can be searched without a                    warrant.

This is a specious argument today because, simply put, the vehicle that can 'move' can also be followed (police drone) while the police obtain the warrants. But, it's easier to eff us over and take your chances seeing what incriminating evidence you can find unrelated to the initial stop. There's almost always something, and, if there isn't, well we've heard cases of unscrupulous acts--let's leave it at that.


Media Notes:
Laura Coates--what a gem--informed us of Scotus decisions leading to Minnesota Turmoil. Joey Jackson--I'd want him and Ms. Coates on my team. Omar Jimenez, let me tell you, you are lucky Minnesota isn't using nylon ties as handcuffs. Btw, could the police say that they "suspected" you were not legit because of the absence of a CNN logo on cap or jacket?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

New Jersey's Department of Personnel

I'm 57 years old. That alone makes it very hard to penetrate the job market. However, NJDOP has a website where you can browse available jobs and submit an application along with $15. I did that and I waited and waited for the process to reach the stage where the actual hiring agency would give out interviews for the position. 2 months into that last stage (the DOP said that the hiring agency had 90 days in which to interview candidates), I got anxious and decided to call the municipality. They were supposed to pick from the top 3 candidates but they told me in no uncertain terms that they were going to give it to "the person who was already doing the job." When I questioned the ethics and legality of their decision, I was told that they really hadn't finalized things. This person was hoping that I would go away but, sadly, NJ is a state where ageism and/or crony-ism is condoned. Stay tuned, I'm waiting to see if I get an interview and if I don't get the job,...
Read more

Size and other Characteristics Matter in Trumpville

Why was Comey fired? He towered over Trump, that's why. It's a no-no. That other dude that knew his job well was tall, and I suspect the administration knew all the time of his spousal abuse history but it only became a problem for him when his height got on the president's nerve, OUT. This height obsession is a conflation of the President's own tallness and NY real estate where the bigger the edifice, the bigger your status. Look at whom he holds on to--Sessions, plenty of reason to fire him but he's all so diminutive that Mr. Trump feels he might be charged with child abuse if he were to act against him; besides, Sesssions takes it on the chin and will forever hold the distinct "honor" of being the first mainstream Republican to embrace the President's candidacy. This represents two pluses. The short and tough-looking General Mattis stays while the bigger and better looking Tillerson goes. Mustaches: if you have one, you're out but a whit...
Read more

I Doubt My Mother-in-Law will ever get Covid Even at 90+

You see, she has never been a germaphobe and that means her immune system is tip top. When you're not a germaphobe, you subject yourself to all manner of germs that immunize you against similar organisms. My German mother-in-law cleans her home meticulously but she has no compunction with sticking her hands into the sewer and unclogging it by hand. "But Midge, I have a snake for that. Ah, what's the big deal, she says to me." Never argue with your mother-in-law. When your mother tells you to wash your hands before supper, is she doing you a disfavor? I think so. In countries with many parasites or in our present pandemic, you want to wash them off your hands but, if not, you want lots and lots of germs to keep your immune system on guard. This brings me to the factoid that Women are less likely to get or die from Covid. Duh, obviously, who subject themselves to more germs as a parent? The one who plays in the parlor with the kids or the one who cleans their diaper...
Read more