Black man fatally shot by police in Los Angeles; Family says was lying down when shot

Status
Not open for further replies.
Enzom21 said:
Shouldn't they be recored at all times while on duty? Here is an example of why:
http://youtu.be/sgSfCxq0hdY
They incriminate themselves because they forgot to shut off the audio recording.


Yes law enforcement as a whole is broken, so that anger is justified.
Click to expand...

hardly, the system needs to be overhauled, but blanket demonization does no one good and is unfair.
Anyway I hope the incident in the OP is investigated. As far as reform goes, having through accounting of law enforcement when they discharge their weapon would be a start.
 
Cyan said:
The system of incentives and punishments that we have, combined with a non-perfect screening process for law enforcement candidates, will tend to create this kind of outcome. That's the sort of thing that people who say this presumably mean.

The nice thing is, at least in this case, the system may be fixable or at least patchable. The whole lapel-camera concept people are talking a lot about sounds pretty promising to me. If these shootings lead to more widespread demand for these cameras, at least some good may have come out of them.
Click to expand...

Considering how often "tapes go missing" regarding police recordings as it is I think they should have to be connected to live public feeds as well. There is no reasons for any shadows to hide behind.
 
Cameras won't change anything. How many videotaped encounters do we have of cops abusing the law? Of them murdering or assaulting innocent citizens? Those cops all got away regardless. I'm not against cameras, I'm simply stating that they're not a magic fix. Start actually holding these murderers accountable for their actions? Then we'll start seeing change.
 
Lowmelody said:
Considering how often "tapes go missing" regarding police recordings as it is I think they should have to be connected to live public feeds as well. There is no reasons for any shadows to hide behind.
Click to expand...

I don't think it should be connected to a live public feed, but I do think that in addition to the local storage device, that the recording should be fed to a third party.
 
besada said:
Someone needs to make a website. It needs to include every person killed by the police, starting from the site's inception, going forward. It should have a picture of every killed person, their name, the badge number and name of the officer who killed them, the site of the killing, and links to details. And at the top, there should be a simple counter. And on the sidebars, the data entered should be constantly updating a series of reports, including a demographic representation of who has been killed, socioeconomic data for the dead, geographical clusters of killed citizens, etc.

I think that very shortly, we would be ashamed to look at it. I'm not sure how ashamed we have to be to do something. I've called my representatives, both state and federal, to agitate for camera laws for police, but that doesn't seem like nearly enough. But I don't know what else to do.
Click to expand...

This is a great idea, and sad at the same time. Would have to be crowd sourced for sure though.
 
besada said:
Someone needs to make a website. It needs to include every person killed by the police, starting from the site's inception, going forward. It should have a picture of every killed person, their name, the badge number and name of the officer who killed them, the site of the killing, and links to details. And at the top, there should be a simple counter. And on the sidebars, the data entered should be constantly updating a series of reports, including a demographic representation of who has been killed, socioeconomic data for the dead, geographical clusters of killed citizens, etc.

I think that very shortly, we would be ashamed to look at it. I'm not sure how ashamed we have to be to do something. I've called my representatives, both state and federal, to agitate for camera laws for police, but that doesn't seem like nearly enough. But I don't know what else to do.
Click to expand...

CopWatch is a pretty good idea for a site, but I'm concerned with the potential for traffic given that a lot of Americans seem to agree or acquiesce with innocent people getting blown away by the people who are supposed to protect them. Maybe if it had an integrated forum function?

Oh and maybe the DoJ/FBI wouldn't let you do it. I'm sure someone's tried this before.
 
grap3fruitman said:
Cameras won't change anything. How many videotaped encounters do we have of cops abusing the law? Of them murdering or assaulting innocent citizens? Those cops all got away regardless. I'm not against cameras, I'm simply stating that they're not a magic fix. Start actually holding these murderers accountable for their actions? Then we'll start seeing change.
Click to expand...

Yeah that video of them wrestling down that guy with a choke hold was pretty blatant and then they came out and said it wasn't a choke hold. I don't think that would apply in reverse.
 
My father in law is a retired police officer, serving for over 30 years. He spent most of his last years in the Office of Professional Conduct (Internal Affairs). Every interaction I observed of him with an officer in uniform was stiff, they looked like they wanted nothing to do with him. It is very hard in some institutions to police your own, especially ones like law enforcement and military organizations. Hopefully, the investigations of incidents like this will be conducted in earnest.
 
Tedesco! said:
I don't think it should be connected to a live public feed, but I do think that in addition to the local storage device, that the recording should be fed to a third party.
Click to expand...

I curious why you feel that way. It would be a viable step after police are wired with recording apparatus. Considering what police do while on their job is by nature exposed to the public I'm struggling coming up with any reasons why we should obscure their activity to any degree when we have the technology to make their job as transparent as possible.
 
ipukespiders said:
This is not from the case in question, but it does give some insight on what a cop might be up against. Not comparing to this case. Was just posted on reddit:
Click to expand...

and yet cops all over the world manage to deal with this type of situation all thew time without being armed with guns at all.

and Reddit makes GAF look like MLK.
 
This makes this, what, the 4th incident like this in the past week?

I assume his "Punishment" is paid leave? Or maybe they'll show some grit and it will be unpaid leave.

He's getting paid leave like Karma Houdini isn't he?
 
ShinRPGamer said:
This makes this, what, the 4th incident like this in the past week?

I assume his "Punishment" is paid leave? Or maybe they'll show some grit and it will be unpaid leave.

He's getting paid leave like Karma Houdini isn't he?
Click to expand...

I don't get why people call it punishment or expect punishment to come before the investigation is complete.

Paid leave is given during the investigation. The punishment comes afterwards if there is any. Either a cop is fired, suspended, demoted, or arrested.

Enzom21 said:
But that's my point. What if they had been discussing that before the stop? We would never know that they were breaking the law.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but it's just going to more of a hassle for non-corrupt cops than corrupt cops. Corrupt cops are not going to get caught this way and only going to lead to dissent among police like the LAPD did with their audio recording devices.
 
besada said:
Someone needs to make a website. It needs to include every person killed by the police, starting from the site's inception, going forward. It should have a picture of every killed person, their name, the badge number and name of the officer who killed them, the site of the killing, and links to details. And at the top, there should be a simple counter. And on the sidebars, the data entered should be constantly updating a series of reports, including a demographic representation of who has been killed, socioeconomic data for the dead, geographical clusters of killed citizens, etc.

I think that very shortly, we would be ashamed to look at it. I'm not sure how ashamed we have to be to do something. I've called my representatives, both state and federal, to agitate for camera laws for police, but that doesn't seem like nearly enough. But I don't know what else to do.
Click to expand...

i see what your getting at, and thts why no one will look at the data. in the end white America is very insulated from these types of encounters with police, or with the injustices of the judicial system in general. so America as a whole doesn't think there's an issue, when these sort of cases happen and non-whites find fault with what occurred, the rest of America looks at these people with contempt and annoyance because theres a disconnect with what white America experiences and what non-whites experience with the judicial system. just look at how the school/mass shooters are always portrayed in the media, instead of labeling them cold blooded killers, the media portrays these people as "good kids/people who never showed signs of trouble", " bully victims", "suffered mental illness", " just snapped" , i mean theres literally a million excuses but no blame, they're always portrayed as part victim, part killer. black Americans and other non-white Americans never get that narrative, there's a always a narrative of them being "slightly guilty", "having it coming to them", "the punishment being just", "shouldn't have done...", i mean the excuses go on, but in this case they aren't coming from a place of sympathy instead its contempt. of course there are outliers but rarely do these stick as a trend.
 
ipukespiders said:
This is not from the case in question, but it does give some insight on what a cop might be up against. Not comparing to this case. Was just posted on reddit:
Click to expand...

Boo fucking hoo, I don't give a shit how he feels. Cops are murdering black people on a daily basis, so cry me a fucking river. Cops are all bad, and the good ones are just as guilty for not stopping them. My father was a cop, and he was a abusive racist piece of shit who has fucking confessed to being corrupt. Cops only care about that paycheck, fuck anyone else.

They'll do anything if it means less work or they get paid.
 
Lowmelody said:
I curious why you feel that way. It would be a viable step after police are wired with recording apparatus. Considering what police do while on their job is by nature exposed to the public I'm struggling coming up with any reasons why we should obscure their activity to any degree when we have the technology to make their job as transparent as possible.
Click to expand...

Because two police officers sitting in their car gossiping about someone else in their department or complaining about their chief because said chief wouldn't give them the shift they want is not necessary for the public to see. That's one of the reasons why some officer are reluctant to adopt cameras: They would lose all privacy.

I don't think any system would work 100%, but I do think at this moment in time cameras are the best solution. The cameras can activate when the lights are activated, or activate when the officer steps out of the car. I think that would satisfy most people.

One of the hurdles I see is setting up a third party that would record a wireless feed from the cameras. I haven't quit figured out how they would deal with storage and the releasing of the footage.

I also think you should fine the hell out of the officers that don't comply or try to circumvent the cameras.
 
USA today reporting with new details?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/12/lapd-shooting-ezell-ford/13985607/

As developments continue to unfold in the case of Michael Brown in St. Louis, details are emerging about the police shooting death of an unarmed, 24-year-old black man in South Los Angeles.

A vigil in response to the incident was scheduled for Tuesday evening in Los Angeles, said Officer Jane Kim, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles Police Department.

A woman who said she was the mother of the deceased told KTLA that the victim's name was Ezell Ford. The woman, who said her name is Tritobia Ford, told KTLA that her son was lying on the ground and complying with police commands when police shot him three times. She said police would give her no information about the shooting.

A man who identified himself as a cousin of Ezell Ford told KTLA that every police officer in the area knows that Ford had "mental problems" and "complications." The man told KTLA that police shot Ezell Ford in the back, and that when Ford's mother approached police asking for information, they pulled out billy clubs.
Click to expand...
 
Tedesco! said:
Because two police officers sitting in their car gossiping about someone else in their department or complaining about their chief because said chief wouldn't give them the shift they want is not necessary for the public to see. That's one of the reasons why some officer are reluctant to adopt cameras: They would lose all privacy.
Click to expand...
They are a public servant. Nothing they do should be private while they are on the job if that's what the public wants.

Cheddahz said:
if this is true, this whole thing just got really ugly
Click to expand...
She could have been attacking, another riot could have started out, there might have been a dog nearby, they have to come home from the frontlines, you wouldn't understand.
 
benjipwns said:
They are a public servant. Nothing they do should be private while they are on the job if that's what the public wants.
Click to expand...

Now hold on a minute, does that mean anyone who is on a paycheck issued by the government should give up all privacy?

I can understand at least a bit when people are chilling in their cars and shooting the shit, not wanting that stuff to be recorded. But I think there are work around for this issue.
 
Gentle Rodriguez said:
That's a lot

How horrific this is exactly depends on the total amount of raids though.
Click to expand...

Why should we accept even one mistake when these knock and announce raids are unnecessary? Is it that important to make sure no one flushed their meth?

That website is interesting, this is looking more and more like a bipartisan issue, so when are the politicians going to do something? This is an area that dems and limited gov - republicans should agree.
 
benjipwns said:
They are a public servant. Nothing they do should be private while they are on the job if that's what the public wants.
Click to expand...

If that's the case I would request that from my politicians before my police officers, but that's beside the point. I am a public servant. If the public wants to have a camera feed to my office does that mean I should let them?
 
KidGalactus said:
They support that system by being complicit. They are a part in the the machinery of the system which we both agree is a problem.
Click to expand...

Would love to see something like whistleblower status given to those that do stand up for what is right but that would be a huge mess with so many departments and things across America I would think.
 
TheLostBigBoss said:
I can understand at least a bit when people are chilling in their cars and shooting the shit, not wanting that stuff to be recorded. But I think there are work around for this issue.
Click to expand...

The camera activates when the lights are activated, or when the officer exits the patrol car. For officers that foot patrol, the camera should be activated when they leave the station. That sounds fair, no?
 
TheLostBigBoss said:
Now hold on a minute, does that mean anyone who is on a paycheck issues by the government should give up all privacy?

I can understand at least a bit when people are chilling in their cars and shooting the shit, not wanting that stuff to be recorded. But I think there are work around for this issue.
Click to expand...
How am I supposed to, as their employer, evaluate how well they do their job if they get to choose when to hide things from me?

Tedesco! said:
I am a public servant. If the public wants to have a camera feed to my office does that mean I should let them?
Click to expand...
No, you obey them.
 
silkysmooth said:
Would love to see something like whistleblower status given to those that do stand up for what is right but that would be a huge mess with so many departments and things across America I would think.
Click to expand...

This is what I was talking about. Maybe in my wildest dreams there could be a federal protection system mandated or something to skip the states and specific departments instituting it themselves.
 
benjipwns said:
She could have been attacking, another riot could have started out, there might have been a dog nearby, they have to come home from the frontlines, you wouldn't understand.
Click to expand...
what?

it sounds like ezell ford was following orders and he did/said something the cops didn't like (which could had been cause to his mental problems), yet "every cop in the area" knows that ezell ford has "mental problems and complications" and these cops didn't know or something triggered for the shooting to happen. the fact that the mom tried to get answers for the shooting and the cops responded by showing their clubs is also alarming and it sounds like they wanted to swipe the shooting under the rug and forget about it

now tell me, how would you understand, since according to you, i "wouldn't understand"?
 
TheLostBigBoss said:
Now hold on a minute, does that mean anyone who is on a paycheck issued by the government should give up all privacy?

I can understand at least a bit when people are chilling in their cars and shooting the shit, not wanting that stuff to be recorded. But I think there are work around for this issue.
Click to expand...

I think the rule someone brought up earlier (that's already implemented in some places) works fine: just turn them on for 15 minutes after the sirens are turned on. There may need to be some tuning to the rule, but that (and sending the videos to a 3rd party) should do something, if at least show they're working towards a solution
 
benjipwns said:
How am I supposed to, as their employer, evaluate how well they do their job if they get to choose when to hide things from me?
Click to expand...

...Because people still deserve privacy during work?

TheJLC said:
Technically, you're not their employer, the State is. They hired them for you and gave them permission to arrest you. :P
Click to expand...

Also this.

Tedesco! said:
The camera activates when the lights are activated, or when the officer exits the patrol car. For officers that foot patrol, the camera should be activated when they leave the station. That sounds fair, no?
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me.
 
benjipwns said:
How am I supposed to, as their employer, evaluate how well they do their job if they get to choose when to hide things from me?


No, you obey them.
Click to expand...

Technically, you're not their employer, the State is. They hired them for you and gave them permission to arrest you. :P

As my buddy says all the time when he hears that line. "Who's name is that on the check I receive? That's right, the damn city, not yours. I don't work for you." Edit: He says that to me and a few of our friends in jest. :P
 
TheJLC said:
I see your point, but it's just going to more of a hassle for non-corrupt cops than corrupt cops. Corrupt cops are not going to get caught this way and only going to lead to dissent among police like the LAPD did with their audio recording devices.
Click to expand...
But it shouldn't be an issue for good cops, they would just do their jobs and them being recorded at all times wouldn't even come up.
Tedesco! said:
If that's the case I would request that from my politicians before my police officers, but that's beside the point. I am a public servant. If the public wants to have a camera feed to my office does that mean I should let them?
Click to expand...

It should be both, but police have direct involvement with citizens so them being filmed is more important.
 
TheJLC said:
Technically, you're not their employer, the State is. They hired them for you and gave them permission to arrest you. :P
Click to expand...
Oh, that's right. Explains why they (and people I work with) don't go away when I tell them they're fired.

woen said:
You're not their employer and you have a really strange way of seeing transparency in a democratic state.
Click to expand...
How can you have a democratic state when the state hides information from the demos?
 
Enzom21 said:
But it shouldn't be an issue for good cops, they would just do their jobs and them being recorded at all times wouldn't even come up.


It should be both, but police have direct involvement with citizens so them being filmed is more important.
Click to expand...

The issue is not them doing their jobs and being good. It's being good cops and having their life being made public either at court, some stranger that files a FOIA request, or supervisor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Christopher Nolan’s ‘The Odyssey’ will be the first blockbuster shot ENTIRELY on IMAX cameras
25
690
jason10mm replied
Amouranth says Crypto-thieves invaded her house in the middle of the night, dragged her out of bed, and she shot one of them before SWAT arrived
Drama  2 3
144
13K
jason10mm replied
My HK soundbar says "Dolby Surround" when 5.1 content is playing, shouldn't it say "Dolby Digital"?
6
112
Stafford replied
Danny Boyles “28 YEARS LATER” was shot entirely on an iPhone 15 PRO. Makes it the largest movie ever shot on a phone.
2
78
7K
Trilobit replied
Breaking: US Treasury says it was hacked by China
2
75
5K
Lord Panda replied
Top Bottom