Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

aikoaiko

(34,185 posts)
Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:35 PM Jul 2016

I once gave police the benefit of the doubt when they shot people.

I once gave police the benefit of the doubt when they shot people. Regardless of race if a weapon was found at the scene it was almost automatic for me to assume the worst of the shot person. Unless there was evidence that it was dropped by the police, it was good enough evidence for me.

That time has passed.

If police said the person "made a furtive movement", I gave them the benefit of the doubt, too. How was I to know the truth?

That time has passed.

I also gave police the benefit of the doubt regarding the higher rate of police shootings of POC versus white people. It was the Walter Scott shooting where a police officer shot Scott 8 times in the back as he ran away and then appeared to nonchalantly plant evidence that he had a piece of the cops taser. It was cold-blooded murder. I realized that if that could happen, then all the accusations could be true. I needed to see it with my own eyes to believe. I should have believed my fellow POC citizens, but I didn't.

That time has passed.

The recent shootings of Philandro Castille and Alton Sterling have broke through my denial/benefit of the doubt some more. Clearly, these officers saw black men whom thought were carrying firearms (and they were right) and that was enough to generate enough fear to shoot them even though neither poses a lethal threat. Sadly, I needed to see it with my own eyes to believe. I should have believed my fellow POC citizens, but I didn't. We haven't heard from the explanation from the police, but whatever the explanation is they cannot claim they correctly saw a weapon/gun in their hands. Even if is true that Sterling was a low-level criminal who illegally carried a firearm and had recently brandished it while threatening a homeless person, but he did not have that gun in his hand when when the police shouted he has a gun and the police shot him. He was not a lethal threat and I will give the police the benefit of the doubt.

That time has passed.

I'm more convinced then ever that its time to stop giving the benefit of the doubt for police officers. I'm convinced that giving police the benefit of the doubt has led police to take less risk, shoot quicker, and shoot more -- especially when it involves POC.

I'm not a legal scholar but I wonder if its time to create laws where law enforcement is guilty of voluntary manslaughter if there is no weapon in the hands of the person shot by police. And if there is an object that a reasonable person might think is a weapon, but isn't, then they are automatically guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The specifics of the case would dictate punishment. Maybe involuntary and voluntary manslaughter are not the right terms/laws and new terms/laws might be needed where law enforcement shoots and kills someone when they were not in grave danger. I no longer trust the police, other law enforcement, justice departments, prosecutors, judges, and juries to decide what a reasonable person or cop would do in the situations they describe especially when it is a POC who is shot.


I can't find it on the internet, but at one point Maine had a target misidentification law for hunters where if they shot someone they could not claim they thought it was an animal because the evidence of the shot person was proof enough that they did not identify the target correctly and were guilty of a crime. It didn't matter what the person was wearing. It seemed logical and reasonable to me. If you shoot, you must be sure of what you are shooting it. Its a simple logic that should be applied to police.

The time has come to take drastic measures to address just this tip of the iceberg of police brutality that impacts POC disproportionately. There are lot more brutality and racism to address, but this is a necessary start. This is the low hanging fruit, so to speak.

Police won't like it. I get it, their lives are on the line. But citizens' lives are on the line, too. We must hold police to a higher standard.

eta: I'd even be willing to entertain the idea of extra penalties for shooting POC by cops in order to try to close the gap. I do believe there are extra penalties for killing a cop.

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I once gave police the benefit of the doubt when they shot people. (Original Post) aikoaiko Jul 2016 OP
k&r. Tamir Rice uppityperson Jul 2016 #1
policing needs to quit being a "make work" program for PTSD-riddled, roided-out combat vets. nt villager Jul 2016 #2
That too would be a big help. A lot of city police forces are desperate for recruits and they aikoaiko Jul 2016 #4
I agree. N/t roamer65 Jul 2016 #5
+100 heaven05 Jul 2016 #3
I hardly ever give anyone the benefit of the doubt; maybe soldiers in a warzone. Rex Jul 2016 #6
The Walter Scott murder convinced a lot of people ... Stuart G Jul 2016 #7

aikoaiko

(34,185 posts)
4. That too would be a big help. A lot of city police forces are desperate for recruits and they
Sat Jul 9, 2016, 01:51 PM
Jul 2016

are taking anyone with a pulse and will to serve.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
6. I hardly ever give anyone the benefit of the doubt; maybe soldiers in a warzone.
Sat Jul 9, 2016, 04:17 PM
Jul 2016

Murder is a pretty big issue and anyone in any career can do it, all it takes is a weapon and an unsuspecting person.

Stuart G

(38,453 posts)
7. The Walter Scott murder convinced a lot of people ...
Sat Jul 9, 2016, 05:57 PM
Jul 2016

The cop set himself up, got ready and shot...He was not threatened, and then planted the evidence so he could get away with it..All being photographed, cop too busy to see the photographer, cause he had to get everything just right to get away with it..and he would have except for the proof...

My guess is he will get 10 -15 years...for murder, and it really was 1st degree...cause once the guy ran away, he planned to kill.

Oh..if you do not remember the Walter Scott case..hit the link in the OP, you will after seeing the picture

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I once gave police the be...