News link

New York police officers who fired 50 rounds into a vehicle with no gun were found not guilty today. I know there's all sorts of cries of racism and the government protecting its own surrounding this...but seriously. 50 rounds is intent to kill. There was no gun. Race and occupation aside, WTF? Even if you believe every word of the officers' testimony and not a word of the prosecutors, WTF? I wasn't aware that a hit and run warranted emptying your pistol, reloading, and firing some more.

Mrr.

Never ever trust the po po!

I swear to you unless you have some friends in the police force. Never trust them. If you have friends, make sure they know whats going on when you get in trouble so you don't get hurt.

One of my best friends is a federal attorney, he said to me if I ever get pulled over again, keep my window up, call him and then lower the window only enough to slide the phone through and let him talk to the police.

I did it one time.... and when I got the phone back, I was free to go, no questions asked.... I <3 my best buddy!!! And yeah I got pulled over for changing lanes without a signal or some dumb , not speeding which is why I was let go without a ticket. I am sure if I was speeding I would have gotten the ticket and still been treated like a human being.

This makes me sad. I just honestly don't see how anyone could justify shooting a dude 50 times with 'oops, I thought he had a gun.'

Can I have your friend's name and number? I've got no friends in law and the only person I know in law enforcement does immigration.

S. Wise, but I can't give his number out. He and I did ALOT of not so great things in our past. He managed to get expunged and went to law school. He now does alot of defense work. But he doesn't normally do things like he does for me for the regular guy, since his stuff is normally federal. I am an exception because I did things to cover his ass in the past and he took care of me 100x over..... I actually owe him so much for all the help he has been to me.

A major problem though is it is better to know a good lawyer in the area you live in. What S. did was kinda not on the up and up because being from another state, he doesn't have the "right" to practice in the state I was in at the time. Although he did not mention this to the law enforcement officer. Now if I got in trouble and it was a federal matter, he would be allowed to defend me wherever I was, but hopefully I would never be in trouble with the likes of Federal Law Enforcement.

And I HOPE if I WAS one of MY BUDDIES who I know would GIVE ME A HEADS UP!!!.... Yes if you are reading this you better give me a heads up if federal law enforcement was ever mad at me man

If you are in Virgina a great attorney name is Whitesel or Whitesell, he is real good with drug related issues, and with DUI's and such. He used to be a DA or Ass DA in Fairfax County, but went to where the money was... defense. He is a bit pricey but he is one of the top 3 there.

If you live in another state, it is hard to find a great lawyer unless you go searching for one.



As for the people shooting like they did.... its , and honestly. I don't care if they thought he had a gun or not. There is a protocol to follow for a situation like that, and it is NOT fire 50 rounds into the car on the ASSUMPTION of the perp having a weapon.

Hell I have a weapon in a car when I am driving... a silly knife I use to cut boxes, etc.... but since it is in a glovebox, it could be called a concealed weapon and I really wouldnt want to be shot 50 times under the assumption that I am so fast I could grab a knife and get out of a car at warp speed injuring people with weapons on me.

Just goes to show you, best to keep a clean record. If the guy's friends weren't so shady, the cops would probably be in jail.

I read about this and watched some news reports on it. It's just terrible, really. The NYPD are reportedly notorious for this sort of reckless behavior. They should be fired at least...

There's a difference between a police officer using lethal force, like firing at someone knowing that your aim isn't perfect and someone might die, and firing 50 rounds into a van. That's not a justifiable use of force. That's "DIE MOTHER !!" Even if there was a round fired, which there wasn't, but we're assuming that the police told the truth and the prosecutor's witnesses lied, I'm pretty sure police officers are expected not to respond with "DIE MOTHER !!"

See, I'm torn on this issue. I understand that in this case, the officers were clearly in the wrong for firing 50 rounds into someone. Quite a bit over the top. But, the NYPD (or any PD) is right in defending their own. You know why? Because if they didn't, people would run them all over.

The way things work in this country, those that protect the people are looked at with such disdain its amazing the departments still exist. Lawsuits are the quick and easy way to get what you want in this country. You were a dumbass and slipped on a wet sidewalk? Sue the property owner, you'll win. You spilled hot coffee in your lap? Sue the place that sold you exactly what you wanted-- hot coffee. It's their fault you spilled anyway.

The same thing happens with police and fire departments. My father has been a fire fighter since he was 18. He told me a story once about fighting a fire in an apartment complex. When it was out, the lady that lived in the apartment complex yelled and screamed that the firefighters had taken a few hundred dollars from her dresser. It was a lie of course, when would a firefighter have time to steal money from the back of a dresser drawer hidden under underwear when his life is in danger every second he's in the building? But you know what? She could have sued anyway, and even being dead wrong, she still could have gotten a settlement. She only dropped it because of a race issue.

People whine and complain when these people DO their jobs, so what do you expect from the departments? I'd stand behind my men too. The difference is, when they've been proven guilty, then I'd give them a hard boot.

I think 50 shots is probably excessive force in this case. But this doesn't mean ALL police officers are bad. I'm taking a criminal justice class, and i have also talked to some judges and to some police officers, and most of them are just people doing a job. Police officers put up with a lot of on a day-to-day basis. I would become a very cynical person real fast under the situations they are put through. The cops around here are pretty decent fellers, i get along pretty well with all of them. My cousin is a highway patrolman, so it offends me to hear people saying that all police officers are corrupt and should not be trusted.

Now on another note, I'm glad i don't drive through NYC. I have had guns in my vehicle. Plainly visible and unloaded, on my way to go shoot cans or targets. In a setting away from other people.

I understand what you are saying Ev...

And what the problem is.... that the majority of law enforcement/fire dept/etc. are actually good people. The problem is with the media we will only hear about the bad side of this. It will be blown out of proportion sometimes as well.

Yet there is a real problem with some law enforcement officers in certain situations. I think this is one of them, also wasn't it in Bensohurst where they raped a Hatian or something with a broomstick... Again NYC somewhere.

Then of course you see the King Beatings, I have also seen them go nuts on illegal aliens. Yes they are not citizens of the US but would we want to have our asses beat half to death while going from France to Spain by the border guards? I doubt it would be a fun thing. And yes America would cry out, even if the American Citizen's passport time limit had expired. (It used to be 6 months in 3 months out or something like that... I lived there alot longer, worked illegally and never got in trouble but I wasn't working at a fancy office in Madrid. Yet I wouldnt' have wanted to get my ass beaten over it.)

I don't think all police officers are bad. I don't think most are bad. I don't think most blacks are thieves and rapists, I don't think most Hispanics are illegal immigrants, I don't think most Arabs are terrorists, I don't think most priests are pedophiles, I don't think most polygamists abuse their wives and children, I don't think most politicians are corrupt, and I don't think most athletes are druggies.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter, because some are, and you need to address them when they pop up.

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

Etc.

If you're going to bring up examples to show "why the system fails," please don't pick one where there was some fault, and the jury's rather... excessive finding was hammered down substantially.

Sure, it doesn't always work, and it does feel biased towards the corporations a lot of the time simply due to the funds involved, but there's generally more to a story than just the little tag line, "Oh my, someone sued McDonald's because they spilled coffee!" (McDonald's lawyers didn't help at all in this case, as the jury found them to be rather obnoxious and it's been theorized that this was the reason the jury slapped them with such a high penalty)

There definitely are issues, but they're not always quite as bad as the tag lines make them seem.

To your "two minds" about the matter, I agree to an extent. The people in these departments need to be able to rely on each other in order to do their job, so they need to stick together. At the same time-- if someone in the department is stepping way, way out of line to the point where it's obvious to everyone there, I'd think it would start getting rather difficult to rely on them. The only time I don't see this being the case is if it's turned into an "Us against Them" in which it doesn't matter what the public who's being protected thinks, as long as the department's kept safe.

By the way: A settlement isn't a finding given by the jury for a successful lawsuit. It's not winning, it's the corporation deciding that they don't want to deal with the courts and just reach an agreement on their own. If she got a settlement for that, it would be because the fire department didn't want to deal with the lawsuit, not because anyone found that they did something wrong.