Police abuse

Smellyman

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

Baby was warned and had numerous opportunities to get itself out of the bathtub before the bathwater was thrown out. 

brianlux

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

Baby was warned and had numerous opportunities to get itself out of the bathtub before the bathwater was thrown out. 

Sounds to me like one of the strongest options is hinted at here:

"Details are limited given it's at the start of a wider dismantling process, including with regards as to who would provide the primary law enforcement. It's possible that the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office could play a role, given Minneapolis is in its jurisdiction."

County Sheriffs are often required better, more in-depth training but I've bumped into a few I'd just as soon forget. 

Will be interesting to see where this goes.

jerparker20

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

mickeyrat

  https://youtu.be/Wf4cea5oObY

pjl44

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

What makes you say the Camden model is unsustainable? It's been 7 years now and anything I've read seems to tout improvements. I'm certainly no expert and not even necessarily an advocate. Just curious where the soft spots are.

jerparker20

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

What makes you say the Camden model is unsustainable? It's been 7 years now and anything I've read seems to tout improvements. I'm certainly no expert and not even necessarily an advocate. Just curious where the soft spots are.

Maybe should have picked a better word than sustainable. From my understanding, Camden now has more officers patrolling the city under the county system and has dramatically increased the use of surveillance. Not sure that decreases “policing” per say as some folks are calling for. Camden is also much smaller than Minneapolis.

There are a lot of layers/ideas/options to be explored to resolving this issue. I’m open to them as reform is needed. After having spent numerous years working in adult education/workforce development for community based organizations, I guess I get a little skeptical when politicians throw out generalities stating they are going to do something like “disbanding” “dismantling” “community policing” without a plan to go along with it.  Sounds like pandering.

pjl44

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

What makes you say the Camden model is unsustainable? It's been 7 years now and anything I've read seems to tout improvements. I'm certainly no expert and not even necessarily an advocate. Just curious where the soft spots are.

Maybe should have picked a better word than sustainable. From my understanding, Camden now has more officers patrolling the city under the county system and has dramatically increased the use of surveillance. Not sure that decreases “policing” per say as some folks are calling for. Camden is also much smaller than Minneapolis.

There are a lot of layers/ideas/options to be explored to resolving this issue. I’m open to them as reform is needed. After having spent numerous years working in adult education/workforce development for community based organizations, I guess I get a little skeptical when politicians throw out generalities stating they are going to do something like “disbanding” “dismantling” “community policing” without a plan to go along with it.  Sounds like pandering.

Gotcha and I agree with everything you're saying. To your point, it will be easier to take a critical look at what Minneapolis intends to do once there is a firm plan.

OnWis97

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

What makes you say the Camden model is unsustainable? It's been 7 years now and anything I've read seems to tout improvements. I'm certainly no expert and not even necessarily an advocate. Just curious where the soft spots are.

Maybe should have picked a better word than sustainable. From my understanding, Camden now has more officers patrolling the city under the county system and has dramatically increased the use of surveillance. Not sure that decreases “policing” per say as some folks are calling for. Camden is also much smaller than Minneapolis.

There are a lot of layers/ideas/options to be explored to resolving this issue. I’m open to them as reform is needed. After having spent numerous years working in adult education/workforce development for community based organizations, I guess I get a little skeptical when politicians throw out generalities stating they are going to do something like “disbanding” “dismantling” “community policing” without a plan to go along with it.  Sounds like pandering.

Gotcha and I agree with everything you're saying. To your point, it will be easier to take a critical look at what Minneapolis intends to do once there is a firm plan.

Agreed...but the Minneapolis City Council is giving people the impression that they're just going to defund (the meaning of which people don't understand) and...well...that's it.  There seems to be no plan.  I hope it's just really poor communication.

tbergs

OnWis97 said:

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

jerparker20 said:

pjl44 said:

cincybearcat said:

Interested in seeing how this all works out. I kinda hate throwing the baby out with the bath water, but it’s bold. 

You should read that article about Camden. They also refer to what they're doing as "community policing" but there are actually more cops on the ground - they're just employed by the county vs. a traditional city PD. The other article hints at Minneapolis moving toward something similar (though no talk of head count).

I’m in Falcon Heights, MN where Philando Castile was murdered by cops. At that time our city was sharing police services with another municipality. Our city council terminated the agreement and put a bid out for police services. No one wanted it. 

In MN there is statute that a municipality must provide emergency response services, if the municipality is unable to provide, the county sheriffs department must provide the service. So Falcon Heights has Ramsey County providing the police services. 

With what Minneapolis city council is proposing, Hennepin County Sheriff’s department would then have to provide police services for the city.

As for what is happening in Camden, it doesn’t seem to be sustainable. Yes, there is no city PD, but they now have more county police who are being paid significantly less money. Not sure how that fixes any of the problems.

Ive been reading a book called the End of Policing by Alex Vitale. Lots of arguments and ideas for ways to reduce policing activities, reallocate funds to better serve communities without eliminating police. 

What makes you say the Camden model is unsustainable? It's been 7 years now and anything I've read seems to tout improvements. I'm certainly no expert and not even necessarily an advocate. Just curious where the soft spots are.

Maybe should have picked a better word than sustainable. From my understanding, Camden now has more officers patrolling the city under the county system and has dramatically increased the use of surveillance. Not sure that decreases “policing” per say as some folks are calling for. Camden is also much smaller than Minneapolis.

There are a lot of layers/ideas/options to be explored to resolving this issue. I’m open to them as reform is needed. After having spent numerous years working in adult education/workforce development for community based organizations, I guess I get a little skeptical when politicians throw out generalities stating they are going to do something like “disbanding” “dismantling” “community policing” without a plan to go along with it.  Sounds like pandering.

Gotcha and I agree with everything you're saying. To your point, it will be easier to take a critical look at what Minneapolis intends to do once there is a firm plan.

Agreed...but the Minneapolis City Council is giving people the impression that they're just going to defund (the meaning of which people don't understand) and...well...that's it.  There seems to be no plan.  I hope it's just really poor communication.

It's a horrible communication and will just end up pissing off people all around, both now and later.

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/06/07/minneapolis-city-council-announces-intent-to-dismantle-mpd/

Kat

Um...no. They must be some of the worst and definitely not proud.

https://twitter.com/tmorello/status/1269735849098276864

Gern Blansten

Kat said:

Um...no. They must be some of the worst and definitely not proud.

https://twitter.com/tmorello/status/1269735849098276864

Really strange...this and the SC case where the argument is that police should be immune from personal lawsuits.

Both cameras and personal liability exposure are what keep people honest.

Kat

I'm thinking that's what authoritarian types do to keep power over others...even when the others are trying to do what's right. They make a law so the right action is wrong...  Just like soul-eater...they don't want oversight.

tbergs

Kat said:

Um...no. They must be some of the worst and definitely not proud.

https://twitter.com/tmorello/status/1269735849098276864

I think this is being taken out of context. It appears to me they are saying areas that police have marked off for crimes scenes, investigations, etc. should not be filmed. The George Floyd incident and any other arrest, detainment or incident response is not what this is referring to. Link to the ordinance below.

Adopted by the City Council April 21, Ordinance 11746 makes filming a crime scene a class two misdemeanor punishable by up to four months in jail and a $750 fine.

The ordinance does not ban the recording of police activity in general.

Kat

Why would they ban recordings of that and couldn't they just say "we're investigating" anywhere and use that law to hide what they're doing? Has that been tested in court yet? And is it in a court that McConnell hasn't provided the judges who are not actually qualified. I may be off in the weeds but trust is definitely earned when it comes to some things.

tbergs

Kat said:

Why would they ban recordings of that and couldn't they just say "we're investigating" anywhere and use that law to hide what they're doing? Has that been tested in court yet? And is it in a court that McConnell hasn't provided the judges who are not actually qualified. I may be off in the weeds but trust is definitely earned when it comes to some things.

It would have been helpful if they had created a definition because I could see people being wary of what crime scene means, but generally, it's a physical space where a felony has occurred; homicide, assault, robbery, arson, etc. If people film those areas they may compromise evidence. It seems that public mistrust is going to really turn the current legal process on it's head. 

Kat

I'm thinking they can't lie in court about a crime when a citizen has a video of something they want to lie about. That's how far my cynicism has gone...we need good people in policing. I've always loved blue but I don't like bad apples and it's going to take the good police officers to get the bad apples out of their profession. The bad apples make the good officers look terrible and so the "good" officers are not trustworthy themselves because of that. It wonn't be easy, it never is but it's time to stand up. 
Thanks tbergs.  

pjl44

tbergs said:

Kat said:

Why would they ban recordings of that and couldn't they just say "we're investigating" anywhere and use that law to hide what they're doing? Has that been tested in court yet? And is it in a court that McConnell hasn't provided the judges who are not actually qualified. I may be off in the weeds but trust is definitely earned when it comes to some things.

It would have been helpful if they had created a definition because I could see people being wary of what crime scene means, but generally, it's a physical space where a felony has occurred; homicide, assault, robbery, arson, etc. If people film those areas they may compromise evidence. It seems that public mistrust is going to really turn the current legal process on it's head. 

What would be an example of evidence being compromised if someone is filming?

Kat

I sure couldn't think of anything and to me, the recording is merely a confirmation of reality. Not allowing recording sounds like someone wants to hide something.

Halifax2TheMax

pjl44 said:

tbergs said:

Kat said:

Why would they ban recordings of that and couldn't they just say "we're investigating" anywhere and use that law to hide what they're doing? Has that been tested in court yet? And is it in a court that McConnell hasn't provided the judges who are not actually qualified. I may be off in the weeds but trust is definitely earned when it comes to some things.

It would have been helpful if they had created a definition because I could see people being wary of what crime scene means, but generally, it's a physical space where a felony has occurred; homicide, assault, robbery, arson, etc. If people film those areas they may compromise evidence. It seems that public mistrust is going to really turn the current legal process on it's head. 

What would be an example of evidence being compromised if someone is filming?

Police photos or reports introduced at trial showing the location of a weapon or shell casings and someone who filmed as it happened or after it happened showing no weapon, or a weapon closer/further to/from the body or distribution of shell casings different, or something entirely different that doesn’t jibe with witness testimony (position of the sun/shadows, lighting, number of other potential witnesses, etc. etc.).

pjl44

Kat said:

I sure couldn't think of anything and to me, the recording is merely a confirmation of reality. Not allowing recording sounds like someone wants to hide something.

That's my feeling, too, but I'm open to admitting I'm missing something