Ferguson Police - thoughts on the stats?

[EyeKhan]

I saw this on NPR's website. Ultimately the protests and riots post Mike-Brown-shooting were more about a long history of this kind of thing than about the shooting - imho at least. (I really don't think Brown's shooting was that outrageous, to be honest -- he was a huge guy and he fought a friggin' cop ffs) I'd be interested to hear feedback from anybody that sees problems with the statistics in the report.

The racist emails circulating around the police department email system are particularly good. Those would be easy to spot and stop so nobody in the department apparently thinks they're a big deal. In my company anyone circulating something like that on company email would likely get fired. I haven't seen or heard any jokes remotely like those for at least a decade - sort of underscores how backward the town's police department apparently is. Probably the whole town is backward.

A Few Reactions to the DOJ's 'Scathing' Report on Ferguson Cops And Racial Bias

The Justice Department reportedly did not find enough evidence to charge white officer Darren Wilson with any civil rights violations for shooting Michael Brown last August. But they did find plenty of evidence of routine discrimination by Ferguson police against black residents.


Those findings, which are part of a scathing report that has already been leaked in part and it set to be officially released Wednesday afternoon, conclude that black residents in Ferguson, Mo. were disproportionately targeted by police and the courts.


Over at the Two-Way blog, NPR's Carrie Johnson breaks down the shocking numbers.


Blacks make up 67 percent of the population in Ferguson. But they make up 85 percent of people subject to vehicle stops and 93 percent of those arrested. Blacks are twice as likely to be searched as whites, but less likely to have drugs or weapons.
The report found that 88 percent of times in which Ferguson police used force it was against blacks and all 14 cases of police dog bites involved blacks.
And, as NPR has previously reported, the courts have problems of their own.


Blacks were 68 percent less likely to have cases dismissed by Ferguson municipal judges and disproportionately likely to be subject to arrest warrants. From October 2012 to October 2014, 96 percent of people arrested in traffic stops solely for an outstanding warrant were black.
Blacks accounted for 95 percent of jaywalking charges, 94 percent of failure-to-comply charges and 92 percent of all disturbing-the-peace charges.
The report will also reveal racist emails passed around the Ferguson Police Department, according to Johnson.


One says Obama will not be president for long because "what black man holds a steady job for four years." Another says a black woman in New Orleans was admitted to a hospital to end her pregnancy and then got a check two weeks later from "Crime Stoppers."

[Loki]

My takeaway point: racist dogs.

On a serious note, the NY Times talks about some of the more outrageous behaviors of the Ferguson police and government:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...nt-report.html

[Wraith]

The arrest & citation stats seem pretty damning. Jaywalking, really? Almost everybody jaywalks, there's no way you get stats like that without being extremely selective about who you give a ticket to. The racist joke e-mails were kinda bad, but I think you (EyeKhan) might be putting too much weight on them. It sounds like they weren't widely circulated, and just traded between certain individuals. Still, there's enough evidence here to make a solid accusation of racial bias.

[Flixy]

Aside from the racism, the whole policing for revenue is troubling too.

[EyeKhan]

Aside from the racism, the whole policing for revenue is troubling too.

That's an all too common practice across the country, really. Speed traps, for example, where speed limits are clearly set too low for the size and location of the road and where the speed limit suddenly drops. Cops will sit and pull over one driver after another all day long... When traffic violations become a revenue source rather than maintenance of public safety, something has gone way wrong.

@DW - I'm not that hung up on the emails - it is telling that such things were happening, though. I don't think someone ought to lose their job for sending an email like that, nor do I think speaking or writing the n word should leave someone unemployed either. It's not OK, but losing your job is pretty severe. Still, of all people who should definitely not be doing that sort of thing, it's the police in a majority black community...

Interesting that the justice department found no evidence to contradict the shooter-cop's testimony about shooting Mike Brown. He's not a great poster child for that issue at all. Trevon(sp?) Martin in Florida and the guy the cop strangled in New York are much better examples of injustice against black men.

[Flixy]

That's an all too common practice across the country, really. Speed traps, for example, where speed limits are clearly set too low for the size and location of the road and where the speed limit suddenly drops. Cops will sit and pull over one driver after another all day long... When traffic violations become a revenue source rather than maintenance of public safety, something has gone way wrong.

Yeah, and I am curious about how widespread both this and the other problems are. Lot of focus on just Ferguson now but it would surprise me if they are alone in this.

@DW - I'm not that hung up on the emails - it is telling that such things were happening, though. I don't think someone ought to lose their job for sending an email like that, nor do I think speaking or writing the n word should leave someone unemployed either. It's not OK, but losing your job is pretty severe. Still, of all people who should definitely not be doing that sort of thing, it's the police in a majority black community...

To be honest its very unprofessional in any job, and even worse for police. At the very least they should have been told not to do this again.

Interesting that the justice department found no evidence to contradict the shooter-cop's testimony about shooting Mike Brown. He's not a great poster child for that issue at all. Trevon(sp?) Martin in Florida and the guy the cop strangled in New York are much better examples of injustice against black men.

That's what I thought all the time - Brown wasn't the cause , just the trigger for the protests. Once the evidence became public it became more and more likely that his case itself wasn't problematic. But protests luke this aren't about one case, it's always about deeper issues that have been around for longer, which are now official I guess.

[EyeKhan]

Yeah, and I am curious about how widespread both this and the other problems are. Lot of focus on just Ferguson now but it would surprise me if they are alone in this.

There are two well known speed traps within two miles of my office, both in the same municipality. I've been caught in both and I've seen other people routinely pulled over in both over the years as I drive by, very slowly. Neither one has anything to do with public safety.

[Ominous Gamer]

Theres a speed trap in Florida, between me and Jacksonville thats so notorious that travel companies like AAA will route around it because its so bad. Its a straight up revenue source, nothing more. One stretch of highway that barely enters what a small city calls their domain and they drop the speed from 65 to 45. Last year or so the state started investigating the city and found all kinds of people dipping into that cash revenue for illegal reasons. But I drove through there last week and they are still out there ticketing people. Someone even took out a full sized billboard right outside the city limits to warn drivers.

[EyeKhan]

Theres a speed trap in Florida, between me and Jacksonville thats so notorious that travel companies like AAA will route around it because its so bad. <snip>

That's absolutely absurd.

[EyeKhan]

Just saw this on NPR. Ugh, I can't imagine what it must be like to lose a child/ brother in this kind of circumstance. But I really don't think there's anything there.

Ferguson's mayor is funny. "Sure, we're screwed up and racist, but so is everyone else in the country..." It's got to be tough to have the community you preside over called out so publicly, and with pretty solid evidence, as a den of giant assholes.

Michael Brown's Family Will File Civil Suit Over His Death

The family of Michael Brown, the unarmed black man who was slain by Ferguson, Mo., police last August, say they will file a civil lawsuit over his death. Brown, 18, was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson, who is no longer with the city's police force.


The family's legal team "said the City of Ferguson and former Officer Darren Wilson will be named in the suit," The Associated Press reports.


The news comes one day after the Justice Department cleared Wilson in a civil rights probe — and delivered a scathing appraisal of the Ferguson Police Department.


Responding to the federal report, Ferguson Mayor James Knowles promised that the city will take steps to deal with the charges of racial bias and a focus on generating revenue at the police department.


"Today's report allows the city of Ferguson to identify problems not only in our police department, but in the entire St. Louis region," Knowles told St. Louis Public Radio. "We must do better not only as a city, but as a state, and as a country. We must all work to address issues of racial disparity in all aspects of society."

[Aimless]

I'm just waiting for Dread to explain away all of this

[Lewkowski]

Just saw this on NPR. Ugh, I can't imagine what it must be like to lose a child/ brother in this kind of circumstance. But I really don't think there's anything there.

Ferguson's mayor is funny. "Sure, we're screwed up and racist, but so is everyone else in the country..." It's got to be tough to have the community you preside over called out so publicly, and with pretty solid evidence, as a den of giant assholes.

Only in America can you assault a police officer, be justifiably gunned down and then have your parents sue for wrongful death.

It's like the law suits about a burglar getting bit by a dog and then suing the homeowner. Only in America. (Well probably in a lot of the other parts int he world, liberals seem to think criminals should have more rights than homeowners).

[Flixy]

Only in America can you assault a police officer, be justifiably gunned down and then have your parents sue for wrongful death.

It's like the law suits about a burglar getting bit by a dog and then suing the homeowner. Only in America. (Well probably in a lot of the other parts int he world, liberals seem to think criminals should have more rights than homeowners).

Well, US is sue-happy all over. You can always sue, whether you'll win is another matter of course.

[EyeKhan]

It's like the law suits about a burglar getting bit by a dog and then suing the homeowner.

I'm not familiar with that story. Did he win? Do you have a link?


EDIT:

I did a google search for cases of homeowners being successfully sued by burglars for dog bites and there is nothing credible. Did find this though:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/if...or-175162.html

If my dog attacks a home intruder, am I liable for damages?

Asked about 5 years ago - Danville, VA Flag

I have a large dog, a family pet. I have "beware of dog" signs in English and Spanish clearly posted on the doors and windows of my home. If an intruder breaks in to my dwelling and is attacked by my dog, am I liable for criminal or civil charges?


Laura Mcfarland-Taylor
Animal Law Attorney - Bolingbrook, IL

Answered 5 years ago.
Can you be sued? Yes. Will the suit be successful? Probably not. I agree with my colleague - make sure the dog is licensed, shots kept up to date, and let your insurer know you have a dog.


Elizabeth Lorraine Elliott
Animal Law Attorney - Normandy Park, WA

Answered 5 years ago.
The short answer is "no," unless there is some dispute over whether this person was actually breaking into your home.


Carlos Gonzalez
Criminal Defense Attorney - New York, NY

Answered 5 years ago.
no. while there have been some suits in some states by burglars, or home intruders, generaly they're loosers


Andrew Daniel Myers
Personal Injury Lawyer - North Andover, MA

Answered 5 years ago.
No. Someone breaks into your home and they complain that the dog did its job and protected the property? They're the one with the problem. Dogs are known to bite and to be protective; the intruder takes the risk.

I'm guessing the rumor you heard was a lie intended to get you to support tort reform and/or vote for conservative candidates. Snopes has a whole list of similar stories - burglar injures self by falling off roof, tripping over stuff in darkened house, etc and sues and wins. All are lies.

[Aimless]

You and your goddamned facts and your skeptical approach, shut up

[GGT]

Since we've become a "first page" forum, I won't link to other threads that already debate & discuss the Ferguson Police, or Police actions in general.

I think it's good these "stats" were collected in the first place! Many people think it's either "racially biased" or "racist" when skin color is a box to check on a form. But since police routinely refer to suspects as "male black" or "male white" in their radio communications, skin color obviously matters to certain police departments.

(Not sure how they know male from female, but that's another thread.)

As others said, it's no big secret that certain areas use police citations/tickets to raise local revenue, to fund their police departments, whether they're corrupt or not. We have a history of that in the US, unfortunately. Just look at our TV series and movies to see how art imitates life.....but isn't so entertaining in reality.

[Lewkowski]

I'm not familiar with that story. Did he win? Do you have a link?


EDIT:

I did a google search for cases of homeowners being successfully sued by burglars for dog bites and there is nothing credible. Did find this though:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/if...or-175162.html



I'm guessing the rumor you heard was a lie intended to get you to support tort reform and/or vote for conservative candidates. Snopes has a whole list of similar stories - burglar injures self by falling off roof, tripping over stuff in darkened house, etc and sues and wins. All are lies.

Allow me to repeat:

"Only in America can you assault a police officer, be justifiably gunned down and then have your parents sue for wrongful death.

It's like the law suits about a burglar getting bit by a dog and then suing the homeowner. Only in America."

The first sentence talks about the LAWSUIT.

The second sentence talks about another LAWSUIT.

Strangely you jumped to *winning* the case when I made no statement regarding that. Last time I checked the parents of the thug who was shot by the police officer haven't won anything yet, right? When in all reality there should be NO reason to even have to try the case. Why make the innocent party have to even appear in court? The case should be thrown out instantly before the person being accused even has to respond.

[EyeKhan]

When in all reality there should be NO reason to even have to try the case. Why make the innocent party have to even appear in court? The case should be thrown out instantly before the person being accused even has to respond.

No reason to try the case? So your argument isn't that ridiculous cases are won, you want to ban even the ability to sue to address one's grievances? Wow. Who gets to decide when there is "NO reason to even have to try the case????" These cases are good, they help maintain rule of law, the illusion of fairness, they deflate pent-up frustration, help maintain a functioning society. You may decide from outside and far away that the case is frivolous, but these people feel very strongly that they and their family have been severely wronged and they have the right, and the NEED, to have their case, their argument, the objective evidence heard and judged in the court of law. And we, American society, NEED to have these cases tried too. In places where people are forbidden to even bring a case to the court, they turn to revenge to address their grievances - that would NOT be a good thing for us.

[GGT]

Lewk, stop interchanging terms like "assault", "justifiable", and "innocent". Especially if you only afford those things to Police....who are the agents of that big, bad gummint you railed against in vaccination/public health discussions.

[Lewkowski]

No reason to try the case? So your argument isn't that ridiculous cases are won, you want to ban even the ability to sue to address one's grievances? Wow. Who gets to decide when there is "NO reason to even have to try the case????" These cases are good, they help maintain rule of law, the illusion of fairness, they deflate pent-up frustration, help maintain a functioning society. You may decide from outside and far away that the case is frivolous, but these people feel very strongly that they and their family have been severely wronged and they have the right, and the NEED, to have their case, their argument, the objective evidence heard and judged in the court of law. And we, American society, NEED to have these cases tried too. In places where people are forbidden to even bring a case to the court, they turn to revenge to address their grievances - that would NOT be a good thing for us.

Anyone should be able to file papers however no suit should be allowed to go forward until it passes some sort of litmus test. No one should ever have to defend themselves or lose money/time to deal with a case that has no merits.

Alternatively having a loser pay system could work too. Yes you can bring a suit but if it retarded you have to pay legal fees for the other half plus damages for wasting everyone's time.

[GGT]

Anyone should be able to file papers however no suit should be allowed to go forward until it passes some sort of litmus test. No one should ever have to defend themselves or lose money/time to deal with a case that has no merits.

Alternatively having a loser pay system could work too. Yes you can bring a suit but if it retarded you have to pay legal fees for the other half plus damages for wasting everyone's time.

You're pimping for the police. How does that figure in your anti-government perspective?

[Flixy]

Anyone should be able to file papers however no suit should be allowed to go forward until it passes some sort of litmus test. No one should ever have to defend themselves or lose money/time to deal with a case that has no merits.

Alternatively having a loser pay system could work too. Yes you can bring a suit but if it retarded you have to pay legal fees for the other half plus damages for wasting everyone's time.

IANAL but flimsy cases can be quickly dismissed by a judge, no? I'm against loser pays, but not against making people pay for unfounded suits. But Loser pays, whenever you lose, means you also lose when you do have a proper case, but one that just doesn't have enough evidence.

[Aimless]

The irony of someone promoting law and order by trying to do away with law and order is just wtf

[LittleFuzzy]

I'm not familiar with that story. Did he win? Do you have a link?

You're familiar with the concept of the nuisance suit, I know. Even when they loss, it costs the defendants money. And since the plaintiffs are criminals, they're mostly judgement-proof and can't be made to pay the court-costs (because they don't have the money, won't be getting it anytime soon, and would probably have other creditors with higher priority anyway).

IANAL but flimsy cases can be quickly dismissed by a judge, no?

They can be. But unless there wasn't any real injury, they mostly wouldn't be the sort of flimsy case which can be dismissed like that here. It would get to the point of summary dismissal eventually but it wouldn't be quick, because the home/dog owner is in a source of proximate responsibility for the injuring party

[Flixy]

Regarding policing for money, while it's less outrageous here than in some examples given in this thread, the police unions also use it as leverage. Since they cannot strike, and want a raise here (which tbh sounds fair as their workload has increased recently), the unions have called for their members to only issue tickets for gross breaches of public order and safety, and go for warnings in other cases.

[Loki]

They did that in NYC after the recent police officer murders. As far as I'm concerned, if they're unwilling to do their job, they should be fired. Work slowdowns are not legal, especially when the slowdown entails ignoring other laws.

[Flixy]

They did that in NYC after the recent police officer murders. As far as I'm concerned, if they're unwilling to do their job, they should be fired. Work slowdowns are not legal, especially when the slowdown entails ignoring other laws.

Not that I disagree with you, but warning instead of ticketing isn't ignoring, though - it's always up to the discretion of the police officer whether he warns or fines you for minor offenses. The core job is maintaining law and order, after all, and writing tickets purely for the money is not a part of that.

[EyeKhan]

Anyone should be able to file papers however no suit should be allowed to go forward until it passes some sort of litmus test. No one should ever have to defend themselves or lose money/time to deal with a case that has no merits.

The litmus test is where the danger is... seems like to be sure not to filter out legitimate cases a judge needs to review the merits and rule for/against dismissal. That's how it works now, right?

Alternatively having a loser pay system could work too.

But then you end up with poor people that have legitimate cases not filing because they can't afford to lose. Just because your case is real doesn't mean you're going to win, after all. Imagine the frustrated sense of injustice that would follow.... And as Fuzzy noted above, in the burglar scenario they're still going to file. Why would getting stuck with fees matter to someone who's in jail and probably doesn't have a pot to piss in anyway?

[EyeKhan]

The core job is maintaining law and order, after all, and writing tickets purely for the money is not a part of that.

Yeah, its more like an old-fashioned tax collector - an arbitrary speeding tax that isn't related to public safety. Or government sanctioned racketeering.