I mean they wouldn’t want to preserve the evidence of their guilt, right? Destroying the evidence would be the felonies of tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice. These charges might be easier to prove than murder, so that could be one reason to leave a crime scene untouched. Of course rogue cops would go ahead and hide the evidence, there’d be both shooters and a clean up crew – can’t leave shell casings lying around now. So this means the crews weren’t rogue, weren’t bad apples but rather that the police departments, in question, were themselves criminal.
Here the crime scene was left untouched and unsealed. State’s Attorney Hanrahan claimed it was a shootout. If true, forensics would have proved that. All the shots were from the outside in. Fred Hampton’s friends and Panther comrades did the scientific evidence collection themselves.
Local St Louis activist Heather De Mian said she was disturbed by finding various pieces of debris and what appeared to be shell casings left behind by police investigators from the vehicle where Seals had been found.
“The memorial is constructed on top of his car door, which the police just left there,” De Mian said, the Washington Post reports. “You would think the car door would be important evidence, that there might be fingerprints, you know. The police just left it there.”
Some accounts (main stream media reports) state Darren Seals actually died from being burnt alive not from the gun shots. That would make the killers psycho killers, the way I look at it. Some five or so Ferguson activists have been found dead in burning cars.
St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar, anything to elaborate? I would welcome being proven wrong.
Like any blog writer I’d be delighted to convert writing this into my livelihood. That’s hard to do of course. If I had the freedom (time and money, modest amount) I could publish three or so researched, thought out posts a week, plus supporting the blog in social media. More support could enable me to add interviews and podcasting.
Areas for this blog to explore:
a detailed look at police training focusing particularly on the simulations — is it designed to terrify the officers and further desensitize them?;
what’s the police core mission (not the written one, the actual one)? — obviously not to serve and protect the citizens;
what’s the story with police unions? Why do they often become criminals’ unions? The postal employee unions don’t openly defend their criminals, such as those mailmen who throw away mail. I’m sure they want their accused members to have their day in court with fair play, due process and rules of evidence — but they don’t become obstreperous in their ‘defense of members’. Is Civil Service an alternative to unions?
Is the treatment of African Americans a rehearsal for how the .01%ers wish to treat all citizens (actually that would be subjects, not citizens)?
I’m half joking, it’s almost impossible to know the exact percentages. Personally, I believe, for the NYPD, it’s very high — judging from the sheer number of undercover officers that I recognize that I also think are psychopaths. Also being an undercover officer would be very attractive to psychopaths.
Recognizing undercover police officers is on a need-to-know basis. If you need to know, you will gain the ability to recognize them. Basically, cops pay attention differently than others, also their intent is always different. For example a crazy person standing and staring into the sky has one intent, a cop standing and staring into the sky in exactly the same position has another, namely the intent to look like a crazy person.
These cues are very subtle, too subtle for someone without the need to know to pick up. One can’t be trained to do so, but one can learn to.
Open air prison policing. It started with ‘broken glass’ and then ‘stop and frisk’ and soon . . . It seems the .01%ers have no intention of restarting an economy that would serve the majority. Brutality and humiliation are their intention.
“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”
“This is not something that I am going to run by anybody. I am not looking for approval. I have to stand up for people that are oppressed. … If they take football away, my endorsements from me, I know that I stood up for what is right.”
“[R]ogue cops . . . are allowed to hold positions in police departments, not only put the community in danger, but also put the cops that have the right intentions in danger by creating an environment of tension and mistrust.”
“This country stands for freedom, liberty, justice for all, and it’s not happening for all right now.”
Kaepernick’s decision to kneel and not sit during the anthem was the right move. Kneeling shows respect but deep discontent. Like wearing a flag pin upside down. If you want to persuade people you don’t want to open the discussion with a fist in their face. You have to slowly win them over, kneeling matches that strategy. Also you want to separate the good cops from the rogue cops and address them differently, not push them into a unity against the outside world. Kaepernick’s strategy does this.
We have a new police commissioner in NYC, James O’Neill – a native New Yorker (which is always nice), a seasoned professional, not a psychopath, and seemingly still in touch with his own humanity. These are all good things. Could he change certain negative aspects of the NYPD culture?
Firing the murderer Pantaleo would be a great shout out to the citizens of New York. Then he should fire John Miller (and probably all his hires) and Jonathan David (the head of the NYPD legal bureau and chief blocker of Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests of the NYPD, which he treats with utter contempt. He’s held this position through administrations.).
Internal cultures can only be changed by finding the internal pillars of that culture and exiting them from the organization. Character can’t be changed but consequences for behavior can, and that’s good enough.
This contempt of the law by too many in the department has got to go. They need to be bound by the laws and the constitution. Every officer involved in stop and frisks knows they are unconstitutional (judicial rulings unnecessary), so naturally they think they are above the law, or even wardens in an open air prison. The same with the FOIL process, transparency and legality is considered a joke by too many.
Some changes would have to come from the mayor of course, I’d suggest requiring all officers to sign a waiver of the right to lie in court under oath (Briscoe v. Lahue) as a necessity for employment.
Our new commissioner is in the honeymoon period with the citizens of New York. We all hope for the best.