Justice

You know, it seems obvious to me that it is not useful to speak of a process for acquitting innocent cops UNTIL we have a process for convicting the GUILTY ones.  We cannot speak, legally, of good cops and bad cops.  The distinction is between cops and civilians, with the latter having greatly curtailed rights in disputed situations with respect to the latter.

Now, I want to be clear that I KNOW cops have all sorts of rules.  They must document everything. Reporting is half of what many do.  I KNOW they have all sorts of rules of engagement, etc.

But when they break down the wrong door, and shoot an innocent person, something major needs to happen.  Period.  We can discuss what, but at a minimum the Officer in Charge of a clusterfuck should be fired, and “disbarred”, which is to say legally prohibited from “practicing” law enforcement anywhere in the country.  We disbar lawyers, and revoke medical licenses.  Why not cops?

And I think we need a special process for cops.  Grand Juries presently have to decide whether or not to file criminal charges.  What happens after that is between the police departments and the officers.  This is in part how Grand Juries can get convened over and over and NOTHING happens to bad cops, because they can’t make criminal charges stick, and they don’t have alternatives.

We can and should have grades of charges for Grand Juries to consider which do not presently exist on the books, with the least being official censure and some loss of pay/benefits/seniority, with a middle being getting fired, with or without retirement and benefits, and a high end being a criminal charge, ranging from reckless endangerment to 1st degree murder.

Those charges can then go to a jury trial.

As we read recently, a Grand Jury, if it so chooses, can “indict a ham sandwich”.  But it can’t make those charges stick.

And to let this play out, in Ferguson I think Wilson should have been exonerated, and everyone calling for riots and his death arrested.

In the case of Garner, I think they should have gone for negligent manslaughter.  That WAS a chokehold; choke holds are banned.  Simple logical process.  He had no extenuating circumstances.  He was surrounded with armed reinforcements, and making a Misdemeanor arrest (I would assume).

In the case of the guy I posted on the other day who tried to stop a drunk 19 year old with his body, and wind up killing her, I think he should have been fired without benefits and disbarred.

Smart cops know, I think, that if they are never seen as paying any consequence for what are in some cases more or less open cases of murder through at least stupidity, at some point they will start getting violent push back.  It’s in their interest to SHOW the public that they are willing and able to cull their ranks of the violent and incompetent.