5 ms·

Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best said in a statement that she agrees with the watchdog's findings and suspended the officer for six days without pay, according

by kick 7y ago

Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best said in a statement that she agrees with the watchdog's findings and suspended the officer for six days without pay, according to a police statement Thursday. Six days without pay for taking a human life. Here's a radical proposal: why not hang him? Or imprison him for decades? Or even just fire him? Or do literally anything? That's not even a slap on the wrist, that's a vacation. Why is it that cops can get away with everything under the sun? There are so many instances of this it's ridiculous. If the United States doesn't see reform for these thugs, it seems impossible that a dramatic inversion of the current status quo won't happen.

SamReidHughes 7y ago
He didn't take a human life; he lied about a guy. Why not hang you for lying about him?
- kick 7y ago
  He drove a man to suicide on a lie: for all reasonable intents and purposes, that's murder.
  - SamReidHughes 7y ago
    Wrong. That's slander. You can't just make stuff up.
    - kick 7y ago
      He lied with intention, I said something I believe to be true. By the definition of murder, my statement seems to be accurate. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder
      - ImpressiveWebs 7y ago
        The article says: > While officers are allowed to use a ruse, investigators said the officer’s lie “shocked the conscience” and was inconsistent with the police department’s policy. He did something that he’s allowed to do (lie) but he took it a little too far. He might be negligent to some degree, but this is not “murder”.
      - SamReidHughes 7y ago
        > By the definition of murder, my statement seems to be accurate. You're going to have to clarify that a bit. Lol.
      - close04 7y ago
        > By the definition of murder, I believe my statement is accurate Murder implies intention. This would be more akin to involuntary manslaughter since there's no reasonable expectation that the intent of the lie was to cause death (or any physical harm for that matter). This doesn't mean he doesn't deserve punishment, just not for murder. But the fact that you believe something to be correct would serve as mitigating circumstances at best since the very definition you quote describes something completely different from what is being discussed. > the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought > to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice
        kick 7y ago
        I'm no lawyer, so I was trying to not argue on those grounds, however: What he did seems to fall under modern interpretations of malice aforethought/what it's morphed to (see page 428-429; ctrl-f "recklessness" if desired). https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1337&context=dlj https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article... It wasn't premeditated, so it seems like second degree murder, doesn't it?
        close04 7y ago
        > It wasn't premeditated, so it seems like second degree murder, doesn't it? Still no. You can google "involuntary manslaughter" as mentioned in my previous comment. Murder implies malice, intent, when the death of the victim is a likely outcome. You're talking about getting into a bar fight and stabbing someone. There's a distinct possibility stabbing someone will kill them. But nobody reasonably expects a verbal accusation will kill anyone.
        jdkee 7y ago
        "But nobody reasonably expects a verbal accusation will kill anyone." It was a foreseeable consequence of the officer's actions. Thus intent could be imputed. Therefore, it could reasonably be construed as an intentional homicide i.e. murder.
MrEldritch 7y ago
Cops don't have to face consequences. Who would arrest them?
RickJWagner 7y ago
By this logic, should Jim Carrey be put to death as well? It is claimed he drove his ex-fiance to her death.
- happytoexplain 7y ago
  Are you saying that his case was as negligent as this one? You can't just imply that two things are equal with no details given at all.
  - RickJWagner 7y ago
    It seems Carrey was especially cruel in his treatment of his ex-fiance. At least the cop had a reason (seeking to flush the criminal) for his actions. Carrey was just plain mean.
    - happytoexplain 7y ago
      Surely it depends on details. The cop told a lie that would obviously drive some people to suicidal thoughts ("you may have killed an innocent person"). If Carrey did something similarly concrete, then yes, he would reasonably fall into the same category by the parent post's qualifiers. Or he may have used less direct torments, being generally cruel over a timeframe. That wouldn't necessarily be better or worse, but it would call for a different analysis. The point being that the comparison seems fruitless. Whether or not they're the same depends on the details, and whether the answer is yes or no, I don't see how it affects this case. Edit: "killed" -> "may have killed"

by kick 7y ago

SamReidHughes 7y ago

He didn't take a human life; he lied about a guy. Why not hang you for lying about him?

kick 7y ago
He drove a man to suicide on a lie: for all reasonable intents and purposes, that's murder.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  Wrong. That's slander. You can't just make stuff up.
  - kick 7y ago
    He lied with intention, I said something I believe to be true. By the definition of murder, my statement seems to be accurate. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder
    - ImpressiveWebs 7y ago
      The article says: > While officers are allowed to use a ruse, investigators said the officer’s lie “shocked the conscience” and was inconsistent with the police department’s policy. He did something that he’s allowed to do (lie) but he took it a little too far. He might be negligent to some degree, but this is not “murder”.
    - SamReidHughes 7y ago
      > By the definition of murder, my statement seems to be accurate. You're going to have to clarify that a bit. Lol.
    - close04 7y ago
      > By the definition of murder, I believe my statement is accurate Murder implies intention. This would be more akin to involuntary manslaughter since there's no reasonable expectation that the intent of the lie was to cause death (or any physical harm for that matter). This doesn't mean he doesn't deserve punishment, just not for murder. But the fact that you believe something to be correct would serve as mitigating circumstances at best since the very definition you quote describes something completely different from what is being discussed. > the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought > to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice
      - kick 7y ago
        I'm no lawyer, so I was trying to not argue on those grounds, however: What he did seems to fall under modern interpretations of malice aforethought/what it's morphed to (see page 428-429; ctrl-f "recklessness" if desired). https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1337&context=dlj https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article... It wasn't premeditated, so it seems like second degree murder, doesn't it?
        close04 7y ago
        > It wasn't premeditated, so it seems like second degree murder, doesn't it? Still no. You can google "involuntary manslaughter" as mentioned in my previous comment. Murder implies malice, intent, when the death of the victim is a likely outcome. You're talking about getting into a bar fight and stabbing someone. There's a distinct possibility stabbing someone will kill them. But nobody reasonably expects a verbal accusation will kill anyone.
        jdkee 7y ago
        "But nobody reasonably expects a verbal accusation will kill anyone." It was a foreseeable consequence of the officer's actions. Thus intent could be imputed. Therefore, it could reasonably be construed as an intentional homicide i.e. murder.

MrEldritch 7y ago

Cops don't have to face consequences. Who would arrest them?

RickJWagner 7y ago

By this logic, should Jim Carrey be put to death as well? It is claimed he drove his ex-fiance to her death.

happytoexplain 7y ago
Are you saying that his case was as negligent as this one? You can't just imply that two things are equal with no details given at all.
- RickJWagner 7y ago
  It seems Carrey was especially cruel in his treatment of his ex-fiance. At least the cop had a reason (seeking to flush the criminal) for his actions. Carrey was just plain mean.
  - happytoexplain 7y ago
    Surely it depends on details. The cop told a lie that would obviously drive some people to suicidal thoughts ("you may have killed an innocent person"). If Carrey did something similarly concrete, then yes, he would reasonably fall into the same category by the parent post's qualifiers. Or he may have used less direct torments, being generally cruel over a timeframe. That wouldn't necessarily be better or worse, but it would call for a different analysis. The point being that the comparison seems fruitless. Whether or not they're the same depends on the details, and whether the answer is yes or no, I don't see how it affects this case. Edit: "killed" -> "may have killed"