5 ms·

it goes deeper than having laws against police abuse though. As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own count

it goes deeper than having laws against police abuse though. As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts. Also DAs have to prosecute these crimes. The same DAs who have to work day to day with the same police department. There are huge conflicts of interest in there. We need both to end qualified immunity (I did not go into this, but it has soo many issues as well) and have an organization dedicated to investigate police abuse. It needs both to have the authority to do so and to be entirely independent from the accused. note : in the context here this is not just police corruption (even though that's something that should be taken seriously) but any kind of police abuse.

ordinaryradical 6y ago
This is why the public defender's office should be handling the prosecuting of police and the DA should become their defender. You maintain the adversial nature of the current legal system, and you also fund the PD office more effectively. Win win win.
- JadeNB 6y ago
  > This is why the public defender's office should be handling the prosecuting of police and the DA should become their defender. You maintain the adversial nature of the current legal system, and you also fund the PD office more effectively. Win win win. It sounds good on the face of it, but, even assuming that the public defender's office is staffed with amazing defense lawyers, it seems to me that there's no reason to believe that they'll be able to serve as amazing prosecutors.
  - bigiain 6y ago
    > there's no reason to believe that they'll be able to serve as amazing prosecutors. Seems to me there's an awful lot of well documented police behaviour that totally doesn't need "amazing prosecutors" to secure convictions. A high school kid standing up and saying "Here's 40 bystander phone videos of the defendant officer using unreasonable force. There are affidavits from all the photographers in exhibit b. The prosecution rests." (And the flip side to your argument also holds, the Das won't haver the most skilled/experienced defenders available either. Seems totally fair to me.)
    - curryst 6y ago
      I don't think it's that easy. Many people have a positive bias towards police. The police lawyer will come in and cite some frightening statistics about police injury and fatalities on the job, the officer will say that they used the minimum amount of force they were trained to. They only have to convince one juror to get a hung jury. The free market is an interesting possible solution. Mandate government LE cases to be tried by a law firm. The law firm cannot be paid by the city, but is only compensated with a % fee of any fines levied as a result of a conviction, as well as any civil cases pre-empted by a conviction (i.e. if you have a civil case for wrongful death, and the defendant is convicted of murder, you effectively immediately win the civil suit as well due to the lower burden of proof for the same crime). Law firms that want to softball their prosecution go out of business, and we can still have lawyers that are well-versed in the prosecution of crimes. I am wary of unintended consequences, though. Simply changing venues would be an option (i.e. require that cases against LEOs cannot be prosecuted in the county the LEO serves in), but I worry that the level of police solidarity would cause the police in the new county to pressure the DA. It might be worth a try though.
- smegger001 6y ago
  also require the Public Defenders to get at least the same budget/funding as the DA
JadeNB 6y ago
> As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts. Also in the US we have (or can have—I don't know the statistics on how many districts have them) a separate branch that investigates the police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_affairs_(law_enforcement) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_affairs_(law_enforcem... . They're still police, though.
- cgriswald 6y ago
  To me that’s a bit like complaining to HR. They’re on the side of protecting the company. If you get protected too, it’s just a happy accident. What’s needed is something completely independent like: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garda_S%C3%ADochána_Ombudsman_Commission https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garda_S%C3%ADochána_Ombudsma...
  - JadeNB 6y ago
    > To me that’s a bit like complaining to HR. They’re on the side of protecting the company. If you get protected too, it’s just a happy accident. Agreed completely. I meant to respond to this from my parent (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24358059 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24358059): > My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts. I meant to point out that an internal-affairs branch is still part of the police, even if it's nominally a separate branch; and, as such, as you put it very well, their job is to protect the police, not you.
    - on_and_off 6y ago
      that's a good point and I agree entirely. Actually I agree completely, that's pretty much the problem that my home country (France) has. "Police des polices" is separate, but it still falls under the authority of the interior ministry, who also helms the police. As a result, its mission is very often perverted and they get pressure from the ministry in order to get the result the interior minister wants. So close .. take the same organization with a different head (somebody completely independent from the interior minister) and that would be great.
anm89 6y ago
Very good point independent enforcement would need to be part of any solution.

ordinaryradical 6y ago

This is why the public defender's office should be handling the prosecuting of police and the DA should become their defender. You maintain the adversial nature of the current legal system, and you also fund the PD office more effectively. Win win win.

JadeNB 6y ago
> This is why the public defender's office should be handling the prosecuting of police and the DA should become their defender. You maintain the adversial nature of the current legal system, and you also fund the PD office more effectively. Win win win. It sounds good on the face of it, but, even assuming that the public defender's office is staffed with amazing defense lawyers, it seems to me that there's no reason to believe that they'll be able to serve as amazing prosecutors.
- bigiain 6y ago
  > there's no reason to believe that they'll be able to serve as amazing prosecutors. Seems to me there's an awful lot of well documented police behaviour that totally doesn't need "amazing prosecutors" to secure convictions. A high school kid standing up and saying "Here's 40 bystander phone videos of the defendant officer using unreasonable force. There are affidavits from all the photographers in exhibit b. The prosecution rests." (And the flip side to your argument also holds, the Das won't haver the most skilled/experienced defenders available either. Seems totally fair to me.)
  - curryst 6y ago
    I don't think it's that easy. Many people have a positive bias towards police. The police lawyer will come in and cite some frightening statistics about police injury and fatalities on the job, the officer will say that they used the minimum amount of force they were trained to. They only have to convince one juror to get a hung jury. The free market is an interesting possible solution. Mandate government LE cases to be tried by a law firm. The law firm cannot be paid by the city, but is only compensated with a % fee of any fines levied as a result of a conviction, as well as any civil cases pre-empted by a conviction (i.e. if you have a civil case for wrongful death, and the defendant is convicted of murder, you effectively immediately win the civil suit as well due to the lower burden of proof for the same crime). Law firms that want to softball their prosecution go out of business, and we can still have lawyers that are well-versed in the prosecution of crimes. I am wary of unintended consequences, though. Simply changing venues would be an option (i.e. require that cases against LEOs cannot be prosecuted in the county the LEO serves in), but I worry that the level of police solidarity would cause the police in the new county to pressure the DA. It might be worth a try though.
smegger001 6y ago
also require the Public Defenders to get at least the same budget/funding as the DA

JadeNB 6y ago

> As I understand it, the police investigates police abuses. I find that very shocking. My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts. Also in the US we have (or can have—I don't know the statistics on how many districts have them) a separate branch that investigates the police: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_affairs_(law_enforcement) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_affairs_(law_enforcem... . They're still police, though.

cgriswald 6y ago
To me that’s a bit like complaining to HR. They’re on the side of protecting the company. If you get protected too, it’s just a happy accident. What’s needed is something completely independent like: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garda_S%C3%ADochána_Ombudsman_Commission https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garda_S%C3%ADochána_Ombudsma...
- JadeNB 6y ago
  > To me that’s a bit like complaining to HR. They’re on the side of protecting the company. If you get protected too, it’s just a happy accident. Agreed completely. I meant to respond to this from my parent (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24358059 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24358059): > My own country has lots of the same issues, but at least it is a separate branch of police which investigates abuse, not a colleague who will have to deal with the backlash if they report dirty acts. I meant to point out that an internal-affairs branch is still part of the police, even if it's nominally a separate branch; and, as such, as you put it very well, their job is to protect the police, not you.
  - on_and_off 6y ago
    that's a good point and I agree entirely. Actually I agree completely, that's pretty much the problem that my home country (France) has. "Police des polices" is separate, but it still falls under the authority of the interior ministry, who also helms the police. As a result, its mission is very often perverted and they get pressure from the ministry in order to get the result the interior minister wants. So close .. take the same organization with a different head (somebody completely independent from the interior minister) and that would be great.

anm89 6y ago

Very good point independent enforcement would need to be part of any solution.