13 ms·

Deaf Man Who Couldn't Hear Police Commands Was Tased and Spent 4 Months in Jail

254 points by amin 5y ago

tw600040 5y ago
Police using violence against someone who is not violent is insane. Anyone doing so should be disqualified from ever being a cop.
- ancode 5y ago
  That's like most of what cops do in the US
  - drdeca 5y ago
    Do you mean "like what most cops do" rather that "most of what cops do"? Because weighting by time, the latter seems implausible to me.
    - BoorishBears 5y ago
      Do you think most cases of violence by cops are against violent people? Remembering that when they're called to a violent crime, usually it's already over, but when they're called for a non-violent offense the perpetrator is more likely to be there?
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        I mean this completely unironically: cops are mostly armed bureaucrats. The vast majority of their function is to basically hand out tickets, police reports for insurance reasons, and to a lesser degree arrest people for whom there is an arrest warrant. Actually stopping crime in progress is more a factor of luck than an intended role, and not one they have any legal obligation to do. The fact that we tolerate this level from people who probably don’t even need to be armed is insane. Hell, red light cameras and speed cameras could probably save a lot of lives purely by eliminating unnecessary police/civilian interactions, let alone whatever road safety function they’d perform.
    - jrochkind1 5y ago
      I guess it depends on what police behavior counts as 'violence'. So the first part of the question is, are most policing hours spent "using violence" or not? I'm not sure. Then the next part of the question might be, of the hours of policing spent "using violence", is the violence being used against someone who is not being violent most of the time? This one I feel pretty safe saying a big yes to. And I think is mainly what the original comment was getting at.
      - drdeca 5y ago
        I assume that by "violence" we mean, like, physical violence, things like beating, choking, tazing, tear gas, shooting, etc., things by which one is exerting power over another through physical exertion, in a way that can directly cause injury or pain. "using violence against someone" doesn't refer to "taking advantage of an implicit threat of violence", it means actively doing violence (or actively directing others to do so).
        jrochkind1 5y ago
        What about an explicit threat of violence? If someone who is not the police does that, we generally consider them "violent" and (ironically?) support police violence against them. Like if someone points a gun at someone (an explicit(?) threat of violence, but not yet violence itself?), if the police shoot them, people consider that a justified violent response to violence. Then we can ask if, say, imprisoning someone is "violence" on it's own -- again, if someone that wasn't the police kidnapped you and locked you in the basement, we'd probably consider it a violent act, even if they didn't have to punch you to get you into the basement? I think it's interesting to talk about because I think what's violent and not is not as clearcut as we sometimes assume, and is worth interrogating. (I don't mean to suggest that anything anyone finds emotionally uncomfortable is "violence" either... there is lots going on culturally around "violence" these days...) Still, regardless, I think it's probably true that the majority of policing hours are not spent in the active use of violence (although some are spent preparing for use of violence, or looking for opportunity to use violence), and also, that the majority of times that are use of violence are against people who were not being violent.
    - LilBytes 5y ago
      Cops have a bad reputation in most places, but this might be media bias or media coverage. I can't say in the countries I've lived in (most countries in the UK, France, Germany and now Australia) are anything like what you see covered in the US.
      - jandrewrogers 5y ago
        It depends on what kind of law enforcement you are dealing with. City police have a poor reputation but county sheriffs often have a more positive reputation in many areas. Federal law enforcement is a whole different can of worms. The incentive structures and relationships to the population are different, and that leads to different behaviors. My experience in several jurisdictions matches the heuristic. Encounters with city police were always default adversarial, even when I had done nothing wrong; interactions with sheriffs were uniformly pleasant and reasonable, not adversarial, even in a couple cases where I was inadvertently breaking the law.
      - jollybean 5y ago
        "are anything like what you see covered in the US." Judging US police from media coverage is really not useful. Having lived experience of living in the US I think does illustrate some things, and then, more importantly, having access to 'good data' (which is hard, but nevertheless possible) is even better. I believe the police in the US overall take a more aggressive tone and posture. I also believe US citizens are far more likely to act in defiance. The things I've seen American individuals do ... I have never in my life seen in Canada, UK, France, Germany and couldn't even imagine it happening. The scenes of a man, with two police officers arresting him - four hands on him, putting cuffs on him - and he goes for his gun (!!). Or the number of times people race away from police after being pulled over and resulting high-speed chase. It's absurd. It's an issue I think people often don't tend to want to think about, but if we use car chases as an example - I think this is worthy because these are generally not situations in which arbitrary police aggression is going to be a 'root cause'. You can see total deaths in the US from car chases is ballpark 2/million/year, where as in he UK it's about 0.2/million/year. [1][2] High speed chases are a cultural phenom [3] (FYI about 1/2 of the people who die in high speed pursuits are innocent bystanders.) Obviously, this will be affected by police police in terms of pursuit policy (i.e. in many forces they won't pursue if it's too dangerous) - but there's no doubt that Americans have a much greater propensity to run from police, in cars, which is an extremely dangerous thing to do for those involved, but also for everyone else. It's nary impossible to get the data, but I believe that this applies to all other forms of confrontation as well. I think that they are related, i.e. civilians more aggressive posture - combined with the fact so many people have weapons - makes the police more 'on edge' and combined with their more systematically aggressive posture, you have considerably greater chances of 'small things' escalating into 'big things' - as we have in this article. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/319294/deaths-during-or-following-police-contact-police-pursuit-in-england-and-wales/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/319294/deaths-during-or-... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/727008/vehicle-pursuit-related-deaths-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/727008/vehicle-pursuit-r... [3] https://www.lamag.com/longform/how-high-speed-car-chases-became-a-citywide-pastime-in-los-angeles/ https://www.lamag.com/longform/how-high-speed-car-chases-bec...
  - jcims 5y ago
    That seems unlikely given there were an estimated 61.5 million encounters between police and the public in 2018. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cbpp18st.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cbpp18st.pdf My nephew just started as a police officer in a small town recently. He hasn't cracked a skull or kneed a chest in an entire year of service. Most of his time is spent as a medic, social worker or civil servant but also has to be ready in case shit hits the fan. The scope of work is too much for a single person and we get what we get as a result.
    - elikoga 5y ago
      > He hasn't cracked a skull or kneed a chest in an entire year of service. What a powerful sentence.
- User23 5y ago
  Does that mean I don’t need to pay taxes and they should never use violence to coerce me? Does that mean I don’t need to pay rent, because so long as I’m not violent they can’t remove me? Edit: Y’all are evidently missing the point that passive resistance can require violent force to overcome. Ultimately the difference between a law and a polite suggestion is that the former is backed by the threat of whatever force is necessary to enforce it. Suppose I prefer not to be arrested and I don’t attack the police, I just don’t let them cuff me and take me away. Are they justified to overpower me, regardless how much force it takes to overcome my noncompliance?
  - coderintherye 5y ago
    First of all, your first question is a strawman because local police, as being discussed here, are not the ones performing arrests in cases of tax evasion. Rather, federal authorities would be the ones handling tax evasion.
    - LanceH 5y ago
      As soon as a warrant goes out from any source, local police are potentially conducting arrests.
  - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
    You're conflating the academic definition of "violence" (e.g. "Nationstate monopoly on violence") with the colloquial and context-sensitive word "violence" ("That violent cop tased me for no reason.").
  - Ar-Curunir 5y ago
    Yes, and yes.
  - II2II 5y ago
    There is a difference between the use of force and the use of excessive force. When people talk about violence, they are usually referring to the latter. Then there is the question of when is the use of force appropriate. Failure to pay taxes or rent rarely involves the use of physical force. It would be used as a last resort, after other methods have failed. Likewise, the alleged failing to stop for a stop sign should not have led to a physical confrontation unless it was initiated by the person being ticketed. Even the refusal to comply with a police officer should not result in the immediate use of force. There are other ways to handle it.
- vkou 5y ago
  > Anyone doing so should be disqualified from ever being a cop. Preferably by ending up in prison, among the general population.
  - gruez 5y ago
    Great idea! Let's punish extra-judicial punishment with... extra-judicial punishment /s
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - tombert 5y ago
      Should we not hold the people who are given a higher amount of power to a higher standard? I feel like the only way that it makes sense to have some sort of Leviathan-esque system is if we have assurances that the enforcers can be trusted.
      - gruez 5y ago
        >Should we not hold the people who are given a higher amount of power to a higher standard? You don't need extra-judicial and/or cruel and unusual punishment to do that.
        tombert 5y ago
        How is putting cops in prison extra-judicial or cruel and unusual? I do think cops should get harsher sentences for abusing their power because, again, they're given extra power. If we cannot trust the enforcers of the law, then I am skeptical of the concept of enforcers. But of course I think there should be a standard trial and whatnot, I'm not suggesting we go to Mad Max or anything like that. I'm not saying we summarily execute every cop who has run a red light, but I'm saying that if a cop does a bad thing, then it shouldn't be an outlier case for them to go to prison for it.
        5y ago
- ghoomketu 5y ago
  Yeah this video still haunts me(1). The cop was acquitted by jury, saying the victim, committed a misdemeanour by leaving the house without identification(2). They did win $1.75m in the end though so at least there is that. (1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_SSGa7-6BQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_SSGa7-6BQ (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sureshbhai_Patel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sureshbhai_Patel
  - whiddershins 5y ago
    That Wikipedia article is almost certainly inaccurate. I would need much stronger evidence than a link to photographyisnotacrime to be convinced that not having id when walking around is even a citation, much less a misdemeanor anywhere in the US. Much more likely someone got their wires crossed in hearing the detail of the story.
    - papercrane 5y ago
      It's accurate, it's misdemeanor for a permanent resident to not carry ID in public. https://www.al.com/news/2016/01/judge_throws_out_case_against.html https://www.al.com/news/2016/01/judge_throws_out_case_agains...
    - magicalist 5y ago
      > I would need much stronger evidence than a link to photographyisnotacrime to be convinced that not having id when walking around is even a citation, much less a misdemeanor anywhere in the US. Or just do a basic search. If you're a green card holder it's a misdemeanor to be without your id.
      - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
        As an LPR myself, this is true. I keep mine in my wallet. It is handy as a secondary backup identity card when (for whatever reason) I don't have my drivers license on me. (PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong!) I understand there are some weird situations you can be in though (caused by poorly written legislation), for example, not having your LPR Green Card is a *strict liability* federal misdemeanor, without any exceptions or legislated consideration if someone stole your card off you, or even if the card was confiscated by a federal or state/local official. So you could be stopped by a cop, who asks for your Id and confiscates your GC, and then immediately charges you for not being in possession of your GC. However I gather that this has never been tested in court, but it's still an unpleasant possibility. ...and if you lose it, that's $600 (!!!!) to renew it, which means having to go to your nearest USCIS building in-person (which can be hundreds of miles away) to have your fingerprints and other biometrics re-taken - I don't know why but USCIS simply won't re-print an existing GC unlike how WA's DoL has been re-issuing my drivers' license using the exact same biometrics and other info unchanged from almost a decade ago... it still says I weight 140lbs (lol... I'm 90kg now, ugh). And you're on-the-hook for that $600 regardless of the reason for reissuing it: whether it was your fault or not (though if it was someone else's fault I guess you could file a civil claim for damages at least) LPR rights are not exactly high on the priority list - but the law should be changed to not require us to carry the GC; and misplacing a GC (or being the victim of a crime of GC theft) should certainly not cost $600 and a half-day spent at a (depressing) USCIS building every time. It's super-absurd: I understand the "must carry" rule also applies to children: so rambunctious kindergarten kids too young to even tie their own shoelaces need to carry a $600 hologram of past presidents' heads. Surely there must be some way this is an unreasonable burden or maybe even unconstitutional because of the power-imbalance it introduces? ------ ...also I could be horribly misinformed about all of the above.
- donatj 5y ago
  Monopoly on legal violence is the job description. Don't want things smashed, don't use a hammer. Don't want violence, don't send a cop.
  - mdp2021 5y ago
    Such grasp of the point - monopoly of legal violence - completely perverts it. Who is given powers to perform a function, plainly must not abuse them. The police is entrusted with a power to use violence, which means it is given a special responsibility associated with the special power: to abuse it is corruption, which is treason against the mandate, against the role and against the Entity empowering and entrusting. One is given a hammer, one is entrusted not to smash things. Don't want thing smashed, hire reliable personnel. If a cop is sent and you get gratuitous violence, that individual is unfit for its job, its behaviour is corrupt and it is treason.
    - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
      You're speaking from the position of how it should be, while everyone else is talking about how it is. It's not hard to find plenty of instances of police abusing their power and getting away with it. In many departments, "Internal Affairs" works FOR the police, rather than as a neutral 3rd party. The "We investigated ourselves and found no wrong-doing" is a common meme because it's often true.
      - mdp2021 5y ago
        Where that is tolerated (including accepted as a fact, or put aside as a background fact), the involved societies have a much bigger problem to deal with first. And if that fact is forced to fit into someone's mind through monstrous excuses for thought (with reference to that involving undefined association with violence), to problem (1) - the corruption in the state -, and problem (0) just above - the corruption of the members of society -, you get an even bigger damage (-1) - thought pollution, the corruption of clear cognitive function.
  - atoav 5y ago
throw7 5y ago
I doubt this exact circumstance and set of details of a deaf man having his leg broken by cops has ever been adjudicated. Qualified Immunity. Next.
- im3w1l 5y ago
  > [police claimed] that Mistic resisted arrest, causing one of the officers to break his leg. It's unfortuante that the wording is ambigous. My interpretation was the opposite, that the deaf man broke the leg of the police officer. Checking with other sources, it seems that what happened was that a police officer accidentally broke his own leg.
63 5y ago
I don't want the following to come off as judgemental or to imply that I have anything but the utmost empathy for everyone involved in this case. I think it's interesting to consider these types of articles that get popular online. It seems perfect for creating outrage, but for what? If the purpose of the news is to inform, what does this news inform me of? What am I to do except get angry and ruminate and forget and repeat for the next story? I don't want to seem like the archetypal angry cynic that so often appears in these comment sections, but this is genuinely the reason I stopped paying attention to most of the news. I'm not sure what else to add here. I just think about this a lot.
- rtkwe 5y ago
  This is a weird fatalism about being unable to ever effectuate change that is really annoying in US politics. Without information about what's happening we'll never have a chance to change things, the whole culture of police violence loves hiding in the dark which is why news articles, body cams, and public videoing officers are met with such push back from police and their protectors.
  - internet_user 5y ago
    It's the eternal "who watches the watchers" problem. Some people propose having a very local, municipal for small towns, or even smaller for large towns, mercenary force with license to use lethal force that answers to direct democracy of the area they are assigned to and nobody else. Just like police, only their contract is reviewed every year, for everyone in the force.
    - krapp 5y ago
      >It's the eternal "who watches the watchers" problem. Odd. Plenty of other countries manage watching their watchers just fine... >Some people propose having a very local, municipal for small towns, or even smaller for large towns, mercenary force with license to use lethal force that answers to direct democracy of the area they are assigned to and nobody else. ... and they don't even need local murder squads answering only to populist rage to do it.
ectopod 5y ago
120 years ago my grandmother's deaf uncle was shot dead by New York police. He was running for a train. Now it's tase and jail. I guess that's progress. I'm just glad I don't live in America.
- EastOfTruth 5y ago
  There is usually at least 1000 people shot by police each year (edit: in the US)... and that don't include chockings and other murder methods: https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings
  - mfgs 5y ago
    There is usually at least 1000 people shot by police each year in the US. All other developed nations have significantly lower rates and incidences of police killings: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/.
    - jcims 5y ago
      There are ~50 officers 'feloniously killed' in the US every year. https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/topic-pages/officers-feloniously-killed https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/topic-pages/officers-feloniou... If you dig around most other nations have substantially lower rates of LEO homicides. Bunch of older stats here https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdf I think one begets the other in a positive feedback loop that is difficult to break.
  - fnord77 5y ago
    many pet dogs get needlessly shot too
    - EastOfTruth 5y ago
      true, but dogs need to be leeched
meetups323 5y ago
To the people who just just know history/world politics things reading: are there any examples of a nation successfully transitioning themselves away from police brutality against minorities/"undesirables"/those-lacking-general-privilege? What did that transition look like? Places with racial/economic diversity generally similar to the US's are preferred.
- iudqnolq 5y ago
  I think the US's progress from "the cops set you on fire and smirk about to the press" to "the cops shoot you and pretend they thought your phone was a gun" is significant and informative for what we should do next. You might also be interested in the UK and Germany.
- themarbz 5y ago
  World War II?
- fy20 5y ago
  I'm originally from the UK, and now live in a post-Soviet country and I'd say people here are much more accepting of people who are "different". I guess this is partly due to the history of Russia and the USSR, as there was a lot of migration between countries in the past hundred years or so. A lot of my friends who are "native" have grandparents or such from another country. The only case where being "different" may have issues is if you are not straight... but in larger cities now it is usually accepted as long as you don't flaunt it. Two men sharing a hotel room would not raise eyebrows on its own, as people like to travel with friends and like to spend as little money as possible, but if you are affectionate in a bar it's a different story.
- Doxin 5y ago
  This is anecdotal at best, so take it for what you will, but where I lived the cops used to be much much more violent. Beating up hippies with sticks for shits and giggles and the like. While far from perfect we've managed to get to a state where unprompted beatings like that basically don't happen. And if something like that does happen, it also tends to lead to police officers getting fired. For reference: it's a fireable offence for a police officer to gesture to their gun without cause. The way we got here was by, essentially, an uproar from the public. Action groups would go out and intentionally irritate cops, leading to large scale beatdowns. The public took notice and swayed opinion towards "wtf are these cops doing beating up innocent kids". Now like I said it's far from perfect, there's still a racism problem in our police force, but at least there aren't frequent shootings or beatings of unarmed civilians. Of course direct comparisons make very little sense here, but at least it's one case showing that a reversal of the trend with respect to police violence is a possibility. For more (quite amusing) reading, I can heartily recommend the wikipedia article on the Provo movement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement)
mcbishop 5y ago
I'm not used to seeing this sort of news on HN (I'm not saying that's good or bad).
tailrecursion 5y ago
This makes me think about those individuals who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons. Are the people who get angry from this story, the same people who are favorable to mandates and passports? The front line nurses who were heroes a year ago, are now hated... until they become homeless, and we'll feel sorry for them again.
- girvo 5y ago
  Straw man argument. Effectively zero people are angry with those who cannot get vaccinated for valid medical reasons. People are angry with those who claim "medical reasons" as to why they cannot be vaccinated, when they are lying. I cannot receive certain vaccines due to legitimate medical reasons: however I can and did receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who cannot be vaccinated need herd immunity to be protected. People who lie and claim to be a member of that small community of vulnerable people put those same people at massive risk by making herd immunity impossible to achieve. But you know all this already, none of this will convince you.
  - tailrecursion 5y ago
    Looks like I either failed to get my point across, or hit too close to home. Many who get angry at this story also enjoy seeing penalties (such as mandates and passports) for the unvaccinated. These penalties will create more pathos, whether you empathize or not. Maybe people think talking about unvaccinated people here is irrelevant or inflammatory or something like that; I don't know what exactly ties these stories together in my mind, but I suggest that maybe it's technophilia, that there are people who love to throw technology at every problem. Or, perhaps the hate comes from the sense of certainty some people have in their information sources, and they can't empathize with anyone who may be suffering from false or ideological info sources. Instead such people must be stupid and trolls. If it is a lack of empathy -- I think it's more likely a lack of sophistication -- I can see this same mode of hatred and blame we are seeing now, being directed at criminals back when those draconian laws were being drafted that put the deaf man in jail.
  - fidesomnes 5y ago
    imagine being this strident about the flu. I can't.
etc-hosts 5y ago
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21071962-mistic-v-hanning-et-al-original-petition https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21071962-mistic-v-ha... says he didn't have an interpreter to communicate with his attorney while he was in jail
- Goety 5y ago
  Is it that we dont have resources for this or is it because nobody cares?
  - ancode 5y ago
    both
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    Interpreters cost next to nothing.
  - etc-hosts 5y ago
    I thought it was interesting because for 4 months the deaf man was probably completely unable to communicate with his jailers, attorney, or family.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      I mean at some point a pencil and paper, right? Tear your toilet paper into strips to spell for the guards to read your message? something other than just sitting in jail for 4 months
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    It's because the people in power care... about controlling and dehumanizing those they have power over.
  - throwaway737383 5y ago
    In the world's largest* economy, is there a difference? Resource allocation is a reflection of values. *Or one of the largest, depending on which measure you choose.
fidesomnes 5y ago
wtf does this have to do with "Hacker News"?
TheMagicHorsey 5y ago
Not all, but some police officers I've met have severe psychological issues concerning power and seem to lose control too easily ... especially when they are dealing with people that they feel they should have power over: e.g. juveniles, homeless people, etc. I have observed some very peculiar and aggressive behavior from police when they feel their authority is being challenged or they are being disrespected. I feel we should only give guns and badges to people that are extremely resistant to bruised egos and who do not snap when their authority is challenged. To be clear, I myself am not suitable to be a police officer. I have a violent streak which I cannot control when I feel threatened. At one time I applied to be an FBI agent ... but when a friend pointed out I have this violent tendency, I decided it would not be a good career for me. Getting into fist fights over ego is not good even for civilians, but for police officers it can result in fatalities.
- macintux 5y ago
  Regrettably one of the most popular police trainers in the country advocates for police violence as part of the training. The problem is systemic. And endemic. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/02/14/a-day-with-killology-police-trainer-dave-grossman/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/02/14/...
elihu 5y ago
> In a statement, the Idaho Springs Police Department said the two officers didn't know Mistic was deaf during the initial encounter and maintained that Mistic resisted arrest, causing one of the officers to break his leg. Weird the article mentions this once and doesn't elaborate. I mean, how exactly did the officer break his leg? > Mistic then spent more than four months in jail and says he was repeatedly denied an interpreter. That's horrifying. > Hanning was later charged with third-degree assault and fired from the police force in a separate case in which he allegedly used his Taser on a 75-year-old man, according to The Associated Press. Summers, who used a Taser on Mistic, according to the lawsuit, is still an officer with the Idaho Springs police. Sounds like this sort of thing is a recurring problem.
- harikb 5y ago
  > Summers, who was in training at the time, > Summers told emergency medical staff called to the scene that Mistic was deaf, but neither officer I can see why some leniency is shown towards the junior one.
  - nuclearnice1 5y ago
    When you say some leniency is shown, did anything happen to either one as a consequence of this? From my reading of the article, it doesn’t seem like it.
    - anotherevan 5y ago
      > Hanning was later charged with third-degree assault and fired from the police force in a separate case in which he allegedly used his Taser on a 75-year-old man So not directly, but reading between the lines there is probably something to do with straws and camels going on.
  - elihu 5y ago
    ...on the other hand, Summers was also the one who tasered Mistic, according to the article.
- 5y ago
s5300 5y ago
I'll take being deaf and in jail over being autistic and being shot at for playing with a toy truck. Note: the cop had bad aim and hit the person next to, and trying to assist, the person playing with a toy truck. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Kinsey https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Kinsey https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442... IIRC, the man asked "why did you shoot me" (as he's on the ground, bleeding) and the cop replied with "I don't know"
Trias11 5y ago
Feels like it's not the whole story, with important details omitted to push specific narrative. Things doesn't adds up.
- r00fus 5y ago
  Pray tell, what do you think is missing? You can say "we don't know the whole story" for almost any news article and be likely correct and yet detract from the discussion.
  - Trias11 5y ago
    The guy was 4 months in jail and no lawyer and no one to raise alarm that he’s deaf. What he was stopped for? What were charges? How did he behave exactly before jail?
    - r00fus 5y ago
      4 months in detention without access to a lawyer and no translator sounds like something you'd see in a 3rd world country. It's up to the police to tell us why those conditions existed and who should be held accountable.
sfifs 5y ago
I have always wondered about the approach in the US of locally managed law enforcement departments. It's almost a given that such local oversight of a group with a societally granted monopoly on violence will breed corruption, nepotism and abuse as people with power collude locally. No other major country I know of has this system. Law enforcement oversight is almost always at a provincial or national level. I understand the historical perspective of how this originated as the country was settled but why does it persist? Could anyone knowledgeable share perspectives?
- eyelidlessness 5y ago
  Additional historical perspective: it was designed this way specifically for power, abuse, corruption. The entire jurisdictional system was designed to empower the worst while letting the “best” wash their hands of it. That there’s a through line from slavery to Jim Crow to rampant abuse of power in law enforcement shouldn’t be a surprise.
- plandis 5y ago
  People don’t have much control over their local police force but I don’t understand how making a national police force which citizens have even less control over helps. It’s also not clear to me that instances of corruption and nepotism don’t exist at a national level.
- nyolfen 5y ago
  i don't know why you think federal law enforcement is any better
- fnord77 5y ago
  that's not entirely accurate. The PD in Oakland, CA has been under federal oversight for 15 or 20 years now. Due various abuses.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
fastball 5y ago
So, uh, why would you yell "no ears" instead of "I'm deaf"?
- nuclearnice1 5y ago
  It possibly comes from the signs for deaf. One is a motion from ear to mouth. An older one is ear and closed. If you watch the video of him at the hospital, he is almost entirely nonverbal. So it is not surprising that his word choice was a bit odd. Why would you insert “,uh,” into your comment? What does that intend to convey?
  - fastball 5y ago
    Fair, I hadn't watched the video so didn't realize he was almost entirely non-verbal. Uh is intended to convey confusion. It's a fairly common way of speaking.
    - fletchowns 5y ago
      It comes off as very condescending, even if that is not the intent.
      - fastball 5y ago
        It really doesn't.
        LocalH 5y ago
        It really does, whether you realize it or not. Maybe not in person, where the other social cues are available, but in text it absolutely does.
r00fus 5y ago
As a parent of a special needs child, our policing situation is terrifying. I think non-black folk are now starting to see the horrors of our unaccountable law enforcement agencies that black folk have experienced for centuries.
thinkski 5y ago
From the Hacker News guidelines, this appears Off-Topic.
- sysihyk 5y ago
  It fits general "progressive" agenda, so exception applies.
jesterswilde 5y ago
I'm blind (not fully, but definitely well past the legal definition.) Obviously not the same as deaf, but it's a broken input nonetheless. One guy on here went with,"Why did cripple guy not understand the world as I would, I pretended I was him and it's not a problem." There is a lot missing without one of the inputs. Humans communicate on a spectrum of bands. Missing one causes confusion and miscommunication. I've had a handful of encounters with police. I've been stopped for being drunk (I wasn't, just blind and hadn't been willing to use the stick yet.) I could tell he, the cop, was uncomfortable with me. I dropped my ID, told him I couldn't see and asked for help. No idea his response, but he was silent as I crawled around on my hands and knees looking for my ID he was demanding. I don't know how far this was, or the other cops were, from violence when they stopped and interacted with me. But I could feel the mistrust. I'm confident they were thinking about it. Because I don't behave like everyone else. This is entirely predictable, and I imagine, common. It's also a thing I fear whenever I'm aware I'm near a cop.
justshowpost 5y ago
Is he also blind so didn't see uniformed officers trying to intervene?
sysihyk 5y ago
Yet another case when counterfeit currency brings one in trouble...

254 points by amin 5y ago

Police using violence against someone who is not violent is insane. Anyone doing so should be disqualified from ever being a cop.

ancode 5y ago
That's like most of what cops do in the US
- drdeca 5y ago
  Do you mean "like what most cops do" rather that "most of what cops do"? Because weighting by time, the latter seems implausible to me.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    Do you think most cases of violence by cops are against violent people? Remembering that when they're called to a violent crime, usually it's already over, but when they're called for a non-violent offense the perpetrator is more likely to be there?
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      I mean this completely unironically: cops are mostly armed bureaucrats. The vast majority of their function is to basically hand out tickets, police reports for insurance reasons, and to a lesser degree arrest people for whom there is an arrest warrant. Actually stopping crime in progress is more a factor of luck than an intended role, and not one they have any legal obligation to do. The fact that we tolerate this level from people who probably don’t even need to be armed is insane. Hell, red light cameras and speed cameras could probably save a lot of lives purely by eliminating unnecessary police/civilian interactions, let alone whatever road safety function they’d perform.
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    I guess it depends on what police behavior counts as 'violence'. So the first part of the question is, are most policing hours spent "using violence" or not? I'm not sure. Then the next part of the question might be, of the hours of policing spent "using violence", is the violence being used against someone who is not being violent most of the time? This one I feel pretty safe saying a big yes to. And I think is mainly what the original comment was getting at.
    - drdeca 5y ago
      I assume that by "violence" we mean, like, physical violence, things like beating, choking, tazing, tear gas, shooting, etc., things by which one is exerting power over another through physical exertion, in a way that can directly cause injury or pain. "using violence against someone" doesn't refer to "taking advantage of an implicit threat of violence", it means actively doing violence (or actively directing others to do so).
      - jrochkind1 5y ago
        What about an explicit threat of violence? If someone who is not the police does that, we generally consider them "violent" and (ironically?) support police violence against them. Like if someone points a gun at someone (an explicit(?) threat of violence, but not yet violence itself?), if the police shoot them, people consider that a justified violent response to violence. Then we can ask if, say, imprisoning someone is "violence" on it's own -- again, if someone that wasn't the police kidnapped you and locked you in the basement, we'd probably consider it a violent act, even if they didn't have to punch you to get you into the basement? I think it's interesting to talk about because I think what's violent and not is not as clearcut as we sometimes assume, and is worth interrogating. (I don't mean to suggest that anything anyone finds emotionally uncomfortable is "violence" either... there is lots going on culturally around "violence" these days...) Still, regardless, I think it's probably true that the majority of policing hours are not spent in the active use of violence (although some are spent preparing for use of violence, or looking for opportunity to use violence), and also, that the majority of times that are use of violence are against people who were not being violent.
  - LilBytes 5y ago
    Cops have a bad reputation in most places, but this might be media bias or media coverage. I can't say in the countries I've lived in (most countries in the UK, France, Germany and now Australia) are anything like what you see covered in the US.
    - jandrewrogers 5y ago
      It depends on what kind of law enforcement you are dealing with. City police have a poor reputation but county sheriffs often have a more positive reputation in many areas. Federal law enforcement is a whole different can of worms. The incentive structures and relationships to the population are different, and that leads to different behaviors. My experience in several jurisdictions matches the heuristic. Encounters with city police were always default adversarial, even when I had done nothing wrong; interactions with sheriffs were uniformly pleasant and reasonable, not adversarial, even in a couple cases where I was inadvertently breaking the law.
    - jollybean 5y ago
      "are anything like what you see covered in the US." Judging US police from media coverage is really not useful. Having lived experience of living in the US I think does illustrate some things, and then, more importantly, having access to 'good data' (which is hard, but nevertheless possible) is even better. I believe the police in the US overall take a more aggressive tone and posture. I also believe US citizens are far more likely to act in defiance. The things I've seen American individuals do ... I have never in my life seen in Canada, UK, France, Germany and couldn't even imagine it happening. The scenes of a man, with two police officers arresting him - four hands on him, putting cuffs on him - and he goes for his gun (!!). Or the number of times people race away from police after being pulled over and resulting high-speed chase. It's absurd. It's an issue I think people often don't tend to want to think about, but if we use car chases as an example - I think this is worthy because these are generally not situations in which arbitrary police aggression is going to be a 'root cause'. You can see total deaths in the US from car chases is ballpark 2/million/year, where as in he UK it's about 0.2/million/year. [1][2] High speed chases are a cultural phenom [3] (FYI about 1/2 of the people who die in high speed pursuits are innocent bystanders.) Obviously, this will be affected by police police in terms of pursuit policy (i.e. in many forces they won't pursue if it's too dangerous) - but there's no doubt that Americans have a much greater propensity to run from police, in cars, which is an extremely dangerous thing to do for those involved, but also for everyone else. It's nary impossible to get the data, but I believe that this applies to all other forms of confrontation as well. I think that they are related, i.e. civilians more aggressive posture - combined with the fact so many people have weapons - makes the police more 'on edge' and combined with their more systematically aggressive posture, you have considerably greater chances of 'small things' escalating into 'big things' - as we have in this article. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/319294/deaths-during-or-following-police-contact-police-pursuit-in-england-and-wales/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/319294/deaths-during-or-... [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/727008/vehicle-pursuit-related-deaths-by-state/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/727008/vehicle-pursuit-r... [3] https://www.lamag.com/longform/how-high-speed-car-chases-became-a-citywide-pastime-in-los-angeles/ https://www.lamag.com/longform/how-high-speed-car-chases-bec...
- jcims 5y ago
  That seems unlikely given there were an estimated 61.5 million encounters between police and the public in 2018. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cbpp18st.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cbpp18st.pdf My nephew just started as a police officer in a small town recently. He hasn't cracked a skull or kneed a chest in an entire year of service. Most of his time is spent as a medic, social worker or civil servant but also has to be ready in case shit hits the fan. The scope of work is too much for a single person and we get what we get as a result.
  - elikoga 5y ago
    > He hasn't cracked a skull or kneed a chest in an entire year of service. What a powerful sentence.
User23 5y ago
Does that mean I don’t need to pay taxes and they should never use violence to coerce me? Does that mean I don’t need to pay rent, because so long as I’m not violent they can’t remove me? Edit: Y’all are evidently missing the point that passive resistance can require violent force to overcome. Ultimately the difference between a law and a polite suggestion is that the former is backed by the threat of whatever force is necessary to enforce it. Suppose I prefer not to be arrested and I don’t attack the police, I just don’t let them cuff me and take me away. Are they justified to overpower me, regardless how much force it takes to overcome my noncompliance?
- coderintherye 5y ago
  First of all, your first question is a strawman because local police, as being discussed here, are not the ones performing arrests in cases of tax evasion. Rather, federal authorities would be the ones handling tax evasion.
  - LanceH 5y ago
    As soon as a warrant goes out from any source, local police are potentially conducting arrests.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
  You're conflating the academic definition of "violence" (e.g. "Nationstate monopoly on violence") with the colloquial and context-sensitive word "violence" ("That violent cop tased me for no reason.").
- Ar-Curunir 5y ago
  Yes, and yes.
- II2II 5y ago
  There is a difference between the use of force and the use of excessive force. When people talk about violence, they are usually referring to the latter. Then there is the question of when is the use of force appropriate. Failure to pay taxes or rent rarely involves the use of physical force. It would be used as a last resort, after other methods have failed. Likewise, the alleged failing to stop for a stop sign should not have led to a physical confrontation unless it was initiated by the person being ticketed. Even the refusal to comply with a police officer should not result in the immediate use of force. There are other ways to handle it.
vkou 5y ago
> Anyone doing so should be disqualified from ever being a cop. Preferably by ending up in prison, among the general population.
- gruez 5y ago
  Great idea! Let's punish extra-judicial punishment with... extra-judicial punishment /s
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - tombert 5y ago
    Should we not hold the people who are given a higher amount of power to a higher standard? I feel like the only way that it makes sense to have some sort of Leviathan-esque system is if we have assurances that the enforcers can be trusted.
    - gruez 5y ago
      >Should we not hold the people who are given a higher amount of power to a higher standard? You don't need extra-judicial and/or cruel and unusual punishment to do that.
      - tombert 5y ago
        How is putting cops in prison extra-judicial or cruel and unusual? I do think cops should get harsher sentences for abusing their power because, again, they're given extra power. If we cannot trust the enforcers of the law, then I am skeptical of the concept of enforcers. But of course I think there should be a standard trial and whatnot, I'm not suggesting we go to Mad Max or anything like that. I'm not saying we summarily execute every cop who has run a red light, but I'm saying that if a cop does a bad thing, then it shouldn't be an outlier case for them to go to prison for it.
        5y ago
ghoomketu 5y ago
Yeah this video still haunts me(1). The cop was acquitted by jury, saying the victim, committed a misdemeanour by leaving the house without identification(2). They did win $1.75m in the end though so at least there is that. (1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_SSGa7-6BQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_SSGa7-6BQ (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sureshbhai_Patel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sureshbhai_Patel
- whiddershins 5y ago
  That Wikipedia article is almost certainly inaccurate. I would need much stronger evidence than a link to photographyisnotacrime to be convinced that not having id when walking around is even a citation, much less a misdemeanor anywhere in the US. Much more likely someone got their wires crossed in hearing the detail of the story.
  - papercrane 5y ago
    It's accurate, it's misdemeanor for a permanent resident to not carry ID in public. https://www.al.com/news/2016/01/judge_throws_out_case_against.html https://www.al.com/news/2016/01/judge_throws_out_case_agains...
  - magicalist 5y ago
    > I would need much stronger evidence than a link to photographyisnotacrime to be convinced that not having id when walking around is even a citation, much less a misdemeanor anywhere in the US. Or just do a basic search. If you're a green card holder it's a misdemeanor to be without your id.
    - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
      As an LPR myself, this is true. I keep mine in my wallet. It is handy as a secondary backup identity card when (for whatever reason) I don't have my drivers license on me. (PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong!) I understand there are some weird situations you can be in though (caused by poorly written legislation), for example, not having your LPR Green Card is a *strict liability* federal misdemeanor, without any exceptions or legislated consideration if someone stole your card off you, or even if the card was confiscated by a federal or state/local official. So you could be stopped by a cop, who asks for your Id and confiscates your GC, and then immediately charges you for not being in possession of your GC. However I gather that this has never been tested in court, but it's still an unpleasant possibility. ...and if you lose it, that's $600 (!!!!) to renew it, which means having to go to your nearest USCIS building in-person (which can be hundreds of miles away) to have your fingerprints and other biometrics re-taken - I don't know why but USCIS simply won't re-print an existing GC unlike how WA's DoL has been re-issuing my drivers' license using the exact same biometrics and other info unchanged from almost a decade ago... it still says I weight 140lbs (lol... I'm 90kg now, ugh). And you're on-the-hook for that $600 regardless of the reason for reissuing it: whether it was your fault or not (though if it was someone else's fault I guess you could file a civil claim for damages at least) LPR rights are not exactly high on the priority list - but the law should be changed to not require us to carry the GC; and misplacing a GC (or being the victim of a crime of GC theft) should certainly not cost $600 and a half-day spent at a (depressing) USCIS building every time. It's super-absurd: I understand the "must carry" rule also applies to children: so rambunctious kindergarten kids too young to even tie their own shoelaces need to carry a $600 hologram of past presidents' heads. Surely there must be some way this is an unreasonable burden or maybe even unconstitutional because of the power-imbalance it introduces? ------ ...also I could be horribly misinformed about all of the above.
donatj 5y ago
Monopoly on legal violence is the job description. Don't want things smashed, don't use a hammer. Don't want violence, don't send a cop.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  Such grasp of the point - monopoly of legal violence - completely perverts it. Who is given powers to perform a function, plainly must not abuse them. The police is entrusted with a power to use violence, which means it is given a special responsibility associated with the special power: to abuse it is corruption, which is treason against the mandate, against the role and against the Entity empowering and entrusting. One is given a hammer, one is entrusted not to smash things. Don't want thing smashed, hire reliable personnel. If a cop is sent and you get gratuitous violence, that individual is unfit for its job, its behaviour is corrupt and it is treason.
  - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
    You're speaking from the position of how it should be, while everyone else is talking about how it is. It's not hard to find plenty of instances of police abusing their power and getting away with it. In many departments, "Internal Affairs" works FOR the police, rather than as a neutral 3rd party. The "We investigated ourselves and found no wrong-doing" is a common meme because it's often true.
    - mdp2021 5y ago
      Where that is tolerated (including accepted as a fact, or put aside as a background fact), the involved societies have a much bigger problem to deal with first. And if that fact is forced to fit into someone's mind through monstrous excuses for thought (with reference to that involving undefined association with violence), to problem (1) - the corruption in the state -, and problem (0) just above - the corruption of the members of society -, you get an even bigger damage (-1) - thought pollution, the corruption of clear cognitive function.
- atoav 5y ago

throw7 5y ago

I doubt this exact circumstance and set of details of a deaf man having his leg broken by cops has ever been adjudicated. Qualified Immunity. Next.

im3w1l 5y ago
> [police claimed] that Mistic resisted arrest, causing one of the officers to break his leg. It's unfortuante that the wording is ambigous. My interpretation was the opposite, that the deaf man broke the leg of the police officer. Checking with other sources, it seems that what happened was that a police officer accidentally broke his own leg.

63 5y ago

I don't want the following to come off as judgemental or to imply that I have anything but the utmost empathy for everyone involved in this case. I think it's interesting to consider these types of articles that get popular online. It seems perfect for creating outrage, but for what? If the purpose of the news is to inform, what does this news inform me of? What am I to do except get angry and ruminate and forget and repeat for the next story? I don't want to seem like the archetypal angry cynic that so often appears in these comment sections, but this is genuinely the reason I stopped paying attention to most of the news. I'm not sure what else to add here. I just think about this a lot.

rtkwe 5y ago
This is a weird fatalism about being unable to ever effectuate change that is really annoying in US politics. Without information about what's happening we'll never have a chance to change things, the whole culture of police violence loves hiding in the dark which is why news articles, body cams, and public videoing officers are met with such push back from police and their protectors.
- internet_user 5y ago
  It's the eternal "who watches the watchers" problem. Some people propose having a very local, municipal for small towns, or even smaller for large towns, mercenary force with license to use lethal force that answers to direct democracy of the area they are assigned to and nobody else. Just like police, only their contract is reviewed every year, for everyone in the force.
  - krapp 5y ago
    >It's the eternal "who watches the watchers" problem. Odd. Plenty of other countries manage watching their watchers just fine... >Some people propose having a very local, municipal for small towns, or even smaller for large towns, mercenary force with license to use lethal force that answers to direct democracy of the area they are assigned to and nobody else. ... and they don't even need local murder squads answering only to populist rage to do it.

ectopod 5y ago

120 years ago my grandmother's deaf uncle was shot dead by New York police. He was running for a train. Now it's tase and jail. I guess that's progress. I'm just glad I don't live in America.

EastOfTruth 5y ago
There is usually at least 1000 people shot by police each year (edit: in the US)... and that don't include chockings and other murder methods: https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings
- mfgs 5y ago
  There is usually at least 1000 people shot by police each year in the US. All other developed nations have significantly lower rates and incidences of police killings: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/.
  - jcims 5y ago
    There are ~50 officers 'feloniously killed' in the US every year. https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/topic-pages/officers-feloniously-killed https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/topic-pages/officers-feloniou... If you dig around most other nations have substantially lower rates of LEO homicides. Bunch of older stats here https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdf https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdf I think one begets the other in a positive feedback loop that is difficult to break.
- fnord77 5y ago
  many pet dogs get needlessly shot too
  - EastOfTruth 5y ago
    true, but dogs need to be leeched

meetups323 5y ago

To the people who just just know history/world politics things reading: are there any examples of a nation successfully transitioning themselves away from police brutality against minorities/"undesirables"/those-lacking-general-privilege? What did that transition look like? Places with racial/economic diversity generally similar to the US's are preferred.

iudqnolq 5y ago
I think the US's progress from "the cops set you on fire and smirk about to the press" to "the cops shoot you and pretend they thought your phone was a gun" is significant and informative for what we should do next. You might also be interested in the UK and Germany.
themarbz 5y ago
World War II?
fy20 5y ago
I'm originally from the UK, and now live in a post-Soviet country and I'd say people here are much more accepting of people who are "different". I guess this is partly due to the history of Russia and the USSR, as there was a lot of migration between countries in the past hundred years or so. A lot of my friends who are "native" have grandparents or such from another country. The only case where being "different" may have issues is if you are not straight... but in larger cities now it is usually accepted as long as you don't flaunt it. Two men sharing a hotel room would not raise eyebrows on its own, as people like to travel with friends and like to spend as little money as possible, but if you are affectionate in a bar it's a different story.
Doxin 5y ago
This is anecdotal at best, so take it for what you will, but where I lived the cops used to be much much more violent. Beating up hippies with sticks for shits and giggles and the like. While far from perfect we've managed to get to a state where unprompted beatings like that basically don't happen. And if something like that does happen, it also tends to lead to police officers getting fired. For reference: it's a fireable offence for a police officer to gesture to their gun without cause. The way we got here was by, essentially, an uproar from the public. Action groups would go out and intentionally irritate cops, leading to large scale beatdowns. The public took notice and swayed opinion towards "wtf are these cops doing beating up innocent kids". Now like I said it's far from perfect, there's still a racism problem in our police force, but at least there aren't frequent shootings or beatings of unarmed civilians. Of course direct comparisons make very little sense here, but at least it's one case showing that a reversal of the trend with respect to police violence is a possibility. For more (quite amusing) reading, I can heartily recommend the wikipedia article on the Provo movement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement)

mcbishop 5y ago

I'm not used to seeing this sort of news on HN (I'm not saying that's good or bad).

tailrecursion 5y ago

This makes me think about those individuals who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons. Are the people who get angry from this story, the same people who are favorable to mandates and passports? The front line nurses who were heroes a year ago, are now hated... until they become homeless, and we'll feel sorry for them again.

girvo 5y ago
Straw man argument. Effectively zero people are angry with those who cannot get vaccinated for valid medical reasons. People are angry with those who claim "medical reasons" as to why they cannot be vaccinated, when they are lying. I cannot receive certain vaccines due to legitimate medical reasons: however I can and did receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who cannot be vaccinated need herd immunity to be protected. People who lie and claim to be a member of that small community of vulnerable people put those same people at massive risk by making herd immunity impossible to achieve. But you know all this already, none of this will convince you.
- tailrecursion 5y ago
  Looks like I either failed to get my point across, or hit too close to home. Many who get angry at this story also enjoy seeing penalties (such as mandates and passports) for the unvaccinated. These penalties will create more pathos, whether you empathize or not. Maybe people think talking about unvaccinated people here is irrelevant or inflammatory or something like that; I don't know what exactly ties these stories together in my mind, but I suggest that maybe it's technophilia, that there are people who love to throw technology at every problem. Or, perhaps the hate comes from the sense of certainty some people have in their information sources, and they can't empathize with anyone who may be suffering from false or ideological info sources. Instead such people must be stupid and trolls. If it is a lack of empathy -- I think it's more likely a lack of sophistication -- I can see this same mode of hatred and blame we are seeing now, being directed at criminals back when those draconian laws were being drafted that put the deaf man in jail.
- fidesomnes 5y ago
  imagine being this strident about the flu. I can't.

etc-hosts 5y ago

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21071962-mistic-v-hanning-et-al-original-petition https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21071962-mistic-v-ha... says he didn't have an interpreter to communicate with his attorney while he was in jail

Goety 5y ago
Is it that we dont have resources for this or is it because nobody cares?
- ancode 5y ago
  both
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  Interpreters cost next to nothing.
- etc-hosts 5y ago
  I thought it was interesting because for 4 months the deaf man was probably completely unable to communicate with his jailers, attorney, or family.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    I mean at some point a pencil and paper, right? Tear your toilet paper into strips to spell for the guards to read your message? something other than just sitting in jail for 4 months
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  It's because the people in power care... about controlling and dehumanizing those they have power over.
- throwaway737383 5y ago
  In the world's largest* economy, is there a difference? Resource allocation is a reflection of values. *Or one of the largest, depending on which measure you choose.

fidesomnes 5y ago

wtf does this have to do with "Hacker News"?

TheMagicHorsey 5y ago

Not all, but some police officers I've met have severe psychological issues concerning power and seem to lose control too easily ... especially when they are dealing with people that they feel they should have power over: e.g. juveniles, homeless people, etc. I have observed some very peculiar and aggressive behavior from police when they feel their authority is being challenged or they are being disrespected. I feel we should only give guns and badges to people that are extremely resistant to bruised egos and who do not snap when their authority is challenged. To be clear, I myself am not suitable to be a police officer. I have a violent streak which I cannot control when I feel threatened. At one time I applied to be an FBI agent ... but when a friend pointed out I have this violent tendency, I decided it would not be a good career for me. Getting into fist fights over ego is not good even for civilians, but for police officers it can result in fatalities.

macintux 5y ago
Regrettably one of the most popular police trainers in the country advocates for police violence as part of the training. The problem is systemic. And endemic. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/02/14/a-day-with-killology-police-trainer-dave-grossman/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/02/14/...

elihu 5y ago

> In a statement, the Idaho Springs Police Department said the two officers didn't know Mistic was deaf during the initial encounter and maintained that Mistic resisted arrest, causing one of the officers to break his leg. Weird the article mentions this once and doesn't elaborate. I mean, how exactly did the officer break his leg? > Mistic then spent more than four months in jail and says he was repeatedly denied an interpreter. That's horrifying. > Hanning was later charged with third-degree assault and fired from the police force in a separate case in which he allegedly used his Taser on a 75-year-old man, according to The Associated Press. Summers, who used a Taser on Mistic, according to the lawsuit, is still an officer with the Idaho Springs police. Sounds like this sort of thing is a recurring problem.

harikb 5y ago
> Summers, who was in training at the time, > Summers told emergency medical staff called to the scene that Mistic was deaf, but neither officer I can see why some leniency is shown towards the junior one.
- nuclearnice1 5y ago
  When you say some leniency is shown, did anything happen to either one as a consequence of this? From my reading of the article, it doesn’t seem like it.
  - anotherevan 5y ago
    > Hanning was later charged with third-degree assault and fired from the police force in a separate case in which he allegedly used his Taser on a 75-year-old man So not directly, but reading between the lines there is probably something to do with straws and camels going on.
- elihu 5y ago
  ...on the other hand, Summers was also the one who tasered Mistic, according to the article.
5y ago

s5300 5y ago

I'll take being deaf and in jail over being autistic and being shot at for playing with a toy truck. Note: the cop had bad aim and hit the person next to, and trying to assist, the person playing with a toy truck. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Kinsey https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Kinsey https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442... IIRC, the man asked "why did you shoot me" (as he's on the ground, bleeding) and the cop replied with "I don't know"

Trias11 5y ago

Feels like it's not the whole story, with important details omitted to push specific narrative. Things doesn't adds up.

r00fus 5y ago
Pray tell, what do you think is missing? You can say "we don't know the whole story" for almost any news article and be likely correct and yet detract from the discussion.
- Trias11 5y ago
  The guy was 4 months in jail and no lawyer and no one to raise alarm that he’s deaf. What he was stopped for? What were charges? How did he behave exactly before jail?
  - r00fus 5y ago
    4 months in detention without access to a lawyer and no translator sounds like something you'd see in a 3rd world country. It's up to the police to tell us why those conditions existed and who should be held accountable.

sfifs 5y ago

I have always wondered about the approach in the US of locally managed law enforcement departments. It's almost a given that such local oversight of a group with a societally granted monopoly on violence will breed corruption, nepotism and abuse as people with power collude locally. No other major country I know of has this system. Law enforcement oversight is almost always at a provincial or national level. I understand the historical perspective of how this originated as the country was settled but why does it persist? Could anyone knowledgeable share perspectives?

eyelidlessness 5y ago
Additional historical perspective: it was designed this way specifically for power, abuse, corruption. The entire jurisdictional system was designed to empower the worst while letting the “best” wash their hands of it. That there’s a through line from slavery to Jim Crow to rampant abuse of power in law enforcement shouldn’t be a surprise.
plandis 5y ago
People don’t have much control over their local police force but I don’t understand how making a national police force which citizens have even less control over helps. It’s also not clear to me that instances of corruption and nepotism don’t exist at a national level.
nyolfen 5y ago
i don't know why you think federal law enforcement is any better
fnord77 5y ago
that's not entirely accurate. The PD in Oakland, CA has been under federal oversight for 15 or 20 years now. Due various abuses.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

fastball 5y ago

So, uh, why would you yell "no ears" instead of "I'm deaf"?

nuclearnice1 5y ago
It possibly comes from the signs for deaf. One is a motion from ear to mouth. An older one is ear and closed. If you watch the video of him at the hospital, he is almost entirely nonverbal. So it is not surprising that his word choice was a bit odd. Why would you insert “,uh,” into your comment? What does that intend to convey?
- fastball 5y ago
  Fair, I hadn't watched the video so didn't realize he was almost entirely non-verbal. Uh is intended to convey confusion. It's a fairly common way of speaking.
  - fletchowns 5y ago
    It comes off as very condescending, even if that is not the intent.
    - fastball 5y ago
      It really doesn't.
      - LocalH 5y ago
        It really does, whether you realize it or not. Maybe not in person, where the other social cues are available, but in text it absolutely does.

r00fus 5y ago

As a parent of a special needs child, our policing situation is terrifying. I think non-black folk are now starting to see the horrors of our unaccountable law enforcement agencies that black folk have experienced for centuries.

thinkski 5y ago

From the Hacker News guidelines, this appears Off-Topic.

sysihyk 5y ago
It fits general "progressive" agenda, so exception applies.

jesterswilde 5y ago

I'm blind (not fully, but definitely well past the legal definition.) Obviously not the same as deaf, but it's a broken input nonetheless. One guy on here went with,"Why did cripple guy not understand the world as I would, I pretended I was him and it's not a problem." There is a lot missing without one of the inputs. Humans communicate on a spectrum of bands. Missing one causes confusion and miscommunication. I've had a handful of encounters with police. I've been stopped for being drunk (I wasn't, just blind and hadn't been willing to use the stick yet.) I could tell he, the cop, was uncomfortable with me. I dropped my ID, told him I couldn't see and asked for help. No idea his response, but he was silent as I crawled around on my hands and knees looking for my ID he was demanding. I don't know how far this was, or the other cops were, from violence when they stopped and interacted with me. But I could feel the mistrust. I'm confident they were thinking about it. Because I don't behave like everyone else. This is entirely predictable, and I imagine, common. It's also a thing I fear whenever I'm aware I'm near a cop.

justshowpost 5y ago

Is he also blind so didn't see uniformed officers trying to intervene?

sysihyk 5y ago

Yet another case when counterfeit currency brings one in trouble...