3 ms·
>Now try filing a complaint about the police, but you have to go through the police to do it - good luck with that. If city police officers intentionally viola
by nokcha 15y ago
>Now try filing a complaint about the police, but you have to go through the police to do it - good luck with that.
If city police officers intentionally violated one's rights, one can sue the offending officers (and the municipality [1]) in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (However, under Supreme Court case law, officers have qualified immunity for honest mistakes.)
>No ... federal oversight - they make you go through them
You can file a complaint with the US Department of Justice.
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/documents/polmis.php http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/documents/polmis.php
It is true that police officers get away with too much misconduct, but it's not true that there is no independent oversight whatsoever.
[1] Monell v. Dept. of Soc. Svcs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978).
- CWuestefeld 15y agounder Supreme Court case law, officers have qualified immunity for honest mistakes And thus, police agencies have incentive to keep their officers ignorant about the rights of the people. If the police are never taught the law, then any "mistake" they make is clearly the result of ignorance rather malicious intent. But if they're properly educated, then they'll be responsible for their own actions.
- tincholio 15y agoIgnorance of the law is not a valid excuse, ever. What's your point?
- CWuestefeld 15y agoIgnorance of the law is not a valid excuse, ever. What's your point? No, and that is my point. Government agents enjoy qualified immunity. They aren't personally responsible for their actions if they can show that they were ignorant of the law. (and since you weren't aware of this, I think that demonstrates that it's an important point to make)