4 ms·
This is pretty much all you need to read: Davis’s termination came less than two weeks after top IPRA officials, evaluating Davis’s job performance, accused hi
by ClayM 11y ago
This is pretty much all you need to read:
Davis’s termination came less than two weeks after top IPRA officials, evaluating Davis’s job performance, accused him of “a clear bias against the police” and called him “the only supervisor at IPRA who resists making requested changes as directed by management in order to reflect the correct finding with respect to OIS,” as officer-involved shootings are known in the agency.
Since its 2007 creation, IPRA has investigated nearly 400 civilian shootings by police and found one to be unjustified.
- jMyles 11y agoCan you imagine if your build process worked that way? "Yeah, the integration tests failed 400 times, but in all but one of them, it was the test runner that was the problem."
- sp332 11y agoOur product killed 400 people, but we're pretty sure 399 of them deserved it.
- yebyen 11y agoTo be fair, that they were shot by an officer does not imply that they were killed. Of course I haven't read the statistics in detail, maybe we're only investigating these cases because they were cases where the person was killed. </cynical outlook>
- serge2k 11y agoOr it could reasonably be "Yeah, the integration tests failed 400 times, but, in all but one of them, the failure was indicative of an actual problem with the system". 1 out of 400 could easily mean the police use justified force almost all the time. Of course then they probably wouldn't be firing investigators, but there you go.
- jMyles 11y agoI guess it depends on what counts as a "pass." I think that the state mortally wounding someone is always a failure. There are different severity levels, to be sure, but there's a reason that they're all investigated. Even in the (in my estimation) relatively small fraction that are in fact truly, expressly legally justified, it's a failure on a different layer of the stack.