Quote:Anybody following the "He had priors for child endangerment with a weapon and possibly shot at police while in Texas" story? Hasn't made the mainstream yet? Hmmmmmm
Quick google search yielded this:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/slain-charlotte-man-had-lengthy-record.php'>http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/slain-charlotte-man-had-lengthy-record.php</a>
I believe it's not being discussed b/c prior history isn't supposed to influence current crimes / prosecution? No mainstream outlet had mentioned it yet, at least none that I've seen.
Quote:Look back at your own post that I replied to and see where what you're saying is incorrect. You're talking about something else entirely in this post.
Originally you said the governer passed a bill that no camera footage can be released. That is incorrect and that is what I responded to. Here you are saying the Chief is saying it will be released when a there is a compelling reason to do so.
The most recent news is that releasing it at this point may cause more riots because it isn't clear whether the man had a weapon or not but with all the other evidence they have it's clear the right decision was made by the officer to defend himself. No one rioting is going to see the "but" of this whole thing- they won't hear that there is more evidence than just the video. They'll just see a video that doesn't have clear proof the man had a weapon and will go bat turd crazy and burn the city.
I don't care what a newspaper says. They are not responsible for the fallout of the release of the video or any other evidence. Until the investigation is at a point where the PD feels it can do so without mass chaos, they have every right to keep it in hand. I used to be married to a military police officer which, other than being deployed to war zones, isn't as different from civilian police as a lot of folks think, so I happen to have some knowledge as to the how and why of this sort of thing. There can be posturing on the side of the PD and it's not always right. Their job is to investigate, analyze the evidence and make determinations from there. It is not to appease the the media or the people.
To give you perspective:
We recently had a very sad hit and run accident locally and the victim was a young black man walking to his job at McDonald's at 430am. There was footage from a nearby gas station camera that showed a truck pull into the area and someone exiting the vehicle to look at the front of it then got back in and drove away. The local PD eventually positively ID'd him as the one who hit the kid but they took their time making sure everything was as it should be so when the case goes to trial there is nothing that can be questioned. As you can imagine the family and other folks in the black community thought the PD was dragging tail or just not doing anything because the kid was black. They couldn't understand that there were very specific things that had to be done to be sure the case against the driver was solid. A lot of people don't understand you can't have a fast and thorough investigation if you want the right outcome. Too many people base their ideas of how things like this should go based on TV shows and movies which is ridiculous.
I clarified my position which is correct, the NC governor signed a bill into law which makes it impossible for the general public or media to request access to law enforcement's body and dash cam (which the CMPD has released).
Riots start because of the media which if there is coverage or a perception that law enforcement is not being transparent then civil unrest begins to happen.
You may not care what a newspaper does, but its clear the Charlotte Observer put pressure on local police and which led to the release of the video,
In regards to what you referenced about the person being killed in a hit and run, I can only speculate as to why there was unrest because their may have been a perception police wasnt being transparent. Im unsure because I dont live there.
Quote:You may not care what a newspaper does, but its clear the Charlotte Observer put pressure on local police and which led to the release of the video,
.
Not arguing, but you are dead wrong.
Do you live in Jacksonville? Do you think the Times Union could possibly pressure JSO enough into compromising an investigation just because they wanted footage? The Charlotte Observer is treated like most local papers - in that nobody reads it except on Sunday.
I PROMISE - the Observer had no hand in the release of the videos. The police chief had repeated that videos wouldn't be released until all witnesses had signed sworn statements. Once that happened - the videos went out to the news outlets.
Before that, Charlotte officials only worried about public backlash and trucking in "protesters" on loan from the last bit of outrage.
Nobody seemed to care that the video would exonerate the cop. Nobody seemed to care that all the riots could have been prevented if they released footage immediately. Charlotte sat back, took a deep breath, and knew they were in for a few days of morons looting and overreacting because that is what happens in these scenarios.
Whatever city you live in, it's going to happen there eventually too.
Quote:I clarified my position which is correct, the NC governor signed a bill into law which makes it impossible for the general public or media to request access to law enforcement's body and dash cam (which the CMPD has released).
Riots start because of the media which if there is coverage or a perception that law enforcement is not being transparent then civil unrest begins to happen.
You may not care what a newspaper does, but its clear the Charlotte Observer put pressure on local police and which led to the release of the video,
In regards to what you referenced about the person being killed in a hit and run, I can only speculate as to why there was unrest because their may have been a perception police wasnt being transparent. Im unsure because I dont live there.
The police were doing their job to the best of their ability considering it happened at 430am so there were no witnesses because nothing is open, it was on a country road, no one else was out that time of night and no evidence initially other than the grainy video from a gas station camera that captured the footage in almost complete darkness. Had the video not been captured there would have been virtually nothing to eventually lead the police to the perpetrator.
The family and friends were upset because they weren't doing it fast enough because the dead kid was black. This is not speculation, it was said by family and friends on multiple local media outlets. The police released a still photo of the person in the video to local media for help in identifying the person and/or the vehicle. They kept the family updated as often as they could but it still wasn't good enough or fast enough because the kid was black- and after the photo was released the perp was found to be white. Thankfully after a thorough investigation the person was identified, arrested, charged and is being held until his court date. Sadly, the family and friends still have a chip on their shoulders because they think most, if not all police officers are against the black community.
There are people here who outright say they will not help the police if someone from their neighborhood (race) is in trouble for rape, murder, drug trafficking, robbery, etc. They say it loud and proud and it's the poorer black community that says it. This leads to tensions in our town because known criminals are being shielded from police and allowed to commit more crimes. They eventually get caught but the damage from their crimes is done. Sadly I know families who would not turn a family member in if they commit a serious crime. Personally it ticks me off to no end that this behavior is allowed and encouraged no matter the skin color because it puts everyone at risk of the crimes being committed. Would I turn in a family member if they committed a serious crime? Yes, I would because no one is nor should be above the law.
Quote:The police were doing their job to the best of their ability considering it happened at 430am so there were no witnesses because nothing is open, it was on a country road, no one else was out that time of night and no evidence initially other than the grainy video from a gas station camera that captured the footage in almost complete darkness. Had the video not been captured there would have been virtually nothing to eventually lead the police to the perpetrator.
The family and friends were upset because they weren't doing it fast enough because the dead kid was black. This is not speculation, it was said by family and friends on multiple local media outlets. The police released a still photo of the person in the video to local media for help in identifying the person and/or the vehicle. They kept the family updated as often as they could but it still wasn't good enough or fast enough because the kid was black- and after the photo was released the perp was found to be white. Thankfully after a thorough investigation the person was identified, arrested, charged and is being held until his court date. Sadly, the family and friends still have a chip on their shoulders because they think most, if not all police officers are against the black community.
There are people here who outright say they will not help the police if someone from their neighborhood (race) is in trouble for rape, murder, drug trafficking, robbery, etc. They say it loud and proud and it's the poorer black community that says it. This leads to tensions in our town because known criminals are being shielded from police and allowed to commit more crimes. They eventually get caught but the damage from their crimes is done. Sadly I know families who would not turn a family member in if they commit a serious crime. Personally it ticks me off to no end that this behavior is allowed and encouraged no matter the skin color because it puts everyone at risk of the crimes being committed. Would I turn in a family member if they committed a serious crime? Yes, I would because no one is nor should be above the law.
Some people don't realize that this is a very large part of the problem.