Copland, no Black & White, only Blue!
Posted on 05/19/2015 8:29:27 AM PDT by smokingfrog
A Chicago police commander whose aggressive tactics won him street cred with rank-and-file officers and community leaders is set to go on trial next month on charges he crossed the line by shoving the barrel of his service weapon down a man's throat and threatening to kill him.
When his trial starts June 22, Glenn Evans will become the second recent Chicago police officer facing criminal charges to opt to let a judge, not a jury, decide his fate at the Leighton Criminal Court Building.
The trial appears likely to play out amid a continuing national debate over police use of force against unarmed African-Americans after deaths in Baltimore, New York City and Ferguson, Mo. A Cook County judge's acquittal last month of a Chicago police detective in the fatal 2012 off-duty shooting of an unarmed black woman also captured national headlines.
The chief evidence against Evans appears to be the alleged victim's DNA on Evans' service weapon. But Evans' attorney, Laura Morask, said the DNA doesn't distinguish whether the gun was placed inside the mouth of alleged victim, Rickey Williams, or simply touched by him during the course of his arrest in January 2013.
"The DNA is not the smoking gun that prosecutors say it is," said Morask, a former longtime Cook County assistant state's attorney.
Morask also confirmed that Evans was never questioned by authorities about the incident before he was charged.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
The more they the people act up, the more aggressive they need to be.
The more aggressive.....we get the picture... obama gets what he wants.
Long past time to eliminate the entire Chicago Police Department and replace it with as many Black Panthers as possible.
Meanwhile: tourists stay out of Chicago.
Actually, making a very credible physical threat upon a miscreant is VERY effective policing, as it breaks down resistance to paying attention to some very important truths about to be imparted.
Obviously the person being interrogated was showing some degree of intransigence, and the objective was important enough to offer a really stark choice - comply, or face potential consequences.
So you’re saying it’s okay for a citizen to threaten the life of someone they detaining?
I thought the stories about Burma were exaggerated.
Copland, no Black & White, only Blue!
I know you’ll probably resent this, but police are granted additional authority in a society, by consent of the governed in a free country, to pursue offenders and present an intimidating presence to deter would-be offenders. And I like that.
Abusers are another subject and can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. But on the whole, the police function.... functions.
IF the COMMANDER were a White man...chicago would explode.
>>Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.<<
Good grief. Shoving a muzzle down a man’s throat? Perhaps if the firearm went pow, it may have been damned if he do and damned if he don’t.
Some cops really ARE out of control. That sort of behavior is beyond reasonable. Come on man.
Chicago has black precinct offices - places where suspects are held without arrest, and without rights, and imprisoned.
They are not allowed counsel, or contact with family.
That’s right here in the US.
In my younger days, I would travel to Chicago to partake of the nightlife with my college friends who lived there. When Daley, and then Byrne, were in the mayor’s office, Rush Street and the other “officially sanctioned” night spots were kept safe and clean by Chicago PD. As for the techniques employed to do that, you didn’t ask. I saw the checkerheads giving a guy a wooden shampoo one evening, and when one of the cops thought I was gawking a bit much, he made it clear I should move on. He didn’t have to tell me twice.
When Harold Washington became mayor, a lot changed. We went to Rush Street and you couldn’t take two steps out of a bar without being swarmed by black prostitutes. That never happened under Daley or Byrne; the hookers knew not to go there. With Washington they had free license. And there were a lot of other shady character hanging around too.
I knew which arrangement I preferred.
Now if you are talking about a random citizen just minding his own business out there on the street, snatched up and detained with little prior reason for this action, threatening life and limb may not be justified.
But catching someone in the commission of a crime, or to whom the commission of a crime can be strongly linked, THEN applying some forceful methods to gain their compliance and the real facts of the matter are an altogether different strategy.
A very strong police presence is one of the marks of an entrenched tyranny, as this sort of search and seizure without probable cause is not likely to be questioned.
There is a balance between strong police presence, and sound policing procedure, that has to be observed, else it tips either into anarchy or despotism, either too little order, or too much.
I don't know what you're getting all upset about. I was reading a book about Soviet secret police techniques, post-Stalin. Since arbitrary executions were pretty much out, the KGB used methods like the one described in the article. And they worked!
Oh wait...that's probably not a good argument after all.
So you’re saying the 5th amendment doesn’t apply?
Funny post...well, maybe not, but I get it. lol
We just can’t have cops abusing folks. We trust them to protect and serve. When a suspect is down, cuffed and no longer a threat...ya just can’t keep on kicking/punching the guy.
We are supposed to be different. I’ve seen the Russian cops arrest an individual. It’s just in a dayz work to tune on the guy for a spell before delivering him up to the jailhouse.
Wait...was I watching local Houston news?
Maybe we should send our Gitmo prisoners there...
“But catching someone in the commission of a crime, or to whom the commission of a crime can be strongly linked, THEN applying some forceful methods to gain their compliance and the real facts of the matter are an altogether different strategy.”
Well, you’ll never get a cop to admit he just stopped a random person breaking no laws just because he felt they were suspicious, then proceed to disregard their civil rights.
With police, a sideline glance at a child becomes ‘predatory’, a lingering gaze at an officers face becomes ‘menacing’. Clench your buttocks and they perform cavity searches. Record them from across the street and you’re ‘interfering’ with police. Question them or exercise your rights and you’re ‘resisting’ arrest. Flinch in pain when they grab you and you ‘assaulted’ them.
All those benefits of doubt you want to give police, I do to. But only when they’re conducting themselves professional as police, not as paramilitary police.
Indeed . . . .
Wait-— so if somebody is minding their own business and is arbitrarily abducted and assaulted this “may” not be justified? So maybe yes, maybe no?
And if you catch them committing a crime you can assault, threaten to kill or torture? So, when a cop puts a gun in a suspects mouth that is just a noble pursuit of truth?
Egads man, you’re setting a low bar
You’re just racist against black prostitutes.
Stop microaggressing!.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.