It likely would make for legal difficulties in today’s PC ruled courts. It ‘may’ have been unprofessional depending on one’s point of view.
But wrong? No it was not wrong. It was 100% accurate. Unless ‘right’ means “Live like a thug, die by a law abiding respectable person.”
It’s a pretty well established fact that action results in consequence. If one sky dives, he has a far greater chance of falling thousands of feet to his death than a bed ridden man in a ground floor nursing home. If a person swims regularly mid ocean, his chances of drowning are far greater than those of an Arab living in the Sahara.
And if one lives like a thug, with the crime/murder/death statistics of thuggery to go by, there are greater than even odds that one’s chances of dying like a thug are quite high.
I think that would hold up in court, don’t you?
No further questions councilor ;)
As long as we let PC word games hold sway, we will be ruled by the people who play them.
Edit “Dy “LIKE” a law abiding respectible person”
Wouldn’t hold up in Court at all. This Officer would be eviscerated on the stand in any case involving any prejudice he may have. If I were the Defense Atty, I’d easily tear him to pieces.
Even if it were a pre-trial hearing. let’s say the issue is racial profiling and there was no probably cause. Just about every judge worth a hoot would toss the evidence in question if it appeared that he was prejudiced.
This one statement has the potential to ruin dozens, if not more, criminal cases in his jurisdiction.
Just because something's accurate doesn't mean a public official can say it without repercussions. A judge cannot, in his or her private life, make general but true comments about the statistical likelihood of a black man committing a violent crime compared to an asian man without facing motions to recuse himself every time he or she sits on a case with a black male defendant charged with a violent crime.