So a hunting license for black people costs $3 million. Probably a lot of mayors and police departments feel that’s a reasonable fee.
$3 million bucks is a lot of admission of a lot of fault.
This disturbs me. The city pays out $3 million and the cop walks. Cause and effect?
So, I gather you’re not a Republican?
Not to be dramatic, but that wasn’t a traffic stop, it was an assassination…
Your hunting comment reminded of this cartoon from a while back:
Never enough
I don’t know HOW you guessed that???
Think who’s going to be picking the federal judiciary over the next few years.
This is a big fucking deal. Way back in the day, I used to think it was good that all this racist bs was brought out into the light, to make it impossible for anyone to deny the problem. You know, sunlight being a great disinfectant, and all that. Way back in the day.
They should have gotten enough money to bankrupt the whole damn city. When cities can’t afford to hire belligerent dickbags, they’ll stop. And only then.
Taxpayers eventually foot the bill for these settlements. White majority cities, which are most cities in the U.S., will always be willing to pay cops to kill black people. Hence you don’t read of white taxpayers flooding city council meetings demanding sanity from police departments vis-a-vis the deployment of violence against blacks. Shooting a black person today is just as acceptable as lynching one was in the early 1900s. You just have to pay a fine for doing it. Buying permits ahead of time would be more honest.
Obviously the city’s lawyers know the difference between beyond a reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence. Notice the shooter isn’t working for the department any more.
I think the shooter needed jail time, but don’t think for a moment the police department got away free.
Fortunately for all those white taxpayers the Department of Justus will not be reviewing and correcting police policy to even the limited level they did under President Obama. Sessions looks on this ongoing murder spree with comity.
These are completely separate events and anything related to the civil matter would be inadmissible in the criminal trial. So no.
The main thing to realize here is that civil trials you need to just push the scale slightly to your side to win. A preponderance of the evidence is >50% (so if the jury sees the case as 50/50 you still haven’t proven your case). But in criminal law, we have the highest burden of proof in the world, beyond a reasonable doubt (arguably its higher in Islamist countries that follow a strict Sharia that only gives a woman half the the evidentiary weight as a man, but I digress).
What’s most troubling to me is:
the city of St. Anthony said it was offering Yanez a “voluntary separation agreement” from the police department, and he would no longer be an on-duty officer.
Why wasn’t he fired? Does this mean he can work a desk job? I would hope that this settlement would be a warning to any county/city/private security that seeks to hire Yanez as an officer in the future.
Until the taxpayers in the city determine that these costs get out of hand and start impacting other services, this will be the standard technique that is followed. As to the jury, I would ask only one question if I was the prosecutor, how would you respond if this was a hispanic or black policemen and the people in the car had been all white? I think I know what they would say and I think I also know how they would vote in the criminal trial.
It seems to have been what the Cops call an “investigational stop”. You see people likely to be involved in law breaking ( in this case Black was enough ) so you manufacture a reason to stop and take a closer look. Tail lights are a biggie. Once stopped you can look around the vehicle and over the person and see if you can gag them. They’re another clever way to get around peoples Constitutional rights. Of late several of these have been escalated to shootings due to cops being nervous or “afraid for their life” due to circumstances created wholly by them. The other guy dies though.
The thing that blew me away about the recently released video of the assassination was that the cop had to have seen there was a kid in the car, and still poured a fusillade into the car.
So many criminals take their kids with them on the crime sprees, right?