POLICE MUST UNZIP LIPS
In the wake of the recent attacks on police in Dallas and Baton Rouge and the increasing protests by racist and sometimes-violent groups like (Only) Black (Criminal) Lives Matter, it is not easy to point a finger of blame at the police themselves. But to ignore why these protests occur is to doom the police and Society at large to more, larger, and more violent confrontations.
In all of the cases (O)B(C)LM references, of those that erupted in large and fervent protests, there is one glaring consistency: the police hold back for days, sometimes weeks, the information that would help to diffuse or even squelch the anger.
Take the (O)B(C)LM poster child, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Initial reports, debunked later but still believed by many, were that Brown and his friend were innocently walking down the middle of a street when the officer stopped them. The officer got out of his car and while Brown was saying "Don't shoot", shot him dead. So (O)B(C)LM got its slogan "Hands up, don't shoot."
The truth is Michael Brown is seen on video robbing a convenience store just before the encounter, and when stopped by the officer, punched the policeman who was still in his vehicle, then reached inside the car trying to get the officer's firearm, and failing that, ran. The officer, injured in the fight, got out of his car, Brown turned and came at him, at which point he was shot and killed, never having his hands up or saying "Don't shoot." Michael Brown was a street thug, a strong-arm robber, and an attempted cop killer, period.
The police made 2 errors. First, they left the body uncovered on the street for hours as they did their investigation, angering the residents over the perceived disrespect. Covering the body would have been easy and removing it even better. Photographs can be quickly taken and if not practicable for forensic reasons (taking a 3-D scan of the area, for instance), covering the body when not being examined would have shown some respect.
But the worst mistake was allowing the narrative to be made to the news media by pretend witnesses. That the officer was injured was not made public for many hours after the false story was reported. Yet the police investigators surely had the officer's story within minutes after arriving at the scene or meeting him at the hospital. Putting out the officer's story immediately would have cast doubt on the false accounts and lessened, if not eliminated, the subsequent protests.
Turn now to Florida's Trayvon Martin case, another that (O)B(C)LM claims was wrongfully decided. The myth, built from 2 or 3 weeks of coverage with silence on the true facts, is that Martin, depicted as a 12 or 13-year-old in the photos shown by the news networks, was cheerfully skipping home after buying Skittles when George Zimmerman saw him and unfairly profiled him as a burglar because he was black, and after calling 911 and being told not to follow him, shot him without cause.
The truth is Martin was a 17-year-old would-be gangsta, with an interest, and maybe participation, in fight club violence. Zimmerman was not told to not follow (the exact wording from the 911 operator was "Okay, you don't need to do that"), and Martin initiated the confrontation. He was younger and certainly faster than Zimmerman and ahead of him if he were to go home. So Martin either waited for Zimmerman to catch up or turned around and confronted him (which was the testimony of Martin's friend he was on the phone with just before the encounter). In the ensuing fight, Zimmerman, with a broken nose and bleeding head, losing and being maybe lethally pummeled, rightly employed deadly force in self-defense.
The Trayvon Martin case is a tragedy of a naive teenager's unrealistic opinion of his fighting ability coming into contact with reality. Martin was not an innocent in actions, but he was likely ignorant of the possible response to those actions. A sad case.
Once again, the police knew of Zimmerman's injuries the night they responded and had his story immediately. Why keep it back for weeks? Had they put it out, much of the controversy would never have arose.
Freddie Gray in Baltimore, MD. Ignoring the incompetent, malevolent, and hyper-political DA, this case against 6 officers hinged on the ride to jail in the police van. The myth is that the driver of the van deliberately drove to fling the unbelted Gray around, resulting in his broken neck.
But Freddie Gray had a history of acting out when put in police cars and vans, and the other occupant of the van (who could not see Gray) said Gray was agitated and acting out. And there was the exculpatory video available from day 1, yet it never comes out until the trial of the 3rd cop, the driver, the policeman considered most culpable. Why on earth do you wait months to show nothing was amiss? To allow rumors to grow and grow, inflaming those inclined to believe the worst of the police, is inexcusable.
The trials of the officers so-far completed make it most likely a tragic accident, that Gray was throwing himself around trying either to damage the van or to bruise himself to claim abuse by the police. Possibly he misjudged his movements, maybe exacerbated by the moving vehicle, and landed wrong, breaking his neck. Again, a sad case, but not criminal.
Now we have the troubling shooting of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, LA. The 2 videos played by the media are unclear as to what occurred, both ending before the fatal shot is fired. That no statement by the police officers involved has yet been released makes it appear that the authorities are hiding something and has lead directly to the unrest and police targeting. Obviously the officers have told their side, and did so immediately after the shooting. Yet all the police say is "the officers feel they were completely justified." Hardly convincing to skeptics.
In Minnesota, the shooting of Philando Castile is even more troubling. Again, the video shows not what happened, but there are many questions, and no clarity coming from the authorities.
The police always fall back on it being an "ongoing investigation". That's garbage. If the shooting is questionable by what the media and public know, and rumors are starting or a false narrative beginning, it is incumbent on the authorities to knock the false or questionable information down. To immediately put out the involved officer's statement is not to agree with it, just to lend credence to the possibility of another "truth". A savvy police chief or sheriff, or DA or Mayor, will also invite an investigation by State or even Federal authorities just to ensure justice is done in questioned cases.
Officer-involved shootings are not who-done-its in which information needs to be withheld to get a conviction in the future (things only the perpetrator would know). The aftermath is clear, those involved known. There is nothing to be gained by hiding evidence from the public except suspicion and lack of trust.
In the wake of the recent attacks on police in Dallas and Baton Rouge and the increasing protests by racist and sometimes-violent groups like (Only) Black (Criminal) Lives Matter, it is not easy to point a finger of blame at the police themselves. But to ignore why these protests occur is to doom the police and Society at large to more, larger, and more violent confrontations.
In all of the cases (O)B(C)LM references, of those that erupted in large and fervent protests, there is one glaring consistency: the police hold back for days, sometimes weeks, the information that would help to diffuse or even squelch the anger.
Take the (O)B(C)LM poster child, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Initial reports, debunked later but still believed by many, were that Brown and his friend were innocently walking down the middle of a street when the officer stopped them. The officer got out of his car and while Brown was saying "Don't shoot", shot him dead. So (O)B(C)LM got its slogan "Hands up, don't shoot."
The truth is Michael Brown is seen on video robbing a convenience store just before the encounter, and when stopped by the officer, punched the policeman who was still in his vehicle, then reached inside the car trying to get the officer's firearm, and failing that, ran. The officer, injured in the fight, got out of his car, Brown turned and came at him, at which point he was shot and killed, never having his hands up or saying "Don't shoot." Michael Brown was a street thug, a strong-arm robber, and an attempted cop killer, period.
The police made 2 errors. First, they left the body uncovered on the street for hours as they did their investigation, angering the residents over the perceived disrespect. Covering the body would have been easy and removing it even better. Photographs can be quickly taken and if not practicable for forensic reasons (taking a 3-D scan of the area, for instance), covering the body when not being examined would have shown some respect.
But the worst mistake was allowing the narrative to be made to the news media by pretend witnesses. That the officer was injured was not made public for many hours after the false story was reported. Yet the police investigators surely had the officer's story within minutes after arriving at the scene or meeting him at the hospital. Putting out the officer's story immediately would have cast doubt on the false accounts and lessened, if not eliminated, the subsequent protests.
Turn now to Florida's Trayvon Martin case, another that (O)B(C)LM claims was wrongfully decided. The myth, built from 2 or 3 weeks of coverage with silence on the true facts, is that Martin, depicted as a 12 or 13-year-old in the photos shown by the news networks, was cheerfully skipping home after buying Skittles when George Zimmerman saw him and unfairly profiled him as a burglar because he was black, and after calling 911 and being told not to follow him, shot him without cause.
The truth is Martin was a 17-year-old would-be gangsta, with an interest, and maybe participation, in fight club violence. Zimmerman was not told to not follow (the exact wording from the 911 operator was "Okay, you don't need to do that"), and Martin initiated the confrontation. He was younger and certainly faster than Zimmerman and ahead of him if he were to go home. So Martin either waited for Zimmerman to catch up or turned around and confronted him (which was the testimony of Martin's friend he was on the phone with just before the encounter). In the ensuing fight, Zimmerman, with a broken nose and bleeding head, losing and being maybe lethally pummeled, rightly employed deadly force in self-defense.
The Trayvon Martin case is a tragedy of a naive teenager's unrealistic opinion of his fighting ability coming into contact with reality. Martin was not an innocent in actions, but he was likely ignorant of the possible response to those actions. A sad case.
Once again, the police knew of Zimmerman's injuries the night they responded and had his story immediately. Why keep it back for weeks? Had they put it out, much of the controversy would never have arose.
Freddie Gray in Baltimore, MD. Ignoring the incompetent, malevolent, and hyper-political DA, this case against 6 officers hinged on the ride to jail in the police van. The myth is that the driver of the van deliberately drove to fling the unbelted Gray around, resulting in his broken neck.
But Freddie Gray had a history of acting out when put in police cars and vans, and the other occupant of the van (who could not see Gray) said Gray was agitated and acting out. And there was the exculpatory video available from day 1, yet it never comes out until the trial of the 3rd cop, the driver, the policeman considered most culpable. Why on earth do you wait months to show nothing was amiss? To allow rumors to grow and grow, inflaming those inclined to believe the worst of the police, is inexcusable.
The trials of the officers so-far completed make it most likely a tragic accident, that Gray was throwing himself around trying either to damage the van or to bruise himself to claim abuse by the police. Possibly he misjudged his movements, maybe exacerbated by the moving vehicle, and landed wrong, breaking his neck. Again, a sad case, but not criminal.
Now we have the troubling shooting of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, LA. The 2 videos played by the media are unclear as to what occurred, both ending before the fatal shot is fired. That no statement by the police officers involved has yet been released makes it appear that the authorities are hiding something and has lead directly to the unrest and police targeting. Obviously the officers have told their side, and did so immediately after the shooting. Yet all the police say is "the officers feel they were completely justified." Hardly convincing to skeptics.
In Minnesota, the shooting of Philando Castile is even more troubling. Again, the video shows not what happened, but there are many questions, and no clarity coming from the authorities.
The police always fall back on it being an "ongoing investigation". That's garbage. If the shooting is questionable by what the media and public know, and rumors are starting or a false narrative beginning, it is incumbent on the authorities to knock the false or questionable information down. To immediately put out the involved officer's statement is not to agree with it, just to lend credence to the possibility of another "truth". A savvy police chief or sheriff, or DA or Mayor, will also invite an investigation by State or even Federal authorities just to ensure justice is done in questioned cases.
Officer-involved shootings are not who-done-its in which information needs to be withheld to get a conviction in the future (things only the perpetrator would know). The aftermath is clear, those involved known. There is nothing to be gained by hiding evidence from the public except suspicion and lack of trust.