For the record, I am not one to advocate for the dentist to receive the same fate he delt that poor lion, though I remain deeply disgusted by his actions. I also do not advocate for the killer cop to be punished in the same fashion, as I’m not an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth proponent either. In fact, I’ve moved from believing in the death penalty only in the most agregious and incontrovertibly proven cases, to being anti-death penalty in all cases.
Suzy, what do you think was the reason for the shooting?
I think this guy was a jackass, young cop (with a history of being a jackass, young cop) who was throwing his weight around. When the victim started to move his car, I think the young, jackass cop panicked and killed Mr. DuBose and should be prosecuted.
Heyden, anyone who feels that black people are inherent dangerous merely by virtue of them being black, has no business whatsoever being a law enforcement officer. I can’t even begin to say how disturbing it is that such a thing might be a widespread phenomenon. But, this guy clearly was lying, as was the “he grabbed my taser” cop who shot Walter Scott in the back. If you feel as though the chances are high that you could be killed by a black person whom you pull over for a minor traffic offense, like a busted tail light, or the absence of a front license plate, why would you ever take that chance? Unless you approach with the mindset that you must act preemptively, and thereby have the trigger half pulled in your mind before you even approach the car, I don’t see any reasonably sane person doing that. But then again, what’s reasonably sane about sentencing someone to death for a minor traffic offense?
I basically agree with most everything you say, poetsheart. These people should either not be on the force, or their training should be changed in significant ways. My point is the racism is so deep-seated and ingrained that the officers themselves don’t see it. That’s not an excuse by any means. Actually I mean it as an indictment not only of the police who act like this, but also on our society as a whole, where I see the same phenomenon.
The prosecutor’s comments have a specific meaning, not just anger about what happened and the officers lying about it. (As it appears not just the shooter lied.) He expresses a legal perspective: you can’t shoot a person who is running away unless the person “poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.” (That’s the Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Garner, which held a TN law unconstitutional because it allowed the police to shoot someone who flees, even if unarmed and there is no threat other than running away.) There was no one on the street. The officer lied about being dragged. At most his hand was perhaps partly in an open window. The prosecutor’s point is that this is an illegal shooting because you can’t just shoot a person running away. I have little doubt the officer was startled but being startled doesn’t constitute a “significant threat of death or serious physical injury”. Take away the badge and think of it like this:
- you're in a fight and it gets desperate and you shoot the other guy to save yourself: justifiable (assuming other stuff like why the fight started, etc.).
- you're in a fight and the other guy stops fighting and starts to run away and you shoot him in the head as he's fleeing: murder. Of course you plead "heat of passion" and maybe it's manslaughter but that's still a form of murder.
It’s pretty much the same for police: an arrest is like the fight and you have a right to protect yourself and others in that fight but if the guy starts to run and you then shoot him you’ve committed murder.
I have no idea how well trained the campus cops are, which suggests the school could be wide open for a lawsuit unless there’s some indemnification/hold harmless clause in the agreement under which they patrol near campus. But no one with a gun and a badge is supposed to be on the street if he/she shoots a fleeing suspect without “significant threat”, etc. That’s about as basic as it gets. And this guy is not a rookie.
I find it absurd that campus police 1) are armed, 2) have any jurisdiction beyond the campus itself, and 3) have the power to stop motorists for minor infractions that endanger no one. Seems like the city of Cinncinnati was trying to extend its police force on the cheap. The university should never have agreed to any of this. One can only hope that this tragedy will result in re-thinking the whole set-up.
MommaJ, I agree with you.
As far as keeping hands in view… My ex husband was a tall, thin young black man when we married. I am a short white woman who is now the mother of a young black man. The way I am treated by police bears no resemblance to the way my exdh or son are/were treated. I have had police pull me over when I am in the car with each of them (separate occasions spanning decades) just to ask me if I was okay. There was no reason to stop us.
Considering the university police on my campus are police officers under the jurisdiction of the county and as legit as any other city police, I don’t see a problem with them being armed or enforcing any laws or statutes any other police officer would do off campus. Why should a college campus be a dome in which infractions should not be enforced? understand to the discretion of the police officer, but not being allowed to enforce them at all? Perhaps someone could explain in greater detail, but I’m not quite understanding the problem of having police officers on campus.
At my college, our officers are also geared up and have the same authority as city police. It’s almost like having your own body guards since they’re, most of time, cool to us students.
Seems to be rather common (particularly for state universities), but not universal. Universities that do not have true police departments typically have a “campus safety” department that avoids using the term “police” on its web pages other than to describe actual police departments in the surrounding city or county.
For various reasons, students should know who is and is not actual police around the campus that they attend school at.
There is a place for university police depts. Last November when Florida State University Police Dept. dispatchers first received call at 12:25 a.m. that a gunman was shooting people in FSU’s Strozier Library, campus police immediately responded and gunman was confirmed as down by 12:27…2 minutes. Countless lives may have been saved because FSU has a campus police dept.
http://www.fsunews.com/article/20141119/FSVIEW/141120001/Two-shot-inside-FSU-s-Strozier-library-
@MommaJ no the city wasnt trying to expand its force on the cheap. Actually they have begged UC let them take over policing duties on campus and create a new district. The city has five police districts and they have asked UC to let them create district 6. The prosecutor has met with the count officials and the board of UC with that proposal but they keep turning him down. The police powers of UC cops were probably expanded in recent years because the area around UC has gotten bad. A lot of robberies, assaults and some shootings have occurred. Hopefully now they will consider letting the city take over.
I’m ecstatic the officer was indicted but I will be surprised if he gets indicted. Hamilton county is very pro police and very conservative. I think it will be a hung jury, but I hope I’m wrong.
@partyof5, I can’t see the need or sense of city police as a campus presence, but as a public institution, how does U. Cincinnati get to make a decision like that? It’s part of the state system, isn’t it? So is it the state that’s resisting having the city police on campus?
At the schools my family members have attended, campus “police” were unarmed security personnel who handled enforcement of school rules (parking violations, drunk students, noise, etc.) and called in the real police when it was (rarely) necessary. It just boggles my mind that armed professional police officers would be an on-campus presence–what could possibly be happening on campus that would make that necessary? What exactly are “policing duties on campus” that the city of Cincinnati wants handled by the creation of a new police district?
None of the above, of course, addresses why the college police were patrolling an off-campus road (at least it’s my understanding that the shooting took place off-campus–I may be mistaken) and enforcing laws that had nothing to do with the college. Why was that in their purview at all?
@niquil77, it hasn’t been clarified whether and to what extent the college police in this case were under any government jurisdiction–it appears the university freely fired Tensing of its own accord yesterday. And while I don’t think any college property should be exempt from the law, the thought that a college cop answerable to the school rather than the city could be in charge of general law enforcement on campus is bewildering to me.
@MommaJ To answer your first question, I have no idea why or how UC can make that decision. Maybe it is the state, but I do know city cops dont really respect UC cops, as they dont have the same training. There was a bit of grandstanding by the DA, as in “look, I told you so, this is why you should let us set up shop on campus”.
For your second question, I answered that in my previous post. Crime unfortunately has gotten worse in the areas around UC. In order to combat, the increase in crime, the city collaborated with UC and granted off campus police powers to UC officers to help patrol the neighborhoods around UC.
Some universities don’t have enough dorm beds on campus so some universities contract with off campus private apartment complexes and offer campus police protection for the affiliated off campus housing university students. Not uncommon for university police depts. to patrol areas off the actual campus to protect students.
Ok…I’m trying to find a way to express this, but it boggles my mind a bit, as well. A college campus is able to have every bit of crime that would occur off-campus.
Having a designated police department allows for a force to be devoting all the time and effort on one area - the college campus. Your bike is stolen? You can report to the police. You were mugged? You can report to the police who, thankfully, are patrolling your campus streets. A gun man runs on campus, and this has happens every semester, police are already on campus coordinating with the city police department because well they’re police officers too. You were speeding? Gotcha, there’s a police officer right on that corner! A person let a homeless guy sleep in your dorm (yes, this has happened)? Police are on their way to escort the man out. A student gets hit on the cross walk? There’s an officer in the next quad.
All these things have happened on my campus and I’m grateful that we have a devoted police department. I don’t understand the problem with the wording because even if you removed the title of “[College] Police Department” with “[City Police Department”, they’d be doing the same thing.
Additionally, I can see how campus police officer go off campus if they weren’t given strict rules to which areas they can patrol. I’m not sure of the rules and if anyone has knowledge of them that’d be great. I know UPD is involved with crime off-campus in university-affiliated student housing areas, but its when someone calls 911 and its whoever can get their the fastest. I’m not sure what they do when their just driving about.
EDIT- @MommaJ Just now seeing your edit when reloading the screen
Confused by the thread title. Are we only counting black victims of police violence these days? Do they happen more frequently or something?
How many campus police are armed?
Just for the record…the FSU library shooting I mentioned in post #55 above…FSU’s police chief is black and the shooter was black who shot the 3 students…one of victims permanently paralyzed now. Really doesn’t mean much who was what race with that tragedy…race isn’t key factor in most shooting incidents in my opinion.