We recently discussed the incredible decision by the Dallas Police Chief that officers will no longer be allowed to give their accounts of shootings for the first 48 hours after officers were found to have lied in past cases. They will now be allowed to get their accounts straight before going on the record. Two Brooklyn officers are probably wishing that such a rule might apply to non-lethal controversies. Officers Christopher Oliver and Shazad Shigri are accused of sideswiping a parked SUV owned by Robert Jackson, 31, and then charging him with the accident — after looking around for any security cameras that would contradict them. They missed one.
Jackson is now suing the officers. Jackson says that he was sitting in his legally parked car outside of his apartment when the officers came down the wrong way on a street and slammed into the side of his car. He says that he got out of the vehicle and smiled at the officers and asked “How’d you run into me?” He says that the officer immediately replied, “Dude, you ran into me.” They charged him with damaging the police cruiser.
Before arresting him, the two officers reportedly checked the block for surveillance cameras before arresting Jackson for destruction of city property, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. However, he was only charged with unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle because he had a suspended license. This was based on their claim that Jackson has the keys in the ignition when the crash occurred.
As we have seen in past abusive arrests, the charges were later dropped but not after Jackson spent the night in jail and had to appear repeatedly in court over the course of six months.
Despite the videotape, there is no record of the officers being disciplined or fired. Being terminated would seem just the starting point if these charges are proven. The question is why the officers have not been charged themselves with making false statements to hide their accident and imprison an innocent man.
Source: NY Post
raff, ” I would love to hear how a parked car could side swipe a moving car. ” Happened to me. Snow, parking both sides, not enough room for a car and small bus traveling in opposite directions to pass. I was in the one lane when a bus decided to come from the opposite direction. I found a place where I could pull over and stop. The bus clipped the left rear of my car. The cop gave me the ticket.
Methinks that Law Enforcers sometimes become Law Violators in consequence of some traditional methodologies of the construction and interpretation of the law.
Methinks that, in social psychology terms, this is a consequence of confusing situational attribution with dispositional attribution.
Methinks that the underlying puzzle is of the measurement problem of theoretical quantum mechanical physics, and the essence of said underlying puzzle is the mere fact that the measurement problem of theoretical physics is not actually a problem of theoretical physics; rather, it is a problem within theoretical and applied theoretical biology.
Methinks that the theoretical and applied theoretical measurement problem of quantum mechanical biology is actually a solved problem, the solution of which is given, in testable and refutable-if-actually-false form in my doctoral dissertation. Said dissertation successfully defended before my thesis committee in July, 1987, and, methinks, diligently tested for possible falsity through my continuing field work research since 1987, contains the biological solution to the measurement problem.
How can the accuracy of one or more aspects of human belief(s) and systems of belief(s) be accurately measured? The solving of that question is the essence and nature of my life work.
Methinks that “the law” is comprised of a collection of beliefs, the accuracy of which is subject to testing when a way of testing the accuracy of the beliefs has become practicable.
Methinks that my research work and its findings may contain a scientifically accurate way of measuring (and not merely testing) the accuracy of the beliefs which underlie and which comprise “the law.”
I completed three years as a Carleton College physics major, during which I came to the view that a “theory of everything” could not possibly be a physics theory because the realm of physics was vastly too tiny to have any chance of harboring a scientifically valid “theory of everything.”
The only field of scientific inquiry that I recognized as having even the slightest chance of actually containing a valid “theory of everything” was biology. When I realized that my effort to find a plausible candidate for a “theory of everything” within physics was absurdly impossible, I set out to find a way to learn enough biology to get a grasp of whether or not biology was a big enough realm of science as could be a safe harbor for a scientifically valid “theory of everything.”
It took me from 1960, when I dropped out of Carleton, until 1966, when I began as a bioengineering undergraduate student at the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle, to find a college/university biology program that I thought might give me the tools needed to formulate, and test for scientific validity, a genuine “theory of everything” which could actually include all of everything.
Methinks that a scientifically valid “theory of everything” has to be readily tested for falsity and readily falsified if actually false.
The biological “theory of everything” can be represented very simply in words, and the words are not the theory, only a form of symbolizing it.
One simple word form of a biological theory of everything is, “Whatever actually happens, as it happens, is inescapably both fully necessary and fully sufficient; this being a simple consequence of nothing else ever actually happening.”
Every apparent violation of “the law” is both necessary and sufficient as an aspect of “the law,” and as an aspect of human improving human understanding of “the law.”
The only violations of “the law” that actually happen are the inevitable result of human errors embedded within “the law.”
I apparently came to understand “the measurement problem” and a “theory of everything” during November, 1987. It took me somewhat more than ten years to get my dissertation, which contains both the biology-based solution of “the measurement problem” and a biological “theory of everything” accepted by the University of Illinois at Chicago so my Ph.D. in Bioengineering could be completed.
It has taken from then until now for me to find enough people who have been willing and able to help explore the social meaning of my thesis and dissertation sufficiently for me to set about to translate the scientific jargon used in the dissertation into forms of English language that may be usefully intelligible to non-bioengineers and non-scientists.
Neurologist Robert C. Scaer, in his book, “The Trauma Spectrum,” (W. W. Norton, 2005) observed that trauma is “imprisonment of the mind.”
In my work the process of the infant-child transition, which typically occurs at about 18 months of age in, for example, the United States of America, is a devastatingly traumatic experience; it is the indoctrination of an innocent child into the realm social norms of deception and dishonesty.
Perhaps a brief quotation, for which I have written permission to use in my work as I see fit, from Martin Buber, “Tales of the Hasidim,” Olga Marx, tr., Schocken Books, 1947, 1975, will illumine an aspect of imprisonment of the mind:
{begin quote from Tales of the Hasidim}
The Strong Thief
The maggid of Mezritch said:
“Every lock has its key which is fitted to it and opens it. But there are strong thieves who know how to open without keys. They break the lock. So every mystery in the world can be unriddled by the particular kind of mediation fitted to it. But God loves the thief who breaks the lock open: I mean the man who breaks his heart for God.”
{end quote from Tales of the Hasidim}
The purpose of my life work is the making of a scientifically effective effort to irreversibly shatter the lock of imprisonment of the mind.
What do I know of heartbreak? Perhaps nothing except it being the whole of my entire life and the most abundant joy I may ever understand?
We need to be side-swiping a few Cops……
Well, that’s the good part of having lots of cameras. A lot of people got a little bent out of shape about all those cameras in London, starting 20 years ago, & now getting more worldwide, but its not the same as the NSA recording every phone call & email, and its okay if laws are reasonable & reasonably enforced. Most of these blogs are about misusing justice. Cameras can be misused too if used purely to increase revenue. Its quite okay to make a citation based on a flagrant red light runner, particularly if there is traffic. Giving the same ticket for a car that slows & does a pretty good stop before safely turning right is not okay, particularly if its only the movie camera that shows no technical complete stop. In fact if all laws were simple & reasonable and reasonably enforced, the NSA would lose their bad rep, Obama would be in jail, & we would not care much who knew what!
“The point is all these NYC guys had to do was man up to what happened and everything would have been ok. But they had to try to cover it up and look what happened to them. For nothing.”
This is exactly what makes this so egregious. If the cop were facing years in jail, then I could at least understand the lies and false arrest. But, just so they could avoid some embarrassment and possibly some minor reprimand, they arrested a totally innocent man. Not to mention the possible criminal sanctions the guy faced, just being arrested can be a really bad thing to happen to someone. If these cops were wiling to do this over such a minor matter, who doubts they’d do much worse than this if their a@@ were truly on the line.
In Nuyawk, what the cops did is known as testilying.
Stupid is as stupid does.
As I read these allegations, I see this broken on so many levels it almost makes me think these officers want to get fired. Again stupid stuff mushrooming out of control. Everything these cops alleged to have done was wrong. Wrong way on the street, the accident, the ridiculous charges (especially the keys in the ignition as evidence of suspended driving) and finally arresting an innocent man who would have been ok with just having his car repaired.
Folks: If you work as a patrol officer long enough, it is only a matter of time before you have an accident. It is not a matter of if, but when. I did. I wiped out the side of my patrol car during a pursuit and caused $3,800 in damage The state patrol investigated, I was cleared. (admittedly more embarassed than anything) . Another time I was putting a guy I arrested on a warrant into the back of my car and I accidenally smashed out the tail light of another parked car with the door. I talked to the owners of the car, called my supervisor, and made arrangements for the tail light to be repaired. They took it their car to the county shop and we repaired it for them. It was no big deal to my department. Things like this happen and the sheriff knows it.
The point is all these NYC guys had to do was man up to what happened and everything would have been ok. But they had to try to cover it up and look what happened to them. For nothing.
I hope the plaintiff wins on this one. He deserves it.
If the video backs the plaintiff’s story, then this is an absolutely outrageous action by the cops. First fired, then prosecuted, then jailed for a long time. Is it any wonder people don’t trust the police?
The police are teaching the citizenry the important lesson when you see a cop: run for your life.
raandyjet, DiBlasio would love to fire all cops and replace them w/ social workers.
and they wonder why we are ALL getting so suspicious and distrustful of them !!! Trust and respect have to be EARNED !!!
Wow. The officers should be ex-officers, along with their supervisors who are allowing this charade to continue, and I would love to hear how a parked car could side swipe a moving car. I hope Mr. Jackson forces the officers and city to dig deep into their pockets on this one.
I love it, the surveillance mentality coming full circle to bite their asses.
When these incidents occur, and they seem to occur relatively often, someone should analyze the: education of the officer, IQ level of the officer, upbringing of the officer, etc. Are these idiots barely high school or local college products? Do they have a minimal IQ? Do they have issues and baggage they have carried with them from their youth? The two ingredients necessary for these incidents of blatant disrespect for those you are supposed to serve are imbeciles in uniform and lack of accountability from the institution. Given that the imbeciles at the top came from the bottom, there needs to be an overall scrutiny of everyone.
Since NYC has a new mayor, I would think that it is time for him to act. Fire the chief of police or fire those cops. Then he should insist that the DA file felony charges against the cops so that they can never work as cops again, or be allowed to legally own a firearm. That last part will really hurt them.
When the police are to be as feared as the criminal element, we are living in a third world police state.
Sad commentary how little surprise this kind of report generates.
Readers are irritated, but not surprised – we have come to expect dishonesty from police officers.
In court, a cop’s testimony carries more weight than that of an ordinary citizen – wonder when we are going to start seeing juries discounting the testimony of police.
It is truly frightening to think how many people are sitting in jail, or convicted, and sentenced to prison right now because of testilying by law enforcers. I can think of no greater slap to the face of the judicial system then law officers or attorney’s either lying in the court, or hiding evidence. http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news%2Fnational_world&id=9441539
More uniformed thuggery. It is becoming the black and blue line.
Good for the camera….. Too many times the innocent are prosecuted based upon the sole word of a lying officers….