stupidity with a badge

[dthmstr254]

I don't know if this is a society and ethics topic or L&A topic, so I post it here and let you mods deal with it.

This is a bit old, but it isn't quite as old as some post topics.


August 29, 2007

Police are called out to a domestic disturbance reported in a Detroit suburb. Officer Krupinski and 3 other officers arrive to find 39 Yr old Errol Shaw holding a rake over his shoulder.

Now details get fuzzy, as some say that he advanced on the officers, while CNN does not report that he advanced on him. None of the reports say that he was within 15 feet of the officers, making it difficult to believe, for me, that a trained officer would have much of a problem pulling out a taser and disabling the man, even if he was truly threatening him. Whatever the reason, instead of disabling, Officer Krupinski shot and killed Errol Shaw.

Now, look at it from Shaw's point of view:

You come out from the back with a rake, whether or not you are doing your lawn is irrelevant since you find 4 police officers holding guns pointed to you. Their mouths move, but, since you are Deaf, you can't hear. You move closer, possibly to get a better view of their lips to see what they are saying, and you get shot.

In addition to that, the family was beyond the range of Errol Shaw's possible attack possibilities, and they were shouting that he was Deaf.

The next situation is stupidity with a robe and gavel:

April 6 2006:

Judge screams at Deaf man in court. Footage caught on channel 13 news station, but I can't find out which station that is. If someone knows where it came from, let me know.

Even without the exact knowledge on the last one, I doubt that judges are supposed to do that, and despite the conflicting testimony, Officer Krupinski had the ability and time to pull a Taser and disable Mr Shaw.

Now, round 1. Ding!

 

[Lerxst]

Just by what you have posted the first incident is very tragic, and probably very avoidable. Any more info available? That would be helpful. The second, well pretty callous judge it sounds like. I know some like that.

 

[dthmstr254]

Just by what you have posted the first incident is very tragic, and probably very avoidable. Any more info available? That would be helpful. The second, well pretty callous judge it sounds like. I know some like that.

DeafDc bloggers actually have two opposing views on the story. Look up Officer Krupinski and they will show up. Neither one directly correlates with CNN, but what is to be expected in blogs? They tend to be worse than DP, without even the requirement of civility.

As for the second, many people do that, some even think that if there is only one hearing aid, the ear not supported can hear fine. That almost always results in a rather comical dance where the rude butthole who has that assumption tries to speak into the unaided ear.

 

[Caine]

Just by what you have posted the first incident is very tragic, and probably very avoidable. Any more info available? That would be helpful. The second, well pretty callous judge it sounds like. I know some like that.

Agreed.

And with the judge, could be possible he didn't know he was deaf?
Judges usually know VERY LITTLE about the people that come before them, ESPECIALLY if its in district court, where they deal with so many offenders its like a drive through line.

 

[Onine]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military. The men and women "serving" in the police do very little to actually, and literally, "serve". They have no morals; no honor; no code of ethics to follow as guidelines. They just randomly act like *******s until they are the only ones left talking or standing. Have you ever tried to hold a convorsation with an "Officer of the Law"? Good luck with that.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

The Judge is a buffoon...


The 1st incident you made a value judgment on. I just have one question for you. How long do you think it would take to advance on the officers at 15 feet?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military. The men and women "serving" in the police do very little to actually, and literally, "serve". They have no morals; no honor; no code of ethics to follow as guidelines. They just randomly act like *******s until they are the only ones left talking or standing. Have you ever tried to hold a convorsation with an "Officer of the Law"? Good luck with that.

All of them? nice.... :roll:


I hold conversations with them all the time.


Perhaps you should try it without a crack pipe sticking out yo ear.

 

[rivrrat]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military. The men and women "serving" in the police do very little to actually, and literally, "serve". They have no morals; no honor; no code of ethics to follow as guidelines. They just randomly act like *******s until they are the only ones left talking or standing. Have you ever tried to hold a convorsation with an "Officer of the Law"? Good luck with that.

Uh... yeah, I have had conversations with them. Many times. When I've been pulled over for speeding (pulled over several times, only ticketed twice), when I was arrested for shoplifting during my wild child days. The officer then was extremely nice, and was probably one of the big reasons I straighted my *** up. He wasn't rude, he wasn't condescending, he wasn't pushy. He was actually concerned for my future. He didn't run me downtown and fingerprint me like he could have, just gave me a citation and a hefty - but kind - lecture. I owe a lot of gratitude to that officer. He could have been a total ***, he could have handcuffed me, thrown me in the car, taken me to the station and fingerprinted me, etc. But he didn't. What he did do is probably the reason I'm still around today and not in prison or dead.

I've also talked to them numerous times when I drove an ambulance. Police officers were almost always on scene with us. They protected us, they kept the scene clear, they made sure the scene was safe before we even proceeded to do our job. They made sure we COULD do our job, and we were grateful every single day.

Just a couple of instances of "holding a conversation with an officer of the law". Those aren't even including just personal convos with officers I knew or know outside of the job.

Do officers screw up? Of course they do. They're human like the rest of us. We hold them to a higher standard, but we cannot expect them to be perfect. Such expectations will only lead to disappointment, as they would with anyone. We can only hold individuals accountable when they do screw up, and decidely NOT hold entire police forces accountable for the imperfections of a few.

 

[Onine]

We hold them to a higher standard? Wow. That's a rather large choice of words. How do you figure we hold them to a higher standard? It must be quite comfortable living up in the tree tops.

 

[Caine]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military. The men and women "serving" in the police do very little to actually, and literally, "serve". They have no morals; no honor; no code of ethics to follow as guidelines. They just randomly act like *******s until they are the only ones left talking or standing. Have you ever tried to hold a convorsation with an "Officer of the Law"? Good luck with that.

Wow... Ive never seen a more childish rant from someone who doesn't know shit about the police.

 

[Caine]

We hold them to a higher standard? Wow. That's a rather large choice of words. How do you figure we hold them to a higher standard? It must be quite comfortable living up in the tree tops.

And if you can't figure out what this means you have issues.

Ahem...

Police officers are held to a higher standard because they are not expected to do things that this guy would be expected to do......

Is that clear enough for you?

 

[dthmstr254]

Agreed.

And with the judge, could be possible he didn't know he was deaf?
Judges usually know VERY LITTLE about the people that come before them, ESPECIALLY if its in district court, where they deal with so many offenders its like a drive through line.

However, the interpreter in the courtroom should have been an anvil-sized hint.

 

[WI Crippler]

How long do you think it would take to advance on the officers at 15 feet?

Well some people on this board seem to think cops can slow time and discern the intent, mental stability, possible health concerns, upbringing, social inequalities, domestic issues, financial stability, and credit score of somebody advancing on them. They also believe that cops have x-ray vision and know exactly if the person they are confronting has a weapon or a cell phone in their pants.

So I would say from 15 feet away it should take someone at least a week to get to a police officer.......

I respect cops and all, but they aren't superman. They are people just like you and me.

 

[Caine]

However, the interpreter in the courtroom should have been an anvil-sized hint.

Possibly, Look, im not going to sit here and argue back in forth of the millions of possibilities of what he DID or DID NOT know.

Some people don't have time to notice every detail like you can when you already know things AFTER THE FACT.

 

[dthmstr254]

Well some people on this board seem to think cops can slow time and discern the intent, mental stability, possible health concerns, upbringing, social inequalities, domestic issues, financial stability, and credit score of somebody advancing on them. They also believe that cops have x-ray vision and know exactly if the person they are confronting has a weapon or a cell phone in their pants.

So I would say from 15 feet away it should take someone at least a week to get to a police officer.......

I respect cops and all, but they aren't superman. They are people just like you and me.

They aren't stupid either. The entire family was there, they informed the dispatcher that he was Deaf, and the cop had taser available. He chose gun over Taser. However, it was kind of obvious that both the person's hands were sort of occupied holding the rake, if he was indeed lifting it above his head as Officer Krupinski said.

Note to a lot of you: Please no cop-bashing. It makes this thread look more like a theatre act than a debate.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military. The men and women "serving" in the police do very little to actually, and literally, "serve". They have no morals; no honor; no code of ethics to follow as guidelines. They just randomly act like *******s until they are the only ones left talking or standing. Have you ever tried to hold a convorsation with an "Officer of the Law"? Good luck with that.

Absolutist post with no basis in reality. You imply 'all'. Offer evidence, please.

 

[Caine]

Absolutist post with no basis in reality. You imply 'all'. Offer evidence, please.

Well, whatever evidence he offers, I am counter evidence right here.
:2razz:

 

[1069]

I don't understand why the police in our US of A aren't more like the military.

It seems to me the police and the military are a lot alike.
You don't think so?

 

[Caine]

It seems to me the police and the military are a lot alike.
You don't think so?

Being someone who has been involved in both.........

No, they arent...

Next?

 

[dthmstr254]

Being someone who has been involved in both.........

No, they arent...

Next?

As far as I know, you are absolutely correct. However, I haven't had an answer to anything I said earlier in my last post. I ain't blaming you for it, but it seems this thread has become a bashing room.

 

[Caine]

You mean this?

They aren't stupid either. The entire family was there, they informed the dispatcher that he was Deaf, and the cop had taser available. He chose gun over Taser. However, it was kind of obvious that both the person's hands were sort of occupied holding the rake, if he was indeed lifting it above his head as Officer Krupinski said.

Now, you do realize there are several different types of rakes correct?
If this was one of them landscaping rakes that are hard metal not flimsy or plastic, then it was definately a deadly weapon if stabbed down on the top of someone's head with a good amount of force.
Therefore, I could understand using deadly force on the guy if he were approaching with the rake raised in the air in an assaultive manner.


If this was not the case, I would question the actions of Krupinski.
But, I understand in this job 2nd guessing someone's actions is a little unfair, considering those 2nd guessing have the luxury of the facts that weren't fully known at that moment when a split second decision needed to be made.

Therein lies the problem with criticism of officer actions in the media.

 

[dthmstr254]

You mean this?

Now, you do realize there are several different types of rakes correct?
If this was one of them landscaping rakes that are hard metal not flimsy or plastic, then it was definately a deadly weapon if stabbed down on the top of someone's head with a good amount of force.
Therefore, I could understand using deadly force on the guy if he were approaching with the rake raised in the air in an assaultive manner.


If this was not the case, I would question the actions of Krupinski.
But, I understand in this job 2nd guessing someone's actions is a little unfair, considering those 2nd guessing have the luxury of the facts that weren't fully known at that moment when a split second decision needed to be made.

Therein lies the problem with criticism of officer actions in the media.

It was that kind of rake, but it wasn't a 15 foot long rake. Also, according to Krupinski, the man wasn't even approaching him, but was going toward someone else, who was himself pulling a taser, according to witness testimony. Also, they still conclude that the rake was still in a neutral stance, the weight resting on his shoulder with hands at the end. Court TV had a picture of Krupinski showing how he was holding the rake.

 

[Caine]

It was that kind of rake, but it wasn't a 15 foot long rake. Also, according to Krupinski, the man wasn't even approaching him, but was going toward someone else, who was himself pulling a taser, according to witness testimony. Also, they still conclude that the rake was still in a neutral stance, the weight resting on his shoulder with hands at the end. Court TV had a picture of Krupinski showing how he was holding the rake.

Yeahhhh, not so sure about that situation then.
Sounds like using the firearm wasn't the right call to make.

 

[dthmstr254]

Yeahhhh, not so sure about that situation then.
Sounds like using the firearm wasn't the right call to make.

Tell me. This may be combat 101, but isn't it true that in real life situations that we are not to kill unless absolutely necessary? If you are able to use a Tazer, then using a gun would be unethical, following the same self-defense rules taught at Tennessee Temple University by Police Captain Jeff Francis, and other self-defense classes around the nation. If the rules only permit deadly force as a last resort, and Krupinski had the option and ability to use non-deadly force, then this person would still be alive today.

I could cite one where the cops were corrupted, but I prefer to leave it out since it will most likely lead to cop-bashing. If you want to hear it, then I can PM what I know of the situation.

 

[Caine]

Tell me. This may be combat 101, but isn't it true that in real life situations that we are not to kill unless absolutely necessary? If you are able to use a Tazer, then using a gun would be unethical, following the same self-defense rules taught at Tennessee Temple University by Police Captain Jeff Francis, and other self-defense classes around the nation. If the rules only permit deadly force as a last resort, and Krupinski had the option and ability to use non-deadly force, then this person would still be alive today.

The bold portion above is where you messed up.
Nobody should EVER use deadly force as a "last resort". In a general sense, yes that is what is done, however, that is NOT how anyone should remember the use of a firearm. The phrase "last resort" implies that other methods must be used first, and that is NOT how an officer, or even a citizen defending themselves, should ever remember use of a firearm. Why? Because if someone continues to think of deadly force as "a last resort" then when in a situation they will attempt to apply this same principle of a graduated use of force, which will cost them their lives.

And then, there is the phrase you stated, "Unless absolutely necessary".
A situation in which deadly force is necessary to an officer WHO IS FACING THE THREAT, AT THAT MOMENT, and the review of such an incident by a person of the news media who are in a sense "monday morning quarterbacks" are two totally different perspectives.
As was stated earlier by someone in the thread, or another thread, there is absolutely NO WAY an officer can determine all the facts/history/motives of a person who is attacking them in a very short amount of time. They can only determine one thing... This person is coming after me and they have a knife/crowbar/broomstick, I must defend myself... OR... This person is holding a firearm and refuses to drop it, while continuing to size me up, I must react.

If you think I, or any other police officer are going to stand and wait for the suspect to try to blow our heads off or beat my head in or otherwise mortally wound me your dead wrong. We don't have to wait to become the victim before we can defend ourselves. Thats a BIG problem with the way the media and more liberal citizens seem to have with police use of force policies.

I could cite one where the cops were corrupted, but I prefer to leave it out since it will most likely lead to cop-bashing. If you want to hear it, then I can PM what I know of the situation.

I could care less. Its impossible to weed out all assholes in any profession. There are always going to be some, and Im quite frankly sick of having to hear about the less than 1% of my profession who do wrong things every time law enforcement is mentioned.

[rant]
Seriously, does anyone like to constantly hear about less than 1% of their group every time they are mentioned?
Hell, some groups have the troublemakers of their groups in numbers much greater than 1% and I know they are probably tired of hearing about stuff.

Do you think legal hispanic folks like to constantly hear about illegal immigration?


Do you think blacks like to hear people talking about how blacks are always robbing, stealing, doing/selling drugs and other stupid shit?

No, they probably don't.

However, if you generalize all blacks as a bunch of thug criminal fucks, then you will rightfully get shouted down.

If you generalize all hispanic people as illegal immigrant non english speaking wetbacks, then you will rightfully get shouted down.

But apparently its okay to talk shit about law enforcement officers.
:roll:
[/rant]