- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
72 Philly police officers on leave over “racist” FB posts
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:04 am
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:04 am
So my question is - Should FB posts made when off duty be held against officers when they come to work? And is there a line between what is allowable and what isn’t? Never mind the question of why these idiots have public FB pages in this day and age.
LINK
quote:
Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross confirmed Wednesday that 72 Philadelphia police officers were placed on administrative duty amid an internal investigation into alleged anti-Muslim social media posts made by officers on the force.
Ross said the officers were taken off patrol duty and had their guns confiscated as the Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) investigates approximately 3,100 total posts, Philadelphia’s Fox 29 reported. He could not confirm if more officers would be placed on administrative duty as the investigation continues, but he does expect “several dozen” of the seventy-two officers to be disciplined and at least some to be fired.
The posts were uncovered by a team of researchers who spent two years looking at the personal Facebook accounts of police officers from Arizona to Florida. They said they found officers bashing immigrants and Muslims, promoting racist stereotypes, identifying with right-wing militia groups and, especially, glorifying police brutality. All the posts were public.
The Philadelphia Police Department is set to hire an independent law firm to analyze the posts of each officer placed on administrative duty to see if the posts are constitutionally protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. If any of the posts are not protected by the First Amendment, the department will take action accordingly
LINK
38
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:05 am to jbgleason
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:07 am to jbgleason
quote:
Should FB posts made when off duty be held against officers when they come to work?
Of course they should. They are against every other working joe.
And in this case, especially if its glorifying police brutality like it says.
Good on them for trying to hide behind the 1st amendment though.
This post was edited on 6/20/19 at 7:08 am
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:07 am to jbgleason
quote:This'll make Philly much safer!
72 Philadelphia police officers were placed on administrative duty amid an internal investigation into alleged anti-Muslim social media posts
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:07 am to fr33manator
Obama’s parting gift to the police.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:08 am to jbgleason
Officers who made public statements about the ills of Islam should be given medals.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:09 am to Jon Ham
“No go zones” are racist against whites and blacks who happen not to believe in that goat fricker.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:09 am to jbgleason
If you work for the government and post on Facebook you’re asking to get fricked
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:10 am to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
Of course they should. They are against every other working joe.
So because social media is weaponized against one group, that makes it ok to be weaponized against another?
How about we stop hyperventilating over what anyone posts on social media?
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:11 am to LsuTool
quote:
If you post on Facebook you’re asking to get fricked
Zuck will destroy you if he wants to. Why anyone posts on that site is beyond me.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:12 am to Centinel
quote:
So because social media is weaponized against one group, that makes it ok to be weaponized against another?
What does this even mean and how does it make it ok for a police officer to publicly support police brutality?
If you're dumb enough to post something like that publicly, you're waaaaay too dumb to have any position of authority.
This post was edited on 6/20/19 at 7:13 am
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:13 am to jbgleason
quote:Norm Macdonald: 72 Virgins
72 Philadelphia police officers were placed on administrative duty amid an internal investigation into alleged anti-Muslim social media posts
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:13 am to Centinel
quote:
So because social media is weaponized against one group, that makes it ok to be weaponized against another?
He would have been fired if he posted flyers in the neighborhood with the same content.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:15 am to jbgleason
quote:
a team of researchers who spent two years looking at the personal Facebook accounts of police officers from Arizona to Florida
Demercrits
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:16 am to The Torch
quote:
from Arizona to Florida
Wonder why they left California out?
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:18 am to jbgleason
quote:
to see if the posts are constitutionally protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. If any of the posts are not protected by the First Amendment, the department will take action accordingly
Are they going to be charged or something?
People who think the first amendment means they can say whatever the frick you want with no consequences are retarded.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:18 am to jbgleason
My quick thoughts on this...
It's not (just) about "holding it against" them. It's about the entire criminal justice system. Detectives and prosecutors (dun-dun) work with what patrol officers give them, good or bad.
Defense attorneys know what to do with information like that, and they'll find it whether it's public or private. It's not hard to convince a jury of ill intent when an officer's personal prejudices are displayed like that. The state has the burden of proof, and the defense needs to show reasonable doubt about guilt - not proof of innocence.
I say this as the son of a career sheriff's deputy and brother of a former deputy. I know the crap they put up with on a daily basis. I also know that LEO are people like anyone else with all their flaws and assets.
I'm not a "back the badge no matter what" person. All of us are accountable for our words and actions. Some people are prejudiced by nature, others by experience. LEOs are no different, except that their position of trust within society creates a greater burden on them to do things the right way.
Now the Philly authorities have a major problem on their hands, and it taints everyone with a badge whether they deserve it or not.
That is the real damage being done here.
It's not (just) about "holding it against" them. It's about the entire criminal justice system. Detectives and prosecutors (dun-dun) work with what patrol officers give them, good or bad.
Defense attorneys know what to do with information like that, and they'll find it whether it's public or private. It's not hard to convince a jury of ill intent when an officer's personal prejudices are displayed like that. The state has the burden of proof, and the defense needs to show reasonable doubt about guilt - not proof of innocence.
I say this as the son of a career sheriff's deputy and brother of a former deputy. I know the crap they put up with on a daily basis. I also know that LEO are people like anyone else with all their flaws and assets.
I'm not a "back the badge no matter what" person. All of us are accountable for our words and actions. Some people are prejudiced by nature, others by experience. LEOs are no different, except that their position of trust within society creates a greater burden on them to do things the right way.
Now the Philly authorities have a major problem on their hands, and it taints everyone with a badge whether they deserve it or not.
That is the real damage being done here.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:19 am to EarlyCuyler3
Your bias is showing, how sad. Who are these “researchers” what proof is there that they “glorified police brutality”? Have these officers been convicted of this? Didn’t think so. Also “right wing militia groups”? This research group sounds like a SJW hit squad to me. Frick this world and let Philly burn I guess, because that’s what’s gonna happen if these “researchers” are allowed to hollow out these police departments with this kind of nonsense bullshite.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 7:19 am to Ice Cold
quote:
Defense attorneys know what to do with information like that, and they'll find it whether it's public or private. It's not hard to convince a jury of ill intent when an officer's personal prejudices are displayed like that. The state has the burden of proof, and the defense needs to show reasonable doubt about guilt - not proof of innocence.
#MarkFuhrman
Page 1 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News