re: Cop assaults and arrests mother filming from her own porch

quote:

---

absolute bullshite,,,an abuse

another casualty in the war on drugs was our Civil Rights

I absolutely believe that but believing that does not make me think that all cops are bad\

---

quote:

---

I believe the constitutional allowance for that
has been expanded past the intent of the authors

---

This is where I might disagree, but I'll admit up front that I'm not an expert on the Constitution, or the law in general, but what language in the Constitution, in your opinion, provides a clear allowance for immunity?

eta- this also might be a case of me misunderstanding what you mean.

quote:

---

take out word clear and I'm more comfortable answering

---

Please. I don't really have any argument, I'd just like to better understand how we got here.

no problem

quote:

---

This is where I might disagree, but I'll admit up front that I'm not an expert on the Constitution, or the law in general, but what language in the Constitution, in your opinion, provides a clear allowance for immunity?

---

There is none. It is born from Pierson v Ray 1967(?) in one of the litany of Civil Rights cases. While I don't think the court referenced sovereign immunity, it is hard to argue that qualified immunity is not based on that concept. Sovereign immunity was solidified in Hans v Louisiana back in the late 19th century. While there is also no mention of sovereign immunity in the Constitution, it was a pillar of English Common Law and much of the Constitution is structurally in line with the concepts of ECL. If sovereign immunity is constitutional, then it logically follows that their agents in the proper performance of their official duties should also have a level of immunity.

We can't get caught up in what is and is not in the Constitution. It was not designed as the body of law but the rules and guidelines for developing the body of law. My issue with QI is a lot of the case law was built at a time when officers of the law were given a high amount of deference, which has become clear that allows a lot to get off the hook that shouldn't.

I used to believe in the "few bad apples" theory vis-a-vis police, but I feel there are a lot more than I ever considered. That grows exponentially when you include all the ones that turn a blind eye are even actively cover up misdeeds. Police as a whole need a revamp but I am not sure how that can be done with current police budgets and the paucity of training that it produces. As you well know, the military puts great emphasis on the times in the training/deployment cycle. This is one reason I never had a 18 or 19-year-old private kill a non-combatant (face to face*) despite a near 100% language barrier and quite a few furtive moves in baggy clothing.


* I say face to face because the possibility that they and I killed or wounded non-combatants at range because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong people. I used to have nightmares about the possible results of the indirect fire I called in.

I hope that a-hole gets fired and never gets another job in LE.
Obviously, a micro penis loser, whose power Trippin on his new found authority, particularly over white people, especially white women whom he can bully physically.
He was loving every minute of that.

Being that I'm around law enforcement quite a bit in my line of work, I know many good ones and very few bad ones. You're dealing with shitty people all day and for many of them shitty pay, especially in states like Kentucky and WV. Many are former military so of course they will naturally have a hard edge about them. Considering how many horrible people there are in the US I'm actually surprised there aren't more incidents like these.

quote:

---

Considering how many horrible people there are in the US I'm actually surprised there aren't more incidents like these.

---

What did the two ladies in the video do that was in any way, shape, or form horrible?

What a POS. I hope she can she can sue him.

While I appreciate she will sue in civil court and will likely win, what would preclude the trooper from being charged with assault?

There was absolutely no legal basis fir the stop, there was absolutely no legal basis for the arrest,etc. The trooper had absolutely no legal basis whatsoever to do what he did.

If someone (who wasn't law enforcement) did that to another random person, they'd be charged with assault, kidnapping, etc. There would be no legal basis or justification for their actions, just like the trooper had no legal justification.

The trooper shouldn't be covered by qualified immunity in this case, since there was zero legal basis for the stop. The lady had current tags on her car by the letter of the law. Ignorance of the law isn't an applicable defense for me, it shouldn't be for the trooper either.

Egregious actions like this, by law enforcement personnel, should be met with criminal charges and all the fallout that goes along with that.