acab

https://www.popsci.com/technology/cybertruck-police-patrol-car/

Finally, a cop car that lights itself on fire!

https://archive.ph/mUWPn

$132 for the Cybershit. $20k for customization.

After purchasing the $132,363 truck, police contracted UP.FIT, a California-based company that customizes high-tech police vehicles, to put in emergency response features. It added an electrical system that allows drivers to use a computer, radios and a GPS device. Contractors attached a rifle mount under some seats. They also added a lighting system that provides a spotlight in the front and provides flashing lights to the roof, front, sides and back of the vehicle.

At least 13,395 people have been killed by law enforcement officers in the past 10 years nationally, according to one nonprofit that tracks data.

The organization Mapping Police Violence says that means about 7% of homicides between 2013 and last year can be attributed to law enforcement.

The Aristocrats!

Lesbian Democrat AG

Protesting crimes against humanity is a crime kiddo!

I'm having trouble finding info about how many people the pigs killed, or died of wounds inflicted by them or counter protestors. Or how many became disabled.

https://archive.ph/5o0cK

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/uncooperative-tyreek-hill-redirected-to-the-ground-by-officers-police-union-president/3412500/?os=os

In the 20 months since Mr. Nichols’s death, the state’s Republican leaders have repeatedly maligned Steve Mulroy, the newly elected district attorney for Shelby County, and other Memphis-area officials for failing to address the scope of the city’s crime issues and overstepping their legal boundaries.

At least one police reform ordinance supported by Mr. Nichols’s family, which would have prevented police from stopping cars over more minor traffic infractions, was repealed by Republicans in the legislature.

Mr. Mulroy now faces a threat to oust him from his position when the legislature convenes in January, led by State Senator Brent Taylor. And last month, the top two Republicans in the legislature threatened to withhold sales tax revenue from the city, the second-largest in the state, over plans to put three gun safety initiatives on the November ballot.

John Mitchell, a spokesperson for the prisons, said the department had advance notice of the sweep in Kensington last week and were prepared for a surge of inmates. He said a nurse performing withdrawal assessments visited Cahill at about 1 a.m. Saturday, and Cahill “indicated she was fine.”

About six-and-a-half hours later, a nurse found Cahill unresponsive and administered CPR. Mitchell said a medical response team “continued lifesaving efforts,” but Cahill never regained consciousness, and was pronounced dead at 7:45 a.m.

...

Clark said Cahill struggled with addiction since she was a teenager — first it was prescription pills, then heroin and fentanyl. But she was also a loving mother to two boys, ages 12 and 6, Clark said, and was “very funny and all-around caring.”

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/20076228

I was just pooooostin and now I can't find it, and this comm is empty!

Edit: It turns out that I am very silly and had accidentally clicked the block community button, and also I thought this post didnt go through because fun fact if you block a community all your posts in that community also disappear from your own view of your profile so I couldn't see that I actually posted this post...

https://fxtwitter.com/1HoodPower/status/1831141799600984412

A former Massachusetts police detective is accused of murdering a pregnant woman to prevent her from revealing that he allegedly groomed her as a teenager and then staging her death as a suicide.

Former officer Matthew Farwell, 38, was charged Tuesday with fatally strangling Sandra Birchmore, 23, in her Canton, Mass., apartment in 2021. An initial autopsy wrongly ruled that Birchmore had killed herself after Farwell used his police knowledge to stage the scene of his alleged crime, prosecutors wrote in court documents.

It's a badly written Reason article but the only other top source I saw at Google News was Fox News. I moved things around and I did some very minor editing.

Albuquerque's Police Chief Says Cops Have a 5th Amendment Right To Leave Their Body Cameras Off

Albuquerque, New Mexico, Police Chief Harold Medina operated his department-issued pickup truck "in an unsafe manner" on February 17, when he ran a red light and broadsided a car, severely injuring the driver. So concludes a recent report from internal investigators who looked into that shocking incident.

[...]

Medina said he "purposefully did not record because he was invoking his 5th Amendment right not to self-incriminate." Since "he was involved in a traffic collision," he reasoned, he was "subject to 5th Amendment protections."

[...]

Medina received two official reprimands for the camera violation and the reckless driving that injured Perchert, a casualty of the police chief's desperation to save his own skin. In similar situations, other Albuquerque police officers have been fired. But after the crash, Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller hailed Medina as a hero who is "out on the front line…doing what he can to make our city safe."

[...]

Surveillance camera footage of the crash [shows] Medina crossing Central Avenue, a busy, four-lane street, against the light. He crosses the westbound lanes through a gap between two cars, forcing one of the drivers to brake abruptly, before barreling across the eastbound lanes, where he rams into the side of a gold 1966 Mustang driven by 55-year-old Todd Perchert.

Although Medina's recklessness seems obvious, the Albuquerque Police Department's Fleet Crash Review Board (CRB) earlier this year concluded that the crash was "non-preventable." How so? Medina, who was on his way to a Saturday press conference with his wife when he took a detour to have a look at a homeless encampment, said he ran the light to escape an altercation between two homeless men that had escalated into gunfire at the intersection of Central and Alvarado Drive.

While "the initial decision to enter the intersection is not in question," Lt. James Ortiz says in the Internal Affairs report, "the facts and circumstances do not relieve department personnel of driving safely to ensure no additional harm is done to personnel or to citizens." Medina, Ortiz says, clearly failed to do that: "By definition, driving into a crosswalk, darting between two vehicles driving on a busy street, and crossing through an intersection with vehicles traveling eastbound were unsafe driving practices." In this case, he notes, those unsafe practices "resulted in a vehicle collision with serious physical injuries to the victim, including a broken collarbone and shoulder blade, 8 broken ribs (reconstructed with titanium plates after surgery), collapsed lung, lacerations to left ear and head, multiple gashes to his face, a seven-hour surgery, and hospitalization requiring epidural painkiller and a chest tube for nearly a week."

Ortiz not only disagrees with the CRB's conclusion about Medina's crash; he says the board never should have reviewed the incident to begin with, since its mission is limited to accidents "not resulting in a fatality or serious injury." Ortiz says Commander Benito Martinez, who chairs the CRB, violated department policy when he decided the board should pass judgment on Medina's accident.

Martinez acknowledged that department policy "prohibited the CRB from hearing serious injury crashes" and that "allowing such a case to be heard would be a policy violation." Why did he allow it anyway? "He explained that his reasoning for permitting the Chief's crash to be reviewed by the CRB was based on his belief that someone wanted the crash to be heard," Ortiz writes. "Cmdr. Martinez clarified that he believed someone from Internal Affairs wanted the case to be heard by the CRB to ensure full transparency. However, he did not consult with anyone in Internal Affairs to verify the accuracy of this assumption."

Both the CRB's decision to review the crash and its implicit exoneration of Medina are hard to fathom. But Medina's explanations for the third policy violation identified by Ortiz—the chief's failure to activate his body camera after the crash—are even weirder.

"After the collision occurred, the shooting victim approached," Ortiz writes. "The victim informed the Chief that he was okay and had not been shot. Chief Medina asked the victim to remain at the scene, but the victim refused and fled southbound on Alvarado. Another citizen approached the Chief and reported having seen individuals leaving a black truck and fleeing away from the scene. Chief clarified with the witness that no one was outstanding. It is important to note that these interactions were not recorded and are contacts that require mandatory recording."

That mandate is not just a matter of police department policy. State law requires that on-duty police officers wear body cameras and that they activate them when "responding to a call for service or at the initiation of any other law enforcement or investigative encounter between a peace officer and a member of the public." The statute adds that "peace officers who fail to comply" with such requirements "may be presumed to have acted in bad faith and may be deemed liable for the independent tort of negligent spoliation of evidence or the independent tort of intentional spoliation of evidence."

Medina offered two puzzling excuses for leaving his camera off. He "cited intermittent conversations with his wife, who was a passenger in his unmarked patrol vehicle at the time of the collision," Ortiz says. "He claimed there was a right to privileged communication between spouses, which specifically exempted him from mandatory recording requirements." But the relevant policy "does not provide for nonrecording based on spousal privilege."

Think about the implications of that argument. Body cameras are supposed to help document (and perhaps deter) police misconduct. But Medina is suggesting that cops have a constitutional right to refrain from recording their interactions with the public whenever that evidence could be used against them. By turning on their cameras in those situations, he argues, police could be incriminating themselves. That is the whole point.

[This post has been updated with information about New Mexico's statutory requirements regarding body cameras.]

The teen was seeing King's court as part of a visit organized by The Greening of Detroit, a nonprofit environmental group. During the visit, King noticed the girl falling asleep, WXYZ reported.

The fuck is an environmental group doing court tours for?

I hope the family can sue either the court or the org. Just what the hell was the purpose of it?

https://www.greeningofdetroit.com/

YOU PLANT PLANTS! THAT'S WHAT YOU DO! What in the just...

Documents provided under freedom of information laws show the total cost of Operation Bourglinster, the AFP investigation into a boy known as Thomas Carrick, was $507,087

Victorian children’s court found that police encouraged Thomas in his fixation on Islamic State during an undercover operation after his parents sought help from the authorities.

17 April 2021, his parents went to a police station and asked for help because Thomas was watching Islamic State-related videos on his computer and had asked his mother to buy bomb-making ingredients such as sulphur and acetone.

Thomas, an NDIS recipient with an IQ of 71, was first reported to police by Victoria’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and then by his parents because of his fixation with Islamic State, which included him accessing extremist material online and making threats to other students.

Thomas was investigated and charged with two terror offences by the Joint Counter Terrorism Team (JCTT), which comprises Australian federal police, Victoria police and Asio members. He was the youngest person ever charged with those offences