Re: Police shooting videos leaves questions unanswered

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

Civilian Office of Police Accountability (a city agency that investigates
police) just released video of a shooting on March 21 on the west side
of Chicago. The driver of a vehicle pulled over for a traffic stop,
a 26 year old man, is dead. Police say he shot first (not clear from
provided video); four officers fired. One police officer was hit in the
forearm. There is video from a neighbor's surveillance camera that
implies that the officer, on the passenger side of the vehicle, was hit.

Dexter Reed was the driver pulled over in the seemingly pre-textual
traffic stop by multiple tactical police officers. The police had their
weapons drawn. This was no ordinary traffic stop.

Reed was killed by police because it appears that he initiated the gun
battle. Regardless of whether his civil rights were violated in being
pulled over, it does appear that he shot first.

No one following up in this thread cared to offer an opinion about the
nature of these pretextual traffic stops by tactical officers.

Kim Foxx, your TV state's attorney, has offered a response. She's
greatly concerned that these heavy handed police tactics are ineffective
in preventing crime where they are used and that nearly every driver has
been black.

So she's written a draft policy that there shall be no prosecutions of
gun violations or drug violations for contraband found in the vehicles
with a search. The vehicle code violations may still be prosecuted.

Assistant state's attorneys are appalled.

Um.

Yes, these tactics -- heavy handed, potentially dangerous, expensive,
and ineffective as they may be -- are not always bad policing. It's
possible to pull a vehicle over for a vehicle code violation as a
pretext to a search without violating civil rights. Cops do it
routinely. Very few people understand their civil rights during a police
stop and are convinced that they can talk their way out of anything when
they are better off saying nothing at all. They don't invoke their right
against self incrimination. They don't immediately ask for an attorney.
They don't tell the police officer that they do not consent to a search.

Instead, cops try to intimidate the driver into allowing the search, and
they can do so approaching the line but not crossing it into a civil
rights violation.

It's perfectly reasonable to instruct her assistants that these tactics
may not be searches that don't violate civil rights. Therefore they must
take an especially hard look at police reports and videos to make the
determination for themselves whether the evidence was lawfully obtained
and may be presented in court.

But to take the position that NONE of it may be presented in court to
back charges, even if it wasn't unlawfully obtained, is outrageous.

Kim Foxx wouldn't prosecute gun cases tied to some minor traffic stops
under new plan
The draft policy aims to undercut a dramatic rise in stops that
disproportionately target people of color and rarely lead to arrests.
"It felt like it was time to do something about it," said Foxx, who is
stepping down as Cook County state's attorney this year.
By Matthew Hendrickson, Tom Schuba and Andy Grimm
Chicago Sun-Times
May 16, 2024, 7:21pm CDT
https://chicago.suntimes.com/police-reform/2024/05/16/prosecutors-reject-drug-gun-charges-routine-traffic-stops-states-attorney-kim-foxx

. . .