Sickening

[hork]

I undestood the idea was to protect and serve not to beat and terrorize. And folks wonder why so many (even those who abide by the law) have problems with law enforcement agencies.

This is as apalling as the King trials and does little to alleviate the allegations of racism in the bayou by law enforcement and government agents. Too bad we didn't have a DOJ with integrity at least there might have been the possibility of civil rights case but as we all know the whole idea of civil rights is little more than an after-thought these days. Well here's to hoping there is a god and these jackasses (and all their kind) get what's coming to them in the end.

Obviously not all law enforcement officers are criminal but it sure does little to boost their image when those that are continue to be protected by the boys in blue and their buddies on the bench.

[rich76]

all walks of life...all professions...have a minority amount of unprofessional lawbreaking jackasses that besmerch the rest. I refuse to judge those officers off of one yahoo article. There is ALWAYS more to the story.

[hork]

Originally Posted by rich76

all walks of life...all professions...have a minority amount of unprofessional lawbreaking jackasses that besmerch the rest. I refuse to judge those officers off of one yahoo article. There is ALWAYS more to the story.

oh there was a hell of a lot more. like the video taped evidence that was all over the place in the aftermath of the beating. and the testimony offered by no less than a dozen bystanders.

it's a case (as we see so often) of the law enforcement agents and the courts protecting the shield and it's beyond sickening but hardly surprising. in fact it's become a common theme throughout the nation (cf., Rodney King, Jerry Jackson, 1992 St. Clair Commission report, the Christopher Commission report, the Mollen Commission hearings, the 39th District of the Philadelphia PD, the list goes on and on)

so i agree to base one's opinion on a single story from the AP would be a bit lazy, but the facts pretty much speak for themselves in this and many other earlier cases.

[P562045]

I guess the judge had his own interpretation of the facts in this case.

Sadly I could see how fears of a jury acquitting the police officers could be a real concern but a judge?

That to me for some reason is quit different. The judge is a public official no matter how they get on the bench and to pretend that nothing went wrong is beyond me.

But the judge did have an easy out in this case. The judge did not see excessive force being used by the officers in this case.

I am sure that if I asked the question what is excessive force no two answers would be the same.

This is yet another case because of the very nature of the charges which in this case was excessive force used the judge could interpret this many different ways.

Something just tells me that the law in Louisiana does not come right out and say what excessive force is or is not excessive force.

This gives the judge in this case a lot of room in which he can make his own interpretation of what happened.