There was an interesting article the other day from USA Today that raised the possibility that due to lowered standards, "necessary to fill the
ranks," less than desirable candidates are becoming LEOs, resulting in more cases of brutal behavior.
From the article:
Federal prosecutors are targeting a rising number of law enforcement officers for alleged brutality, Justice Department statistics show. The
heightened prosecutions come as the nation's largest police union fears that agencies are dropping standards to fill thousands of vacancies and
"scrimping" on training.
Cases in which police, prison guards and other law enforcement authorities have used excessive force or other tactics to violate victims' civil
rights have increased 25% (281 vs. 224) from fiscal years 2001 to 2007 over the previous seven years, the department says.
During the same period, the department says it won 53% more convictions (391 vs. 256). Some cases result in multiple
convictions.
Source | USAToday.com | Police brutality cases on rise
since 9/11
Hmmm, those numbers don't add up...
Anyway, and however, and this is a big however:
Federal records show the vast majority of police brutality cases referred by investigators are not
prosecuted.
Source | USAToday.com | Police brutality cases on rise
since 9/11 Empahsis mine.
And here's the clincher:
Last year, 96% of cases referred for prosecution by investigative agencies were declined.
In 2005, 98% were declined, a rate that has remained "extremely high" under every administration dating to President Carter, according to a TRAC
report.
The high refusal rates, say Burnham and law enforcement analysts, result in part from the extraordinary difficulty in prosecuting abuse cases. Juries
are conditioned to believe cops, and victims' credibility is often
challenged.
Source | USAToday.com | Police brutality cases on rise
since 9/11
So LE agencies are putting poorly trained thugs in uniform, and when they inevitably brutalize citizens, if they're even prosecuted at all, juries
are reluctant to convict.
Nice.
Keep in mind, probably the only reason we're hearing about cases such as this latest one, is the fact that surveillance cameras have recorded the
altercations, not because LE agencies have been forthcoming.
Just as LEOs are armed to enforce "the law," the common citizenry are henceforth going to need to be armed with personal surveillance technology to
protect ourselves
from "the law."
What a sad state of affairs.
The above referenced article was the subject of a thread posted the day the article was published, you can find it here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...&flagit=321601
It's curious that it didn't get more replies...
[edit on 21-12-2007 by goosdawg]