8 Feb 2015

The NYPD's chief supports harsher penalties for resisting arrest. That’s a horrifying idea.

During widespread protests in New York last summer after the killing of Eric Garner by police officer Daniel Pantaleo (who was not charged in Garner's killing), New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton had this message for protesters: "You must submit to arrest, you cannot resist …The place to argue your case is in the courts, not in the streets."
Now, it looks like he supports punishing protesters even more harshly for resisting arrest.
According to Buzzfeed's Nicolas Medina Mora, Bratton was asked about resisting arrest while testifying before the State Senate Wednesday.
If the state legislators asked Bratton about this, it's possible that they're at least considering changing New York law to make it a felony to resist arrest. This could spell disaster for New Yorkers, for one big reason: resisting arrest charges are used mostly by a small share of cops, many of whom are among the most abusive.
Bratton told the State Senate (according to Buzzfeed) that "if you don't want us to enforce something, don't make it a law." But that's the opposite of how resisting-arrest cases actually work. Most cops don't bring in many, or any, people for resisting arrest. But a few cops bring in a lot.
In New York, in particular — according to a 2014 report from WNYC — 40 percent of resisting-arrest cases are brought in by 5 percent of police officers.
Here's why that matters: if a cop is routinely hauling people into court for resisting arrest, he might be taking an overly aggressive attitude toward civilians. A police officer might even, as police accountability expert Sam Walker told WNYC, use the criminal charge to cover up his use of excessive force:
"There's a widespread pattern in American policing where resisting arrest charges are used to sort of cover - and that phrase is used - the officer's use of force," said Walker, the accountability expert from the University of Nebraska. "Why did the officer use force? Well, the person was resisting arrest."
As the New York Times reported in September 2014, even the NYPD itself might be tracking resisting-arrest cases as a red flag for excessive force:
Many policing experts consider charges of resisting arrest to be the best broad measure of use of force in arrests. The department has tracked charges of resisting arrest as a way of identifying officers who may use excessive force, said a former senior department official who insisted on anonymity because he still works in law enforcement.
If resisting arrest is a reasonable indicator of the use of force, department statistics for 2013 suggest that officers used force more regularly than indicated on arrest reports. In 2013, there were 12,453 arrests that included charges of resisting arrest, about 3.1 percent of all arrests, thousands more than the total number of recorded uses of force.
Read more:http://www.vox.com/2015/2/4/7979351/bratton-resisting-arrest 

6 comments:

  1. Resisting arrest eh? You shitbags in positions of authority, have no idea of the shitstorm heading your way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Right now the sanctioned uniformed assassination squad is killing people for next to nothing and this moron wants it to accelerate? And they WONDER why two of them were ambushed, I mean they really wonder about that; talk about being clueless.
    Or maybe it is simpler than all that, and it goes back to the entire police selection process, where those selected must not be past the just-barely-above-average IQ level, which makes of them mentally incapable of grasping what the rest of normal society sees clearly.

    US
    Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone
    who is Too Smart - See more at:
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-court-says-its-okay-for-police-departments-to-refuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014#sthash.vcz89YeM.dpuf

    US
    Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone
    who is Too Smart - See more at:
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-court-says-its-okay-for-police-departments-to-refuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014#sthash.vcz89YeM.dpuf
    US
    Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone
    who is Too Smart - See more at:
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-court-says-its-okay-for-police-departments-to-refuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014#sthash.vcz89YeM.dpuf
    US
    Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone
    who is Too Smart - See more at:
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-court-says-its-okay-for-police-departments-to-refuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014#sthash.vcz89YeM.dpuf
    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/us-court-says-its-okay-for-police-departments-to-refuse-to-hire-someone-who-is-too-smart_092014

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is not the old Soviet Union under Joesph Stalin. Most Americans still believe that the Constitution is still in effect because the courts and the media are doing a excellent brainwashing job but millions already know that this is a facade, and so the stupid still naively protest However, as awareness of slavery begins to dawn and guerrilla warfare takes place, the targets will be the treasonous leaders and the police will eventually join the revolution as they too realize that this is their country as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. How long before tens of millions of armed citizens, when seeing the cops coming just start shooting and consider it self defense?

    ReplyDelete
  5. “Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking
    an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136
    Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in
    the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated:
    “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally
    accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very
    different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the
    arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in
    the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the
    facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

    “An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without
    affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one
    who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting
    officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than
    an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491;
    reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan.
    245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v.
    Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

    “When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a
    right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by
    force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his
    assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80;
    Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

    “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an
    arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use
    of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who
    unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex.
    App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93,
    903.

    “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so
    attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in
    defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.”
    (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

    “Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a
    case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer
    and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State
    v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

    ReplyDelete
  6. its rigged game,.. everyone can be "trapped" into "resisting". Unless there is cell phone or dashcam video, here's how they do it. Two cops approach you, 1 on each side or 1 front 1 back. With one cop yelling "down on the ground!", the other cop yells "dont move!", the one yells "put your hands behind your head!", while the other yells, "keep your hands where I can see'um". Now which every one of the cops who's orders you didn't comply with,..well he's now lead, and the others doctor their reports to read,.."officer x issued clear orders for the suspect to,..which he didn't comply,..at this point I assisted officer x in subduing the uncooperative suspect".

    ReplyDelete