Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Minneapolis Star Tribune)   Defendant acquitted in case where two Minneapolis officers forgot to turn on their body cams before punching and tazing him. Unfortunately for them, security cameras caught the whole thing   ( startribune.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Lopez, Criminal law, Anastacio Lemus Lopez, Police, Crime, National Football League, Minneapolis, Constable  
•       •       •

6483 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Aug 2017 at 4:57 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-08-11 01:27:35 PM  
This is my shocked face.  Lawsuit in 3, 2, 1, ...
 
2017-08-11 01:54:22 PM  
Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.
 
2017-08-11 01:59:36 PM  
We're missing the point: they did him a real solid by not shooting him.
 
2017-08-11 03:27:24 PM  
Until these thugs start getting serious jail time for this crap, it will continue.
 
2017-08-11 04:19:29 PM  
"I really hope there's some kind of change, because this shouldn't be happening to anybody," he said

Cops in the US will kick your ass, steal all your money, and get away with it.  Assuming there's no video.  That's not going to change without a lot of whining, crying, and gnashing of teeth from the Thin Blue Line.
 
2017-08-11 04:49:02 PM  

wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.


FTA: The jury's decision in the criminal case could affect the lawsuit, said Lopez's attorney, Michael Nadimi. One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Oh, that is rich.
 
2017-08-11 05:00:57 PM  

wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.


If  flight recorders can record up to 25 hours of data, why can't they just default the camera to be on? When the cop suits up they take the camera from it's docking station. As soon as it is clipped to their uniform it turns on. When they get back to the station it gets plugged back into it's station and the data is automatically uploaded to the server. Because the recording is time-stamped they can find the relevant portion by matching the time against when the cop called in the incident. Or, better yet, the camera is synced to the cop radio. When the radio is keyed a "bookmark" is marked on the recording.
 
2017-08-11 05:01:38 PM  

Solid State Vittles: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

FTA: The jury's decision in the criminal case could affect the lawsuit, said Lopez's attorney, Michael Nadimi. One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Oh, that is rich.


Actually I think that Lopez will be rich.
 
2017-08-11 05:02:52 PM  
One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Gives this cartoon a whole different meaning:
s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
 
2017-08-11 05:03:46 PM  

Slypork: Actually I think that Lopez will be rich.


He's asking for 75K they will settle quick. Lawyer gets a bit, So maybe 50K when all is said and done. That is crap money
 
2017-08-11 05:04:27 PM  

Slypork: Solid State Vittles: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

FTA: The jury's decision in the criminal case could affect the lawsuit, said Lopez's attorney, Michael Nadimi. One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Oh, that is rich.

Actually I think that Lopez will be rich.


Lopez is suing for $75,000.  So, not THAT rich.
 
2017-08-11 05:05:19 PM  
lopez, 35, traveled from Texas to Minneapolis to watch the Dallas Cowboys play the Minnesota Vikings ....
Now, that's a real fan.
 
2017-08-11 05:07:24 PM  

rightylefty: This is my shocked face.  Lawsuit in 3, 2, 1, ...


You should be shocked...this guy was Caucasian!!
 
2017-08-11 05:08:10 PM  
Also, don't get drunk & in fights in public. Just sayin'
no I am not intimating that he deserved it
 
2017-08-11 05:08:15 PM  

Slypork: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

If  flight recorders can record up to 25 hours of data, why can't they just default the camera to be on? When the cop suits up they take the camera from it's docking station. As soon as it is clipped to their uniform it turns on. When they get back to the station it gets plugged back into it's station and the data is automatically uploaded to the server. Because the recording is time-stamped they can find the relevant portion by matching the time against when the cop called in the incident. Or, better yet, the camera is synced to the cop radio. When the radio is keyed a "bookmark" is marked on the recording.


Flight Data Recorders only record 2 hours.
 
2017-08-11 05:09:40 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2017-08-11 05:09:51 PM  

rightylefty: This is my shocked face.  Lawsuit in 3, 2, 1, ...


Those cops should be jailed
 
2017-08-11 05:10:10 PM  

Solid State Vittles: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

FTA: The jury's decision in the criminal case could affect the lawsuit, said Lopez's attorney, Michael Nadimi. One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Oh, that is rich.


And par for the course in ALL cases of LEO misconduct.  LEO's almost never turn on each other.  They consider "Good citizens" little more than "Bad guys who haven't got caught yet"
 
2017-08-11 05:10:39 PM  

wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.


Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.
 
2017-08-11 05:11:00 PM  
on one hand, it's a horrible thing the cops did, on the other, he's a Cowboys fan, so maybe it was deserved
 
ecl [TotalFark] [BareFark]
2017-08-11 05:12:30 PM  

BeerBear: rightylefty: This is my shocked face.  Lawsuit in 3, 2, 1, ...

Those cops should be jailed


They're only guilty of being Vikings fans.  They just wanted him to know what it was like.
 
2017-08-11 05:14:06 PM  
The guy did seem to be resisting before they brought him down. And if someone won't cooperate putting their arms back for handcuffs, I honestly don't think a punch to the head is that much out of line. It's better than a police truncheon to the head.
 
2017-08-11 05:14:26 PM  
Waiting on the Boobies that's a version, "But, no, police are nice. They told me that in grade school."
 
2017-08-11 05:14:34 PM  
I think the Packers set a record during the pre-season game last night.  Only 2 people arrested.
 
2017-08-11 05:17:05 PM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: The guy did seem to be resisting before they brought him down. And if someone won't cooperate putting their arms back for handcuffs, I honestly don't think a punch to the head is that much out of line. It's better than a police truncheon to the head.


Why not just best him until his retinas detach? Its better than being shot.
 
2017-08-11 05:18:40 PM  

AppleOptionEsc: Pointy Tail of Satan: The guy did seem to be resisting before they brought him down. And if someone won't cooperate putting their arms back for handcuffs, I honestly don't think a punch to the head is that much out of line. It's better than a police truncheon to the head.

Why not just best him until his retinas detach? Its better than being shot.



They were afraid that if they beat him too hard, delicious candy would come out.
 
2017-08-11 05:19:44 PM  

Jaymark108: Slypork: Solid State Vittles: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

FTA: The jury's decision in the criminal case could affect the lawsuit, said Lopez's attorney, Michael Nadimi. One of the city's defenses in the lawsuit is that Lopez was at fault because he was criminally charged.

Oh, that is rich.

Actually I think that Lopez will be rich.

Lopez is suing for $75,000.  So, not THAT rich.


He's probably suing for much more than that. $75k is likely the jurisdictional minimum for that particular court. His complaint probably asks for "not less than $75,000" and the reporter didn't read very carefully.

/Law talking guy
 
2017-08-11 05:20:38 PM  

Snarfangel: AppleOptionEsc: Pointy Tail of Satan: The guy did seem to be resisting before they brought him down. And if someone won't cooperate putting their arms back for handcuffs, I honestly don't think a punch to the head is that much out of line. It's better than a police truncheon to the head.

Why not just best him until his retinas detach? Its better than being shot.


They were afraid that if they beat him too hard, delicious candy would come out.


img.fark.net
 
2017-08-11 05:21:47 PM  
I hate to side with the cops, but he's a Cowboys fan.  He deserved.
 
2017-08-11 05:22:32 PM  
Fark the police
 
2017-08-11 05:23:31 PM  

bacchanalias and consequences: Waiting on the Boobies...


Story of my life, man
 
2017-08-11 05:24:16 PM  

justanotherfarkinfarker: Slypork: Actually I think that Lopez will be rich.

He's asking for 75K they will settle quick. Lawyer gets a bit, So maybe 50K when all is said and done. That is crap money


Yeah I hope that's a misquote and it's 75K from every party.

There should be a way you can sue to force criminal charges to be brought against someone, like the police or a prosecutor or judge who acts out of line and there's a reasonable suspicion they committed a crime. None of this BS internal investigation crap. You should be able to put them in front of a jury and the penalties should be trebled because they are in a position of power and should know better.
 
2017-08-11 05:28:24 PM  

wax_on: Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening


A single 128GB card can easily capture over 10 hours of high-quality HD video and audio. Have a body cam that has no on/off button at all, and a fixed-in-place non-removable memory card. Officer removes it from the recharging/downloading dock station and it starts. Officer returns it at the end of a shift, it automatically downloads. Way way easier to deal with, and far better for the public.
 
2017-08-11 05:31:02 PM  

Stone Meadow: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.


That's entirely fair. They need to go to the bathroom just like anybody else. And nobody needs them filming it (or others) having a piss at the urinals (or the station locker room).

That said, yet another isolated incident, just like every other one this week/month/year/decade/forever.
 
2017-08-11 05:31:44 PM  
This made me sick to my stomach. Capital punishment seems appropriate for this kind of misconduct.
 
2017-08-11 05:32:15 PM  

Stands With A Tiny Fist: Stone Meadow: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.

That's entirely fair. They need to go to the bathroom just like anybody else. And nobody needs them filming it (or others) having a piss at the urinals (or the station locker room).

That said, yet another isolated incident, just like every other one this week/month/year/decade/forever.


"You only get paid for time on camera."
 
2017-08-11 05:32:55 PM  
The guy was definitely resisting arrest, tried to pull away from the cops, and everyone careened into the wall then the ground.

That said, cops should not be in the business of punching and tasing for compliance purposes.
 
2017-08-11 05:34:12 PM  

Snarfangel: Stands With A Tiny Fist: Stone Meadow: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.

That's entirely fair. They need to go to the bathroom just like anybody else. And nobody needs them filming it (or others) having a piss at the urinals (or the station locker room).

That said, yet another isolated incident, just like every other one this week/month/year/decade/forever.

"You only get paid for time on camera."


Wouldn't help, actually. Turn it off for ten minutes to almost-kill someone and/or plant evidence, get paid for the rest of the day anyway, plus seven minutes of overtime to make up for it.
 
2017-08-11 05:36:02 PM  
I find it amazing that these mass minority of bad cops somehow always seem to get partnered together. I'm sure it's just some mathematical anomaly.
 
2017-08-11 05:46:38 PM  
Forget the body cameras, they're not the issue. You're ignoring the issue in favor of focusing on this nonsense.  It's the same as the gun debate.

Ignore the hype about tools, focus on fixing the actual issue!
 
2017-08-11 05:47:14 PM  

Stone Meadow: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.


Don't want us seeing their tiny dicks?

/If you're on duty, you get no privacy
//Don't like it? Go back to being a civilian
 
2017-08-11 05:50:09 PM  
The video looks like it should be for misdemeanor resisting arrest, not a felony for "disarming".  The cops also overreacted to a drunk being merely belligerent while they drag him out.
 
2017-08-11 05:53:50 PM  
This really has to stop.
All of this taping of honest cops doing their duty being taken out of context, just to make some low-life criminal richer.
Who is going to protect you when all of these good cops are gone, your mommy?!
All of this is probably driven by those perverts who want to see cops taking a whiz.
Just drop it with all of this whining for always on cameras and put your trust back in the people who have been taking care of you all of this time!

/I tried
 
2017-08-11 06:02:33 PM  

sunderland56: wax_on: Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening

A single 128GB card can easily capture over 10 hours of high-quality HD video and audio. Have a body cam that has no on/off button at all, and a fixed-in-place non-removable memory card. Officer removes it from the recharging/downloading dock station and it starts. Officer returns it at the end of a shift, it automatically downloads. Way way easier to deal with, and far better for the public.


Problems:

1. Sometimes officers need to talk to confidential informants and crime witnesses who won't talk if they are on camera.

2. Sometimes officers need to take a leak.

I can see leaving it on to record as default, but there has to be a way for the officer to shut it off because of the two reasons I listed (and probably others).  Of course, the moment there is any discretion in this, it leaves an opening for abuse.
 
2017-08-11 06:04:48 PM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: The guy did seem to be resisting before they brought him down. And if someone won't cooperate putting their arms back for handcuffs, I honestly don't think a punch to the head is that much out of line. It's better than a police truncheon to the head.


With all due respect, that's idiotic. A punch or truncheon to the head is going to cause someone to put their arms over their head. Instead, you should be punching them in the kidneys. They'll move their hands behind their back to block, and you're good to go.

/and if they pee blood, why that just happens to be most cops' fetish
 
2017-08-11 06:05:03 PM  

Stone Meadow: wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.

Police Dept/Union says no because pee-pee time.


I say have them record completely through the start of shift to the end.
If something questionable needs to be reviewed you're not gonna start at the beginning and sit through 8 hours of video, you're going to go right to the pertinent time.
If mr. bluesuit peed at 3:00 and was accused of mishandling someone during a traffic stop at 4:30 then you're going to review the recordings around 4:30 and not some arbitrary time that they might be in the bathroom.
 
2017-08-11 06:05:57 PM  

ds615: Forget the body cameras, they're not the issue. You're ignoring the issue in favor of focusing on this nonsense.  It's the same as the gun debate.

Ignore the hype about tools, focus on fixing the actual issue!


I hear you but I don't see any way other than to force accountability. What do you suggest?
 
2017-08-11 06:06:57 PM  

wax_on: Lawsuits already filed.

Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening but it seems clear that body cams shouldn't be able to be turned off by the officers using them. That's just asking for trouble.


Maybe not always,but a sensor that shows when a weapon is drawn with, say, a 1 minute recording buffer. Camera would only turnoff by a commanding officer requested from H Q.. This might sound onerous, but most cops don't draw weapons on a daily basis. This would of course require a charging discharging place at the station, or maybe a locker room.
 
2017-08-11 06:10:27 PM  

Geotpf: sunderland56: wax_on: Clearly police body cams should be always on. Perhaps there's some mode that records with reduced resolution for times when 'nothing' is happening

A single 128GB card can easily capture over 10 hours of high-quality HD video and audio. Have a body cam that has no on/off button at all, and a fixed-in-place non-removable memory card. Officer removes it from the recharging/downloading dock station and it starts. Officer returns it at the end of a shift, it automatically downloads. Way way easier to deal with, and far better for the public.

Problems:

1. Sometimes officers need to talk to confidential informants and crime witnesses who won't talk if they are on camera.

2. Sometimes officers need to take a leak.

I can see leaving it on to record as default, but there has to be a way for the officer to shut it off because of the two reasons I listed (and probably others).  Of course, the moment there is any discretion in this, it leaves an opening for abuse.


Easy answer: make it a rebuttable presumption that any evidence gathered while the camera was off was falsified. They're not arresting people while peeing, so that's moot, and they can't rely on anonymous statements to prosecute someone anyway, so that's also moot.

Mind you, this doesn't prevent them from planting evidence and then doing a "dramatic reenactment" on camera, like the story last week, but neither would any other rule that doesn't involve implanting the camera in their foreheads.
 
2017-08-11 06:13:42 PM  
For example, in this case, the officers turned off their cameras and claimed that, while they were off, he grabbed for their weapons. You instruct the jury that they should presume that the officers are lying, and that they should only change that presumption if there's other evidence that corroborates it: because their cameras were off, it's not just that their word isn't enough, but that their word is specifically false, unless proven otherwise.
 
Displayed 50 of 88 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report