Jump to content

Kyle

banned
  • Posts

    1684
  • Joined

Posts posted by Kyle

  1. On ‎9‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 9:37 AM, MillerEP said:

    Yeah s2 of Serial kinda went off the usual format that made them good. I actually like s3's premise to do a deep look at how the criminal justice system works or doesn't work in America. 

    There's a lot of travesties of justice ... weird how the Avery (obviously did it), Adnan (obviously did it), and West Memphis Three (likely did it) get picked for exposition. It did sucker me into a few more true crime podcasts.

  2. 19 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

    Not today boy. You fire somebody you better protect yourself from claims of racism, sexism, or some other ism, and you'd better give em a really glowing reference letter.  At least in corp. America.

    Forget about firing a civil servant, you'd have to kill somebody it seems....

    Fire? Heck, my last two shops HR goes over PDRs to ensure certain groups' averages are not below the mean. If you give a particular group below average, you're getting a talking to by HR and encourage to raise it to the mean.

  3. 1 minute ago, tbone_ said:

    I agree. Good perspective.

    I also feel like people all up and down the line generally have it better than any time in history. Yet something in our human nature, not to mention the constant negative media bombardment, won’t let us feel good about it as a society. Seems to me like most of our collective angst is a function of goofy perspective.

    But what do I know.

    I'm with you. I realize I'm generalizing, but the things we get so ridiculously outraged about and cause social media and talk shows to lose their mind would make most previous generations laugh out loud. The world will never be perfect or fair, but times are pretty good for most people relative to other periods. I think you're right our need to get worked up about something I suspect often tends to create "goofy perspectives." Does not mean we should not strive for improvement, but temper that with getting from 80 to 82 is harder and a better problem to have than getting from 30 to 50 ... the law of diminishing returns does not apply to qualitative positions I suppose.

  4. Just now, Kyle said:

    Thanks. As a lay person, it feels gray given she (thought) she was entering her own home and thus was acting as (I think) another citizen could legally do, i.e. defend her property / home from danger; versus, she entered a third-party domicile or business because she was an off-duty cop and intervened. All academic I get - feels as complicated as the actual crime because she was a cop but acting completely as a citizen (ostensibly). Without knowing the details, in my legal simpleton mind I would draw a line between "what would Joe Q. Public rightfully do" vs. "what would Jane Q. Cop do because she is a cop." (in terms of the city's liability vs. her own)

    Horrible story - makes for an interesting academic question on myriad fronts as unfortunately many tragedies do.

     

  5. 16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Some examples of when an officer would not be within the scope of employment when off-duty would be while working private security and doing something, even law-enforcement related, within the scope of that employment.  Or something in a personal capacity, where they aren't going to rely in any way on their peace officer powers.  Here, her initial story that she thought she was apprehending/shooting an intruder, and issued commands, probably puts her within her peace officer jurisdiction, and probably on the job for employer liability purposes.

    Thanks. As a lay person, it feels gray given she (thought) she was entering her own home and thus was acting as (I think) another citizen could legally do, i.e. defend her property / home from danger; versus, she entered a third-party domicile or business because she was an off-duty cop and intervened. All academic I get - feels as complicated as the actual crime because she was a cop but acting completely as a citizen (ostensibly). Without knowing the details, in my legal simpleton mind I would draw a line between "what would Joe Q. Public rightfully do" vs. "what would Jane Q. Cop do because she is a cop."

    Horrible story - makes for an interesting academic question on myriad fronts as unfortunately many tragedies do.

  6. 3 hours ago, South Austin said:

    The cast intrigues me.  Aside from Cooper, whom I think has really developed some solid acting chops, you have Sam Elliot, Andrew Dice Clay, and Dave Chappelle. 

    Don't care ... Ford Fairlane still one of my top 5 guilty pleasures - Morris Day helps: "Damn. You gots to shave before you leave the house in a skirt that short ... and I don't mean yo legs."

    • Like 1
  7. 4 hours ago, Jerry Callo said:

    Diversity Day day is still one of my favorite episodes and was the episode that hooked me for several more seasons (didn't ultimately finish the series, though).

    Without question, maybe the best. Back when we could laugh at our differences.

  8. 1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

    There's two theories of liability here. One is Texas tort law, the allegation that she was negligent in her actions.  Under that theory, yes the city would be liable under respondent superior if she was acting within the scope of her employment.  However, liability is capped at $250k by the Texas Tort Claims Act.

    She probably was acting within the scope of her employment, even if off-duty, because even an off-duty officer has the ability to make arrests if crimes are witnessed and are felonies or involve a breach of the peace.  So, for a lot of purposes, a cop is always acting within the scope of employment.

    The second theory of liability, that implied by "excessive force," is the civil rights or 42 USC 1983 claim, also known as a Bivens claim.  Under that theory, the use of excessive force is a violation of civil rights.  There is no cap on liability.  However, the City is not liable for her actions under respondeat superior.  The plaintiff would have to prove a policy of this kind of action to make the City liable.

    Apparently, both the City and Guyger are insured for these claims by the Texas Municipal League, but I don't know what policy limits.  It may be the statutory $250k for the tort claims.

    Thanks. Really interesting. I'm not qualified to discuss the legal POV, so I was just contemplating my own moral / ethical perspective. Obviously not a lawyer, but it does seem like a really interesting gray area (or maybe not) that she was acting on her own behalf vs. interceding on behalf of a third party, which then would make more sense to me in terms of liability. The city will settle, the special interests will get paid. I hope his family gets something. Nothing that will cover the loss of their son.

  9. 3 hours ago, Hawndoh said:

    In other words, employee fired for not following organizational policy. Shocking. 

    This. Personally, I disagree with the policy, but regardless you pretty much have to follow policy. We could talk all day about grade inflation and our education system producing snowflakes that cannot compete with the Asians, but that's another topic.

  10. 5 minutes ago, bigup2dahorns said:

    DMN:

    The family of 26-year-old Botham Jean plans to sue the city of Dallas and the former Dallas police officer who shot him in his own apartment earlier this month.

    Attorney Lee Merritt said Allison and Bertrum Jean plan to file a federal lawsuit claiming excessive use of force by Amber Guyger.
    The city will be named as a defendant because Guyger was operating "under the color of state authority" even though she was off the clock, Merritt said.

    "She is in uniform, she was wearing a badge, she purports to give commands which he allegedly failed to comply to," he said. "Clocking in or clocking out has no bearing on that analysis."
    Merritt said he didn't know when the lawsuit would be filed.

    Legal experts have said Dallas could be held liable for Jean's death if attorneys can convince a court that Guyger was acting in the scope of her employment when she killed Jean.

    The Dallas Police Department fired Guyger on Monday, more than two weeks after the Sept. 6 shooting at the South Side Flats apartment complex in the Cedars. She was charged with manslaughter three days after the shooting and turned herself in to the Kaufman County Jail. She posted bond within an hour and is free, awaiting trial.

    https://buff.ly/2Ijzu0o

    We knew this was coming, but I do not support this. I wish the city would hold firm, but it will buy off the special interests. On principle, I do not think employers should be accountable for their employees actions while off the clock. The special interests will get paid, but I disagree.

    • Like 1
  11. 2 hours ago, destroya said:

    No doubt. I also wonder what if any difference there is between an administrative internal affairs questioning and a criminal investigation questioning and which side the new policy impacts. 

    That's a great question. Regardless, I do not think the rule should be applied. To the points above, I think that if they believe they committed a criminal offense and want to claim Miranda / 5th, so be it but at the risk of professional discipline, i.e. if they refuse to respond to IA immediately they should face termination. Cops should be held to a higher standard because of their training and responsibility.

    • Like 1
  12. At the end of the day, I hope life is nothing but blessings for M and all who see to live with integrity. I respect and appreciate the "rage" and disenchantment, but overall life's pretty beautiful despite its ups and downs. Most of us on the streets realize we're a lot more alike than different.

  13. Thanks for sharing a great post. I've found the world on the streets - from racial interaction, to community, to brother helping brother, to economic issues - is much different than the dark world painted by the Internet façade created by those seeking a remedy for whatever gluten-free cultural ailment has them worked up today. America and none of us are perfect, but there is still not a much better place on the planet. Most of the Internet-fabricated outrage is just the latest expression of "white man's burden." Believe it or not, most folks out there don't need us white guys to be angry for them nearly as much as we think.

    • Like 2
  14. 11 hours ago, destroya said:

    Do you even The First 48? The cops can interview someone but that doesn’t mean that person has to answer their questions. 

    I think you may be confusing the privileges of a cop performing as a officer of the law versus the privileges of a cop performing as a citizen. While I agree a cop and citizen should not necessarily have equal standing in a law enforcement situation, that does not mean a cop should be treated any differently than a citizen when the cop is on the other side of the table, acting as a cop or as a citizen. They should actually be held to higher standard IMHO because in theory their training should afford them more skills and thus more accountability.

×
×
  • Create New...