Sea Speed said:
Stereotypes exist for a reason.
I'm this case bc people are too dense to comprehend what statistically insignificant means.
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
Memphis video is expected to be bad
42,816 Views |
437 Replies |
Last: 9 mo ago by ABATTBQ11
I'm this case bc people are too dense to comprehend what statistically insignificant means.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.localmemphis.com/amp/article/news/local/decertification-documents-former-mpd-officer-preston-hemphill-tyre-nichols-case-memphis-police/522-ddfd187a-61ff-43fb-8e90-ccd742eaa5ec
Oh look...
Preston Hemphill claimed that Nichols attempted to reach for another officer's weapon in his response to resistance report, which was an outright lie. This was mentioned between the other officers after the second interaction, but never occurred. It would seem Hemphill colluded with the other officers after the fact and LIED in an effort to justify the force used at the first scene. He also told investigators that Nichols tried to fight him and his partner, but the video shows this was never the case. Turns out, the reports he made after the incident were full of ****.
Hemphill violated the department's taser policy that forbids using a taser on someone who does not demonstrate an overt intention to use force or violence for compliance and forbids the use of a taser on fleeing subjects. There is no question, based on the specifics cited in the documents, that Hemphill violated the policy, no matter what any other officer would like to believe.
Hemphill's behavior in the initial stop was found to be unprofessional and unbecoming confusing the situation and in violation of their personal conduct policy. Yes, saying, "I hope they stomp his ***," was deemed unprofessional and unbecoming, but so was, "Get on the ****ing ground! Finne tase yo ***!" when Nichols was not using profanity and showed no signs of violence. Turns out, screaming like a probably child, threatening nonviolent people, and generally being an ***hole isn't professional. Who knew?
Hemphill didn't have his department issued cuffs and was using his own personally owned cuffs. Call this chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
Hemphill also failed to fully inventory Nichols's property and vehicle when impounded. Again, call it chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
Oh look...
Preston Hemphill claimed that Nichols attempted to reach for another officer's weapon in his response to resistance report, which was an outright lie. This was mentioned between the other officers after the second interaction, but never occurred. It would seem Hemphill colluded with the other officers after the fact and LIED in an effort to justify the force used at the first scene. He also told investigators that Nichols tried to fight him and his partner, but the video shows this was never the case. Turns out, the reports he made after the incident were full of ****.
Hemphill violated the department's taser policy that forbids using a taser on someone who does not demonstrate an overt intention to use force or violence for compliance and forbids the use of a taser on fleeing subjects. There is no question, based on the specifics cited in the documents, that Hemphill violated the policy, no matter what any other officer would like to believe.
Hemphill's behavior in the initial stop was found to be unprofessional and unbecoming confusing the situation and in violation of their personal conduct policy. Yes, saying, "I hope they stomp his ***," was deemed unprofessional and unbecoming, but so was, "Get on the ****ing ground! Finne tase yo ***!" when Nichols was not using profanity and showed no signs of violence. Turns out, screaming like a probably child, threatening nonviolent people, and generally being an ***hole isn't professional. Who knew?
Hemphill didn't have his department issued cuffs and was using his own personally owned cuffs. Call this chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
Hemphill also failed to fully inventory Nichols's property and vehicle when impounded. Again, call it chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
ahh yes white supremacy
ABATTBQ11 said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.localmemphis.com/amp/article/news/local/decertification-documents-former-mpd-officer-preston-hemphill-tyre-nichols-case-memphis-police/522-ddfd187a-61ff-43fb-8e90-ccd742eaa5ec
Oh look...
Preston Hemphill claimed that Nichols attempted to reach for another officer's weapon in his response to resistance report, which was an outright lie. This was mentioned between the other officers after the second interaction, but never occurred. It would seem Hemphill colluded with the other officers after the fact and LIED in an effort to justify the force used at the first scene. He also told investigators that Nichols tried to fight him and his partner, but the video shows this was never the case. Turns out, the reports he made after the incident were full of ****.
Hemphill violated the department's taser policy that forbids using a taser on someone who does not demonstrate an overt intention to use force or violence for compliance and forbids the use of a taser on fleeing subjects. There is no question, based on the specifics cited in the documents, that Hemphill violated the policy, no matter what any other officer would like to believe.
Hemphill's behavior in the initial stop was found to be unprofessional and unbecoming confusing the situation and in violation of their personal conduct policy. Yes, saying, "I hope they stomp his ***," was deemed unprofessional and unbecoming, but so was, "Get on the ****ing ground! Finne tase yo ***!" when Nichols was not using profanity and showed no signs of violence. Turns out, screaming like a probably child, threatening nonviolent people, and generally being an ***hole isn't professional. Who knew?
Hemphill didn't have his department issued cuffs and was using his own personally owned cuffs. Call this chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
Hemphill also failed to fully inventory Nichols's property and vehicle when impounded. Again, call it chicken**** if you want, but the above is more than enough to fire him.
Lmao! I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing in your general direction.
Let's say there was no reckless driving and no evading. So multiple squad cars with multiple officers did a traffic stop on an individual and angrily yanked him out of the car for absolutely no reason? Then they attempted to take him into custody for no reason? Does that make logical sense to you? I can see one officer doing that or an officer and his partner, but a group of officers? Then after you lose him from your illegal stop and attempt to arrest, you put it out on the radio to get more officers involved in your illegal act? It is possible, but I just don't think that is likely.
They're saying "there is no proof" of him evading or driving recklessly bc none of the cars have in-car camera. There's no proof he didn't drive recklessly either.
The handcuff and cussing thing makes me laugh.
I was pretty sure the taste yo ass comment was made by one of the black officers and not the whitey but I could be wrong. They're clearly gonna try to cut ties with any and everyone involved in this deal.
Sometimes people get exactly what they ask for and deserve. Memphis is about to experience that. It was a hole before this event.
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
I see we've completely abandoned the, "His use of a taser was perfectly fine," reasoning, continue to ignore the fact that he materially lied in his official reporting of the incident, and continue to defend his unprofessional conduct.
Do you honestly still think he should have kept his job?
Do you honestly still think he should have kept his job?
ABATTBQ11 said:
I see we've completely abandoned the, "His use of a taser was perfectly fine," reasoning, continue to ignore the fact that he materially lied in his official reporting of the incident, and continue to defend his unprofessional conduct.
Do you honestly still think he should have kept his job?
Without closely examining every video and every angle to see if a gun was grabbed, yes. Course I also know that video is only 2-dimensional and misses a lot, ESPECIALLY in a crowd.
His taser use was fine to me. When tasers first came out the national standard was that the ideal time to shoot someone was in the back when they were attempting to flee. Back shots were preferred bc you could get a wide spread and decrease the chance of bulky clothing getting in the way. A lot of departments changed the policy bc lawsuit due to falling directly on their face, but a change in policy does not always equal a change in behavior on the street.
You continue to confuse written policy with reality. Departments put policy down on paper that they will never enforce in real life and they know will never be applied in real life so they can point to it when a lawsuit happens.
But yada tada yada handcuffs.
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
ABATTBQ11 said:
I see we've completely abandoned the, "His use of a taser was perfectly fine," reasoning, continue to ignore the fact that he materially lied in his official reporting of the incident, and continue to defend his unprofessional conduct.
Do you honestly still think he should have kept his job?
DDP
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
And for the sake of argument, as I've said, there is a lack of physical proof that Nichols did anything wrong to get pulled over on the first place, and the only support of that is the word of officers who have been proven grossly dishonest and untruthful. Their word is worth nothing. With nothing but the word of proven liars, we're expected to believe that a guy who was gainfully employed, with no prior criminal history, no known history of drug use, and no prior interactions with police, just decided to speed away from a traffic stop? No drugs or alcohol were found in his car that we know of. There's nothing to give any indication that he would be motivated to evade a stop.
What is much more likely is that a violent crime unit was profiling cars, attempted to pull him over using "reckless driving" as a pretext for the stop with the intent to find or manufacture a reason to search his vehicle, severely ****ed it up, then lied about it. Don't pretend that this isn't a common tactic used by cops, especially units like this.
There is no reason for them to hesitate to take such action in the moment or involve other officers if they think they'll get away with it. If there is no regular oversight and strict accountability, why wouldn't they? Considering their actions and attitudes afterwards, this wasn't something new to them and they thought little of it. This was culturally acceptable practice. The difference is that this time someone died and they were put under a microscope. What was previously acceptable or overlooked became a ****storm where every detail was investigated to the nth degree.
What is much more likely is that a violent crime unit was profiling cars, attempted to pull him over using "reckless driving" as a pretext for the stop with the intent to find or manufacture a reason to search his vehicle, severely ****ed it up, then lied about it. Don't pretend that this isn't a common tactic used by cops, especially units like this.
There is no reason for them to hesitate to take such action in the moment or involve other officers if they think they'll get away with it. If there is no regular oversight and strict accountability, why wouldn't they? Considering their actions and attitudes afterwards, this wasn't something new to them and they thought little of it. This was culturally acceptable practice. The difference is that this time someone died and they were put under a microscope. What was previously acceptable or overlooked became a ****storm where every detail was investigated to the nth degree.
There were two unmarked Dodge Chargers that didn't seem to have flashing lights. One blue and the other champagne. You see the blue one in the video of the initial stop and it didn't have flashing lights on. Video of the initial stop shows the blue charger parked slightly ahead and blocking Tyree's car. You again see a blue charger from the overhead surveillance video and again, no flashing lights.
I believe one of the officers in the blue charger said they told Tyree to pull over and he refused. Did Tyree think he was getting car jacked? When did the patrol car that was parked directly behind Tyree's car in the video of the initial stop begin pursuit?
It's possible Tyree thought he was being followed by thugs attempting to car jack him and this could explain the erratic driving.
Also in the complete video that shows the BWC footage after Tyree was cuffed, you can hear one of the cops remarking Tyree reached for his gun.
I believe one of the officers in the blue charger said they told Tyree to pull over and he refused. Did Tyree think he was getting car jacked? When did the patrol car that was parked directly behind Tyree's car in the video of the initial stop begin pursuit?
It's possible Tyree thought he was being followed by thugs attempting to car jack him and this could explain the erratic driving.
Also in the complete video that shows the BWC footage after Tyree was cuffed, you can hear one of the cops remarking Tyree reached for his gun.
So he gets the benefit of the doubt in stating that Nichols both reached for a gun and attempted to assault officers, despite no evidence of either? Nichols hands are readily visible or restrained until they attempt to pepper spray him, and he inarguably gets up and runs after that. There was absolutely no effort at confrontation made at any point. Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt in the gun, which is an incredible stretch in itself, the claim he attempted to fight with officers is a blatant lie.
You admit he objectively violated policy, but you just don't care? You expect perfect compliance from people in stressful or chaotic interactions because that's what they're legally supposed to do, regardless of the reality of what can be reasonably expected, but you refuse to apply the same standard and expectation to an officer? Just follow policy and you don't get fired. It's not hard.
THIS is what I mean when I say there is a resistance to accountability and a refusal to accept responsibility in LE. You will perform whatever mental gymnastics necessary and defend him, and why other cop, to the ends of the earth despite all evidence to the contrary. No matter how bad of a job cops do, there is always an excuse and justification.
ETA Not only that, there's palpable contempt for anyone who disagrees or expects a higher level of professionalism. We're all the problem for having the expectation that police act ethically and professionally. It's the public's fault for your poor perception, not the poor performance and its zealous defense.
Why is it so hard to admit he did a bad job and was justly fired?
You admit he objectively violated policy, but you just don't care? You expect perfect compliance from people in stressful or chaotic interactions because that's what they're legally supposed to do, regardless of the reality of what can be reasonably expected, but you refuse to apply the same standard and expectation to an officer? Just follow policy and you don't get fired. It's not hard.
THIS is what I mean when I say there is a resistance to accountability and a refusal to accept responsibility in LE. You will perform whatever mental gymnastics necessary and defend him, and why other cop, to the ends of the earth despite all evidence to the contrary. No matter how bad of a job cops do, there is always an excuse and justification.
ETA Not only that, there's palpable contempt for anyone who disagrees or expects a higher level of professionalism. We're all the problem for having the expectation that police act ethically and professionally. It's the public's fault for your poor perception, not the poor performance and its zealous defense.
Why is it so hard to admit he did a bad job and was justly fired?
Gator92 said:
Also in the complete video that shows the BWC footage after Tyree was cuffed, you can hear one of the cops remarking Tyree reached for his gun.
And this was cited in their decertification documents. Despite Bocephus's argument that a lack of video doesn't prove he didn't try to grab a gun, his hands are restrained or visible for most of the video (that we have) of the initial stop. MPD has the rest of the video, including dash cams, and didn't see anything anywhere to substantiate it. That, along with the fact that Nichols was nonviolent and nonthreatening through the entire encounter, is likely why MPD considers the claim untruthful.
One of the officers reported that he heard another say, "Don't grab my gun," during the initial stop. That would undoubtedly have been picked up on audio, but no such statement was recorded. They all reported it because they talked about it, not because it happened.
Well said. This accurately portrays the reality of the problem for all citizens, but most don't interact with police enough to recognize it.ABATTBQ11 said:FireAg said:
I have been VERY clear and consistent that my problems with police are in resistance to accountability, contempt for public's civil rights, refusal to take responsibility and exercise agency, and the proliferation of a law enforcement culture that places LEO job security over public safety and professionalism.
Bocephus wrongly believes that there are only a few bad cops ("statistically insignificant" LOL), but the reality is that the majority (yes, I'm suggesting greater than 50%) are compromised in some facet of their duty and obligation to lawfully and morally uphold the integrity of their position. That's putting it as nicely as one can. I use position intentionally as professionalism is largely absent in local law enforcement. It's become an island of misfit toys at best and criminals at worst.
ABATTBQ11 said:
So he gets the benefit of the doubt in stating that Nichols both reached for a gun and attempted to assault officers, despite no evidence of either? Nichols hands are readily visible or restrained until they attempt to pepper spray him, and he inarguably gets up and runs after that. There was absolutely no effort at confrontation made at any point. Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt in the gun, which is an incredible stretch in itself, the claim he attempted to fight with officers is a blatant lie.
You admit he objectively violated policy, but you just don't care? You expect perfect compliance from people in stressful or chaotic interactions because that's what they're legally supposed to do, regardless of the reality of what can be reasonably expected, but you refuse to apply the same standard and expectation to an officer? Just follow policy and you don't get fired. It's not hard.
THIS is what I mean when I say there is a resistance to accountability and a refusal to accept responsibility in LE. You will perform whatever mental gymnastics necessary and defend him, and why other cop, to the ends of the earth despite all evidence to the contrary. No matter how bad of a job cops do, there is always an excuse and justification.
ETA Not only that, there's palpable contempt for anyone who disagrees or expects a higher level of professionalism. We're all the problem for having the expectation that police act ethically and professionally. It's the public's fault for your poor perception, not the poor performance and its zealous defense.
Why is it so hard to admit he did a bad job and was justly fired?
There is no simpler way for me to explain it. I do not believe firing a taser at someone's back is a reason to fire him. I believe his use of the taser was justified, end of story.
What kind of car was he driving that they profiled?
Save the sanctimonious BS. I have not defended any officer here save the one who fired a taser and was not involved in the assault. He was fired for political reasons and everyone can admit that save you.
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
Tattoos always reveal that it ain't the cops first bad decision.
TRADUCTOR said:
Tattoos always reveal that it ain't the cops first bad decision.
Lmao
TAMU ‘98 Ole Miss ‘21
It's not a bad way to profile women. "She's made several bad decision in her life....wonder if I can be her next one."TRADUCTOR said:
Tattoos always reveal that it ain't the cops first bad decision.
Wild West Pimp Style
This update to the story may have already been posted, but I thought it was a bit interesting.
But the true Memphis follow up to that follow up:
After the murder of Tyre Nichols by several MPD Scorpion Unit cops, former MPD sergeant Mark LeSure was surprisingly candid with reporters about the unit
— AFL-CIA Local 1312 (@UnionBustingBot) July 10, 2023
He was found dead yesterday on his front lawn. 3 days ago the city filed a motion of dismissalhttps://t.co/DjFkJHoHKK https://t.co/RoGHeLseaI pic.twitter.com/lJaqhuXth8
Remember these five Memphis police officers? Let me introduce you to a whistleblower, retired detective Mark Lesure from the same department. He's been on the news several times and very outspoken about the Memphis police force and their handling of the Tyre Nicholes incident.… pic.twitter.com/FTods7AMPE
— Kenny Akers (@KeneAkers) July 11, 2023
But the true Memphis follow up to that follow up:
Shuntae Daniels mugged retired Memphis homicide detective Mark Lesure after he collapsed and died in his driveway, used his phone to send herself $1,500 https://t.co/7Zg6si4NMh pic.twitter.com/o7IcqA4fUy
— Lipstick Alley (@lipstickalley) July 13, 2023
I'm still waiting on how there was more to the story and these guys were really gang enforcers and confirmation on which one's wife he banged.
Featured Stories
See All
18:03
3h ago
1.7k
In-Home Visit: Elko's four early additions during spring portal window
by TexAgs Recruiting
11:24
6m ago
243
Reviewing A&M's recruiting returns in first four months of Elko tenure
by Ryan Brauninger
11:47
1h ago
684