Cops Are Liars

The killing of Laquan McDonald: The dashcam video vs. police accounts
By Wayne Drash, CNN
Updated 11:35 AM ET, Fri December 18, 2015

Newly released documents in the Laquan McDonald shooting show how elaborately police appear to have fabricated their version of that moment and how officers stood by each other in verifying the details.

The documents shed new light on just how crucial the release of last month’s video was and how it contradicts nearly everything police said happened when veteran police officer Jason Van Dyke shot and killed the 17-year-old McDonald around 10 p.m. on October 20, 2014.
…
Comparing the officers’ accounts of the moment of the shooting with the video reveals stunning differences and what appears to be a conspiracy to create a scenario in which deadly force would be justified.
…
Van Dyke’s partner backed up his account, telling the detective that the teen walked down South Pulaski Road, refused officers’ orders and then “continued to advance toward the officers.”
…
At least four other officers gave accounts that matched Van Dyke’s story, including one who said McDonald “got closer and closer to the officers, continuing to wave the knife.”
…
The police narrative became the public narrative in news reports. But last month, that whole account unraveled after a judge ordered the release of dashcam video of the shooting.

Oh it’s just a few bad apples, in this case 6 not counting the Public and Police Officials who covered up the murder for 13 months. Anyone remember Homan Square?

Well, that’s only Chicago and everyone knows what they’re like.

Umm… No. Police Perjury is endemic across the country and the entire Criminal Justice system knows it.

“It is an open secret long shared by prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges that perjury is widespread among law enforcement officers”: Why judges so rarely second-guess police testimony
by Susan Bandes, Salon
Wednesday, Dec 16, 2015 07:57 AM EST

The sad reality is that judges almost never second-guess police testimony. They give police more than just the benefit of the doubt—they practically give them a free pass.

Judges themselves are well aware how common it is for police to lie on the stand. Federal Judge Alex Kozinski stated publicly: “It is an open secret long shared by prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges that perjury is widespread among law enforcement officers.” And only one of 27 Chicago judges interviewed by Temple University professor Nicole Van Cleve for her new book “Crook County” said police perjury didn’t occur. Twenty willingly admitted it, and the rest didn’t respond at all.

The cozy relationship between judges and police is so taken for granted that most people don’t even see it as bias. In fact, it is the worst kind of bias—a bias in favor of police as a group, which takes the place of an individual judgment in each case. It’s a violation of the judicial duty to decide cases without fear or favor.

This is an especially acute problem in police brutality cases. In the swearing contest between cop and alleged victim, the cop is sure to win nearly every time. The result is that cops have virtually a blank check to engage in acts of brutality and corruption, knowing the courts will turn a blind eye. As an infamous Chicago police commander named John Burge said to a suspect he was torturing, “No court and no State are going to take your word against a lieutenant’s word.” And he was proved right on multiple occasions.
…
This attitude was perfectly captured by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger, who explained in a case where police perjury was alleged: “It would be a dismal reflection on society to say that when the guardians of its security are called to testify in court under oath, their testimony must be viewed with suspicion.” In other words, the police officer isn’t an individual with a particular job to do. She represents all of us. Or to put it another way, to question one cop is to smear them all, and in impugning our public servants, we sully ourselves.

This played out in one recent case in Portland, Ore., when a judge threw out charges that high school sophomore Thai Gurule had assaulted and attempted to strangle an officer. Numerous cellphone videos flatly contradicted police testimony. Judge Diana Stuart then did something exceedingly rare: She refused to believe a cop’s testimony.
…
It is a familiar refrain that criticism of police behavior disrespects the whole profession. Or even that the very act of questioning police conduct will lead to a tide of criminality and mayhem.
…
The so-called “Ferguson effect” is another variation on this theme: Police can’t do their jobs if we persist in doubting and criticizing them; if all hell breaks loose, they cannot be held responsible.

How do they get away with it? They payoff the families and victims with hush money, just as the U.S. Government under the Obama Administration is trying to do to cover up the War Crimes it committed in shelling from the air the MSF Hospital in Kunduz.

In many police cases, Rahm Emanuel administration chooses secrecy
By Ari Melber and Safia Samee Ali
12/10/15 02:44 PM—Updated 12/10/15 10:08 PM

In the dispute that began the current firestorm, for example, Chicago paid $5 million to the family of Laquan McDonald, the 17-year-old shot 16 times by police last year. That settlement deal did not simply avoid a public lawsuit, however, it also required the crucial video of the shooting remain secret.

Under the deal, the city required McDonald’s family and lawyers “not to publically release, disclose or disseminate” the video until all of the pending criminal investigations were complete, which can take years.

“It’s absolutely hush money,” said David Yellen, Dean of Loyola Law School in Chicago.
…
It is Chicago taxpayers who spent a whopping $521 million on police settlements in the 10 years through 2014 – more than most other cities.

In case you’re a little math impaired that’s half a Billion dollars or $52 Million a year and if you want to excuse Rahm Emanuel please remember that Chicago has been under Democratic Party control since 1931 or roughly 84 years.