[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

Can you please clarify which part of your many sources provides support for your claims about complaints? Thnkas.

And if you read the LAPD report on the Rampart scandal, you will find no mention of racism nor any recommendations for dealing with racism. http://assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/boi_pub.pdf

When you refer to the bolded text (i.e. the fact that it was cops who decided that the killing was justified) as key, what exactly do you mean?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

Can you please clarify which part of your many sources provides support for your claims about complaints? Thnkas.

"Nevertheless, analysis of departmental and citizens’ complaints against police officers was shown to provide somewhat reliable estimates of use-of-force (McCluskey and Terrill 2005: 513)."

And if you read the LAPD report on the Rampart scandal, you will find no mention of racism nor any recommendations for dealing with racism. http://assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/boi_pub.pdf

The DOJ thought otherwise given the inclusion of issues of discrimination in the consent decree. Had LA not accepted those, they would have gone to court against the DOJ over this matter.

When you refer to the bolded text (i.e. the fact that it was cops who decided that the killing was justified) as key, what exactly do you mean?

If the events transpired as the press alleges, then why would you expect them to incriminate themselves? It's a matter that is best left to the courts. If the DA thought there was no reason to prosecute, this decision is seemingly up for revision by higher ranked prosecutors.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

The cited text says nothing about racism, nor does it explain why complaints provide estimates of use of force.

The DOJ was looking at racism before the Rampart scandal broke out, and the Rampart scandal was the deciding factor in whether or not the LAPD was going to let the DOJ in. So, the Rampart scandal had nothing to do with systemic racism, and so it does not support the claim that the (then) DA lost their job because of said racism.

So you reconcile the unjust killing of Elijah McCain with the obvious inference that the police and DA covering it up by simply shrugging and saying that this is how the system works. And to a degree you are correct: the system is designed to let cops kill unarmed black people with impunity, and it worked.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

The cited text says nothing about racism, nor does it explain why complaints provide estimates of use of force.

It cites a previous paper showing that complaints and use of force incidents are correlated.

The DOJ was looking at racism before the Rampart scandal broke out, and the Rampart scandal was the deciding factor in whether or not the LAPD was going to let the DOJ in. So, the Rampart scandal had nothing to do with systemic racism, and so it does not support the claim that the (then) DA lost their job because of said racism.

The Rampart Scandal was the straw that broke the camel's back, and it did objectively include racial incidents. And it also included other incidents of police brutality. And it led to the defeat of the DA on the election.

So you reconcile the unjust killing of Elijah McCain with the obvious inference that the police and DA covering it up by simply shrugging and saying that this is how the system works. And to a degree you are correct: the system is designed to let cops kill unarmed black people with impunity, and it worked.

No, the only thing I said is that it's gone to a higher prosecutorial authority to further investigate. The rest of your idea is simply your silly attempt to push a narrative that has little support on the facts.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

It would be a good idea for you to quote this previous study.

No, it objectively does not have to do with racism. There is literally and objectively no mention of racism in the report.

Please explain how the killing of Elijah McCain was illegal or how the system failed and should have worked. Since we already discussed how it is legal, it seems difficult for you to now argue that it is actually illegal. And we also discussed how there was supposedly accountability and monitoring at every step, so it would be difficult to argue that it somehow failed.

And yet he is dead and his killers are walking around with guns. Either the system is supposed to allow this to happen, or not.

If not, then explain where and when the system failed.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

It would be a good idea for you to quote this previous study.

Departmental and Citizen Complaints as Predictors of Police Coercion

NCJ Number 212274
Date Published January 2005
Author(s)
John D. McCluskey, William Terrill

Annotation

This study examined a variety of measures of citizen complaints against police and their link to police officers' use of coercion in encounters with suspects.

Abstract

Data were collected in St. Petersburg, FL, during the summer of 1997 as part of the Project on Policing Neighborhoods. Patrol observation was conducted in 12 beats, with the beat sample varying in levels of socioeconomic distress, measured as the sum of the percentages of families with children headed by a single female, the unemployed adult populations, and the population below 50 percent of the poverty level. At the time of the study, the St. Petersburg Police Department was accepting anonymous complaints; however, in the course of an investigation of the complaint, citizens were required to give a notarized statement. An outside civilian component was not included in decisionmaking regarding complaints. The study recorded the number and type of complaints received by each officer during the 5 years prior to observations in the summer of 1997. Observers recorded officer contacts with approximately 5,500 citizens. In such observations, police coercion was defined as acts that threatened or inflicted physical harm on citizens. The level of coercion exerted was distinguished in observation data. The analyses found that after controlling for other important predictors, an officer's complaint rate for force and verbal rudeness was linked to higher levels of coercion observed in encounters with suspects. The analyses also found that officers' complaint rate for verbal rudeness was associated with higher levels of coercion, but complaint rates for physical force were not related to higher levels of coercion in observations. These findings suggest that police departments could reduce citizen complaints by focusing on behavioral modification training for officers who receive frequent complaints for rudeness in their encounters with citizens. 3 tables, 7 notes, and 46 references

No, it objectively does not have to do with racism. There is literally and objectively no mention of racism in the report.

Firstly, the DOJ disagrees. Secondly, so you take PD reports as objective facts now? You can't have your cake and eat it too

Please explain how the killing of Elijah McCain was illegal or how the system failed and should have worked. Since we already discussed how it is legal, it seems difficult for you to now argue that it is actually illegal. And we also discussed how there was supposedly accountability and monitoring at every step, so it would be difficult to argue that it somehow failed.

And yet he is dead and his killers are walking around with guns. Either the system is supposed to allow this to happen, or not.

If not, then explain where and when the system failed.

As I said, assuming that the press reports are factually correct, it would be illegal. But we don't really know the facts, or at least the DA doesn't seem to believe the press is correct. Since some people don't trust the DA, now a higher-ranked authority like the Colorado AG is investigating, which is also part of the system and indeed shows the system is still working on this. How you claim otherwise is up to you, but the criminal justice system is not done with this case.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

That also says nothing about racism, and also points out that complaints of violence are not correlated with police coercion.

Please quote the exact text where the DOJ report discusses racism as part of the Rampart scandal. And it does not matter what I believe or not. What matters is what the voters believed when they did not re-elect the DA. You have the burden of showing that the DA lost their job because of their apparent refusal to deal with police racism. The Rampart scandal does not support your claim.

The AG only became involved after widespread protests. If there had been no protests, it would have ended there.

Are you arguing that black people need to engage in widespread protests as part of the system, and that this is how it is normally expected to operate?

If not, you are simply ignoring the protests and why they occur: because it is obvious that the system is set up to let cops kill black people with impunity.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

That also says nothing about racism, and also points out that complaints of violence are not correlated with police coercion.

Police coercion is defined as actual or threatened use of force. I don't understand why do you keep grasping at straws here.

Please quote the exact text where the DOJ report discusses racism as part of the Rampart scandal.

Why would it address racism as a problem within the LAPD in the wake of the scandal if race had nothing to do with it? Also, do you believe that the shooting of African American policeman Kevin Gaines was racially motivated? So far all instances of police violence against African Americans are, so I see no reason for you to make an exception here.

And it does not matter what I believe or not. What matters is what the voters believed when they did not re-elect the DA. You have the burden of showing that the DA lost their job because of their apparent refusal to deal with police racism. The Rampart scandal does not support your claim.

Since the Rampart Scandal did include issues of race, you are wrong here.

The AG only became involved after widespread protests. If there had been no protests, it would have ended there.

Are you arguing that black people need to engage in widespread protests as part of the system, and that this is how it is normally expected to operate?

If not, you are simply ignoring the protests and why they occur: because it is obvious that the system is set up to let cops kill black people with impunity.

Since DAs are elected officials, protests are in fact related to their job too. But it is also false that protests were necessary to prosecute these incidents of police brutality against African Americans, as the Rampart Scandal shows.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Your evidence does not support your claim about complaints.

2. The evidence does not support your claim about Rampart.

3. Rampart does not have anything to do with McCain’s death.

Elijah McCain’s death was unjustifiable.

His death is perfectly legal and justified by the system.

You can either concede that the system is set up to allow these killings, or show were it failed.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Your evidence does not support your claim about complaints.

Why? There is a correlation between overall complaints and overall coercion. The outcome in the paper is overall complaints - the rest is cherry-picking on your end.

2. The evidence does not support your claim about Rampart.

Why? The very first incident of the scandal was the killing of an African American cop by a White one.

3. Rampart does not have anything to do with McCain’s death.

Elijah McCain’s death was unjustifiable.

His death is perfectly legal and justified by the system.

You can either concede that the system is set up to allow these killings, or show were it failed.

Rampart was about racism among other things, and the DA wasn't reelected for not dealing with Rampart properly. In McClain's case, the AG is investigating and we'll have to wait to see whether there are any indictments and how those end.

Also, it's funny you claim to know what happened in McClain's case with such certainty too. Were you there that you know something the rest of the world doesn't?

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

Your paper said there was no correlation between complaints of violence and police coercion.

Again, the first incident was not part of the scandal and is only mentioned because it led to an investigation that later led to Rampart.

If you want to keep harping on this, note that the official report in Rampart did not discuss racism at all, and you never supported your claim about the DOJ saying Rampart was about racism.

Since you are ignoring the issue of McCain's perfectly legal killing, I will assume you concede that the system is set up to let cops kill black people and get away with it.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

Your paper said there was no correlation between complaints of violence and police coercion.

That's not what it said. I see you can only cherry-pick to sustain your argument.

Again, the first incident was not part of the scandal and is only mentioned because it led to an investigation that later led to Rampart.

Thereby making it part of the scandal, and indeed is counted in the timeline. Even worse, the Black officer was part of the Rampart unit as well.

If you want to keep harping on this, note that the official report in Rampart did not discuss racism at all, and you never supported your claim about the DOJ saying Rampart was about racism.

Then explain why is it that the DOJ decided to include racism into the mix in the consent decree.

Since you are ignoring the issue of McCain's perfectly legal killing, I will assume you concede that the system is set up to let cops kill black people and get away with it.

Since you prefer to ignore my arguments and cherry pick, I take it you have none to offer (unsurprisingly).

[Pants-of-dog]

The analyses found that after controlling for other important predictors, an officer's complaint rate for force and verbal rudeness was linked to higher levels of coercion observed in encounters with suspects. The analyses also found that officers' complaint rate for verbal rudeness was associated with higher levels of coercion, but complaint rates for physical force were not related to higher levels of coercion in observations. These findings suggest that police departments could reduce citizen complaints by focusing on behavioral modification training for officers who receive frequent complaints for rudeness in their encounters with citizens. 3 tables, 7 notes, and 46 references

@wat0n

What does the bolded phrase say?

[wat0n]

The analyses found that after controlling for other important predictors, an officer's complaint rate for force and verbal rudeness was linked to higher levels of coercion observed in encounters with suspects. The analyses also found that officers' complaint rate for verbal rudeness was associated with higher levels of coercion, but complaint rates for physical force were not related to higher levels of coercion in observations. These findings suggest that police departments could reduce citizen complaints by focusing on behavioral modification training for officers who receive frequent complaints for rudeness in their encounters with citizens. 3 tables, 7 notes, and 46 references

@wat0n

What does the bolded phrase say?

Why cherry pick? The outcome variable in the study is total complaints, precisely because the overall number of complaints correlates with coercion:

The analyses found that after controlling for other important predictors, an officer's complaint rate for force and verbal rudeness was linked to higher levels of coercion observed in encounters with suspects. The analyses also found that officers' complaint rate for verbal rudeness was associated with higher levels of coercion, but complaint rates for physical force were not related to higher levels of coercion in observations. These findings suggest that police departments could reduce citizen complaints by focusing on behavioral modification training for officers who receive frequent complaints for rudeness in their encounters with citizens. 3 tables, 7 notes, and 46 references

And the meaning of "coercion" is established in the sentence before the fragment you cherry picked:

In such observations, police coercion was defined as acts that threatened or inflicted physical harm on citizens.

If most coercion consists on verbal threats rather than actual use of force, it's not that surprising that complaints about the latter won't correlate with the sum of both. And yet, I think any reasonable person would easily conclude that being threatened by cops is hardly a great experience.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

You are failing to understand something.

The study looks at three different correlations and finds support for two of them.

You then use this as evidence assuming that the correlation works for all three.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

You are failing to understand something.

The study looks at three different correlations and finds support for two of them.

You then use this as evidence assuming that the correlation works for all three.

Not really. The study says that complaints of use of force specifically don't correlate with coercion as defined there, but total complaints do. The experiment included total complaints here ("Rialto Police Department tracked complaints against officers with software called IAPro. Formally, the system records citizens’ complaints where the reporting party has filed a grievance for alleged misconduct or what they perceive as poor performance. We used the data captured on this system to count the number of complaints (of any kind) filed against Rialto police officers.").

So now you have to argue that not only the cops were lying about the incidents of use of force (a fact that would if anything would probably bias the estimated effect downwards: One would expect that cops who were filmed are deterred from hiding incidents, unlike those who were not. As such, if the latter are under-reporting more than the former then the decrease would be even greater), but that complaints only predict verbal threats.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

You seem to be discussing a detail of a tangent of a side discussion that has nothing to do with racism any more, when discussing complaints. At this point, it would make sense to tie this back to whatever argument you were originally making.

Now, quote the DOJ report where it discussed racism in the Rampart scandal, as you claimed it did.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

You seem to be discussing a detail of a tangent of a side discussion that has nothing to do with racism any more, when discussing complaints. At this point, it would make sense to tie this back to whatever argument you were originally making.

Now, quote the DOJ report where it discussed racism in the Rampart scandal, as you claimed it did.

It didn't discuss racism in the Rampart Scandal but discussed it in general, since the decision was not focus on an already established matter (the facts related to the Rampart unit) but went for a broader review of LAPD operations, including Rampart. And it did deal with discrimination.

As for the argument I was originally making, there's quite a bit of decent evidence suggesting bodycams can help with police brutality - which affects African American males most.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

So you now agree that Rampart was not about racism, and since that is the case, the DA who lost their job because of Rampart did not do so because of police racism. This, in turn, means that you have only one example of a DA being held accountable for letting racist cops off for brutality.

No, we looked at the evidence about body cams, and the evidence is weak. Most studies are useless, and the ones that you think are good have no objective measure of brutality. So, no, the evidence is not decent.

And you still have not explained how Elijah McCain’s death can be unjustified, while simultaneously arguing that the system works.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

So you now agree that Rampart was not about racism, and since that is the case, the DA who lost their job because of Rampart did not do so because of police racism. This, in turn, means that you have only one example of a DA being held accountable for letting racist cops off for brutality.

Rampart wasn't only about racism, but it had that too. So no, you are wrong about this.

No, we looked at the evidence about body cams, and the evidence is weak. Most studies are useless, and the ones that you think are good have no objective measure of brutality. So, no, the evidence is not decent.

Repeating your argument won't make it true. Having a tantrum doesn't negate the fact that the study shows violence decreased - both self-declared and also proxied by complaints. You have also not explained why would reports of violence would be biased as a measure between the two groups that only differ in that one included officers wearing bodycams and the other did not. If the average measurement error associated to using police reports or complaints is independent of whether the cops worn bodycams or not, then the only effect is to add noise to the measurement, the point estimate of the effect remains unchanged

And you still have not explained how Elijah McCain’s death can be unjustified, while simultaneously arguing that the system works.

Simple: The system can revise its own decisions and as that case shows DA decisions need not be final.