More completely isolated examples...

[lighthorseman]

A three-year investigation into the police’s habit of fixing traffic and parking tickets in the Bronx ended in the unsealing of indictments on Friday and a stunning display of vitriol by hundreds of off-duty officers, who converged on the courthouse to applaud their accused colleagues and denounce their prosecution.

As 16 police officers were arraigned at State Supreme Court in the Bronx, incensed colleagues organized by their union cursed and taunted prosecutors and investigators, chanting “Down with the D.A.” and “Ray Kelly, hypocrite.”

As the defendants emerged from their morning court appearance, a swarm of officers formed a cordon in the hallway and clapped as they picked their way to the elevators. Members of the news media were prevented by court officers from walking down the hallway where more than 100 off-duty police officers had gathered outside the courtroom.

The assembled police officers blocked cameras from filming their colleagues, in one instance grabbing lenses and shoving television camera operators backward.

The unsealed indictments contained more than 1,600 criminal counts, the bulk of them misdemeanors having to do with making tickets disappear as favors for friends, relatives and others with clout. But they also outlined more serious crimes, related both to ticket-fixing and drugs, grand larceny and unrelated corruption. Four of the officers were charged with helping a man get away with assault.

www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/nyregion/officers-unleash-anger-at-ticket-fixing-arraignments-in-the-bronx.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp#More at the link

Yes yes, I know, the problem lies completely with me, and that these cops should be totally excused because they were probably stressed, and anyway, its a totally isolated example and doesn't in any way reflect badly on police officers in other jurisdictions

[largeham]

And the second part:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=related

[erictheblue]

There are about 45,000 NYPD officers. 16 were arraigned (0.03%). If even 500 were protesting, that would be 1.11%.

So what about the other 98.9% of NYPD officers?

[lighthorseman]

Nov 1, 2011 6:26:59 GMT -5 erictheblue said:

There are about 45,000 NYPD officers. 16 were arraigned (0.03%). If even 500 were protesting, that would be 1.11%.

So what about the other 98.9% of NYPD officers?

How many BRONX police officers are there?

Also might point out that, from my reading of the article, this appears to be a union endorsed protest.

[ltfred]

The assembled police officers blocked cameras from filming their colleagues, in one instance grabbing lenses and shoving television camera operators backward.

Assault. The media companies should sue these cops- you can't just beat up journos and get away with it.

These officers seem to believe that cops should be above the law. Even if they are guilty, they're saying, no judge should be allowed to judge the ubermensch.

[Tenfold_Maquette]

Lighthorseman, I don't think you're talking out of your ass when you say there is a undercurrent of corruption in the police force. I just think the brush you paint them with is a touch wide for the actual scope of the corruption. If only a small percentage of cops (say 5%, as a random number) are bad, it's unfair (and untrue) to cast the other 95% as corrupt simultaneously.

Does that mean the 5% of bad cops need to be dealt with? Sure. Did the other (uncorrupt) officers know about the activities of their brethren? Possibly, but that's harder to prove. Systemic corruption is not necessarily blatant.

[Art Vandelay]

Nov 1, 2011 7:31:02 GMT -5 Tenfold_Maquette said:

Lighthorseman, I don't think you're talking out of your ass when you say there is a undercurrent of corruption in the police force. I just think the brush you paint them with is a touch wide for the actual scope of the corruption. If only a small percentage of cops (say 5%, as a random number) are bad, it's unfair (and untrue) to cast the other 95% as corrupt simultaneously.

Does that mean the 5% of bad cops need to be dealt with? Sure. Did the other (uncorrupt) officers know about the activities of their brethren? Possibly, but that's harder to prove. Systemic corruption is not necessarily blatant.

The fact that this protest was organised by the Police Union likely means that the corruption and culture of thinking they're above the law is a little more pervasive than just 5%. What happened to the other 95%, do they have no influence in the Police Union?

[Tenfold_Maquette]

Nov 1, 2011 7:34:44 GMT -5 Art Vandelay said:

The fact that this protest was organised by the Police Union likely means that the corruption and culture of thinking they're above the law is a little more pervasive than just 5%. What happened to the other 95%, do they have no influence in the Police Union?

It's my understanding (and I may be wrong) that most people who are part of a union pay their dues because it's required of their job, and are otherwise distantly aware, if at all, of the activities thereof. I certainly wouldn't be surprised by the police force, in general, having an attitude of invulnerability when it comes to the law. I think my point was that it's hard to accurately gauge just how corrupt the police force really is, so calling every cop corrupt is perhaps jumping to conclusions.

[Art Vandelay]

Nov 1, 2011 7:40:34 GMT -5 Tenfold_Maquette said:

Nov 1, 2011 7:34:44 GMT -5 Art Vandelay said:

The fact that this protest was organised by the Police Union likely means that the corruption and culture of thinking they're above the law is a little more pervasive than just 5%. What happened to the other 95%, do they have no influence in the Police Union?

It's my understanding (and I may be wrong) that most people who are part of a union pay their dues because it's required of their job, and are otherwise distantly aware, if at all, of the activities thereof. I certainly wouldn't be surprised by the police force, in general, having an attitude of invulnerability when it comes to the law. I think my point was that it's hard to accurately gauge just how corrupt the police force really is, so calling every cop corrupt is perhaps jumping to conclusions.

I'm not saying they're all corrupt, just that the corruption problem should be treated as far more serious than just assuming only 5% of cops are crooked. Not to mention, the culture of being above the law and protecting each other from any and all consequences, regardless of their legitimacy is also a whole other problem.

[Tenfold_Maquette]

Nov 1, 2011 7:48:03 GMT -5 Art Vandelay said:

I'm not saying they're all corrupt, just that the corruption problem should be treated as far more serious than just assuming only 5% of cops are crooked. Not to mention, the culture of being above the law and protecting each other from any and all consequences, regardless of their legitimacy is also a whole other problem.

Well, even if it is only 5% it's still very serious, if only because it only takes a few well-placed officers looking out for their own to swing the balance of power dangerously out of whack. I can't think of a way to correct this, however, because corruption seems to run hand in hand with people accumulating power, and it would take something akin to removing that tendency from humanity in its entirety to get rid of it.

[lighthorseman]

Nov 1, 2011 7:31:02 GMT -5 Tenfold_Maquette said:

Lighthorseman, I don't think you're talking out of your ass when you say there is a undercurrent of corruption in the police force. I just think the brush you paint them with is a touch wide for the actual scope of the corruption. If only a small percentage of cops (say 5%, as a random number) are bad, it's unfair (and untrue) to cast the other 95% as corrupt simultaneously.

Does that mean the 5% of bad cops need to be dealt with? Sure. Did the other (uncorrupt) officers know about the activities of their brethren? Possibly, but that's harder to prove. Systemic corruption is not necessarily blatant.

Hey, cops who do their job with integrity get nothing but my respect. They are an essential part of our social fabric. However, the ones who DON'T are one of THE big problems in our society.

So even if we accept, for the purposes of argument, that it is only 5% that are corrupt (and even beyond that, accept that the other 95% are genuinely naive about their activities) it is still worthwhile to make a big noise and say to those 5%, "your conduct is unacceptible!".

Because if no one does, and the 5% are allowed to get away with stuff like in the OP (or any of the myriad, but totally unrelated and isolated incidents mentioned on this forum and elsewhere) and no one says anything, or does anything, then that is a tacit admission that not only can they get away with it, but that no one else even cares.

And I am saying "I care." The best cure for corruption is full disclosure, and making sure as many people know about what's going on as possible. Which is why I post stuff like this.

Also because I like to think people enjoy reading the interesting and unusual news articles I find.

[Art Vandelay]

Nov 1, 2011 7:59:28 GMT -5 Tenfold_Maquette said:

Well, even if it is only 5% it's still very serious, if only because it only takes a few well-placed officers looking out for their own to swing the balance of power dangerously out of whack. I can't think of a way to correct this, however, because corruption seems to run hand in hand with people accumulating power, and it would take something akin to removing that tendency from humanity in its entirety to get rid of it.

Can't say I disagree with you there. There's simply no easy solution to the problem. If there were there probably wouldn't be such a corruption problem in the first place.

[erictheblue]

Nov 1, 2011 6:33:07 GMT -5 lighthorseman said:

How many BRONX police officers are there?

Not applicable, as nothing in the article infers the actions were done only by officers in the Bronx.

Also might point out that, from my reading of the article, this appears to be a union endorsed protest.

A valid point. However (1) the article says the indicted cops were union officials. It could be the union sticking up for itself, more than sticking up for the cops. And (2) if the 98% who were not involved did not know about the scandal until that day, a text from the union saying cops had been arrested could bring members out, believing that the cops were wrongly accused.

We know more because we read the article. The cops who got the text that morning may not have known everything. Wouldn't you protest in favor of someone you believed was wrongly accused? Especially if you had no idea of the details, only that cops were being indicted?

[lighthorseman]

Nov 1, 2011 9:04:17 GMT -5 erictheblue said:

Nov 1, 2011 6:33:07 GMT -5 lighthorseman said:

How many BRONX police officers are there?

Not applicable, as nothing in the article infers the actions were done only by officers in the Bronx.

Also might point out that, from my reading of the article, this appears to be a union endorsed protest.

A valid point. However (1) the article says the indicted cops were union officials. It could be the union sticking up for itself, more than sticking up for the cops. And (2) if the 98% who were not involved did not know about the scandal until that day, a text from the union saying cops had been arrested could bring members out, believing that the cops were wrongly accused.

We know more because we read the article. The cops who got the text that morning may not have known everything. Wouldn't you protest in favor of someone you believed was wrongly accused? Especially if you had no idea of the details, only that cops were being indicted?

Do we need to make excuses for them?

Or would it be more constructive to accept that, yes, police corruption is a real thing, and that, misguided or not, police officers defending corrupt cops is effectively a betrayal of every non cop out there?

[erictheblue]

Nov 1, 2011 9:12:55 GMT -5 lighthorseman said:

Do we need to make excuses for them?

It seems we do, since you seem determined to paint the protestors as just as culpable as the 16 who were indicted.

Or would it be more constructive to accept that, yes, police corruption is a real thing, and that, misguided or not, police officers defending corrupt cops is effectively a betrayal of every non cop out there?

You seem determined to believe all the protestors knew and agreed with the actions of the 16. No doubt some of them did, but the exact number cannot be determined. As I said above, if 500 protesters were out there, and every single one of them knew and agreed with the corrupt actions, you are tarring 98% of NYPD officers for actions they had nothing to do with.

The title you gave this tread also infers that you believe many cops are crooked, else why would you sarcastically call it an "isolated example[]?" If you really want to state that cops defending corrupt cops is betrayal, perhaps consider using different words to title your post. As it stands, your argument sounds more like "all cops are corrupt, and everyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves. Here's proof!!!!"