Caporegime
Yet multiple others can understand. I'd suggest it's not the explanation that's lacking but rather your ability to comprehend and process.
"Hundreds" of Met Police armed response officers hand in the weapons after colleague charged with murder - Chris Kaba Shooting aftermath.
- Thread starter ianh
- Start date
Yet multiple others can understand. I'd suggest it's not the explanation that's lacking but rather your ability to comprehend and process.
Soldato
We also have a slightly controversial proposition that two highly trained (at public expense) servants of the law are not performing core duties and are thus wasted.
Brought back into the fold with some admonitions they can fulfil the roles that we have paid for. The original sentence was disproportionate.
Brought back into the fold with some admonitions they can fulfil the roles that we have paid for. The original sentence was disproportionate.
Last edited:
Soldato
Maybe that's their bias showing.
Last edited:
On what basis was it valid?
Soldato
If it wasn't valid why appeal?
I think you've just answered your own question - it wasn't thus the appeal!
Soldato
Last edited:
Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 allows police to do exactly that and they're not that infrequently authorised in places like London (S/60 authorisations are time and geography limited orders to deal with suspected disorder)
And of course that was lie:
But a whole load more time and taxpayer money gets wasted on it all because this guy can't accept any personal responsibility for his actions and instead uses this as a race-grift to get attention, sympathy etc.
The other one got a driving ban and 29 points on her license after failing to tell the police who was driving a tesla in another incident:
Bianca Williams banned from driving and given 18 penalty points
The British sprinter said the six-month driving ban could dash her Olympic hopes.www.bbc.co.uk
They. both sound like a complete nightmare but of course they'll still kick-off, it's someone else's fault never their own.
It no very old but it reminds me yet again about the New Jersey Turnpike experiment
Which even still to date is one of the few attempts at investigating whether higher rates of adverse criminal justice encounters for 'black' people can be attributed to 'racial profiling' 'systemic racism' or whether they are better explained by differing behaviours of the groups stopped.
The New Jersey highway patrol were accused of being racists for stopping more blacks in traffic stops.... So a study was devised to test this accusation by measuring the speed of cars on a stretch of freeway (covertly) whilst also photographing the drivers of the cars concerned (again covertly).
A panel of people where then asked to try and establish the ethnicity of the drivers photographed but crucially, they didn't know what the recorded speed of the corresponding cars was and didn't know if the vehicle was exceeding the speed limit or not.
The results of the study showed that the drivers identified as black were speeding at noticeably higher rates when compared to the actual stop ratios for the police suggesting the police should be stopping more black drivers if they were acting on the basis of this offending activity alone whilst ignoring ethnicity!
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/nyregion/racial-study-of-speeders-is-released-in-new-jersey.html
The New Jersey turnpike test was a pretty good attempt at looking at the issue as it completely disentangled the driver's outward appearance from one very relevant aspect of behaviour likely to lead to a traffic stop (speeding)
Blacks may have been stopped disproportionally to whites in terms of their absolute population demographics in this test but less than this aspect of offending (speeding) would suggest should be the case.
I personally find if very telling that so little academic attention has been paid in the last 20+years (and decades before this test) to test the reasons actually why offending rates vary between groups and the degree to which this may be attributable to bias or subject behaviour.
For many people the disparity *is the evidence* of discrimination but then they have nothing sensible to say when it's pointed out to them that men consistently feature much higher than women in adverse criminal justice outcomes but yet there isn't many claiming this is driven primarily by sexism against men and/or for women. People just intuitively know that its primarily caused because men commit more crime, particularly violent and sexual crimes.
Last edited:
No, especially if the original judgment was valid!