Michelle, Here's what I don't quite understand. How do you reconcile this statement:
"No matter what you believe a person has done, they are still entitled to a fair trial. We cannot allow a person to be made indefensible by accusations..."" -[Mpls] Coddling the Criminals: CUAPB Statement on Latest Police Brutality(?) Incident with this one: "We denounce in the strongest possible terms this heinous attack on a member of our community," stated Michelle Gross, spokesperson for CUAPB. She added, "It is shocking to the conscience that two similar incidents involving sexual assault should occur nine days apart by two different law enforcement agencies in Minneapolis. Communities United Against Police Brutality will continue to advocate for and assist these survivors of police brutality and their families. We are calling for independent medical examinations and for appropriate medical and psychological care for these men in the aftermath of their assaults." -[Mpls] CUAPB Statement on Latest Police Brutality Incident While there is still investigations going on? Any rational person recognizes that there are disproportionate numbers of people of color and poor people in the criminal justice system, as well as there are police officers who abuse the power that they have, and who should never have a badge in the first place. What I'm not sure of is why a criminal, especially a repeat offender, is more worthy of being "innocent until proven guilty" than a police officer? When police officers violate the very law they are sworn to uphold, I would be the first to argue that the penalties and punishment should be more severe than the average person on the street, and if any of these officers are guilty of these crimes, there is no amount of punishment that would be severe enough in my mind, and I would harken back to some medieval techniques that would be closer to appropriate treatment for this. However, isn't it just as appropriate to give these officers, if not the benefit of the doubt, than at least the same fair trials you call upon for criminals? Is it not right that they as well should be afforded an unbias investigation into this matter? And if they are found to be innocent, I will echo Anne's question of will you as strongly exonerate them as you have pre-emptively condemned them? No one has said that these individuals deserved the alleged assaults, but they have raised the concern that people could make up these allegations in order to draw attention from their crimes. How is it more plausible that an officer assaulted an individual with a plunger than that a individual created a story for leniency? Is this not what investigations are for discerning? And should we not wait for all the facts to emerge and investigations to be completed before coming to the conclusions of what happened? Having been a victim of police harassment and assault, I strongly believe that those who we have trusted with power have a higher responsibility not to abuse it. But as someone who believes strongly in principles of law and order, in fair and equal treatment, in appropriate measures for dealing with one another in a civil society, I submit that we have to adhere to the self same principles and ideals that we call for from our officers. Most noted among these is giving the same right of due process to our enemies or those we despise as much as we do to those we love or support. The validity of being able to call for an end to abuse and unfair treatment, requires that the ethic be consistent across the board and that all people, including police officers, be afforded equal treatment under the law and in public. Jonathan Palmer Victory REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
