Jason Stockley

St. Louis references in the news. Oh yeah, don't forget our favorite "Top Lists."
Ebsy wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:33 am
I'm in total agreement with the statements above that there probably needs to be a new crime for police officers that use excessive force because they were "scared". Unfortunately, the chance of that passing in Missouri in any of our lifetimes is 0.
Honest question. As a city are we not able to define our own crimes?

I'm confident the state of Missouri would pass their own law that somehow eliminates it. But at least it'd further the discussion.
I don't think state law or the state constitution permits municipalities to pass their own criminal codes. I suppose we could pass a municipal ordinance, but punishments for those are capped.
whitherSTL wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:47 am

Also, we need not forget that this man rammed a police cruiser, led cops on an 85 mile per hour chase and most likely was dealing heroin.
He "rammed" it from close range so couldn't have been going very fast. And neither leading police on a chase nor dealing heroin warrant being murdered by another criminal (i.e. Stockley) illegally wielding an A-K 47. Police are not entitled to judge and execute suspects, except when the legal system fails--which it does frequently when black people at involved. Period.
Does Missouri have a reckless homicide statute? Or a negligence statute that carries sufficient penalties? Would it be reasonable to call police overreaction recklessness or criminal negligence? If it's a defined part of a police officer's job to use reasonable force then excessive force could be criminally negligent. We clearly need some reform that puts some teeth in police oversight. We need a way to hold police officers criminally liable for overreach, at least in the most egregious cases. And keep in mind, part of this is the double standard. It was pointed out recently that August A Busch IV nearly ran over a pair of undercover officers in strikingly similar circumstances, led them on a high speed chase, and . . . they shot out his tire. And he was out in bail in a matter of hours. We need change. We need real and lasting change. We need our police officers to be answerable to us. They are the servants of the community, of the public good. They are not judge, jury, and executioner. This is not Judge Dredd. This is not a war. A suspect is innocent until proven guilty. And that means police officers need to treat him as a human being. Treat us as human beings. As neighbors. As family.
urban_dilettante wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:13 pm
whitherSTL wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:47 am

Also, we need not forget that this man rammed a police cruiser, led cops on an 85 mile per hour chase and most likely was dealing heroin.
He "rammed" it from close range so couldn't have been going very fast. And neither leading police on a chase nor dealing heroin warrant being murdered by another criminal (i.e. Stockley) illegally wielding an A-K 47. Police are not entitled to judge and execute suspects, except when the legal system fails--which it does frequently when black people at involved. Period.
:thumbs up emojii:
I agree he shouldn't have been executed, but by no means was this man a saint either. Trying to keep things objective here. (Neither is Stockley, btw)
Whoa..I just read Chris Sommer's retort on TWTR via the Riverfront Times. Schitt is getting real!

https://www.riverfronttimes.com/foodblo ... a-on-blast
whitherSTL wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:56 am
Whoa..I just read Chris Sommer's retort on TWTR via the Riverfront Times. Schitt is getting real!

https://www.riverfronttimes.com/foodblo ... a-on-blast
Maybe now that an affluent, white male is saying something, people will listen?

Also, Jesus, police, get your crap together.
Just a general FYI for those who work or drive through the area: Organized protest planned for Shaw Park in Clayton today at 5:00 PM.
chaifetz10 wrote:Just a general FYI for those who work or drive through the area: Organized protest planned for Shaw Park in Clayton today at 5:00 PM.

Yep. Saw that too
whitherSTL wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:40 am
I agree he shouldn't have been executed, but by no means was this man a saint either. Trying to keep things objective here. (Neither is Stockley, btw)
of course he wasn't a saint. but if we're being objective, the punishment (being murdered) didn't fit the crime to the extent that the crime was demonstrated in court (dealing + running).

btw, why in the hell are cops STILL not wearing body cameras?
urban_dilettante wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:55 pm
btw, why in the hell are cops STILL not wearing body cameras?
http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/board-to ... /477152314
San Luis Native wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:30 pm
urban_dilettante wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:55 pm
btw, why in the hell are cops STILL not wearing body cameras?
http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/board-to ... /477152314
Maybe they will soon which will help with this ongoing mess between cops and citizens. Im just over this :roll:
St.Louis1764 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:13 pm
San Luis Native wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:30 pm
urban_dilettante wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:55 pm
btw, why in the hell are cops STILL not wearing body cameras?
http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/board-to ... /477152314
Maybe they will soon which will help with this ongoing mess between cops and citizens. Im just over this :roll:
What makes you think that having these incidents on film will get any police convicted? Haven't we already had multiple on camera killings with no charges for police? Philando Castile, Eric Garner, etc.
ricke002 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 10:17 am
St.Louis1764 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:13 pm
Maybe they will soon which will help with this ongoing mess between cops and citizens. Im just over this :roll:
What makes you think that having these incidents on film will get any police convicted? Haven't we already had multiple on camera killings with no charges for police? Philando Castile, Eric Garner, etc.
well it's another layer of surveillance, at least, provided the cops can't switch them off or cover them up at will. in this case a body camera pointing into the car presumably would have seen whether or not Anthony reached for a gun or had a gun in his hand, which was obviously a huge part of Stockley's defense.

and there's this:
“If you look at some of the data from other cities that have implemented them they see use of force drop dramatically and people's confidence within the police department begin to rise,” Reed said.
ricke002 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 10:17 am
What makes you think that having these incidents on film will get any police convicted? Haven't we already had multiple on camera killings with no charges for police? Philando Castile, Eric Garner, etc.
I'd suspect the Castile and Garner cases would've gotten zero attention if it weren't for the cameras. It would've been cops word against "perps" word and we all know how that fairs 100% of the time.
Well i believe cameras for all St.Louis City officers is essential at this stage of St.Louis police department history. People claim that the police are overly aggressive but the cameras will clearly show who's the aggressor or liable for all actions. I think the big caveat is the police must have cameras on at all times to avoid the situation that happened in Minneapolis and in more serious case MB. We the people need to respect the laws of the country however the police must respect the laws of the citizens as well in all respect goes a long ways for all of us no matter the ethnicity/gender of the person.
St.Louis1764 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 8:18 pm
Well i believe cameras for all St.Louis City officers is essential at this stage of St.Louis police department history. People claim that the police are overly aggressive but the cameras will clearly show who's the aggressor or liable for all actions. I think the big caveat is the police must have cameras on at all times to avoid the situation that happened in Minneapolis and in more serious case MB. We the people need to respect the laws of the country however the police must respect the laws of the citizens as well in all respect goes a long ways for all of us no matter the ethnicity/gender of the person.
But you're inherently suggesting that criminals and police should be operating under the same rules. That's just a really strong false equivalency. They're criminals, thus by definition, they don't abide by the laws. Police officers have voluntarily signed up to do their job, which is to enforce laws and protect the public. They have to abide by the laws they have opted to protect. That's why we pay police a salary, pension, health insurance, vacation time, etc. We don't pay the criminals anything.
Protesting through the halls of the Cheshire Hotel. SMH
moorlander wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:54 am
Protesting through the halls of the Cheshire Hotel. SMH
Where should they be protesting?
St. Louis Board of Alderman passed a resolution "honoring" Anthony Lamar Smith. I'm not speaking one way or the other on the shooting or the verdict, but was this guy really deserving of honors? Can anyone find the actual wording of the resolution?

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... eb231.html
framer wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:48 pm
St. Louis Board of Alderman passed a resolution "honoring" Anthony Lamar Smith. I'm not speaking one way or the other on the shooting or the verdict, but was this guy really deserving of honors? Can anyone find the actual wording of the resolution?

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... eb231.html
Seems odd, yes. Maybe the intent was to "acknowledge" him, but "honor" does have an odd feeling to it.
[quote=ricke002 post_id=287351 time=1506096413 user_id=969]
[quote=moorlander post_id=287349 time=1506095664 user_id=553]
Protesting through the halls of the Cheshire Hotel. SMH
[/quote]

Where should they be protesting?
[/quote]

You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?

What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
moorlander wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 1:03 pm

You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?
I didn't say it was okay. I was asking where it's (in your opinion) okay to protest? I think if they're protesting, they should be arrested, but isn't that sort of one of the points of a protest? (And one of the risks of protesting?) To make it inconvenient for others/to get their message across? I don't think it's okay to break windows or burn things, either. Those persons should be held accountable.
What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
I would guess that they're doing this EXACTLY because of the questions you posed. Protesting in other areas (Ferguson) didn't seem to make an impact. Because, possibly, it didn't impact those who make the important decisions? Protesting in "protest zones" doesn't really make an impact, because if you don't want to hear their message, you can just avoid the area. (I don't necessarily think that protesting in a hotel is a logical choice, but it's at least encroaching on the comfort zone of some of the power-holders in the area)
moorlander wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 1:03 pm
ricke002 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 11:06 am
moorlander wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:54 am
Protesting through the halls of the Cheshire Hotel. SMH
Where should they be protesting?
You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?

What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
I've always found reading the opinion polls of how americans viewed the civil rights protests of the 60's fascinating. Stunningly low % of people supported the civil rights protesters, thought they were accomplishing their goals, etc.

Looking at those polls and the headlines from that era helps add a ton of perspective to today's issues. Not the same issues, but it helps add that perspective.