So, if I understand this correctly, this woman is being sued by the state if California for making a list of bad cops using knowledge that she may have obtained prior to her working for the DA's office? Isn't that fucking special. What are they going to do about the bad cops?
this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
37 points (97.4% liked)
News
38534 readers
2655 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Close, but she's not being sued, she's actually being criminally prosecuted on six felony charges
Isn't that fucking special.
In-fucking-deed it is
What are they going to do about the bad cops?
They all already got a variety of punishments (generally not harsh enough imo, but their conduct runs all the way from rigging an intramural athletic competition to driving drunk with a loaded firearm, so it's a bit of a complicated picture and worth reading the full article for those details). She was looking them up after the fact so the prosecutor's office she works for now (Los Angeles county) didn't call on them to testify in court (or, if they had to call them for whatever reason, so her office knew to let defense attorneys know about this as theoretically required under the Brady opinion (but exactly what things are Brady material and what can be ignored is something attorneys will be fighting over until the end of time and something I believe LA county and the CA attorney general have argued over in recent history)).
In a statement, Steve Johnson, the president of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association, vehemently disagreed with release of personnel information which he described as “stolen,” even though they were court records, and said that it would endanger deputies, families and peace officers who serve the community.
We'll be murdered if the public finds out about our misbehavior!
On one exhibit, state prosecutors left public the department identification numbers corresponding to Deputy Does 7, 8 and 9. On another, they left public a connected civil case number. In at least four cases, handwritten margin notes and signatures made it possible to match redacted exhibits to the public versions of the same documents already in L.A. Superior Court records.
It almost feels like someone on the inside strategically left hints for this to be uncovered, but it's probably just incompetence.
Sure seems like cops are able to get their jobs back in a lot of instances. That wouldn't work with my employer. Kinda feels out of balance, like they aren't truly accountable, dontcha think?