• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Baltimore: thousands of suspects arrive too injured to go to jail, records show

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,822
Reaction score
8,296
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
I am not surprised

Baltimore: thousands of suspects arrive too injured to go to jail, records show

Thousands of people have been brought to the Baltimore city jail in recent years with injuries too severe for them to be admitted, newly released records have shown. The records, obtained by the Baltimore Sun through a Maryland Public Information Act request, showed that correctional officers at the Baltimore City Detention Center refused to admit nearly 2,600 detainees who were in police custody between June 2012 and April 2015.

The records did not indicate how the people were injured or whether they suffered their injuries while in custody. However, they suggested police officers either ignored or did not notice the injuries.
my emphasis
 
I think the story is a bit misleading, People who are harmed in Police custody,
know they can use it to get out of whatever they were arrested for, and so those tend to
be well documented.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Arrest-Related Deaths, 2003-2009 - Statistical Tables

All the more reason for police to stop harming people in their custody. Not that we should need reasons for police not to beat suspects, but apparently we're not nearly as advanced as we like to think.
 
All the more reason for police to stop harming people in their custody. Not that we should need reasons for police not to beat suspects, but apparently we're not nearly as advanced as we like to think.
My point was that the story was misleading, by implying that many of those too injured to go to jail
were harmed by police, but the people hurt in custody tend to be well documented.
 
My point was that the story was misleading, by implying that many of those too injured to go to jail
were harmed by police, but the people hurt in custody tend to be well documented.

What exactly leads you to believe this? It's not true. People straight up killed by police aren't even well documented. What makes you think that police would document when they break the law?
 
What exactly leads you to believe this? It's not true. People straight up killed by police aren't even well documented. What makes you think that police would document when they break the law?

What exactly leads you to you believe the criminals/those under arrest? People faced with adjudication and/or fines are not exactly known as the penultimate tellers of truth.
 
What exactly leads you to you believe the criminals/those under arrest? People faced with adjudication and/or fines are not exactly known as the penultimate tellers of truth.

Maybe the numerous videos available online showing that all too many times the cops are lying. That does not mean that some of the felons aren't responsible but it does mean that some cops lie.
 
What exactly leads you to you believe the criminals/those under arrest? People faced with adjudication and/or fines are not exactly known as the penultimate tellers of truth.

Why must the criminal be telling a lie? I'd understand if the prisoner was a pathological lier. I can even accept that some inmates will lie just to gain special treatment or be removed from a potentially harmful or uncomfortable situation, etc., etc., but they could be telling the truth as to how he/she sustained physical harm at the hands of police authority and not from another inmate or injury purposely done to themselves.

Granted, it's harder to believe such individuals based both on the mere fact that they are incarcerated AND many of them have committed some very serious felony crimes. But if we are to dismiss every claim of police brutality out of hand, doesn't that mean the police have a clear mandate to do whatever they want whenever they want to prisoners?

I'll put it to you another way: I recently completed PREA (Prisoner Rape Elimination Act) training and was surprised to learn how often rape and/or sexual abuse committed by prison guards/corrections officers goes unreported (not only in the state of Alabama but nationwide). Moreover, many people would be surprised to learn that such acts (raped, in particular) when committed by corrections officers IS still a crime! But without that camera footage, such crimes committed at the hands of those who are suppose to be adhering to the law often times get away with breaking the law...all because the inmates being inmates are perceived to be untrustworthy.

We need to be careful of being cavalier about claims of abuse committed at the hands of those in authority against inmate. I know it's real easy to do because...well, they're in jail/prison for a reason. But such abuses do happen and they can have a very negative affect on social order.
 
Why must the criminal be telling a lie? I'd understand if the prisoner was a pathological lier. I can even accept that some inmates will lie just to gain special treatment or be removed from a potentially harmful or uncomfortable situation, etc., etc., but they could be telling the truth as to how he/she sustained physical harm at the hands of police authority and not from another inmate or injury purposely done to themselves.

Granted, it's harder to believe such individuals based both on the mere fact that they are incarcerated AND many of them have committed some very serious felony crimes. But if we are to dismiss every claim of police brutality out of hand, doesn't that mean the police have a clear mandate to do whatever they want whenever they want to prisoners?

I'll put it to you another way: I recently completed PREA (Prisoner Rape Elimination Act) training and was surprised to learn how often rape and/or sexual abuse committed by prison guards/corrections officers goes unreported (not only in the state of Alabama but nationwide). Moreover, many people would be surprised to learn that such acts (raped, in particular) when committed by corrections officers IS still a crime! But without that camera footage, such crimes committed at the hands of those who are suppose to be adhering to the law often times get away with breaking the law...all because the inmates being inmates are perceived to be untrustworthy.

We need to be careful of being cavalier about claims of abuse committed at the hands of those in authority against inmate. I know it's real easy to do because...well, they're in jail/prison for a reason. But such abuses do happen and they can have a very negative affect on social order.

The old joke is everyone in jail is innocent. Given a comparison of person A - who holds a job, who has children, who has never been incarcerated justly or unjustly and person B, a convict who is currently serving their second stint in jail and doing 18 months in minimum security prison..... are you really stating that person A and person B are on equal ground when asked to tell the "truth"?
 
My point was that the story was misleading, by implying that many of those too injured to go to jail
were harmed by police, but the people hurt in custody tend to be well documented.

Please show the readers where the article "implied" that the injured had been assaulted by police officers.

What it did say was the following
The records did not indicate how the people were injured or whether they suffered their injuries while in custody. However, they suggested police officers either ignored or did not notice the injuries.
 
What exactly leads you to you believe the criminals/those under arrest? People faced with adjudication and/or fines are not exactly known as the penultimate tellers of truth.

Apparently neither are the cops.
 
I really have to ask myself, "Why should I really care?" This whole discussion has about "maybe" or "could have". I don't see any facts about the actual injuries. I do see conjecture, pontification, assumptions made on personal biases. I do know that people will lie to get out of a bind. I do know that not all law enforcement is honest but I am not going to take the word of a rioter over a law enforcement officer without some kind of proof, which has not been offered. Most of this discussion is pretty much non relevant to anything.
 
Maybe the numerous videos available online showing that all too many times the cops are lying. That does not mean that some of the felons aren't responsible but it does mean that some cops lie.

except you can't take videos shot in different cities, states, and varying circumstances and use them to prove the specific officer who arrested you is lying.
 
The old joke is everyone in jail is innocent. Given a comparison of person A - who holds a job, who has children, who has never been incarcerated justly or unjustly and person B, a convict who is currently serving their second stint in jail and doing 18 months in minimum security prison..... are you really stating that person A and person B are on equal ground when asked to tell the "truth"?

I would say its probably actually opposite of what you expect. Most the ex-cons i know where no-bull****, tell the truth to your face and not worry about the repurcussions socially. And more guys that are blue collar are quick to tell little white lies for comfort and be snively in their revenge.
 
Please show the readers where the article "implied" that the injured had been assaulted by police officers.

What it did say was the following

Baltimore: thousands of suspects arrive too injured to go to jail, records show | US news | The Guardian
The timing of the article just after riots because someone was hurt in police custody.

Baltimore: thousands of suspects arrive too injured to go to jail, records show
The records did not indicate how the people were injured or whether they suffered their injuries while in custody.
wink, wink, nod! nod!
They are implying some of these injuries were in police custody.
 
The old joke is everyone in jail is innocent. Given a comparison of person A - who holds a job, who has children, who has never been incarcerated justly or unjustly and person B, a convict who is currently serving their second stint in jail and doing 18 months in minimum security prison..... are you really stating that person A and person B are on equal ground when asked to tell the "truth"?

I believe a cop is just as likely to lie to cover his ass as a criminal is.
 
OK, whatever the 'conservative' mind perceives must be the truth.
How about facts? Can you provide definitive information on how those people were injured? How many were hurt because of actions by the police? How many were hurt before the police arrived? How many were hurt due to other reasons? Until those questions are answered there's really no way to have an intelligent discussion about this.
 
How about facts? Can you provide definitive information on how those people were injured? How many were hurt because of actions by the police? How many were hurt before the police arrived? How many were hurt due to other reasons? Until those questions are answered there's really no way to have an intelligent discussion about this.

No, I cannot "provide definitive information". I was not trying to do any such thing, I was simply denying that the article "implied" the police had caused the injuries. To me at least, the journalist was simply reporting that Baltimore police have a problem with attempting to jail persons so injured they should be in an ER and not a jail cell.

The object of the article was to point out that lots (thousands) of arrested persons were seriously injured prior to being brought into the detention center. That alone should cause at least some people to think that investigations should take place, the result might simply be better training of LEOs in regards to standard first aid practices plus better record keeping.

I was not the one who posted
wink, wink, nod! nod!
They are implying some of these injuries were in police custody.
 
Last edited:
The old joke is everyone in jail is innocent. Given a comparison of person A - who holds a job, who has children, who has never been incarcerated justly or unjustly and person B, a convict who is currently serving their second stint in jail and doing 18 months in minimum security prison..... are you really stating that person A and person B are on equal ground when asked to tell the "truth"?

Don't be naive. This isn't necessarily a comparision of virtues. This is an issue of truth (seeking). Even the guilty can be telling you the truth about some things. It's up to those in authority to conduct proper investigations and get to the truth. But dismiss claims of wrong-doing even is such a claim comes from an inmate is to give unfettered authority to authoritarians.

While I do believe that those who commit crimes should go to jail/prison for their crimes and while serving their time should submit to authority, I also understand that sometimes unlawful or unethical things happen to inmates while incarcerated. And when that happens even inmates have rights to be heard, their grievances addressed and if it is determined that a criminal act has been committed even against them, justice under the law.

Yeah, it's crappy but due process is still extended to people in jail.
 
Don't be naive. This isn't necessarily a comparision of virtues.
First I wasn't being naive and second since when is telling the truth a "virtue"?
This is an issue of truth (seeking). Even the guilty can be telling you the truth about some things.
It's not about telling the truth it's about credibility - we don't know if they're telling the truth or not however if someone is credible, they are more likely to tell the truth than not. You're saying you'd believe a guy spending the next 2 years in prison just as much as say your wife or parent? Who's being naive?

It's up to those in authority to conduct proper investigations and get to the truth. But dismiss claims of wrong-doing even is such a claim comes from an inmate is to give unfettered authority to authoritarians.
You're sentence is a bit incoherent - however this goes back to my comment about credibility.

While I do believe that those who commit crimes should go to jail/prison for their crimes and while serving their time should submit to authority, I also understand that sometimes unlawful or unethical things happen to inmates while incarcerated. And when that happens even inmates have rights to be heard, their grievances addressed and if it is determined that a criminal act has been committed even against them, justice under the law.

Yeah, it's crappy but due process is still extended to people in jail.
Ok.
 
All the more reason for police to stop harming people in their custody. Not that we should need reasons for police not to beat suspects, but apparently we're not nearly as advanced as we like to think.

Are you aware that sometimes police can't gain control of a suspect? I'm a little miffed at the OP because if it doesn't specify how...then it assumes that injured suspects is 100% of the time never OK or reasonable.

In reality if a suspect were injured in the course of a scuffle...I would consider that to be normal.
 
It's not about telling the truth it's about credibility - we don't know if they're telling the truth or not however if someone is credible, they are more likely to tell the truth than not. You're saying you'd believe a guy spending the next 2 years in prison just as much as say your wife or parent? Who's being naive?

It's often the police who lie when they are the one's who are under investigation.
 
It's often the police who lie when they are the one's who are under investigation.

It's near always that people lie to the police when they are under investigation. Why is that? Answer that and it will be obvious to you that most police hold themselves to a higher standard than the general public, not all, most.
 
Back
Top Bottom