teamosil
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 6,623
- Reaction score
- 2,226
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Are you a lawyer?
Not yet, but I'm in law school.
If so, it explains how you answer and the questions you pose. MCSO is being sued. Does that mean they are guilty, just because DOJ filed the suit? Seems to me they deserve their day in court. Innocent till proven guilty in a court of law.
No, not just because the DOJ filed suit. The DOJ isn't just a litigant. It is the top law enforcement agency in the country. It conducted an exhaustive two year long review of the situation. They watched thousands of hours of footage from those cameras in police cruisers, poured over hundreds of thousands of booking slips and statistics and paperwork, interviewed hundreds or even thousands of people, secured affidavits not just from victims of racial profiling and bystanders, but also from police officers in Arpaio's force describing how they were instructed to operate. They released all the findings in a huge report.
And they clearly aren't on some mission to get Apraio. They offered him a very reasonable settlement where he would just have to clean up his act going forward and they would not prosecute him for any of the things he has done so far. All he had to agree to was to permit a DOJ monitor to track his progress. But he refused. That's why it is going to court.
No. LE without resonalble suspiction should not haul in everyone for a blood test for drunk driving. I also think that is an apple/orange example.
Why is it an apple/orange example? Isn't that exactly what Arpaio is doing to Hispanic US citizens? Just being Hispanic obviously isn't enough to form a reasonable suspicion that they are here illegally, right? Like 90% of Hispanics in Arizona are here legally, but those in Maricopa county are being regularly rounded up and locked up for 1-3 days because they are Hispanic.