It's only not murder because plea deals usually involve lesser charges that a conviction could.
The DA was going to try him again for murder and murder 2, but accepted this deal with the feds to avoid another possibly hung jury or even acquittal. That's how plea deals work.
I found it amazing he willingly took a 20 year sentence considering how cops usually fare in courts, I only wish it was in State prison gen pop instead of club fed's special unit.

I fully agree that the expectations for justice against bad cops are depressingly low, and I agree this outcome was far better than the average yet still not fully justice.

On top of the established fact that spousal abuse rates for cops is up to 15 times higher than among the general public is the fact that bad cops lie habitually on police reports.

Your video, BON COP BAD COP 2 Trailer, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think you will find that when people post a video about a law enforcement officer that shows a reasonable or heroic action in the line of duty, it gets voted up quite well.

The thing is, and I may be speaking out of my ass here without the statistics, most of our posters are going to post things they are exposed to more often. If they are in North America, it is likely they are going to post more videos about cops that are in the USA. Sadly, law enforcement in the USA is having a crisis of faith among the citizens being policed because we have had a few years of epic failures in duty being caught on camera.

So if you look at the sift in microcosm, you are going to noticed a preponderance of 'bad' cop videos. Whereas if you look at each poster, you will find that when they do find a video of an officer behaving in a laudable manner they will usually submit it.

@newtboy
hey i was offering a video from another perspective,the cops perspective.

but i have watched more than one of his videos.

i didn't post this as an excuse for bad policing,or just plain bad cops.

i was a bouncer,a bartender,a titty bar dj.i have seen my fair share of shit cops,and also good ones.

i think izzo is one of the good ones.you disagree.

meh.../shrugs

*kill

I disagree. Police are not supposed to be our masters, we are not supposed to bow and scrape before them in the hopes we don't get sent to the stocks (or worse). Police are simply supposed to enforce the laws that we, as a society, have decided that we all should follow.

The problem is, we have allowed the police to become more than that through our own lack of care and mismanagement. A policeman should have to undergo more rigorous training and background checks, mental and physical, than any other service we provide to ourselves. Instead we pay them about the same as teachers and we let bullies into the system. We also allow people with significant evidence that they should never have positions of authority due to mental issues to become police. We do not rigorously punish the bad cops, nor prevent them from seeking work elsewhere, leading to the same type of thing that led to catholic molesters being shuffled about to molest again.

As far as police fearing others, can we finally say that the number of police fatalities are far less than the the ones inflicted by police? Yes, we have many guns in the USA, but the few times I recall of a police person being killed by one seem to revolve around them experiencing a retaliation style attack when you would least expect it (and not on a call), or when they are alone and on a remote call location. Yet most of these controversial police shootings of suspects seem to happen when they are in a group of officers with weapons drawn, which I would consider far less of a jumpy situation than being alone on a highway. If I am an officer, with multiple other officers nearby, I have weapons on the suspect (taser or otherwise), why am I more worried than if I am alone with a suspect? It simply doesn't make sense.

Finally, referring back to your resisting comment, have we not seen lately that you can still be shot while doing absolutely no resisting? One man was laying on the ground, hands in the air, while telling a mentally ill patient of his not to do anything that would get him shot, and the man on the ground got shot. Here in Austin we had a mentally ill man running naked in the street and he was shot and killed versus being tasered or taken down. The use of force, and the extremity of it, have not been shown to be merited. So if you can be shot and killed for not resisting, or simply not understanding the commands in the short time you are given to do so, what can we do? Should we carry a pair of handcuffs and a taser so we can pre-apply these items and give the cops less to fear?

Cops shouldn't be considered a threat because they have been appointed by the government to uphold the law. The success of that is definitely up for debate, but to suggest that citizens should be fighting cops is absurd. That will only lead to more deaths.
(The solution is for the system to weed out the bad cops, the incompetent ones, the corrupt ones, the power tripping, racist, trigger happy etc).

Most cops do the right thing, most of the time. The millions of police encounters each day where nothing has gone wrong don't make the news.

I think it's worth considering what the any country would be like without law enforcement. We know what it would be like - hurricane Katrina - complete chaos on the streets, far worse than these shootings. Assuming your goal is to have fewer people shot and murdered, then having a police force is the best way we know of. However for that to work we need a competent police force that is there to serve and protect.

There definitely needs to be a system were police are made accountable to make sure stuff like this video does happen, or even non-lethal situations where citizens are being harassed. There are number of ways to do this. But my suggestions is that if you want to argue with someone, don't do it while they're holding a gun at you. Wait until you get to the station and call your lawyer. It's not perfect, but at your chances of getting shot will drop dramatically.

I'm largely with @newtboy on this one.

Charles Kinsey provides an excellent and concrete example of someone who thought that there was zero chance that what he was doing would lead to getting shot. He did absolutely nothing wrong, and from what I/we can tell actually handled everything as well as anyone could reasonably hope for. If I was in that situation, I guarantee I wouldn't have had the presence of mind to lay down on my back with my hands straight up and calmly explain what was going on.

So, as a white person who has never been in a situation like that, all I can do is try to put myself in the shoes of how a black person would see this. Here's a guy who acted perfectly -- a standard that I can't imagine holding myself to -- and he still got shot. And the police response is (so far) boilerplate utter bullshit.

I can't really imagine what it would be like to be black in the US, and have direct experiences with this sort of thing (even less extreme examples like profiling traffic stops) on top of WAY too frequent reports of this stuff happening. But I can try, and all I can say is that it seems terrifying.

Push people far enough, and they start pushing back. I think that's what @newtboy is saying. I absolutely do NOT condone violence against police, or painting them with a broad brush and claiming they are ALL racist ... but at some point, I can absolutely understand that there is going to be blowback for this shit that has gone on way too often for way too long.

In order to slow down / prevent / stop that blowback, police need to be working their asses off to change that image. The "blue line" mentality of protecting their own even when they make (massive) mistakes has got to go. Yeah, it is a hard job. Yeah, it means that police should be held to a higher standard of conduct than average Joe citizens. Yeah, it means that police need to accept that they face a certain amount of danger and risk -- danger that will make it hard to be calm, cool, and collected. But that's the job. Protect and serve the people, not themselves or the police department.

Until all the good cops (and there are lots of them, including some friends of mine) get together and make it clear that the actions of these bad cops are utterly unacceptable, things will continue to get worse.

Settle the fuck down there Social Justice Warrior...I said nothing personal to you so cool your jets. I am honestly getting tired of taking the sane, reasonable route in everything I do. I just got off facebook responding to one of those "233 blacks, 411 whites" posts that "show" cops don't kill more blacks...and I get flak for not defending cops. I come here, point out that Marah and his minions are full of shit on one point, and I get flak...fuck both polar sides.

With that said let us get into the meat of your tantrum. I never even implied, hinted, suggested or whispered that many police actions are somehow mitigated or diminished because things are better. In fact, that whole distraction you ranted on is irrelevant to the whole meaning of my post. What the point was is this--THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO INCENTIVE FOR A SIDE TO BECOME A BETTER GROUP WHEN THE OTHER SIDE NEVER ACKOWLEGES PROGRESS. This is why Democratic and Republican lawmakers are so polarized. Why cops and blacks are so polarized. Why religions are so polarized.

I mean if we talked to our children like we talk about this, we would seem pretty fucking stupid. "Hey Timmy! I know you improved your D to a C+, but fuck you! That's not good enough you shit head. You miswell be an F student in this house!" Yeah, see how little Timmy might not come around to his dad's way of thinking? I swear, you mention some positivity and people flip the fuck out...like we are selling out to the bad cops or some stupid shit. And this is exactly what Marah's point was and is. His words were clear---NO PROGRESS. (You could argue that he meant only that there has been no progress in the thin blue line but then you would have to be a really belligerent asshole who takes words out of context to fit their meaning...)

Next, you mention all the tax dollars our police force gets...BWAHAHAAHA! Holy fuck, and I am sure the education system is overflowing with money too! Just because the numbers are large doesn't mean the actual tax dollars are significant nor does it mean the money flows to the actual police either. Now this does bring up your very serious observation that I find worrisome as well...the militarization of police...unfortunately our politicians cut sweet deals with companies that make war toys, just like in the military, and basically give away huge percentages of the police "budget." This drastically reduces the actual money police have to do their jobs while lining the politicians' pockets with contributions later.

As far as the shooting one unarmed person per week comment you made that should give YOU some perspective of how utterly stupid the side you are on is. 52 deaths a year in this manner (Say if your hyperbolic statement was actually right instead of being smartass.) 39 thousand deaths happen as a result of car accidents. Do I minimize the deaths? No. Do I put them in perspective? Of course.

I personally think that the no snitch code to crimes, whether on the street or in the force, should be a crime. Nowhere should be safe, period.

Know what's scarier than being robbed at gunpoint? Knowing that there are police out there who see themselves as the judge and jury. There's a very good reason there's a judicial system bob, and you really should know all about that. Especially considering how many "bad cop" videos you show up in; you don't want those guys being judge and jury do you?

I'd really like to engage with you and try to convince you on this, so .. you accept that you're not perfect, right? Everyone makes mistakes - it's not an insult, we're just not perfect and we can misread things or misjudge things.. right? So if your goal as a cop is to deliver the safest society possible, you surely also want to protect society from any potential harm you might cause in your duties? I assume that you agree with these points, and so don't we agree that the best way you can do your job is by being unbiased, robotic almost? Doing exactly what is needed to prevent further harm and neutralise danger and deliver the parties to those who we have decided are best positioned to deliver the judgement? Because if you dole out the judgement yourself, you might be mistaken.

I hope we agree, and i'm sorry that i was rude in the first version of this comment. That doesn't help anyone.

Bad Cops, Bad Cops, what 'cha gonna do?

@SDGundamX

it is all good mate.
you vote however you wish,for whatever reasons you deem pertinent.

i do not identify so strongly with a video that it somehow represents me,or everything i stand for,and i have no issue if someone disagrees.though i always do respect when someone states WHY they downvoted.

which you did,and mad respect my man.

as i stated earlier i was fairly ignorant to a lot of this new flavor of social justice warrior.gamergate included.in fact,i still do find gamergate really that important in the larger context,though i am sure there are gamers who would disagree with me.

i found this video interesting in that it was addressing how the more radical and extreme elements were attempting to hijack public spaces by controlling language,and therefore dominate the conversation.

since i was not familiar with this particular youtubers stance on gamergate,nor followed his videos,i harbored zero bias on his conclusions.

in my opinion,this mans stance or political leanings in regards to gamergate is not enough of a valid reason to dismiss what he is laying down in this video.

what you are suggesting (and if i am reading your position wrong,please let me know),is that because this youtuber held a certain position on a related subject,devalues and dismisses his position on radical social justice warriors.

a good analogy is me pointing to the sky and stating "the sky is blue" and having my statement dismissed because you may disagree with my politics,religion or philosophy.

but that would not make my statement any less true.

i agree with you that it does not matter of someone is a narcissist or a special snowflake.it is the argument that matters.the IDEAS that should be examined for their veracity and clarity.

and yes,this youtuber makes certain assumptions that are not only irrelevant but extremely biased.

which brings me back to my main point.
freedom of speech and how these radicals attempt to impose their own selective bias by controlling the language we use to express ourselves and those very ideas that you and i find to important.

so while the radical right attempts to legislate morality and impose THEIR own narrow and subjective understandings on all of us.

the radical left is attempting to silence dissent and dialogue by controlling language by using this weird orwellian doublethink.

"zero tolerance for the intolerant" almost every college campus has something similar to this all over campus.

now THAT phrase is a brilliant example of orwellian doublethink.
definition of doublethink:The power to hold two completely contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accept both of them.

so my main point is in regards to freedom of speech and how the radical end of these social justice warriors are threatening that most basic and vital right.

did i get my point across?
well,the jury is still out,but i hope that at least i got a few people thinking and giving this situation a bit more scrutiny.

i am also attempting to address this phenom of binary thinking.
that because i post a video that criticizes the more radical elements of social justice warriors.this automatically translates to me being "anti-social justice warriors".

my recent posts on this matter have confused and troubled some sifters.because they had a certain mental image of who i was and because they may identify as a social justice warrior,my posts were offensive to them,and confusing.

now thankfully @Jinx spoke up and inquired about my reasons,because it appeared to him that i was behaving out of character.

but i am not.
i am,and always have been,about freedom,equality,fairness and justice.i apply that metric as evenly as i humanly can ( i make mistakes,of course).

bad ideas MUST be challenged and how this new batch of social justice warriors are behaving in order to further their agenda is a bad fucking idea.

does this mean trash ALL people who are socially conscious and wish to create a better world by fighting injustice,racism and bigotry?

of COURSE not!
but i do blame those well-intentioned people for not standing up this new form of bully groupthink.just because someone identifies as a social justice warrior does not mean that they get a free pass just for being part of a group.

so just like i blame the "good" cops who stand by and allow the "bad" cops to break the law,abuse their authority and behave like fascists with impunity.they are just as responsible as those cops who cross the line.

so while the intentions may be good,the execution is a horrible lovecraftian nightmare,with far reaching implications that affect us all and can be easily abused.

freedom of speech is good.
disagreement is healthy.
we cannot be so allergic to conflict that we shut down the conversation,and all reside in our own little echo chambers where everybody is agreeing and nobody is questioning.

as a society there is grave danger in that practice.

and that is really what i am talking about.
thanks for commenting my man.
as you may have figured out.this is a fairly important subject to me.
stay awesome!

Seems to me there are good reasons the Seattle police dept has been putting out these videos the last couple years. I assume it's A PR thing in their attempt to combat the reality that their dept is one of the worst in the country when it comes to police brutality (based on the need for the feds to investigate the dept due to abuse) and how the internal overwatch won't punish bad cops in Seattle.

A more realistic picture of the Seattle Police Dept.
http://truthvoice.com/2015/05/what-two-programmers-have-revealed-so-far-about-seattle-police-officers-who-are-still-in-uniform/

You know its a HUGE issue when the Feds investigate your police force.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Feds-findings-in-Seattle-Police-abuse-2407378.php

Clarify. You have a problem with them having the right, or just a problem with they exorcising that right? Please explain the difference...as a right only exists if exorcised.
EDIT: You say you answered my question 'should they have the right to fire him', but I looked and can't find that answer. You answered 'they DO have the right', but never answered if you think they SHOULD have the right...which it seems you think they should not, because you have a 'problem' with them using that right....right?

For it to not be 'fair' for him to lose his job, you must assume he has a right to his job...he does not. It is absolutely fair to fire someone for any reason you see fit if you own or run the company...as happened here. What's the issue?

His family has not publicly shown a penchant towards racism or other intolerably intolerant behavior that I know of, they can probably find their own jobs.

Yes, it's OK, and normal, for future employers to investigate potential applicants and disqualify them if they show insanely poor judgement publicly like this guy did. You think that's not OK?

Should his wife divorce him...she probably agrees with him, but if not, perhaps she should. Being married to a racist, antagonistic idiot sounds terrible if you aren't one yourself.
Should his kids shun him, no, should they teach him at every opportunity how backwards his thinking is until he changes? Yes.
Should he die hungry and alone in an alley, no, no one should, but it happens none the less.

Laugh away and fictionalize if you wish, but the terms clearly apply.

I'm not hiring bad cops. If I were, I could put the resources in to investigate applicants for them. With 5 VS pages of 'bad cop', and 6 pages of 'police abuse' alone, it's quite a job, one I don't intend to take up to satisfy you, but I'm satisfied any competent HR person could find out just about anything they've done that might matter. If I felt like spending an hour doing it, I could find 99% of them on VS....I don't.
Often applicants are required to list their accounts (facebook, twitter, etc) so they can be looked at easily. And there are sites that record those sites so even erased posts can be investigated.
So yes, it's eternal, now isn't it? I won't remember this guy in less than a week, as there's no reason to, fortunately or unfortunately, employers have resources and reasons I don't.

I never said it was 'justice' that he would lose his job and be mostly unemployable forever, I said it was IRONIC, since he was lambasting people on the video for being 'lazy' and 'taking his tax dollars', which is what he'll be doing now. I agree, it's a little much that he's mostly unemployable for life now, but as I said, he just needs to find an employer that's willing to be labeled, at best, a racist sympathizer if not racist themselves...he should try Trump.

but now you're changing the question on me.

First, you asked if the company should have the right, and I answered that. But now you're asking if I have a problem with it..and obviously, I do.

Fortunately, those two things don't conflict. Nuance is a bitch, ain't it?

And I didn't ask you if it was fair to expose people. I asked you if it was fair for the poor schlub who is probably already working paycheck to paycheck to LOSE HIS JOB over this nonsense. Public ridicule is one thing...losing one's livelyhood is quite another. Not only he will be hurt for a long time over this, but his family probably will be too.

And hey, let's take this to the logical conclusion. If it's ok for his current employer to fire him. Isn't it alright for his future employers to know about this? Let's make it so that this guy should never hold a job ever again. Should his wife divorce him over this? should his kids shun him? Should he die, hungry and alone in an alley? Where's the line here?

Don't use fictional terms like "free market" and "informed consumer" and apply them to RL. It's very laughable.

If what happens on the internet is so eternal, without looking, name all the names of ALL the bad cops who have killed unarmed people in all the bad cop videos you've posted on VS. Could you even spot them in a crowd? Those cops certainly have done far more damage than this racist has, so it should be easy.

Not so eternal, now is it? You won't remember this guy in less than a year.

You're confusing justice with revenge.