As long as a majority of cops will stand in a 'blue wall' to protect the worst ones, like happened in this case, yes. When a majority stand against this behavior and call it out publicly when they see it, I'll judge them accordingly.
If a majority of 'me' did the same, I would expect my group to be judged the same. (that's a large part of why I've never been a 'team player', the team expects you to protect/stand with the team, even when they're totally in the wrong)

You don't think that all police officers occasionally witness other officers using too much force, or arresting people without cause, or otherwise abusing their authority? Fair. I cannot assert to what extent police break the law while on duty. My guess is far higher than yours and that's fine.

But it's pretty clear that police don't rat out other police, or if they do, no officer gets arrested. I'd be surprised to hear of more than a few cases in modern history of one police officer choosing to arrest another police officer for an offence they witnessed them commit in the line of duty. The "Blue Wall" and all that. They protect themselves.

As for my mistaking something, the layers of what comment refers to what comment have gone way over my head.

Amazing. Yet more piece-of-shit cops and a cowardly judge (or whatever she is) firmly behind that blue wall. Rights violated by the accused pervert by forcing the woman to recant in the face of arrest, and a fucking judge sits there and ignores it. Absolutely amazing, but not surprising (if that makes sense). Cops are lying sacks of shit and judges protect and give the benefit of a doubt to these fuckers in courts all over this country. God, I hate cops.

You don't have to be Republican to be afraid of the police force. The police have brought on this assholery by, if not directly abusing people's rights, harboring the members who do behind the blue wall.>> ^liverpoolfc:

You claim Police stopping people for random breath testing will lead to all that paranoid crap i'm not going to bother repeating.
If you think police performing random traffic stops to catch drunk-drivers is a dangerous thing I feel sorry for you and the state America is in.
I'm not British but i'd put money on you being a Republican. I'm not afraid of my Government or police force - clearly you are.
>> ^budzos:
It's not a strawman.. nowhere did I say that those things were equilvalent. In fact I was illustrating a vector of unreasonable search and seizure, from one plateau of disreason to another. I see from your handle that you could possibly be British, which would explain your comfort with the government's head up your arse.
Who's to say a drunk driver hasn't killed one, or more, of my friends at various times? Being against random stops is not being pro drunk driving.
>> ^liverpoolfc:
Bahahah nice straw men. Why not just eliminate the police force entirely, speed limits, laws etc. No one has any business telling you what you can or can't do right???
Wonder if you'd feel the same way if a drink driver killed your mother, father, brother, sister, husband, wife, son or daughter.
>> ^budzos:
I didn't watch the clip but I do not agree with random road-checks for any reason. I don't care if the premise is that you're making the roads safer... I think Benjamin Franklin has a quote about that.
If the government thought they could get away with it, they'd institute random house searches. Why wouldn't you want your house searched unless you have something to hide!?
What about forced screenings/vaccinations for various diseases? I'm sure that's in the public/economic interest?
Let's just give our whole bodies and souls over to the government daddy to tell us where we can go and what we can consume at all times. It's good for the economy.

Upvoted for lack of taste from commentors. I thought the intro was a good setup, shit tons better then the blue wall of text youtube videos have been going with for the past 6 years. I was actually impressed at the quality of the costume, not exactly something you can buy at target. As for the music, it was also up my ally. I belive a more accurate term is gothic rock. Either way I am a total sucker when you combine female vocals with orchestral rock.

As for the content, a mixed bag for the most part. Some of these clips are quite anchient, and I would have prefered slow motion out takes to have been spliced in tigher and shorter, as to quickly get to the next clip. also I had pretty much seen all the videos in the front of the video that got slow motion replays as they have been in animated gif form for years, but many of the videos near the end were new to me and didn't get replays. The jack knife and speeding van head shot was insane. Oh yea and I am still trying to figure out that one with the baby.

What about the poor acting? ;}

Check out 1:13 - two different/distinct shades of blue.

- You can hear the fan blowing the leaves of the fake trees

- The trees in the background only blow around right before his reporting, or during the reporting. During the bloopers they are more-or-less still.

- 4:05 "We can't show you anything else than what you're seeing right now, because of military regulations"

Yeah, okay buddy.

I could go on, but I'll just post a bit from the video description:

The first part of this video shows the stage set he was on, and he was clowning around with fellow CNN staff. The Saudi Arabian "hotel" in the background were fake palm trees and a blue wall in a studio. This clip was leaked by CNN staff.

The second part of this video was a live CNN satellite feed recorded onto VHS showing the final cut. Charles Jaco was wearing a different jacket, but he had the same act. The acting was terrible as Charles Jaco wore a gas mask, and his fellow correspondent Carl Rochelle wore a helmet. The sirens and missile sound effects are part of the stage set. The camera never pans out or shows the sky.

Because a large part of the police culture is standing behind your "brother" (the blue wall), no matter what crime he has committed, police would be livid if their department didn't stand behind them and do their best to hide evidence that hurts the police case or make some up that helps. Where have you been? That's been the norm my entire life, more so every year it seems.
To all NON police, it seems obvious that they should shun him. To police, it seems he needs their help and it's their duty to be there for their brother in any way they can.
My point was that there is NO way for the department to look good in this situation, and they have to decide who they want to please more, the public or themselves. Shunning him (and prosecuting him to the fullest extent of the law, and finning him whatever amount the girl wins against the dept. in court) is the proper option, but it is not without pitfalls, and not likely.
I'm not a team player, so I could never be an officer. My partner would shoot me in the back for turning him in for stealing groceries. (also, my IQ is over the 110 maximum, and I don't like telling others what to do, both make me ineligible).

Oh!
I moved in and they had already painted the walls that colour...
but i can take credit for my (somber?) blue walls in my room, which I made 80's two-tone with warped lines around the windows and walls, evident in this photo:
http://pod.ca/photos/gallery/2003-10-31-halloween/hallo_037