Ham-milton
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2007
- Messages
- 5,746
^ absolutely.
He'd get SSI, or SSDI, though.
He'd get SSI, or SSDI, though.
-
DPMC Moderators: tryptakid
No Charges for Police Officer Accused of Stealing Heroin from Evidence Room
- Thread starter phr
- Start date
phr
Bluelighter
Not standing trial due to his situation is bullshit.
goatofthenever
Bluelighter
Disgusting, I hate hypocrisy.
Fausty
Bluelighter
I did time with several inmates who had severe schizoid disorders - so bad they couldn't be in general population, and were only intermittently able to understand the concept of prison, etc. They were in that state when charged, tried, and convicted - most are meth cases, as they seem to find a degree of self-medication using the amphetamines. None have access to medical care on the outside: no insurance, you're fucked. They got charged like anyone else, and convicted of course. Participate in their own defense? They couldn't even consistently manage to keep their spot in the chow line all the way up until they got their tray. They got lost on the way to their cells, and ended up in the library. Often amazingly perceptive people on one level, they still couldn't do some things that the rest of us consider routine. They're doing time, just like any other criminal.
A friend of mine robbed a bank when he was in the midst of a 20 day binge of 1/2 gallon of vodka a day - when caught, he was in intensive care for a week and barely survived the initial detox. Hospitalized for several weeks after that. . . until transferred to FDC SeaTac. Plead guilty and got 18 years.
Some guys have IQ measures that are sufficiently low that they are completely unable to understand the entire legal process, at all. I helped a guy charged with ACC / felon in possession double-whammie. In and out of prison all his adult life, minor drug charges mostly. Despite my best efforts to explain the "enhancement" concepts in sentencing, he always got stuck at "but it wasn't my gun and I didn't even know it was in the car - they can't put me away for doin' nothing!" Tex ended up going to trial as he refused to plead guilty, not understanding that 15 years was the absolute minimum he could ever get for that charge. I'll never forget his face the day he got back from court. He asked me to explain what the judge "really meant" at sentencing.
She'd said "life," but of course that wasn't what she meant - Tex was used to being confused about stuff in court, and he just assumed he was confused here, as well. No, she meant life. Without parole. Explaining that to him was one of the most surrealistically unbelievable things I've ever done. He just didn't understand. He didn't have the cognitive abilities to understand, not the trial or the charge or any of it. It would be like trying to "explain" 11-dimensional string theory to me, and then holding me accountable if I messed up the tensor calculus somehow.
So, yeah, call me more than a little skeptical that a double-standard might be at work. I don't have enough info to make that claim, specifically, in the extant case under discussion. I do know, however, that folks lacking the mental capacity to understand their crime - let alone participate in their own defense - get charged and convicted every day of the week in this country. So, unless this thieving cop is still in a coma, I wonder if there's just a hair of a chance that the excuse of mental impairment isn't more likely to stick for him than it would be for a black kid injured in a shooting in some downtown drug zone, and charged even though he can barely sit up in his new wheelchair. Call me suspicious, that's all.
Peace,
Fausty
A friend of mine robbed a bank when he was in the midst of a 20 day binge of 1/2 gallon of vodka a day - when caught, he was in intensive care for a week and barely survived the initial detox. Hospitalized for several weeks after that. . . until transferred to FDC SeaTac. Plead guilty and got 18 years.
Some guys have IQ measures that are sufficiently low that they are completely unable to understand the entire legal process, at all. I helped a guy charged with ACC / felon in possession double-whammie. In and out of prison all his adult life, minor drug charges mostly. Despite my best efforts to explain the "enhancement" concepts in sentencing, he always got stuck at "but it wasn't my gun and I didn't even know it was in the car - they can't put me away for doin' nothing!" Tex ended up going to trial as he refused to plead guilty, not understanding that 15 years was the absolute minimum he could ever get for that charge. I'll never forget his face the day he got back from court. He asked me to explain what the judge "really meant" at sentencing.
She'd said "life," but of course that wasn't what she meant - Tex was used to being confused about stuff in court, and he just assumed he was confused here, as well. No, she meant life. Without parole. Explaining that to him was one of the most surrealistically unbelievable things I've ever done. He just didn't understand. He didn't have the cognitive abilities to understand, not the trial or the charge or any of it. It would be like trying to "explain" 11-dimensional string theory to me, and then holding me accountable if I messed up the tensor calculus somehow.
So, yeah, call me more than a little skeptical that a double-standard might be at work. I don't have enough info to make that claim, specifically, in the extant case under discussion. I do know, however, that folks lacking the mental capacity to understand their crime - let alone participate in their own defense - get charged and convicted every day of the week in this country. So, unless this thieving cop is still in a coma, I wonder if there's just a hair of a chance that the excuse of mental impairment isn't more likely to stick for him than it would be for a black kid injured in a shooting in some downtown drug zone, and charged even though he can barely sit up in his new wheelchair. Call me suspicious, that's all.
Peace,
Fausty
frizzantik
Bluelight Crew
Fausty, the guy has been in the hospital since November.. I know what you're saying (and yes too many people who should be given medical treatment are sent to jail) but if the guy is practically a vegetable what is the point of charging him? There is very little information available but I really doubt the DA would pass up an opportunity to prosecute someone messing with evidence.. especially evidence which just happens to be heroin.
There are plenty of examples of police protecting their own, but this doesn't even seem like a case of it, and even if it is it, I don't think it's one to get worked up over. Maybe if he had shot somebody or something major. Really there was no victim at all since he stole evidence which was to be destroyed anyways. If this was anyone but a cop people here would be pissed if he was charged lol
There are plenty of examples of police protecting their own, but this doesn't even seem like a case of it, and even if it is it, I don't think it's one to get worked up over. Maybe if he had shot somebody or something major. Really there was no victim at all since he stole evidence which was to be destroyed anyways. If this was anyone but a cop people here would be pissed if he was charged lol
