I can't HEEEEAR you!

There was a big rally in the Wisconsin state capital recently to protest the fatal shooting of an unarmed African-American youth by a Madison policeman responding to a disturbance.  Tragic....absolutely.  But was the shooting justified or not?  I don't know, and you don't know, and neither does anyone attending the above protest rally.  

Maybe I missed something.  Are they protesting this particular shooting or just the idea of unequal enforcement of the law, "profiling", and discrimination in general?  If it's the latter, why aren't these protests year round?  After all, those injustices happen year round.  Fact.

K and I have gone round and round about this.  She says I'll never "get it" because I'm an old white guy.  I don't understand what there is to "get"?  Until an investigation is complete and the results released, no one can say who was right or wrong. 

What the protesters should be demanding is an impartial, detailed, transparent investigation.  To their credit the State of Wisconsin has a law that says local police cannot investigate a fatal shooting by one of their own.  Otherwise the potential is there for the local mounties to cover for a friend, someone they know well, worked side-by-side with, who they've shared meals and personal milestones with.  A distant third party needs to be the investigating body.  This should be a law everywhere.

And how many of these tragedies do we need to go through before we mandate all responding police officers be equipped with body cameras?  I'm sure the cost is an issue in some cities, but with the way our federal government throws around blank checks, surely they could subsidize local police departments who can't afford them on their own.  It seems like the absolute best way to know how a shooting actually went down.

You can't crucify the cop without knowing the facts.  TV news and non-eyewitness accounts are NOT facts.  That just isn't how our justice system works.  WAIT....come to think of it, why not just decide guilt or innocence by popular opinion?  BRILLIANT!  

Put the parties involved, dead or alive, on a stage with (former game show host now judge) Chuck Woolery.  He could hold a sign over each guy's head, one at a time, and let an applause-o-meter decide.  No stinkin' facts, no grubby lawyers to muck things up.  Just up or down....5 minutes....wham, bam.  Done! 

  

 Then, if you lose, Chuck can take you out back (assuming you're not already dead) and shoot you.

Our Founding Fathers would be so proud of our thoughtfulness and efficiency.  :)

S

Perry Mason it wasn't

For 18 years I served on my city's Civil Service Commission overseeing the police and fire departments.  In the event of a dispute between a police officer or firefighter and their chief, we heard the issues and rendered a decision.  These disputes usually involved hiring, firing, discipline, and promotions.

I remember one instance when the Police Chief "indefinitely suspended" (fired) an officer, and the officer felt this was an unfair and excessive punishment.  We heard the case and agreed, giving him some time off without pay, but allowed him to keep his job.  

I later heard the Police Chief was furious with us for our decision.  The city's Director of Civil Service calmed him down by telling him that regardless of what the Chief knew to be the facts, the City Attorney on that day, in that hearing, did NOT prove the city's case, and therefore our decision was correct.

This sounds like what might have happened in the George Zimmerman case in Florida, too.  Zimmerman was, IMO, an idiot.  He should never have been armed while on citizen patrol (a huge no-no) and he should never have confronted Trayvon Martin.  He should have made the call and waited.  Shoulda, woulda....

Nevertheless, during the course of the trial the state did NOT prove their case.  Too much of their crucial testimony was refuted by credible defense witnesses.  Based on the evidence presented there was not "proof beyond a reasonable doubt", regardless of what really might have happened that night.  

I think this is probably why the local police chief and DA didn't charge Zimmerman immediately....they didn't have enough evidence to go to court with.  This is what happens when popular opinion instead of solid evidence moves prosecution forward.  

I hope cool heads prevail and the city stays calm after the "not guilty" decision.  The thoughtful jurors did their job.  The system worked.

S