Search found 2 matches

by cb1000rider
Mon Sep 08, 2014 12:59 pm
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Indiana Supreme Court - 'Officer Testimony' > Video Evidence
Replies: 21
Views: 1885

Re: Indiana Supreme Court - 'Officer Testimony' > Video Evid

C-dub wrote: If Texas were to pass a law that all traffic citation fines go into some kind of state fund instead of to the city the officer is employed by or where the infraction occurred, as Charles has stated should happen, then I would begin to believe that an officer has no incentive to not tell the truth for traffic violations. Yeah, I've been a victim of this type of "lack of incentive to not tell the truth."
I think that re-directing the underlying funds that are associated with citations might encourage PDs to police for safety and effectiveness rather than revenue. It'd probably put an end to municipalities that write more citations than they have citizens.

I believe in traffic enforcement if it's safety related.


I don't think it would impact a LEOs propensity to tell the truth on the stand. I don't see how that's a revenue issue - it's not like they're paid a bonus for more citations. I believe there is an issue with truthfulness on the stand.... An officer that did something he/she shouldn't - has big liability issues in a court room. So choosing a course of action such as an arrest really needs to be followed all the way through to the end.

Cameras worn by law enforcement would put an end to a lot of this and would protect good officers from bad guys who otherwise get away with things that they shouldn't. Use of force goes down, sometimes by significant amounts. Someone remind me why this isn't mandatory for all departments?
by cb1000rider
Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:08 pm
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Indiana Supreme Court - 'Officer Testimony' > Video Evidence
Replies: 21
Views: 1885

Re: Indiana Supreme Court - 'Officer Testimony' > Video Evid

Good lesson. I've seen a few cases (real life) where it's officer vs public testimony. And DA's argue that the officer has no incentive to not tell the truth, while a defendant has a great reason not to tell the truth. This is an immediate shift from guilty until PROVEN innocent. Seeing a judge accept that scared the heck out of me.

On the other hand, a camera can only capture so much perspective and a minor little action out of the field of view can totally alter an interaction...

What do I take away? More cameras = better protections for good guys.

Return to “Indiana Supreme Court - 'Officer Testimony' > Video Evidence”