60 Minutes Wonders Why Chicago Police Doing Less

[Remmus]

19 minutes ago, stevenash said:

And you know for a fact that "tank acquisition" came at the expense of roads and schools?  Am hearing that often this is military surplus that comes very very cheaply to law enforcement

It's bad "optics" ...Hillary told me.

[stevenash]

11 minutes ago, Remmus said:

It's bad "optics" ...Hillary told me.

Once again, " appearances" and "intentions" matter more than facts.  
AS for Hillary advising you on optics, she possibly should have considered that prior to her deplorables speech

[Remmus]

This was an excellent investigative piece done by 60 Minutes.  A retired cop sure experienced some hate for not keeping quiet about what he saw.  Code of Silence?   His testimony sure refutes @tvc184 belief of no existence of this practice.  Did Richard Wooten do the right thing or should he have kept quite?

Garry McCarthy: Officers are under attack. That’s how they feel, right. That’s how they feel in this environment, and they’re not going to put themselves and their families in jeopardy.

Frustration among cops deepened with a new order to be more selective about who they stopped, and write a two-page detailed report for every one. It was the result of a threat by the American Civil Liberties Union to sue the department for racial profiling.

Bill Whitaker: It doesn’t seem that filling out a two page report is that onerous.

Garry McCarthy: Oh, sure it is.

Bill Whitaker: It is?

Garry McCarthy: It could take you up to 45 minutes and one of the things in policing that we’ve been trying to do is knock back the amount of time that officers spend doing paperwork and get them out doing more proactive things to prevent crime.

There are reasons for the scrutiny. Since 2004, the city has paid out more than a half-billion dollars in settlements for police misconduct. A task force appointed by the mayor found evidence of racial bias, and reported that nearly 90 percent of police shootings involved minorities.

Richard Wooten: The Chicago Police is not racist, but I do know and do believe that there are racist police officers in the Chicago Police Department.

Richard Wooten broke ranks and talked to the mayor’s task force about what he saw during his 23 years as a Chicago cop.

Richard Wooten: They put me in this car with this guy, and my first couple of stops, I saw this guy stop a black guy. You know, several black guys on the street and they literally almost got strip searched right in the middle of the street. And I’m looking like “Wow.” Is this the way things are supposed to be done?

Bill Whitaker: You were called a traitor for speaking out?

Richard Wooten: Oh yes. At my retirement party when I got up to speak, a group of white boys in the back, they booed me, called me traitor, snitch.

Bill Whitaker: Was the booing the extent of it?

Richard Wooten: No. I went into the restroom, and I was confronted by a couple of the guys in the restroom about, you know, my position and how could I do that after 20-some years of service? But then as I’m looking into the urinal I see my picture that they’ve torn out of the program is in each urinal.

Bill Whitaker: They put your picture in the urinals?

Richard Wooten: My picture in the urinals. But I wasn’t angry Bill.

Bill Whitaker: You weren’t angry?

Richard Wooten: I was not angry. Because that just told me how dysfunctional we have of officers we have on the police department.

[Remmus]

I see your Michael Brown and raise you a Richard Wooten.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, Remmus said:

This was an excellent investigative piece done by 60 Minutes.  A retired cop sure experienced some hate for not keeping quiet about what he saw.  Code of Silence?   His testimony sure refutes @tvc184 belief of no existence of this practice.  Did Richard Wooten do the right thing or should he have kept quite?

Garry McCarthy: Officers are under attack. That’s how they feel, right. That’s how they feel in this environment, and they’re not going to put themselves and their families in jeopardy.

Frustration among cops deepened with a new order to be more selective about who they stopped, and write a two-page detailed report for every one. It was the result of a threat by the American Civil Liberties Union to sue the department for racial profiling.

Bill Whitaker: It doesn’t seem that filling out a two page report is that onerous.

Garry McCarthy: Oh, sure it is.

Bill Whitaker: It is?

Garry McCarthy: It could take you up to 45 minutes and one of the things in policing that we’ve been trying to do is knock back the amount of time that officers spend doing paperwork and get them out doing more proactive things to prevent crime.

There are reasons for the scrutiny. Since 2004, the city has paid out more than a half-billion dollars in settlements for police misconduct. A task force appointed by the mayor found evidence of racial bias, and reported that nearly 90 percent of police shootings involved minorities.

Richard Wooten: The Chicago Police is not racist, but I do know and do believe that there are racist police officers in the Chicago Police Department.

Richard Wooten broke ranks and talked to the mayor’s task force about what he saw during his 23 years as a Chicago cop.

Richard Wooten: They put me in this car with this guy, and my first couple of stops, I saw this guy stop a black guy. You know, several black guys on the street and they literally almost got strip searched right in the middle of the street. And I’m looking like “Wow.” Is this the way things are supposed to be done?

Bill Whitaker: You were called a traitor for speaking out?

Richard Wooten: Oh yes. At my retirement party when I got up to speak, a group of white boys in the back, they booed me, called me traitor, snitch.

Bill Whitaker: Was the booing the extent of it?

Richard Wooten: No. I went into the restroom, and I was confronted by a couple of the guys in the restroom about, you know, my position and how could I do that after 20-some years of service? But then as I’m looking into the urinal I see my picture that they’ve torn out of the program is in each urinal.

Bill Whitaker: They put your picture in the urinals?

Richard Wooten: My picture in the urinals. But I wasn’t angry Bill.

Bill Whitaker: You weren’t angry?

Richard Wooten: I was not angry. Because that just told me how dysfunctional we have of officers we have on the police department.

23 years and this is it?

Sure doesn't seem like an epidemic. 

[tvc184]

1 hour ago, Remmus said:

This was an excellent investigative piece done by 60 Minutes.  A retired cop sure experienced some hate for not keeping quiet about what he saw.  Code of Silence?   His testimony sure refutes @tvc184 belief of no existence of this practice.  Did Richard Wooten do the right thing or should he have kept quite?

Either you have reading comprehension problems, you make up your own "facts" as you go along or maybe just poor memory. 

You cannot find a single post that I have made in any forum that says such practices do not exist. I have never said that in my career and never will but here you are claiming that I have said that. 

I am thinking there may be some validity to this being an alter ego identity. 

 I have said that the blue wall of silence, as is claimed by many people, does not exist.  The idea that all officers will cover all officers or even anywhere near a substantial percentage of officers is bogus. 

 Just as in any profession or group of people, there will always be crooked police officers. 

 Some of the stuff in the 60 Minutes piece is pure nonsense.  Things like statistics on race or money paid out by cities is drawing a conclusion with nothing to back up the conclusions. 

 I don't know if it can be found anymore but if you want to see nonsense on statistics you should read something called a fair roads standard back from the 1990s. LULAC, NAACP and ACLU wanted stops by police officers of minorities not to reflect only by population but by number of drivers licenses issues. That goes by the utter nonsense that everyone driving has a valid license.  You could come ride Patrol with me and I can stop several people in a row that have no drivers license.  According to the fair road standard this does not exist and I am imagining things. 

 You are either intentionally or unintentionally making up things and why le you did not make up the article for 60 minutes, it proves absolutely nothing.  It certainly does not "refute" anything. 

[tvc184]

 I guess all members of the clergy are child molesters.  This is very easy to prove because several years ago the Catholic Church admitted that they had a problem with pedophile priests and even covered up the information.  Buy your reasoning anyone in the clergy must be a pedophile or at least an overwhelming majority. 

[Remmus]

12 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

23 years and this is it?

Sure doesn't seem like an epidemic. 

Maybe we have 23 years of too many keeping quiet.  Also, 60mins was focused on Chicago.  You don't think he's the only cop to be shunned?  

[Remmus]

11 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Either you have reading comprehension problems, you make up your own "facts" as you go along or maybe just poor memory. 

You cannot find a single post that I have made in any forum that says such practices do not exist. I have never said that in my career and never will but here you are claiming that I have said that. 

I am thinking there may be some validity to this being an alter ego identity. 

 I have said that the blue wall of silence, as is claimed by many people, does not exist.  The idea that all officers will cover all officers or even anywhere near a substantial percentage of officers is bogus. 

 Just as in any profession or group of people, there will always be crooked police officers. 

 Some of the stuff in the 60 Minutes piece is pure nonsense.  Things like statistics on race or money paid out by cities is drawing a conclusion with nothing to back up the conclusions. 

 I don't know if it can be found anymore but if you want to see nonsense on statistics you should read something called a fair roads standard back from the 1990s. LULAC, NAACP and ACLU wanted stops by police officers of minorities not to reflect only by population but by number of drivers licenses issues. That goes by the utter nonsense that everyone driving has a valid license.  You could come ride Patrol with me and I can stop several people in a row that have no drivers license.  According to the fair road standard this does not exist and I am imagining things. 

 You are either intentionally or unintentionally making up things and why le you did not make up the article for 60 minutes, it proves absolutely nothing.  It certainly does not "refute" anything. 

I may not be the only one with comprehension problems. With all due respect, you might be overly hopeful or delusional.  Maybe your department is the beacon of true professionalism.

[Remmus]

11 hours ago, tvc184 said:

 I guess all members of the clergy are child molesters.  This is very easy to prove because several years ago the Catholic Church admitted that they had a problem with pedophile priests and even covered up the information.  Buy your reasoning anyone in the clergy must be a pedophile or at least an overwhelming majority. 

Of course not, my dad is a minister.  That doesn't dismiss what's happened.   Just because we have 10,000 kids molested instead of 10 million doesn't mean the issue isn't serious.  Percentage wise of course the number is low.  So I guess we should accept that .05% of kids will have to deal with molestation.  

[LumRaiderFan]

10 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Maybe we have 23 years of too many keeping quiet.  Also, 60mins was focused on Chicago.  You don't think he's the only cop to be shunned?  

You seem to take this side and run with it.  If the story is true, do you have any interest in the others cop's stories...or any interest in what prompted the guys to be stopped in the first place.  I doubt any of that interests you as much as this one side of the story.

[Remmus]

12 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

You seem to take this side and run with it.  If the story is true, do you have any interest in the others cop's stories...or any interest in what prompted the guys to be stopped in the first place.  I doubt any of that interests you as much as this one side of the story.

Of course, but there's already plenty in the conversation that have the cop's side covered.  I'm pushing the other side of the argument to help balance the conversation.  The 60min story showed an officer that was struggling with a perp and fearful of pulling her weapon in light of all the current tension.  She winded up very hurt with some brain injury. As a sideline quarterback I would have pulled my daggone gun and said "I'll shoot" and see if the perp calmed down.  She had one arm free to pull her weapon.  Her partner was really spectating (based on limited video) and didn't jump in until late in the game. 

[LumRaiderFan]

57 minutes ago, Remmus said:

Of course, but there's already plenty in the conversation that have the cop's side covered.  I'm pushing the other side of the argument to help balance the conversation.  The 60min story showed an officer that was struggling with a perp and fearful of pulling her weapon in light of all the current tension.  She winded up very hurt with some brain injury. As a sideline quarterback I would have pulled my daggone gun and said "I'll shoot" and see if the perp calmed down.  She had one arm free to pull her weapon.  Her partner was really spectating (based on limited video) and didn't jump in until late in the game. 

Maybe the conversation doesn't need balance...could it be the police are in the right almost always and the argument condemning them doesn't deserve balance?

[Remmus]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

You seem to take this side and run with it.  If the story is true, do you have any interest in the others cop's stories...or any interest in what prompted the guys to be stopped in the first place.  I doubt any of that interests you as much as this one side of the story.

You'd be wrong.  I do care about the cops side.  Understanding both sides is where the solution lies.

[stevenash]

1 hour ago, Remmus said:

Of course, but there's already plenty in the conversation that have the cop's side covered.  I'm pushing the other side of the argument to help balance the conversation.  The 60min story showed an officer that was struggling with a perp and fearful of pulling her weapon in light of all the current tension.  She winded up very hurt with some brain injury. As a sideline quarterback I would have pulled my daggone gun and said "I'll shoot" and see if the perp calmed down.  She had one arm free to pull her weapon.  Her partner was really spectating (based on limited video) and didn't jump in until late in the game. 

Then  we can expect you to "balance the situtation" by speaking on behalf of the airport shooter in Ft. Lauderdale?

[Remmus]

9 minutes ago, stevenash said:

Then  we can expect you to "balance the situtation" by speaking on behalf of the airport shooter in Ft. Lauderdale?

Not with the information we have so far.  I'm sure you'll find a bleeding heart liberal to find a way to defend the actions of this nut.  Really can't compare the two situations IMO.  You'd have to assume that all unarmed people that were hurt/killed were actually criminals intending to do harm.  

[tvc184]

17 hours ago, Remmus said:

I may not be the only one with comprehension problems. With all due respect, you might be overly hopeful or delusional.  Maybe your department is the beacon of true professionalism.

The idea that a majority of officers will cover for other officers is nonsense. In response to millions of police contacts per month and 12-13 million arrests per year, people point out individual incidents. You cannot have millions of contacts per month and not have something that is wrong but what percentage out of those millions? 

[tvc184]

17 hours ago, Remmus said:

Of course not, my dad is a minister.  That doesn't dismiss what's happened.   Just because we have 10,000 kids molested instead of 10 million doesn't mean the issue isn't serious.  Percentage wise of course the number is low.  So I guess we should accept that .05% of kids will have to deal with molestation.  

I was referring to your logic. You can point out an incident or two or 100 and make a million police officers guilty by association. You would not likely do the same for any other profession or group.