Something has got to be done about the police.

It's just getting ridiculous. There has to be national standards created for policing. That's all there is to it.

Police pressured him to confess to a murder that never happened. Now, Fontana will pay him $900,000​

The city of Fontana has agreed to pay nearly $900,000 to settle a federal lawsuit filed by a man who said police pressured him to falsely confess to a murder that never happened.

During a 17-hour interrogation in August 2018, Fontana Police Department officers questioned Thomas Perez Jr. about the disappearance of his father, whom Perez had reported missing. Officers alleged Perez had murdered his father and, when Perez denied the accusation, officers tried to convince him that he had forgotten the crime, according to a federal lawsuit, court records and video of the interrogation.

Throughout their lengthy questioning of Perez, officers used a variety of tactics aimed at goading him into confessing. They brought his dog into the interrogation room, told him the dog had walked through blood and would be sent away to be euthanized. They drove Perez to a dirt lot and asked him to walk around in search of his dad’s body. They told him that his father’s body was in a morgue.

“You murdered your dad,” one of the officers said, according to video of the interrogation. “Daddy’s dead because of you.”

At the 16-hour mark, Perez told police that he had gotten into an altercation with his father and had stabbed him.

But a major problem with that confession soon emerged: Perez’s father was alive and safe.

The Founders of this country avoided creating the monster of too much power at the top to avoid mistakes in the European world in which a sedated power monger could have a rival killed at the snap of his fingers. We therefore were preceded by wise men who had high regard for each state to determine urban police policies, and many states went further by allowing state counties and cities to govern police issues. Each area has its own policies, practices, and needs. It wouldn't be a united governance should we deny local policies, considering the people of an area that spends the most money to control safety in arctic winters or patrols sunburned roads with different kinds of heat-resistant pavements in desert climate states. It pays to have local areas choosing policies the people in their zone like and need.
 
The Founders of this country avoided creating the monster of too much power at the top to avoid mistakes in the European world in which a sedated power monger could have a rival killed at the snap of his fingers. We therefore were preceded by wise men who had high regard for each state to determine urban police policies, and many states went further by allowing state counties and cities to govern police issues. Each area has its own policies, practices, and needs. It wouldn't be a united governance should we deny local policies, considering the people of an area that spends the most money to control safety in arctic winters or patrols sunburned roads with different kinds of heat-resistant pavements in desert climate states. It pays to have local areas choosing policies the people in their zone like and need.
BS. They created a centralized goverment because the Articles of Confederation that gave states the most power failed.
 
Last edited:
It’s racist to call out a middle aged white guy for pretending to be black? Haha

Haha well not surprised you are hearing defending him, since he is in your cult
The problem here is that I'm not what you say. And you believe some white idiot who can show no proof of his claim. Even worse is that you cosign with racists who believe blacks are just happy with the way America treats us.
 
”Several parts of the world” doesn’t indicate “everyone“, now does it? Liar.

Are you all caught up now? You can go ahead and address whether you deliberately tried to alter what I said or if it was an honest mistake from you.
I paraphrased the essence of what you said.
I did not bracket with quotation marks, therefore wasn't a quote.
You are deflecting and quibbling semantics at best, lousy backpedaling CYA more likely.

If anyone was lying it would be you (and a few others here) who have made broad-brush claims about quality of police/LEO training deficiencies without citing sources or documenting how they aren't subjective conjectures.
 
This comment is stupid. The police in this situation tortured a innocent man into confessing that he killed his father. They are the criminal instigators.
But they are not representative of ALL police in the USA, nor evidence that ALL police need more training.
Your initial OP extrapolated beyond what the evidence presented suggests.
 
But they are not representative of ALL police in the USA, nor evidence that ALL police need more training.
Your initial OP extrapolated beyond what the evidence presented suggests.
From the Department of Justice:

“84% of police officers have stated in a recent survey that they have directly witnessed a fellow officer using more force than was necessary.” “52% of police officers report that it is not unusual for law enforcement officials to turn a blind eye to the improper conduct of other officers.” “61% of police officers state they do not always report serious abuse that has been directly observed by fellow officers.” 43% of police offers agree with this sentiment: “Always following the rules is not compatible with the need to get their job done.”

In ANY organization showing those kinds of numbers, those who are in charge are not going to try finding the good ones. There will be a housecleaning and a change of culture. This is what needs to be done in law enforcement.
 
From the Department of Justice:

“84% of police officers have stated in a recent survey that they have directly witnessed a fellow officer using more force than was necessary.” “52% of police officers report that it is not unusual for law enforcement officials to turn a blind eye to the improper conduct of other officers.” “61% of police officers state they do not always report serious abuse that has been directly observed by fellow officers.” 43% of police offers agree with this sentiment: “Always following the rules is not compatible with the need to get their job done.”

In ANY organization showing those kinds of numbers, those who are in charge are not going to try finding the good ones. There will be a housecleaning and a change of culture. This is what needs to be done in law enforcement.
First fail is not providing a link/source of this "quote".
Second fail is try to imply this is a survey of all police officers. It could have just been ten and chosen to give the desired answers.

In your OP link, the mislead is that (city of) Fontana will pay out the damages. More correctly it will be the citizen TAXPAYERS who do the payout. Quite likely heads will roll and a couple/few officers will be out of a job (and/or career) once citizen outrage gets in gear.
 
Facts fron the DOJ are now fake news to Stryder.
They are when a source or traceable information are not provided for validation and further examination/checking.
The way you presented, it could have been another of your fabrications and false information.

If you had the education and credentials you have claimed, you would have know better.

In your case, I often use the "fake news" because of the faulty conclusions and extrapolations you make. The only other choice is the thumbs down "disagree", which is too mild and included in the "fake news".
 
But they are not representative of ALL police in the USA, nor evidence that ALL police need more training.
Your initial OP extrapolated beyond what the evidence presented suggests.
They don't need more training they need to get rid of the racist policies and do away with giving the police a license to kill whenever they feel like it.
 
I paraphrased the essence of what you said.
No, you didn’t. ”Several parts of the world” doesn’t indicate “everyone“, dumbass. Do you honestly think these mean the same thing? That’s not paraphrasing when you completely alter what I said.

What you did is called a straw man argument. You couldn’t refute what I said, so you attempted to change what I said to make the argument easier for you to refute.

Very dishonest of you. And since you’re not apologizing for this, it seems to me that you probably did this deliberately. You’re either a liar or you’re stupid. Which one is it?
 
The problem here is that I'm not what you say. And you believe some white idiot who can show no proof of his claim. Even worse is that you cosign with racists who believe blacks are just happy with the way America treats us.
Haha yes you are, sit down, we know
 
First fail is not providing a link/source of this "quote".
Second fail is try to imply this is a survey of all police officers. It could have just been ten and chosen to give the desired answers.

In your OP link, the mislead is that (city of) Fontana will pay out the damages. More correctly it will be the citizen TAXPAYERS who do the payout. Quite likely heads will roll and a couple/few officers will be out of a job (and/or career) once citizen outrage gets in gear.
I stated the source idiot. So suffer. There is way too much evidence supporting my assertions about police. So deal with it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top