Welcome to Our Website

Activation code the crims hack tool 05-2020

Hack financial Crime Compliance

Last week I lost my key ago. A Multi-Parent tool with a few extra options and a functional reliable unparenting tool. During her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary cut a deal with the ruling family of Qatar that, in return for using the state department as a tool for over throwing Assad and installing a Sunni regime, the Qataris wanted to build a natural gas pipeline to Europe and were willing to pay the Clinton Foundation hundreds of millions and possibly up to a billion dollars in return for this. Multi-Parent features -Area select function - hold use + left click. Crimson Bikes Discount Code - Updated Daily 2020.

Element 3d patch 1.0.345

General Debate 23 May 2020 – Kiwiblog

What Crims Don't Want You To Know - OzSpy Security Solutions. In summary one can quite well assume IPv6 to be/become a valuable tool for nsa & co. You are moments away from generating any amounts of Gold and Money. The ideas presented by the citizens were. This hack tool is so easy to use!

Hacked get the inside track on the media ...

UK cops to test Ford Ranger Raptor, Focus https://guptimo.ru/download/?file=400. Transmutation Tool; API; CraftingLists; Supporting the site through Patreon allows you to see and search through your inventory on this website. Home Security Archives - OzSpy Security Solutions. [AMA] I Am a Victoria Police Officer - Ask Me Anything. Application of FISK, an Invasiveness Screening Tool for Non-Native Freshwater Fishes, in the Murray-Darling Basin (Southeastern Australia).

New york arrests search

Ultimate Raise Spectre Necromancer Gear, Jewels, and click this. Get the latest breaking news and top stories from Sri Lanka, the latest political news, sports news, weather updates, exam results, business news, entertainment news, world news and much more from. Although Chevrolet never released an official word about the issue, most owners resorted in replacing the shifter instead, or brought their vehicles to their car's dealership. With the best-in-class analysis technology, Moldex3D can help you carry out in-depth simulation of the widest range of injection molding processes and to optimize product designs and manufacturability. How to use hack tool for Homicide Squad: Hidden Crimes.

  • Nonindigenous Aquatic Species
  • Wednesday Forum: June 3, 2020
  • PSI Magazine June 2020 by ProActiv Publications Ltd.
  • Springfield, MO - Official Website
  • Sanctions Programs and Country Information
  • Civilization v mac patch 1.0.1.221a skype

Fort Worth Texas Crime News

Felons and criminals in United Kingdom are soon to have more difficulty trying to evade the cops in the region. Criminal courts: Crown Court https://guptimo.ru/download/?file=401. The crims hack tool 05-2020. Using our IMVU Credits Hack you will be able to boost your account up to, credits at a time. West Mercia Police also revealed that walking sticks were used in two crimes (contrast this with an incident in Sydney in 2020 in which pharmacy staff bravely turned walking sticks on a robber).

Patch ausmech Mechanical Solutions, 1/7 Sonia Court, Ipswich (2020)

Crims Island habitat restoration in the Columbia River estuary-fisheries monitoring and evaluation, 2020. Through successful and high-profile campaigns such as Guns Off Our Streets, Bite Back and Caught on Camera. In some situations, it might be more appropriate to charge other offences, such as specific racially or religiously aggravated public order offences. County Route Road Name At/ From To Route Direction Start Date Anticipated Opening Description / Traffic Status Crossing GVW (Tons) ABBEVILLE: L-526: AIKEN RD: 13.6 MI NW OF ABBEVI. Find out about financial crime systems and controls during the coronavirus crisis Firms must satisfy us that they have.

  • Qanon.news: Bread Archive [Q Research General #10344
  • NFIU launches crime records information system [ARTICLE
  • Background Check Central Unit
  • Grim Crims and Convicts - Jackie French
  • Crime news for Liverpool, Wirral, Sefton, Knowsley, St
  • What the latest FBI data do and do not tell us about hate
  • Risk Management Community, Education, and Resources
  • Sheffield & South Yorkshire - BBC News

What crims use to hold up chemists

First published: 31/07/2020 Last updated: 06/05/2020. Two tests you must get to stop spread of COVID-19. Edition Anonymous ID: 3b293f 2020-02-09 08: 42: 32Z No. 8081050. Online Free RPG browser game. And so on. 43 0; Log in to Reply; Report; May 23, 2020 9: 28am; WaveyDavey.

  • Get the inside track on the media and government
  • Scotland Neck, NC Accident - News Break Scotland Neck, NC
  • Craig Mitchell, Author at OzSpy Security Solutions
  • Crimson Trace Corporation S&W Shield 9/40 Laserguard Pro
  • TigerTales Magazine - April/May 2020 by ...
  • 1.8 Minecraft Texture Packs
  • The Times & The Sunday Times
  • News Watch 3 with Seven and Ramola D
  • BBC Three - Google Groups

Serial number qanon.news: Bread Archive [Q Research General #12320: The

Now they live in Kyoto. Updated (online and paper) Background Check Authorization form now available. We hold these truths to be se. Local accident news and more police or fire department information of Scotland Neck, NC. Scotlandneck Accident. Prosecutors are reminded to read this guidance with our Public Statement on Racist and Religious Hate Crime as it provides greater detail on some of the key areas of the policy.

Racist and Religious Hate Crime - Prosecution Guidance

World news wrapup: 17 August 2020 full article. According to Manneh, the project was a helpful way to visualize urban planning ideas without necessarily having a training in architecture. Tuesday Overnight Open Thread (5/5/20). With a wireless system key components of your home security system are battery-powered and communicate with a monitor device inside your home. Some criminal deserves to be locked up and away from human civilization IMHO.

[Table] I am Michelle Burrows, civil rights attorney who has spent the last 30 years suing police and prisons for abuse of force and the mistreatment of people. (pt 1)

Source
There was also a "guestbook" in the AMA.
Questions Answers
Can you compare the conditions at private prisons to states run prisons? I think having for profit prisons is one reason we are so over incarcerated This is a complicated question. The government has the legal obligation to provide humane and safe conditions of confinement. They cannot discharge this duty by using a private provider. This duty includes safe housing, medical care, and personal safety for everyone. Many governments bought into the pitch by private companies that they could provide incarceration for the government affordably. Private prisons are run by large corporate conglomerates. Their goal is to make money at any expense to the prisoner.
These private companies bid on providing jail services to local governments and sometimes state governments at a flat contract price (for a multi-year contract). For example a local county jail might contract with Conmed for medical care in jail and promise to provide standard of care medical services for a flat rate for the term of the contract. What happens is that the private provider cuts corners and stops providing services because these contracts let the contractor keep the unspent funds at the end of the contract term. So the less they spend the more they make.
The consequence is that they hire Correction Officers (COs) with no experience, with very little background checks, who have engaged in some of the most horrendous abuse of prisoners I've read about. Private providers also do not allow prisoners to allow prisoners to have expensive medical tests or evaluations, and often times medication. Private providers are still obligated to meet the 8th amendment standards on incarceration for prisoners and can be sued as a quasi-government entity for failure to provide humane and safe conditions of confinement.
My opinion as to why we are over-incarcerated rests in the history of mandatory minimum sentencing, three-strikes laws, incarcerating for non-violent crimes at very high rates, criminalizing addiction, and the proliferation of prosecutors who are allowed to have too much control over sentencing.
The solution?
Get rid of private prisons and jails. The incentive systems are flawed in that there's no incentive to reduce prison population. It's as cheap to incarcerate one as it is a million.
Repeal all mandatory sentencing measures as the Feds did. Repeal all three-strikes laws. Use alternative processes for drug crimes such as drug court and treatment programs. Do no prosecute mentally ill folks, try to achieve hospitalization and medical care instead of jail. Decriminalize or reduce criminality of low-level property crimes. And incentivize rehabilitation instead of punishment. Introduce programs such as education and jobs training into prisons, because 90% of all folks who are incarcerated are going to be released.
And finally, I would recommend removing the stigma for housing, jobs, and voting for those who have been convicted of felony crimes. The inability to get a job or housing after release, removes hope from those who have been incarcerated and takes away their incentive to become a functioning member of society.
the below is a reply to the above
I know I’ve missed my window on our OP, but can someone help me understand the desire to repeal 3 strikes rules? I absolutely believe in repealing mandatory minimums and treating drug use as addiction rather than crime. But 3 strikes rules, especially if they have to do with violent crimes, seem more of a measure of separating a consistently violent person from potential victims. Now, I also believe that prisons should be accommodating, comfortable, safe living places (as far as is humanly possible), rather than harsh places where inmates are treated subhumanly or unkindly. But the single compelling apologetic for prisons is that some people seem to exhibit an inability to not harm others outside of constant supervision. And a three strikes law seems like a tool to help us identify them and protect them and others from their modus operandi. Is it possible that the problem with 3 strikes laws is that they are not strictly applied to violent crimes? I have a multi-level answer. Three strikes laws are not evenly applied. The third strike can be a minor act that is elevated to a felony by a prosecutor with absolute immunity. If the three strikes laws involved only serious personal crimes where someone was hurt, perhaps the premise of this post would be applicable. Because I agree. Some folks should not be out in the community. Some people just cannot be rehabilitated or are too mentally ill to be in the community and they are subject to being mistreated in prison - so we need some kind of in-between facility for mentally folks.
There are a number of serial sex offenders who simply should not be in the community. There is a category of sex offender that are simply too dangerous: violent rapists and child sex offenders. There will always be more victims if those types of offenders have access to victims. And they should not be in the community.
I believe that three strikes are also applied unevenly to communities of color. I would prefer a sentencing system where a judge can evaluate all of the circumstances of a crime and impose the appropriate sentence for that crime. Three strikes and mandatory minimums remove this discretion and give all of the power to prosecutors.
the below is another reply to the original answer
What do you think of the hundreds of large corporations who make money from essentially slave labor from work performed by people who are incarcerated? Edit: After thinking on this, I'm updating with an answer.
Different states have different standards for inmate labor during custody. If the state has a policy that all inmates shall have a job and work during their incarceration they must pay them. Forcing folks to work without pay--once they've been incarcerated--is unlawful. However, the pay is pretty slim. There are a few corporations using inmate labor and quite a few state agencies. My view is that if corporations have somehow managed to get a government contract to use forced labor of inmates there is a great lawsuit in the making.
1. The corporation who acts as a "state employer" steps into the shoes of the government under what's called the "state action' rule and must comply with minimum wage and workplace safety issues.
2. The corporation who uses forced inmate labor probably negotiated that contract without proper bidding and violates any number of state and federal contracting laws.
In Oregon the use of inmate labor is heavily regulated and for the most part inmates love that work because it is the highest paid in the system.
If a citizen sees a cop harming someone what can they do? This question has been on my mind A LOT lately. Interesting you should ask. I just wrote a protester manual dealing with this issue.
Number 1: Don't interfere with the officer in any way. If he is making a legitimate arrest you could be charged with interfering with a police officer. And in fact, you will be if you try to interject yourself.
Number 2: If you fail the attitude test, you're probably going to get arrested. It will be bullshit and a night in jail sucks regardless of your innocence.
Number 3: Even if it is an unlawful arrest in most states you only have the right to resist if you are protecting yourself or your life. Even if you don't resist they may use excessive force and unfortunately you may get hurt. Which is why it's important that all police encounters be video tapes. You more or less should not or cannot do anything in the moment. Your only real option is to seek recourse after the fact.
Number 4: Let the officers know that you're there watching and video taping. I think that when officers know that they're being video taped they will address their behavior. But as we've seen the last two weeks, hundreds of police encounters are being video taped in every major city and that caution that police normally display is gone. They seem to have given up and just said "fuck it". This is unusual. This is really the first time that in America that mass protests have been documented in real time and posted for the world to see. I get the sense that the longer the protests have gone on, the angrier and more entrenched in their defensive positions the police have gotten. Hence you see the calls for defunding the police.
Number 5: Make sure people know where you are in case you get arrested. The police will take your cell phone from you and you may not ever get it back. So password protect it. Please password protect it. They cannot get into your phone without a warrant, a password insures this.
Number 6: If you are arrested you'll be handcuffed, all your property will be taken from you, and you will be put in custody for a period of time. Don't mouth off to the police, don't make it worse. DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE. Exercise your right to be quiet. Try to let someone know you've been arrested in whatever way you can. If you are hurt ask someone to take pictures of your injuries right away and try to make it to the hospital as soon as possible. The hospital will (a) make sure you're ok, and (b) provide additional official documentation of your injuries.
Number 6: If the police are shooting "less lethal" weapons, stay out of the way. I represented a gentleman who had his testicle shot off by a rubber bullet (in his words "I'm your uniballer case"). This was not a great experience, even though it was less than lethal. Less lethal can still kill. Police are taught not to shoot in the chest or head for that reason, but they miss.
It's no longer one victim, one city, one cop. It's now the entire country, thousands of victims, and thousands of cops. Which indicates to me a systemic problem with law enforcement methods today.
the below is a reply to the above
As an attorney, do you advise against ever getting involved? In the case of George Floyd, if a civilian had come in and tackled the murderer, George Floyd would might still be alive. The civilian would be arrested, but isn't that a better outcome? And, how would such a situation likely play out in court? Cops use the "I was in fear for my life" all the time - frequently bogusly. Isn't "I feared for George Floyd's life" a legitimate defense against assaulting a police officer? This is a very important question. One I've thought of myself. Human beings tend to think in terms of self protection. You don't want to get involved in a police interaction because you might get hurt or shot. But if there is someone you can see that's being killed by the police in front of you, what choice are you going to make? If you interfere, you will be charged with a crime and arrested but you may save a man's life. And you can argue a legal defense in court that you were protecting another person's life. You might not win. But George Floyd might still be alive. This is more a humanitarian question than a legal question.
If you step in and you save someone's life like that, I will defend you.
Legally speaking, the George Floyd case is interesting. If you interfere, you don't have the hindsight that confirms that his life is in danger. But it took the police almost 9 minutes to kill him. So at some point between when he passed out and when the officers got off of him, you would probably have a reasonable defense in court. But legally it's clearly interfering with a police officer. I think that the George Floyd case may trigger more bystander inference than ever before.
the below is a reply to the original question
Here's what I've found, but maybe Michelle will have a better answer https://www.teenvogue.com/story/how-to-film-police-safely I love teenvogue! Those young writers are passionate and get the message out there. I hadn't seen this before - it's great! Think about your safety and your rights.
I've heard that one of the biggest problems with getting depositions from police officers is that numerous police officers will coordinate to get their stories straight before any kind of deposition. How serious a problem is that in your work? I start each case hoping the police will tell the truth, that they will man up and take responsibility for their actions. Honestly, 9 of 10 of my clients just want some acknowledgement of the wrongdoing and an apology. But law enforcement closes ranks when they are sued, they get together, compare their memories of the event. Sometimes there is a Grand Jury--In Oregon as in many states Grand Jury proceedings are secret. The Multnomah County DA convenes a grand jury for all police shooting death cases and publicizes the transcript.
In every "use of force" case in the larger departments I see "use of force" reviews--in shooting cases there is a criminal investigation by a multi-agency team of detectives and a Shooting Review Board. The agency always posts official press releases, sometimes the police post something about the shooting on social media. Sometimes old girlfriends have filed domestic violence claims or ex-wives will put information in the dissolution proceeding.
I always hire and use a forensic reconstructionist and usually a pathologist in death cases. I have used blood spatter experts, firearms experts and just about anyone I can think of to recreate that shooting scene especially if there are no videos of the event. If there are videos we get them cleaned up and slowed down--you would be amazed at what shows up on grainy dashcams. I interview everyone and depose every single cop involved in a case.
By the time I get to deposing the shooting officers, I know more about the shooting than they do. In Oregon officers do a "post shooting" walk through of the shooting. We don't get the transcript or report but we get pictures or a soundless video. These real time reconstructions create a much different picture than what officers will ultimately tell at deposition. You have to get them to provide false or misleading information in their deposition. I don't mean to be overly cynical but my experience at this point is that most officers I have deposed have lied, or "can't remember" a lot of information. For example, I have a shooting case now where two officers chased an unarmed young man into a darkened cul d' sac and shot him 12 times claiming he whirled on them after a fast foot chase with two knives, blades extended and lunged at them. All the shell cases from their weapons were over 25 feet in the opposite direction from where they claimed they were standing. The young man had been seen running with a cell phone moments before the shooting and one officer claimed he never saw the knives. Furthermore, the officers were left alone at the crime scene by themselves for almost 15 minutes and sent other officers away while they moved around the scene. Neighbors saw them moving the body and bending over the scene. The entire contents of the decedent's pockets were strewn on the ground and every single one of the 10 first responders including the shooting officer denied removing anything from the pockets. As my client's father said "What these things just magically flew out of his pockets while he's being shot to death". And three bullets came from the posterior angle--the back.
Clearly lies, clearly bullshit. But I will never get the officers to admit to lying. I can only point out the contradiction in evidence as opposed to their statements.
I guess my short answer--I expect them to lie. I spent weeks prepping for their depo and I just ask straightforward questions trying to get them to tell me a made up story.
Is it worth it, what you do? Do you have enough successes to make up for the emotional/mental toll of what you see/know? I had wanted to go into law, but my first instructor (undergrad) told me very bluntly that doing what she did (prosecutor) takes a massive emotional strength to get through some of the things you will become aware of. Do you get paid? I know this is a very stupid question, but I was wondering who funds help like you provide. Thank you for the work that you do. Do heros all have capes? I see this question as a bit of respite from answering questions about the cases I see. Thank you for asking. This work is not for everyone, I admit it. Sometimes I don't even think its for me. A long time friend of mine--a fabulous and stunningly good lawyer--just quit, he can't do it anymore. The desire to do good and make change is often greater than one's ability to do it. One famous lawyer in Seattle told me that I do "god's work". I believe the work is so very important--as we have seen these last few years watching the police go crazy.
If not us, then who?
I think I am reaching the end of my capacity to do this work. It is hard and it does build up. I work with other lawyers a lot, I am teaching some, I am writing more and I'm hoping that younger lawyers will be interested enough to pick this up. I'll give you any briefing, depositions, research and whatever knowledge I have to help. I'll whisper in your ear and wave my magic wand. I do switch between prison and police work when one gets too overwhelming. I just wrapped up ten rape/sex abuse cases in the women's prison against a prison nurse. That took a lot out of me so I'll do a couple of police cases for awhile.
Even if you get past the qualified immunity affirmative defense at the summary judgment stage, how do you get through to a jury when the cop says "I feared for my life" and "He reached for his waistband"? You do this kind of work, don't you? The top responses by a cop to your question: "He engaged in furtive movement", "He wouldn't show me his hands", "He lunged at me in a threatening manner", "He wouldn't obey commands", and yes "He reached for his waistband / pockets"
These cases are hard to prosecute because it's typically been the cops word against everyone else. Until this point in time juries gave a lot of deference to officers. They were our "heroes". In fact, The Culture Code, for cops was hero. But, with the advent of video that is changed. These last two weeks of real-time video of cops in action, I predict, will change juries view of that so-called hero.
What I do, I use forensic science to reconstruct shooting scenes so I can point out any and all inconsistencies with police testimony. I litigated a prison shooting case two years ago. A cop in a tower said that he could see my client stomping the head of the victim. We did a complete reconstruction on the prison yard and determined through science that the officer couldn't see anything. And then I showed the shooter went on comp-leave the next day, never returned to work, went on administrative leave and bought a winery with his comp settlement. So you have to create a villain, and he has to be bad. You should use science to disprove every lie or misstatement that cop makes, even the small ones.
If you can't use science, it's a much harder case. Unless there's a video. But there are always ways to attack the credibility of the officer. Including his past misconduct reports, eye witnesses, do the injuries match up with what the officer says, did his camera get conveniently turned off, was the person injured before he met the cop. The bottom line is if you only have the word of the cop against a private citizen, it used to be impossible to get past that. But the world has changed and you just keep fighting.
the below is a reply to the above
i thought those are usually not admissible? Good catch.
Individual officers who are accused of misconduct and is investigated will have a file on each of those individual cases. Typically these are internal affairs investigations. These can be determined to be unfounded, sustained, or unproven.
In federal court in police misconduct cases I can get all past records of internal affairs or disciplinary matters involving the individual officer as part of discovery. They may or may not be admissible at trial. Admissibility at trial goes to: do these reports prove or disprove any issue at trial. If the police agency itself is a defendant and one of the claim is that they failed to supervise or there was a policy (official or unofficial) allowing the conduct then the disciplinary records are likely admissible. Similarly those past records of misconduct, if they are similar in pattern to the present case they can be admissible.
If the claim is a federal claim, it doesn't matter which court it's in. State court laws vary by state on evidentiary issues.
the below is another reply to the original answer
So it is mandatory for lawyers to watch "My Cousin Vinnie"? How does it work if video was not admitted on a technicality? This and Perry Mason. My family won't watch lawyer shows anymore because I yell at the TV.
Dark Waters is actually a great movie on fighting against overwhelming and well funded evil, while never giving up.
the below is another reply to the original answer
You're so awesome. We really appreciate your insight. Even though most of us in this thread and on this site probably already agree with you on almost every point, the details are what enable us to convince friends and family of the systemic problems in the prison and justice system. Edit: auto correct error Thank you so much! Keep fighting. Power to the people. We will win.
the below is another reply to the original answer
xchris_topher: But also... I love it. freelancer042: Let's be real, son is helping because he's better at Reddit and thought that was a funny way to word it. This is true. Her original reply to my text about Reddit was: "What is Reddict?!"
-son
the below is a reply to the above question
Defer to the experts when your own knowledge is lacking. My son says he qualifies as a Reddit expert.
the below is a reply to the above
Wow I've never had the AMA guest reply to me! If you have time, I have a question: Both my parents are attorneys, practiced for about 40 years each. Neither of them think the police are abusing their power or unjustly using force on the protesters. My father used to practice criminal law but does med. mal. and mediation now, my mom works in family law. I've shown them several of the videos of unprovoked police aggression, but they haven't budged. Is there any more you think I could do or show them to open their minds on this at all? Sounds like your folks are pretty entrenched in their views. If clear video evidence of these issues isn't enough to sway them, I'm not sure what will... But don't you give up!
In your opinion, how does the system remain so broken after years and years of talking about this stuff? Is it controlling interests or simply turning a blind eye? Really good question. I would honestly tear it all down and start over.
It remains broken because there's big money in law enforcement including providing equipment to each officer. For example, Taser, now Axon, worked for years to get Tasers on every officer and expensive training for each officer to be redone every two years. Now Axon is selling the uniform based video system they want all police departments to buy, and the expensive cloud-based video storage capabilities.
Each officer is required to carry a sidearm and some departments only allow them to carry one particular brand. Most departments have AR-15s for sniper shooting and the officers must be certified and trained on that. All of that riot gear you see cops wearing? Probably equals thousands of dollars per officer. Each one of these devices requires training, sometimes they go to Las Vegas and other venues on government dollars.
I'm not criticizing well trained officers or even a lot of the equipment that they have. But departments don't need all of the toys. And they're choosing training that emphasizes shoot-to-kill or "shoot until the threat stops". This mentality has produced a fear based system in politicians. Well armed cops are a sales tool for politicians: "If we don't arm our cops, we're gonna have thugs overtaking our city.", "Look at all pretty uniforms and shiny weapons that we're going to use to protect you.", and that's the lie. Instead of addressing problems like poverty, addiction, and mental health, we're throwing people in jail or killing them.
In my 30-some years, including some representing cops, I have found that cops are uniformly racist. I don't know if that's the egg or the chicken. They primarily arrest people of color, and so it reinforces a belief that color causes crime. And that's bullshit. Most cops do not have college education, have rarely traveled outside of where they work, most are white, and there is a fundamental group think in police departments. You do not snitch on a fellow cop. If you do, you become ostracized, and cops retaliate better than any other group on the planet.
Succinctly, the monetary incentive, racism, and group think contribute. But also, as social and financial disparity grow, so do our social problems, and we're asking police officers to be cops, social workers, mental health workers, and fix everything. We need to well fund addiction treatment, mental health housing, pay to get our kids educated in schools, and really look at the root of the problem. The wealthy really don't want to pay for the poor.
the below is a reply to the above
Do you think that requiring cops to work alongside mental health workers and social workers would help? What about requiring more training in how to deescalate situations without using force? Yes to both! The city of Eugene (in Oregon) has a non-profit provider called Cahoots which the police call in mental health crisis / situations. It's brilliant.
My answer is yes. Either work alongside them or create multi-disciplinary teams to deal with street crime and domestic violence situations.
I want to do a bigger answer on de-escalation, but: police officers are trained to repel with the amount of force that they're faced with, but not more. The use of force is not a ladder. The officers are supposed to de-escalate when the force that they're facing is also reduced. For example, when someone is handcuffed sitting on a curb not doing anything, they can no longer use force against the detainee. Officers are also trained not to ever give up their control of a situation. So, if you call a cop a "motherfucker" that is disrespect and a loss of control, and they are taught to get control back. I've seen cops Taze someone to get them to shut up. I've seen officers choke someone to get them to shut up. I've seen cops engage in intentional "slip and fall" when putting suspects in the back of a vehicle because the suspect failed the "attitude test".
Hi, Michelle. I'm a transactional attorney based in Michigan. I don't have any background in crim pro beyond a 1L criminal law class; most of my expertise is in copyright and cyberlaw. Do you have any advice on getting more involved in fixing the system? I feel a moral obligation to help, but at the same time, I feel stymied by my lack of competence in the relevant subject areas and lack of connections to the people and organisations doing this kind of work. Thanks for your time and for the work you're doing! This is a complicated area of the law. Most civil rights lawyers who practice have been either criminal defense attorneys or prosecutors. It is important to understand the concepts that go into prosecuting a civil rights case. I would say that something like copyright or cyberlaw are very good foundations for 1st amendment work. Those deal with ideas, words, thoughts, and perhaps people impugning on those concepts. The 1st amendment deals with government restraining speech. To work with 1st amendment cases you have to understand what speech is.
However, 4th and 14th amendment work against law enforcement requires a strong knowledge of police practices, arrest procedures, and probable cause. This knowledge is hard to get simply from reading cases.
I would recommend volunteering with the National Lawyers Guild as a protest observer. Get involved in ACLU litigation on some of these issues. Volunteer with the Innocence Project to do investigation and research to become familiar familiar with what can happen in a bad arrest and prosecution case. Find a civil rights lawyer in your community and follow them around, read their pleadings, talk to them, and get familiar with what this work requires.
What is your opinion on the Portland Police Department’s response to protests in the following nights after the vandalizing of the Multnomah County Justice Center? It sucks.
I had hopes when they took a knee things were going to be different. What we have seen in these protests and vigils is what I've been seeing for 30 years. Law enforcement is so heavily armed they could be an occupying militia in our cities. They are also being trained to view all of us as the enemy. And so the response you see by the police is representative of their training, command structure, and a distancing from their real purpose in society.
I believe PPB acted like they always do in these situations and made it worse and caused greater harm. Most of the protests were simply peaceful folks walking to show their support for the rights and equality of African American citizens. Instead what we saw were the use of "less" lethal weapons, gas, and extreme physical force by robocops.
Law enforcement is only entitled to use force against citizens if force is being used against them. They are only entitled to use objectively reasonable force. Shooting a non-resistant protester holding a sign in the face with a projectile is not objectively reasonable.
While there were assholes present vandalizing a causing trouble, those individuals were easily distinguished from peaceful protesters. Vandalism and arson are crimes. Those individuals should be arrested. They still shouldn't be subject to extreme force. Everybody has the same rights. It is up to the police to assess each individual and each individual crime separately. They don't get to shoot me because some asshole is throwing rocks into a store. But the asshole is still protected from abusive police practices including excessive force.
the below is a reply to the above
I hope at some point during your visit with us, you can talk a bit more about where these standards are codified. When I attended peace officer training to become a corrections officer, they taught "minimum force necessary to control a situation." That seems to be a thing of the past these days, but I am unfamiliar with whether to find standards in statutes, city codes, constitutional law, or departmental policy. Most of this is judge-made law.
1. A police officer may only use the amount of force objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. This phrase comes from a supreme court case called Graham v. Connor. It is the bedrock of all police force cases. It has been virtually unchanged since 1989. This is about an African American with type one diabetes who had a low insulin reaction, was seen hurrying out of a store, which an officer determined was suspicious behavior. Graham was arrested and basically beaten for having an insulin reaction and being black.
2. The use of force is judged by events as they happen and as perceived by a "objectively reasonable officer". Not the officer involved in the use of force. You cannot use hindsight and it must be only the information known to the officer at the very moment that force was used. Other factors that can be considered to judge whether force was reasonable include: The crime being investigated, how many officers who are present, the size and age of the suspect in relation to the officer, what degree of force the suspect is using, and whether there are any weapons involved.
3. Many states also have statutes that define what kind of force an officer can use in an arrest. But these statutes cannot change, amend, or be less than the Graham v. Connor standard.
4. The same can be said for department standards and rules. These must comply with the Graham standard.
the below is a reply to the above
If things are laid out this clearly how did the widespread unnecessarily violence become so prevelant? Is it really just years of white citizens looking the other way? I really sensed a change after 9/11. The Feds were handing out military grade equipment for free and the local police forces took the equipment. Even small police departments were creating SWAT teams and terrorist task forces. For example, the Pendleton, Oregon police department has a tactical response vehicle. It's a good 'ol boy ranching town with a population of about 16,000 people and they have a fucking tank...
I noticed that everybody was afraid after 9/11. Nobody knew where the bad guys were coming from. I hate to be cynical in retrospect, but they used the collective fear of the unknown, fear of terrorists, fear of the "brown people", fear of the immigrants, the fear of anyone who was attacking our identity as Americans and used it to build and abuse their power. And we let them. We were afraid.
And we never got control of it again. It's like we forgot what happens when we let the government get out of control. We chose to ignore these rules because we were afraid.
It's not like we were invaded and the change happened overnight. It was a slow process that we as a country allowed to happen. Many people, people of color, families at the border, etc, have had to suffer as a result and now we're at a tipping point where people are fighting back against our own government instead of the government fighting for us.
Thank you for posting your AMA. I have two questions, and I've tried to leave them open to your interpretation: (1) What are the top three civil rights with which you are most passionate to fight for, and why? (2) What's the #1 change you would make to the system, if you had the choice? Top three civil rights issues I'm passionate about:
1. Oddly, police shooting cases. I'm drawn to these because of the deep profound importance of what this means to our society. As I noted in a previous comment police officers are usually less than candid about these cases. I believe everyone has the right to know how these shootings take place. And we have the right to know about the officers who shoot people. These cases are complicated, fraught with emotion, and are usually politically charged. What better way for a cantankerous old lady to work out her frustrations.
2. Prison rape and sex abuse cases. I'm drawn to these cases for many of the same reasons I outlined above. But, on top of the importance of the issues I believe that vulnerable people who are incarcerated deserve and need greater levels of protection. I represent mostly women who are survivors of lifelong sex abuse, sex trafficking, or child porn and find themselves in prison believing that prison is the safest place they've ever been. Think about that. And then these women are raped by prison officials and have no way of reporting it and receive no treatment for it. These cases I do for my soul.
3. Prison medical cases. These cases are tough. I find it particularly repugnant that prison doctors and medical personnel will deny essential and life saving medical care to prisoners. This can often lead to death or irrecoverable damage. And the sheer indifference to suffering by prisoners is mind boggling. I don't make a lot of money on these cases but I feel like I'm saving lives and making a difference.
My number one change:
More transparency and accountability. Everything in these cases is done by the government who try to hide and disguise what happened. This is our government, they should be accountable to us. They should have to explain why they do these things and how they do it. I'm a little extreme on solutions, I believe police officers should have to undergo psych evals and have at least a 2 year college degree. I believe that all officers, to work the streets, should have mandatory body cams that are always on. If the camera gets turned off there should be mandatory disciplinary action. I believe that police unions are one of the biggest culprits behind our police culture today and if there was a legal way to get rid of them, I would do it.
submitted by 500scnds to tabled

[H] M9 Crim Web MW .11 3 Webs PS/ .19 Crimson Weave Gloves *Flawless*/ STAT MW AWP Redline Complexity on Scope/ Glock Dragon Tattoo Hellraisers Holo Best POS [W] Arcs 46/23/6/8

Open to more offers; Not looking for Arcs just using as a pricing tool
M9 Crim Web MW .11 3 Webs PS : https://s1.cs.money/0sD5HJx_image.jpg B/O 46
.19 Crimson Weave Gloves *Flawless*: https://s1.cs.money/oMi497N_image.jpg B/O 23
STAT MW AWP Redline Complexity on Scope: https://s1.cs.money/QhWt3fW_image.jpg B/O 6
Glock Dragon Tattoo Hellraisers Holo Best POS: https://s1.cs.money/2vpe3RO_image.jpg B/O 8
TL; https://steamcommunity.com/tradeoffenew/?partner=158425261&token=GnUK5uQ9
submitted by cherry2d to GlobalOffensiveTrade

0 thoughts on “Tdu2 unofficial patch 0.3 skype

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *