So how is upholding the law, "abuse"???
The fact that both won in court against the police for tens of thousands of dollars is strong evidence that what the police did to them really was abuse. And the police were doing something other than upholding the law.
The fact that the police denied having video evidence that they in fact did have (which did not support their case) is further evidence that the police were simply in the wrong.
And finally, the fact that the "professional police review board" did not flag this as something that needs fixing is strong evidence that the review process does not, in fact, work.
Later that year, I filed a related civil rights lawsuit. March of this year, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on dismissal of that suit. There's no set timeline for a response from the court.
For details, see: - [FAQ: State of New Mexico v. Phillip Mocek](http://papersplease.org/wp/mocek/) - [FAQ: Phillip Mocek v. Albuquerque et al.](http://papersplease.org/wp/mocek2/)
Did the results in court prove that OJ had nothing to do with his wife's murder? There are plenty of cases in court that are also wrong..and it doesn't 'prove' that the police were definitely abusing anyone.
"And finally, the fact that the "professional police review board" did not flag this as something that needs fixing is strong evidence that the review process does not, in fact, work."
What needs to be fixed? That we shouldn't ask people boarding a plane for ID? Both of the people in this article sound like they cause more problems than they actually are claiming to solve.
If I took everything I read in text at face value, we would have lots of innocent people in prison. It's ridiculous to think that this can even be allowed. Neither of the people in the article have the professional experience or education to make any kind of important decision.
The point of the article that you seem to be overlooking is the fact that "talking to any cop working right now" is exactly how we end up in situations where police are abusing their power. Yes, I see that you are specifically referring to "excessive force" complaints, but I am also extending it to "cops watching cops" as a method of fair and proper oversight. When only 6.4% of complaints (284/4407) are sustained and no officers are fired for misconduct over the span of 3 years, seems to me that there's a problem with the oversight in place. What employer that has over a thousand employees doesn't have to terminate an employee over the span of 3 years?
Remember, though, that they're asking for an enormous number of documents.
As far as the spirit of the law goes, I think it's more intended for someone to just request the documents that they're interested in, rather than just hoovering up every document the police have.
And to bring the point back to the unions: the union signed a contract mandating that records be destroyed after 3 years. Not archive, not digitize, but destroy? That destruction isn't to ease job performance, it's to ease long-term liability for the police to the detriment of the general population.
That's an interesting point, and I don't see that that sort of behavior is specifically prohibited anywhere in Chapter 42.56 RCW.
An ID is not required for flying in the US. Taking photos is not illegal. The first is a bit surprising to some, and even the second, so I can understand how you may have thought those were a problem, but surely you knew that being stupid is not a crime?
His arrest was so unjustified that he didn't even present a defense at trial. After the prosecution called its witnesses and presented its arguments, and the defense was given its chance, the defense rested without calling any witnesses or presenting any evidence. All the defense did was in closing arguments point out all the holes in the prosecution's claims, and an hour later Mocek was acquitted on all charges.
Rachner was arrested for acts that were not criminal. That in itself is not abuse, since the police can make mistakes. However, they withheld evidence that would have shown they were wrong. That is not upholding the law. That is abuse.
For context, The Stranger is Seattle's free alt-weekly. They have a very strong leftist bent, consistently endorse pro-union politicians while calling them "independent" without a hint of irony, and are unlikely to press this issue very much if at all.
See http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/12/22/spog-is...
and http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/reform-in-reverse/Content... for examples.
[0] http://nypost.com/2015/04/22/swedish-cops-on-vacation-break-... and
It remains that 99% of complaint-filers think the police used more force than was warranted. Whether or not the police have the authorization doesn't mean the have the right (or are right).
On the other hand, the last couple years we've seen just how willing the justice system is to go after cops.
That has got to be the most fake-ass charge I've heard this week. More properly stated, "failing to respect mah authoritay".
Anyone getting arrested and resisting will complain that it's "excessive force" when the police use any sort of force to arrest them. If you talk to any cop working right now, they will tell you this. This is why 99% don't see the light of day.
"The two Seattle residents are now the closest thing the city has to a civilian police-oversight board"
If this is even close to the truth, it's scary. They see numbers and text on a report. Nothing is in context to the situation that happened. This is why there are professional police review boards dedicated to investigating these matters...and we don't have armchair/twitter warriors making important decisions like this.
"Then, in February 2011, Rachner met Mocek at an SPD town hall meeting. Mocek had had his own run-in with police. In 2009, security agents at Albuquerque Airport threw him in a jail cell for lacking identification and causing a disturbance. Mocek challenged the misdemeanor charges against him and, like Rachner, won. Their run-ins and legal battles with security agencies galvanized them, they said, to hold police accountable for mistakes and abuses."
So how is upholding the law, "abuse"????
"the largest public union in the state"
This entire article is about railing against the police, yet the unions are never mentioned as part of the problem. Very interesting indeed.