[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests) What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic? War in Ukraine Turns on Russia what happened during total solar eclipse Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage Earth is Scorched with Heat Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman Vibe Shift A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound. Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks Questioning the Big Bang James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go Early humans had sex with chimps O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp. Biblical Contradictions (Alleged) Catholic Church Praising Lucifer Raising the Knife One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make.. Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship) Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war: {Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture. Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY Bible Help Libertysflame Database Updated Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit! Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney. Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End? What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery! 2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years 2024 and beyond in prophecy Questions This Speech Just Broke the Internet Status: Not Logged In; Sign In Watching The Cops See other Watching The Cops Articles Title: Video: Ohio cop indicted on murder charge in shooting Officer has said he was dragged by suspect's car and was forced to shoot Source: Associated Press URL Source: [None] Published: Jul 30, 2015 Author: By Lisa Cornwell Associated Press Post Date: 2015-07-30 10:39:43 by GrandIsland Keywords: None Views: 33616 Comments: 189 CINCINNATI — A University of Cincinnati officer who shot a motorist during a traffic stop over a missing front license plate was indicted Wednesday on a murder charge, with a prosecutor saying the officer "purposely killed him" and "should never have been a police officer." Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters announced the grand jury indictment at a news conference to discuss developments in the investigation into the July 19 shooting of 43-year-old motorist Samuel DuBose by Officer Ray Tensing. Authorities have said Tensing spotted a car driven by DuBose and missing the front license plate, which is required by Ohio law. They say Tensing stopped the car and a struggle ensued after DuBose refused to provide a driver's license and get out of the car. Tensing, 25, has said he was dragged by the car and forced to shoot at DuBose. He fired once, striking DuBose in the head. But Deters dismissed Tensing's claim that he was dragged by the car and suggested that he shouldn't have pulled DuBose over to begin with. "He fell backward after he shot (DuBose) in the head," Deters said, adding that it was a "chicken crap" traffic stop. On footage released from the body-camera video Wednesday, the officer could be heard asking for DuBose's driver's license several times with DuBose at one point saying he had one. Later, DuBose said, "But I don't think I have it on me." Tensing asks DuBose to unbuckle his seat belt. About that time Tensing pulls on the door handle, and DuBose puts his hand on the door to keep it closed. Then the video becomes shaky, but a gunshot can be heard and DuBose appears to be slumped in the seat before the car rolls away, coming to stop at a nearby corner. The University of Cincinnati said it fired Tensing after his indictment. Tensing turned himself in Wednesday afternoon at the Hamilton County Justice Center and was processed on charges of murder and voluntary manslaughter. Tensing's attorney, Stewart Mathews, didn't return phone messages seeking comment after the indictment announcement. Mathews said earlier Wednesday that he thought an indictment was likely "given the political climate" and comments made by city officials. But Mathews said given the evidence he's seen, he doesn't believe there should be an indictment. DuBose's death comes amid months of national scrutiny of police dealings with African-Americans, especially those killed by officers. DuBose was black. Tensing is white. Authorities haven't indicated whether race was a part of the investigation. Body-camera video of the shooting was also released Wednesday. DuBose's family had been pressing for its release, and news organizations including The Associated Press had sued Deters to get it released under Ohio open records law, but Deters released it before any ruling had been made. Deters called the shooting "senseless" and "asinine." "He purposely killed him," Deters said. "He should never have been a police officer." The prosecutor also said he thought it was time to reconsider the UC police department's role. "I don't think a university should be in the policing business," Deters said. A message for comment was left Wednesday with the police department. The university said earlier this week it plans an independent review of its police department's policies. The UC officer made the traffic stop near the university's main campus, and UC police have said the intersection was within the campus police's jurisdiction. The University of Cincinnati on Wednesday closed its main campus in anticipation of grand jury action in the case. Mark O'Mara, attorney for DuBose's family, called for a "peaceful and nonaggressive" response from the community after the officer's indictment. O'Mara said the family wanted a peaceful reaction because "Sam was a peaceful person." Tensing has more than five years of experience in law enforcement and has worked as a University of Cincinnati police officer since April 2014, said Jason Goodrich, UC police chief. His annual performance review this April noted that he was extremely strong in the traffic area and maintains control of his weapons and of "situations he is involved in." Tensing formerly worked as an officer in the small Cincinnati suburban village of Greenhills. Deters said when he saw the video of the shooting, he was shocked. "I feel so sorry for this family and what they lost," Deters said. "And I feel sorry for the community, too." If convicted, Tensing could face up to life in prison. Poster Comment: Deckard is losing his mind. He spends time posting garbage by Free Thought Project, where most of the shit he posts has to be written in such a bias way to give the appearance of police misconduct, AND HERE IS A CLEAR CASE OF A BAD OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING... and Deckard doesn't post it. Well I will. This officer should be wood chipped. Hopefully someone here can post the VIDEO... you'll cringe watching it. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-148) not displayed.       .       .       . #149. To: Dead Culture Watch (#141) That's it? You pop up into the thread at post #141 like a Whack-A-Mole and that's all you you have to add to the discussion? You're a pathetic piece of shit. Let your mom have her computer back. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-02   17:55:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #150. To: GrandIsland (#147) Campus police deal with larcenies of cell phones, drunk students, stalking and domestic issues... and as they get bored with their small jurisdiction and limited types of calls, they venture off campus, tho keeping close, and stop vehicles for excitement. This officer probably never had a high speed pursuit in his career... and gosh damn it, he wasn't gonna that day either. He shot him instead. lol What, we have to give up even our most precious white privileges?     : ) You actually have described my own perception of this case pretty accurately. This is why real PDs pair up inexperienced cops with veterans. Experience makes a huge difference. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:00:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #151. To: TooConservative (#143) "I know you think you're making an argument but you aren't." Do you have any basis upon which you speculate, "If it's going to emerge in the court case that they are known to have filed false police reports and/or are utterly unreliable witnesses"? Any at all? Any reason to make a statement like this? You have none. Neither, of course, do I. Meaning my statement is just as relevant as yours. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-02   18:01:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #152. To: misterwhite (#151) Any at all? Any reason to make a statement like this? Just that he sounds like a dissembling liar who can't get his contradictory alibi straght in his own head. Other than that, no. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:09:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #153. To: TooConservative (#144) "I noticed in one of these accounts that they still haven't found the bullet. Interesting, you'd think they would have located it." Maybe it lodged in the marijuana he was carrying. Or in the $2600 in cash he was carrying. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-02   18:12:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #154. To: misterwhite, Liberator, Deckard (#153) Maybe it lodged in the marijuana he was carrying. Or in the $2600 in cash he was carrying. So then you're fine with a cop that shoots anyone in the head who has pot or some cash in their car? That's where you set the bar for summary execution by a Kampus Kop on the streets of America? Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:15:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #155. To: TooConservative (#152) "Just that he sounds like a dissembling liar who can't get his contradictory alibi straght in his own head." Who? Tensing, Kidd or Lindenschmidt? Or all three? Yeah, all three are dissembling liars, right? misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-02   18:24:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #156. To: Dead Culture Watch (#141) It's like you aren't even a worm of a man, it's like a worm made you his bitch. Can I borrow that for a tag line sometime? It seems very effective.     : ) Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:26:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #157. To: TooConservative (#154) "So then you're fine with a cop that shoots anyone in the head who has pot or some cash in their car?" No. I said that's where the bullet might be. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-02   18:26:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #158. To: misterwhite (#155) Who? Tensing, Kidd or Lindenschmidt? Or all three? Lindenschmidt in particular. Yeah, all three are dissembling liars, right? Finally, you've begun to admit the truth. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:27:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #159. To: misterwhite (#149) have to add to the discussion? Why waste time arguing with a complete sack like yourself? You are a liar. You are dishonest. You make normal people's skin crawl. In short, you suck at life in every way. Dead Culture Watch  posted on  2015-08-02   18:30:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #160. To: TooConservative, misterwhite, the worms bitch (#156) It's like you aren't even a worm of a man, it's like a worm made you his bitch. Can I borrow that for a tag line sometime? It seems very effective. : ) Lol, it's yours.... Was easy to come up with given that's exactly how I think of whitey. Dead Culture Watch  posted on  2015-08-02   18:33:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #161. To: misterwhite, DeadCultureWatch, GrandIsland (#155) Who? Tensing, Kidd or Lindenschmidt? Or all three? I think their colleague, Special Officer Doofy, was involved too. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-02   18:39:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #162. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone (#105) An image at #7 shows Tensing with a black watch band on his left arm, as does the image at 1:59 at #105. At #105 is an image at 1:56 and the comment, “At the 1:56 screen grab, it appears as though the officer's left arm is trapped in the crook of the drivers left arm.” This appears to be impossible due to the position of the watch band. It appears the background behind the crook of DuBose’s left arm is out of focus. Tensing’s right arm is well above the crook of DuBose’s left arm. It appears to be around the height of DuBose’s head, rather than the crook of his left arm. Not far in front of the watch band is the butt of the gun, out of focus. nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-03   3:04:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #163. To: misterwhite, TooConservative (#140) [TooConservative #136] The shooter was fired immediately. [misterwhite #140] He was fired after he was indicted. It appears that Tensing was fired, but unlawfully. A government employee is considered to have a property right in his employment and cannot be lawfuly fired without observance of due process, including fair notice and a hearing. IMHO, the university will be paying him. It does not matter how guilty he may appear or what the crime is. The University should have suspended him and placed him on paid administrative leave until they could comply with required due process. Government failure to follow due process gets many, many of their administrative actions overturned. http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/07/31/tensing-union-demands-uc-job-back/30932331/ Tensing, through union, demands his UC job back Anne Saker, asaker@enquirer.com Cincinnati.com 3:43 p.m. EDT July 31, 2015 The union representing the University of Cincinnati police force has filed a grievance on behalf of Raymond Tensing demanding that he get his job back as an officer because the university fired him this week without due process, a union official said Friday. Thomas Fehr, representative of the Fraternal Order of Police-Ohio Labor Council, said the union filed the grievance Thursday, the same day Tensing was arraigned on murder charges in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court. Tensing is accused of killing motorist Sam DuBose July 19 in Mount Auburn. Tensing had stopped DuBose because his car did not have a front license plate. As DuBose turns his ignition key, starting the car, Tensing pulled out his service weapon and fired. Tensing was wearing a body camera that captured the exchange. On Wednesday, Tensing was indicted on murder charges, and the university fired him from the police force. The FOP represents the members of the force, and Fehr said the university did not abide by its three-year contract with the union in dismissing Tensing. “We filed the grievance, No. 1 because there was no just cause, and No. 2 because he was not afforded his due process rights under the contract,” Fehr said. Friday, university spokeswoman Michele Ralston said: "The university stands by its decision to terminate Officer Ray Tensing." The grievance said, "Officer Tensing was terminated on 7/29/2015 without just cause for an on-duty fatal shooting. While Officer Tensing was indicted on a charge of murder, the indictment is not a conviction. Officer Tensing was also denied his due process rights of a pre-disciplinary hearing under the contract." The grievance asked for Tensing to be reinstated immediately and "is to be made whole for all back pay and benefits including but not limited to sick time, vacation time, holidays, shift differential, pension contributions etc. afforded under the current contract." Under the contract, the university has seven calendar days – or until Aug. 6 – to hold a hearing. Fehr said that at the hearing, the university could either restore Tensing in his job or decline, then the case would go to arbitration. That process could take four to six months to conduct. “The contract language says that if you’re going to discipline an employee for anything that involves loss of pay, suspension, demotion or termination, the university is required to have a pre-disciplinary conference with the employee. That was not done,” Fehr said. “They are also required to give the employee a copy of the formal charges, and that was not done. They just fired him and didn’t follow due process.” Fehr said that Tensing was notified that the union was filing the grievance on his behalf. “He wanted it done,” Fehr said. nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-03   3:23:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #164. To: nolu chan, misterwhite (#163) It appears that Tensing was fired, but unlawfully. A government employee is considered to have a property right in his employment and cannot be lawfuly fired without observance of due process, including fair notice and a hearing. IMHO, the university will be paying him. It does not matter how guilty he may appear or what the crime is. The University should have suspended him and placed him on paid administrative leave until they could comply with required due process. Union law and contracts can vary by state or locality. But even if the university ends up having to pay him, they have disavowed his actions publicly in advance. This was probably their purpose. So what if they have to cut some checks to him later, knowing all along that that was the likely outcome? In the meantime, no mob will be showing up to hound the regents or the Kampus Kops offices. It may be the university has legal cause to fire him. We don't know all the specifics of the local contract. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   8:29:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #165. To: nolu chan (#162) "An image at #7 shows Tensing with a black watch band on his left arm, as does the image at 1:59 at #105." The image at #7 is of the other cop (either Kidd or Lindenschmidt) with a black watch band on his left wrist. The image at 1:59 at #105 shows the watch on Tensing's right wrist. As does the the image at 1:56 at #105. In the lower left corner of 1:56, you can see Tensing's (white) left arm behind the driver's (black) left arm and Tensing appears to be grabbing the shoulder strap of the seat belt. That photo is the moment the driver was shot, so it's intentionally blurred. Take away the blurring and you'll see Tensing's arm was trapped. And the prosecutor knows this. Given that Tensing's arm was trapped while the driver accelerated, it gave him reason to believe his life was in danger. Yer honor, the defense rests. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   9:35:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #166. To: nolu chan (#163) "The University should have suspended him and placed him on paid administrative leave until they could comply with required due process." But ... but then the angry black people might have rioted on our pretty campus!! Much better to rush to judgement, proclaim him guilty, fire him, and if that means we have to give him back pay, what the f**k. There was a shooting by another UC cop some years ago. I'll have to find it to see what happened there. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   9:43:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #167. To: misterwhite, nolu chan (#165) In the lower left corner of 1:56, you can see Tensing's (white) left arm behind the driver's (black) left arm and Tensing appears to be grabbing the shoulder strap of the seat belt. That photo is the moment the driver was shot, so it's intentionally blurred. Take away the blurring and you'll see Tensing's arm was trapped. And the prosecutor knows this. What a silly explanation. Tensing grabs a seat belt and won't let go and then shoots the guy, saying he was being dragged? Yer honor, the defense rests. And the jury returns a conviction in two hours or less with most deliberation going to the choice between a murder charge or involuntary manslaughter. I'm thinking this is most likely to end in a plea bargain, not a jury trial. Not a bad bed when only a few percent of criminal prosecutions end up in a jury trial, the rest taking plea bargains after being deliberately overcharged by the prosecutor. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   11:47:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #168. To: TooConservative (#167) "Tensing grabs a seat belt ..." He did? I said it appears he did. Maybe he didn't. Maybe his hand was caught between the seat belt and the driver. Maybe he did grab it when thrown off balance by the accelerating car. I don't know. We'll all know more when we see the unblurred photo. But whatever his hand is doing, his arm is trapped under the driver's arm. Lindenschmidt saw that and said he saw it. Oh, wait. He lied. Or was confused or something. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   13:03:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #169. To: TooConservative (#167) Tensing grabs a seat belt and won't let go and then shoots the guy, saying he was being dragged? Weren't you specifically told by a certain someone to not define drag? Someone here doesn't even want that word brought up. Gee, who could that be? Dead Culture Watch  posted on  2015-08-03   13:19:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #170. To: misterwhite (#168) He did? I said it appears he did. Maybe he didn't. Maybe his hand was caught between the seat belt and the driver. Maybe he did grab it when thrown off balance by the accelerating car. I've never heard of anyone stupid enough to get their arm caught on a seat belt, let alone be in danger of being dragged by it. To believe this tissue of phony excuses, we have to accept that Tensing is a totally low-grade moron, someone who has to be told to let go of a hot stove that is burning him. It's bizarre the lengths you are going to to try to explain away this murder-by-cop as a self-defense shooting. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   13:33:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #171. To: nolu chan (#163) I found three other UC officer involved deaths. None of them had their jobs terminated. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   14:27:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #172. To: Dead Culture Watch, misterwhite (#169) Weren't you specifically told by a certain someone to not define drag? Well, it was confusing. Apparently, he was not being dragged-dragged but was just kinda-dragged. Not really dragged kicking and screaming but just dragged enough to justify blowing a hole in the driver's head. Apparently, the Kampus Kops are trained extensively on knowing exactly how much dragging they have to tolerate before they just execute the citizen behind the wheel. It's all very professional. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   14:27:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #173. To: TooConservative (#170) "I've never heard of anyone stupid enough to get their arm caught on a seat belt" You constantly misquote me. I said his HAND may have been trapped by the seat belt. I said his ARM may have been trapped by the drivers arm. "let alone be in danger of being dragged by it." He said he was dragged. Two other officers said he was dragged. Video evidence shows his arm trapped by the driver. Video evidence shows him getting up off the ground 20-30 feet away from the initial traffic stop. "It's bizarre the lengths you are going to to try to explain away this murder-by-cop as a self-defense shooting." What's really bizarre are your efforts to convict this guy while presenting zero evidence to back your case. You have offered nothing except your smarmy remarks about the evidence I produce. Who are you, Jon Stewart? misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   14:39:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #174. To: TooConservative (#172) "but just dragged enough to justify blowing a hole in the driver's head." What's the minimum distance he must be dragged before he can defend himself? I'm assuming from your prior comments that he must also present evidence of dragging -- such as torn clothes and worn down heels, right? What about blood? Necessary or not? Is there a minimal standard of square inches of ripped-off skin before it's really dragging in your book? misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   14:46:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #175. To: misterwhite (#173) You constantly misquote me. I said his HAND may have been trapped by the seat belt. I said his ARM may have been trapped by the drivers arm. So now you're saying that a sneaky seat belt conspired with some Negro's arm and that together they ambushed this poor Kampus Kop and tried to drag him to his death and forced him to shoot the driver to death? Have you no shame? Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   15:15:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #176. To: misterwhite (#174) I'm assuming from your prior comments that he must also present evidence of dragging -- such as torn clothes and worn down heels, right? What about blood? Necessary or not? Is there a minimal standard of square inches of ripped-off skin before it's really dragging in your book? I'm not setting a minimum. I'm just saying that real dragging would leave some kind of evidence, assuming they had a local crime lab able to collect the evidence quickly. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   15:17:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #177. To: misterwhite (#165) Yer honor, the defense rests. You're right. Point conceded re arm. nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-03   15:44:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #178. To: TooConservative, misterwhite (#164) It may be the university has legal cause to fire him. We don't know all the specifics of the local contract. They may have cause but I have never seen such a CBA that contains a waiver of the otherwise mandatory due process. Here is the relevant excerpt of the University of Cincinnati and Police CBA on DISCIPLINE. The link goes to the full CBA. If/when management loses the grievance on the dismissal absent due process, the dismissal becomes null and void. They then have to go through the proper process to effect a dismissal. They might have legally gotten him off the payroll in a few weeks. Bypassing due process can leave them paying back pay until they accomplish due process. They could drag out the grievance process to step three and even wind up in court. Every day they drag it out without providing due process may become one more day due and payable. https://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/hr/labor_and_employee_relations/collective_bargaining/lrpd_fop_cba_lawenforcement.pdf COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT Between The University of Cincinnati University Law Enforcement Officers And The Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Labor Council, Inc. [...] ARTICLE 9 DISCIPLINE Section 9.1. The following language on Discipline is the sole source of rights and obligations of the parties to this contract in these matters. Section 9.2. A. An employee may receive discipline for just cause. B. The University may take disciplinary action against any employee for actions occurring while the employee is on duty, or off duty actions that negatively impact the employee's ability to function in the community, or working under the colors of the University, or where the employee's conduct violates his/her oath of office. C. Employees shall have the right to Union representation at all hearings to determine discipline and conferences that may result in corrective action, or may choose to present their own case. 12 - - - - - D. Discipline shall be taken according to the seriousness of the offense and the basic purpose of such action is corrective and not punitive. The University shall administer progressive discipline that provides the employee the opportunity to understand a problem and the steps necessary to improve identifiable deficiencies. E. Discipline may be in the form of, but not necessarily start at, written reprimands, suspensions up to thirty (30) calendar days, demotion and/or discharge. F. Employees subject to all written discipline (up to and including dismissal) shall receive notification of the actions in writing. G. Employees who are subject to discipline (except for failure to qualify at the end of their initial probationary period) that immediately results in a suspension, demotion or dismissal shall have a pre-disciplinary conference conducted by a hearing officer prior to the imposition of said action. All charges against the employee shall be in writing (charge letter) and specifically state in detail the alleged infraction and the anticipated discipline. If facts arise during investigation that cause the anticipated discipline to be revised, nothing shall prohibit such revision. The employee against whom charges are issued, or the University, shall have the right to one continuance of the scheduled conference. Such continuance must be requested at least one (1) working day in advance of the scheduled conference. Such continuance shall not exceed fourteen (14) calendar days unless another time is mutually agreed to. The employee must choose to: (1) appear at the disciplinary conference and present an oral or written statement in his/her defense; (2) appear at the disciplinary conference and have one (1) chosen representative present an oral or written statement in his/her defense; or (3) elect in writing to waive his/her opportunity to have a disciplinary conference. Failure of the employee to elect and pursue one (1) of these three (3) options will be deemed a waiver of the employee's right to the disciplinary conference. At the disciplinary conference, the employee may present any testimony, witness, or documents which explain whether or not the alleged misconduct occurred. Discipline involving suspension, demotion, or dismissal shall be imposed by the hearing officer only after issuing the findings and decision. The hearing officer may impose warning letters in place of suspensions. Such warning letters will carry the same weight as the suspension they replace and will be so evaluated in determining 13 - - - - - its appropriateness and in the assessment of any subsequent action. The Hearing Officer shall issue a written report within ten (10) calendar days of the conclusion of the conference. Should an employee decide to file a grievance over action taken as the result of a pre-disciplinary conference, such grievance shall be initiated at Step Two (2) of the grievance procedure. H. An employee charged with or under indictment for a felony, or any crime which results in a weapons disability, may be placed on a paid leave of absence or assigned to an administrative function in an un-armed status until resolution of the court proceedings. Upon a resolution of the proceedings, the employee may be subject to discipline by the University under Section C of this Article. I. The University reserves the right to terminate employment for the following reasons: 1. Voluntary resignation; 2. Discharge for just cause as set forth in this Article, Section 2, A. 3. Failure to return from a leave of absence within seven (7) calendar days of the issuance of a certified letter from the University or other mutually agreed to time frame. 4. Failure to return from a layoff within fourteen (14) calendar days of the issuance of a certified letter from the University. J. After twenty-four (24) months from date of issue, loss of pay discipline shall not be considered in any subsequent determination of discipline unless there has been discipline in the intervening period, and the force and effect period for reprimands shall be twelve (12) months. K. In all cases of dismissal, the employee is entitled to payment of all wages due. L. Employees who have been notified of an upcoming administrative hearing may meet with their steward during working hours with no loss of pay or benefits to prepare for the hearing; such meetings shall be for a reasonable period of time. 14 - - - - - M. Employees have the right to appeal discipline through the grievance procedure, however, reprimands may not be taken past Step 2. Section 9.3. Whenever the Employer or designee(s) interviews, questions, or interrogates bargaining unit members in reference to alleged or suspected misconduct, either in preliminary investigations or in disciplinary hearings, the following conditions shall apply: A. Employees being questioned as witnesses shall be so informed. B. When an employee who is suspected of misconduct is interviewed, questioned, or interrogated regarding such misconduct, he/she shall be apprised of the nature of the suspected misconduct as it is known at that time and his/her right to have the opportunity to have a FOP representative present to advise him/her during the questioning. C. Prior to questioning, employees (including witnesses) shall be informed that failure to respond or failure to respond truthfully may result in disciplinary action for insubordination or dishonesty. Employees shall also be informed of their Garrity and Piper warnings at this time, if the employer decides to utilize the warnings. D. Preliminary investigations and disciplinary hearings shall be held either during an employee's scheduled working hours or at a time in reasonable proximity to his/her shift. E. Questioning sessions shall be for reasonable periods and shall allow for personal necessities and rest period. F. No employee shall be subjected to abusive language during questioning. No promise of reward shall be made as an inducement to answer questions. G. The Police Chief may require an employee to take a polygraph examination, voice stress analysis, or similar technology. The employee shall be entitled to union representation pursuant to Section 2.C. of this Article. H. Any employee required by the Employer to attend an investigatory interview or disciplinary hearing outside of his/her scheduled working hours shall be paid for all such time. Section 9.4. Anonymous complaints with no corroborative evidence shall not be cause for disciplinary action. When an anonymous complaint is made against a 15 - - - - - bargaining unit member, and there is no corroborative evidence of any kind, the complaint shall be classified as unfounded. Section 9.5. Disciplinary action must be instituted within thirty (30) days of when the employer became aware of the employee's alleged misconduct. The thirty (30) day period may be extended if the employer has a legitimate business reason. Section 9.6. Employees shall be given a written disposition of any internal investigation or non-disciplinary complaint filed by an officer within thirty (30) days of the filing. [...] 16 - - - - - nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-03   16:30:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #179. To: TooConservative, misterwhite (#167) I'm thinking this is most likely to end in a plea bargain, not a jury trial. Not a bad bed when only a few percent of criminal prosecutions end up in a jury trial, the rest taking plea bargains.... On the basis of blurred photographic evidence, I can't determine what a court would find. There is a third possibility to a jury trial or plea bargain -- a bench trial (judge, no jury, at request of defendant only). Unless the photographic evidence is clear and compelling, I would not expect a plea bargain. I would roll the dice on reasonable doubt. I doubt the general statistic about plea bargains applies to cases of police officer involved shootings. I think the evidence will show that the officer shot while the car was barely moving, if not stationary. It appears to me, he pulled his gun to stop the guy from fleeing. A frame by frame analysis of unblurred frames may be definitive. nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-03   17:33:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #180. To: nolu chan (#179) (Edited) "Unless the photographic evidence is clear and compelling" The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. The photographic evidence does not refute anyone's statements -- his left arm was tangled up and he fell on the ground 20-30 feet away from the initial stop. The ONLY thing the prosecution has is when he fired. But even if the car just started to roll, he could claim that he feared he was about to be dragged and, therefore, defended himself. Self defense is HIS state of mind at the time, not the prosecution's. I think there's enough there for reasonable doubt. Not guilty. Plea bargaining down to voluntary manslaughter results in a first degree felony carrying 3-11 yrs. in prison. With that felony, his life as a cop is over. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   18:15:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #181. To: TooConservative (#175) "So now you're saying that a sneaky seat belt conspired with some Negro's arm and that together they ambushed this poor Kampus Kop and tried to drag him to his death and forced him to shoot the driver to death?" Correct. The quick-thinking cop tried to shoot the seatbelt to free himself, missed, and hit that poor Negro right in the haid. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   18:19:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #182. To: TooConservative (#176) "I'm just saying that real dragging would leave some kind of evidence" What if his arm was caught and he ran alongside yelling "Stop! Stop!" , he fired, then fell to the ground? I'm not saying that's what happened, but wouldn't you say he was "dragged" along? No evidence there. As I said before, there's way too much emphasis and debate on the word "drag", rather than a discussion of what actually occurred. His arm was caught and he ended up 20-30 feet from the initial stop. He said that, the photos show it, and the eyewitnesses confirmed it. The ONLY thing the prosecution has is when he fired. But I say if the car started to move and if he truly believed he was about to be dragged -- really dragged by your definition -- he had the right to self defense. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-03   18:37:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #183. To: nolu chan (#179) It appears to me, he pulled his gun to stop the guy from fleeing. Yep. He didn't have time to pull the gun after he started being "dragged". He was already pulling the gun. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   19:41:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #184. To: misterwhite (#181) Correct. The quick-thinking cop tried to shoot the seatbelt to free himself, missed, and hit that poor Negro right in the haid. That's your most credible explanation yet. Tooconservative  posted on  2015-08-03   19:42:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #185. To: misterwhite (#180) The photographic evidence does not refute anyone's statements -- his left arm was tangled up and he fell on the ground 20-30 feet away from the initial stop. A frame by frame analysis (think Zapruder film) may tell if the car is moving and its precise velocity and acceleration. I'll have to wait for the investigation report. It seems very unlikely that the other officers could see that his left arm was tangled up as you describe. Perhaps they can testify that what they observed was consistent with that. If the photographic evidence does not show that, the officer might be required to testify to get that claim into evidence. nolu chan  posted on  2015-08-04   2:30:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #186. To: nolu chan (#185) It seems very unlikely that the other officers could see that his left arm was tangled up as you describe Examining the frames immediately (split seconds) prior to the shot being fired, at least one of them clearly shows the officer's entire left arm extending straight toward the drivers chest area, which to me clearly discounts any suggestion his arm could have been tangled in the steering wheel, or anything else. Also, as I pointed out and has not been refuted, since the camera, as a "chest cam", presumably attached to the officer's chest, was apparently above the height of the top of the door of this sedan at the time of the shot being fired, there seems to be no question that the officer was in no way being dragged at the instant of firing. The most reasonable conclusion is that the officer was propelling himself, on foot, along side the car as it moved, as he made some kind of effort to stop the driver from leaving, and the officer made a split second bad decision to shoot the guy as part of that effort. Whether he may have been dragged after the instant of firing, perhaps by hanging on to the door or anything else, or even somehow entangled his arm, is not relevant to an examination of his decision to shoot. That he fell to the ground afterwards some distance from where he was after the car started to move, is not in dispute, and also not relevant. Pinguinite  posted on  2015-08-04   3:56:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #187. To: nolu chan (#185) "A frame by frame analysis (think Zapruder film) may tell if the car is moving and its precise velocity and acceleration. I'll have to wait for the investigation report." The prosecutor said he "fell backwards" when he fired. Not true. I saw an analysis that showed the location of the traffic stop and the location of Tensing on the ground. The distance is 20-30 feet in the direction of the car. But even that analysis is insuficient evidence. Some may claim that he shot DuBose then hung on for 20- 30 feet to make it appear he was dragged. (Hmmm. Why not 50 feet, dangle by one arm, scream, and drag his heels to make it look good?) DuBose intended to drive away with the cop right next to him. He would have had to turn to the left (into Tensing) to avoid the parked car in front of him. He started the car, put it in gear, and accelerated. The key question is, at what point in that sequence did Tensing fire and did he have a reasonable fear for his life at the time he fired? misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-04   9:24:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #188. To: Pinguinite (#186) (Edited) "at least one of them clearly shows the officer's entire left arm extending straight toward the drivers chest area ..." True, but his (white) arm disappears behind the driver's (black) left arm then appears again in the blurred area. Assuming the drivers left hand was on the steering wheel, it means Tensing's arm was trapped -- not in the steering wheel but under the driver's left arm. This was witnessed by another officer. Within minutes of the shooting, Officer Lindenschmidt stated, "They had a traffic stop, the guy took off on him, the officer got caught in his (DuBose's) arm, cause the guy reached for something he thought, so he grabbed on the car, that officer went down when he got tangled in the car, and fired." misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-04   9:47:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #189. To: Pinguinite (#186) "The most reasonable conclusion is that the officer was propelling himself, on foot, along side the car as it moved, as he made some kind of effort to stop the driver from leaving, and the officer made a split second bad decision to shoot the guy as part of that effort." The most reasonable conclusion is that the officer was propelling himself, on foot, along side the car as it moved, as he made some kind of effort to extricate his arm, and the officer made a split second decision to shoot the guy as part of that effort. That's my conclusion. misterwhite  posted on  2015-08-04   9:51:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com