No Charges Prison For Guards Who Allegedly Boiled Schizophrenic Black Man to Death

[GMDino]

(03-20-2017, 02:18 PM)Benton Wrote: Sounds like a more believable account. 

(03-20-2017, 03:45 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Yup, and it is amazing how the content of the story is so different from the OP.

Only difference is it includes the quotes from the officers.

[Dill]

(03-19-2017, 08:43 PM)xxlt Wrote: Why include any details in the headline? Why not just say, "Formerly living being no longer living?" The details could be included in the article. No wait, by mentioning any details about the victim or the perpetrators of the act which resulted in his death we would be trivializing it, so no article, just a headline would be better. And maybe it should just say, "Being, which may or may not have formerly been living, now may or may not be dead." Yes, that would be the best way to communicate the pertinent information without bias or prejudice or hurt feelings.

Some would repress any implication that structural racism exists in the US carceral archipelago--or any other US institution for that matter. 

Reporting the race of a victim's mistreatment flies in the face of their agenda.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-19-2017, 09:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That line is about a hundred miles to your six, it was crossed long ago.  Of course, to some on this board pointing this out somehow calls your integrity into question.  

(03-20-2017, 04:27 PM)Dill Wrote: Some would repress any implication that structural racism exists in the US carceral archipelago--or any other US institution for that matter. 

Reporting the race of a victim's mistreatment flies in the face of their agenda.

Again, like clockwork.  The usual suspects engaging in their usual behavior. 

[*bfine32*]

(03-20-2017, 04:27 PM)Dill Wrote: Some would repress any implication that structural racism exists in the US carceral archipelago--or any other US institution for that matter. 

Reporting the race of a victim's mistreatment flies in the face of their agenda.

Admittedly my agenda is not to divide us along lines of race; unfortunately, not everyone shares this agenda. I felt race played no part in this story and definitely didn't need to be in the headline. How about you?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-20-2017, 04:20 PM)GMDino Wrote: Only difference is it includes the quotes from the officers.

Do you really believe the BS you post? Or are you just so conditioned to automatically throw it out there?
- - - - - - - - - - -

OP:
-Thrown into the shower as punishment.
Other:
-Thrown into the shower because he was covered in feces.

OP:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours as punishment.
Other:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours because he refused to use it to remove all the feces covering his body.

OP:
-Makes sure to include race in the title.
Other:
-Uses the person's actual name rather than just "black man".

OP:
-Claims the man was "boiled to death".
Other:
-Claims the man died due an undiagnosed heart disease.

OP:
-Shower was "rigged" so they could turn it from scalding hot to icy cold, making it sound like some kind of unofficial modification used specifically for torture.
Other:
-Shower is operated from another room to prevent people from turning it off.

OP:
-Makes judgement on the case "But in an unconscionable decision" as in the article right now is telling you that the decision was wrong. Even refers to it as a "medieval-era boiling".
Other:
-Just states what happened and lets you make your own decisions.

- - - - - - - - - - -

That's just me quickly glancing over the two for some differences. But you're right, they're basically the exact same! ...you know, minus the reasoning, the context, the judgement, the presentation of information, and sensationalism, among other things. Yup, totally the same....

[xxlt]

(03-20-2017, 02:18 PM)Benton Wrote: Sounds like a more believable account. 

Sounds like a different account. Sounds like an account with some new details. What makes it sound more believable?

Prosecutors have a lot of discretion. I saw more in the second account that recommended a criminal charge than in the first account, to be honest.

I would not expect guards who murdered an inmate (or another guard) or committed manslaughter to confess. I would expect conflicting accounts in an incident like this, and I would expect at trial a jury to determine whether they believed the guards were culpable for injuries to and/or the death of this inmate. It seems odd that didn't happen.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2017, 05:39 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Do you really believe the BS you post? Or are you just so conditioned to automatically throw it out there?
- - - - - - - - - - -

OP:
-Thrown into the shower as punishment.
Other:
-Thrown into the shower because he was covered in feces.

OP:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours as punishment.
Other:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours because he refused to use it to remove all the feces covering his body.

OP:
-Makes sure to include race in the title.
Other:
-Uses the person's actual name rather than just "black man".

OP:
-Claims the man was "boiled to death".
Other:
-Claims the man died due an undiagnosed heart disease.

OP:
-Shower was "rigged" so they could turn it from scalding hot to icy cold, making it sound like some kind of unofficial modification used specifically for torture.
Other:
-Shower is operated from another room to prevent people from turning it off.

OP:
-Makes judgement on the case "But in an unconscionable decision" as in the article right now is telling you that the decision was wrong. Even refers to it as a "medieval-era boiling".
Other:
-Just states what happened and lets you make your own decisions.

- - - - - - - - - - -

That's just me quickly glancing over the two for some differences. But you're right, they're basically the exact same! ...you know, minus the reasoning, the context, the judgement, the presentation of information, and sensationalism, among other things. Yup, totally the same....

This is GMDino's MO when it comes to stories regarding LEO's or similar professions.  He was the only person arguing that the police shot a suspect without cause when there was video showing the suspect point a gun directly at the officer.  He persisted despite all others pointing out how wrong he was until he finally apologized a day or two later after removing his had from his posterior.  He is sadly, not alone in this.

I'm glad you raised the differences in the story point by point.  However, rest assured he won't do anything like actually address these points.

[xxlt]

(03-20-2017, 05:39 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Do you really believe the BS you post? Or are you just so conditioned to automatically throw it out there?
- - - - - - - - - - -

OP:
-Thrown into the shower as punishment.
Other:
-Thrown into the shower because he was covered in feces.

OP:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours as punishment.
Other:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours because he refused to use it to remove all the feces covering his body.

OP:
-Makes sure to include race in the title.
Other:
-Uses the person's actual name rather than just "black man".

OP:
-Claims the man was "boiled to death".
Other:
-Claims the man died due an undiagnosed heart disease.

OP:
-Shower was "rigged" so they could turn it from scalding hot to icy cold, making it sound like some kind of unofficial modification used specifically for torture.
Other:
-Shower is operated from another room to prevent people from turning it off.

OP:
-Makes judgement on the case "But in an unconscionable decision" as in the article right now is telling you that the decision was wrong. Even refers to it as a "medieval-era boiling".
Other:
-Just states what happened and lets you make your own decisions.

- - - - - - - - - - -

That's just me quickly glancing over the two for some differences. But you're right, they're basically the exact same! ...you know, minus the reasoning, the context, the judgement, the presentation of information, and sensationalism, among other things. Yup, totally the same....

You did a fantastic job of highlighting the differences in the accounts. Well done!

Now, please explain how the accounts contain descriptions of what happened that are mutually exclusive.

For example, how is it impossible that the shower was controlled from an adjacent room to prevent an inmate in the shower from turning it off and also capable of being controlled from said room with the water temperature t turned from icy cold to scalding hot?

[xxlt]

(03-20-2017, 05:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is GMDino's MO when it comes to stories regarding LEO's or similar professions.  He was the only person arguing that the police shot a suspect without cause when there was video showing the suspect point a gun directly at the officer.  He persisted despite all others pointing out how wrong he was until he finally apologized a day or two later after removing his had from his posterior.  He is sadly, not alone in this.

I'm glad you raised the differences in the story point by point.  However, rest assured he won't do anything like actually address these points.

Are you suggesting that differences in how an arrest, use of force, or other critical incident in law enforcement or a correctional setting are described are unusual?

Do the officers on scene, the suspects or inmates, and all other witnesses typically provide identical accounts of such events in your professional experience?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2017, 05:48 PM)xxlt Wrote: You did a fantastic job of highlighting the differences in the accounts. Well done!

Now, please explain how the accounts contain descriptions of what happened that are mutually exclusive.

He doesn't have to, the DA already did that for him.  That leaves you with two options, either the DA is correct in their conclusion or they are not.    If they are not then why?  Please keep in mind that they probably have access to more information about this case than you do.

[xxlt]

(03-20-2017, 05:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: He doesn't have to, the DA already did that for him.  That leaves you with two options, either the DA is correct in their conclusion or they are not.    If they are not then why?  Please keep in mind that they probably have access to more information about this case than you do.

Oh. So, if the DA says so it is correct. Kind of like if the President does it, it isn't illegal. I will say I hope the DA in your community never brings a charge against you, because you would certainly not dare to question the decision of the DA. Just plead guilty and turn in your badge would be the only play in such an unfortunate scenario. As someone who considers you a competent LEO entitled to due process, I would hate to see it go down like that. But, you have your values and I respect that.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2017, 05:59 PM)xxlt Wrote: Oh. So, if the DA says so it is correct.

I said that is one of two options, yes.

 

Quote:Kind of like if the President does it, it isn't illegal. I will say I hope the DA in your community never brings a charge against you, because you would certainly not dare to question the decision of the DA.

Challenge it all day, it's exactly what I asked you to do.

Quote:Just plead guilty and turn in your badge would be the only play in such an unfortunate scenario. As someone who considers you a competent LEO entitled to due process, I would hate to see it go down like that. But, you have your values and I respect that.

You didn't take my bourbon suggestion did you?

[Benton]

(03-20-2017, 05:43 PM)xxlt Wrote: Sounds like a different account. Sounds like an account with some new details. What makes it sound more believable?

 

LeonardLeap's noting of the differences pretty well covers the "more believable" part. There's a lot of editorializing in the first one, some interpretations, some omitted information. My wife was an RN in a psychiatric unit. From her experiences, I find it more believable a mental patient would cover himself or his stuff in feces and he was forced to clean himself up, as opposed to some guards didn't like a black guy so they tortured him.

[GMDino]

(03-20-2017, 05:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is GMDino's MO when it comes to stories regarding LEO's or similar professions.  He was the only person arguing that the police shot a suspect without cause when there was video showing the suspect point a gun directly at the officer.  He persisted despite all others pointing out how wrong he was until he finally apologized a day or two later after removing his had from his posterior.  He is sadly, not alone in this.

I'm glad you raised the differences in the story point by point.  However, rest assured he won't do anything like actually address these points.

You're still bringing up that I was wrong and admitted it as if that's a bad thing.

How sad for you.

[GMDino]

(03-20-2017, 05:39 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Do you really believe the BS you post? Or are you just so conditioned to automatically throw it out there?
- - - - - - - - - - -

OP:
-Thrown into the shower as punishment.
Other:
-Thrown into the shower because he was covered in feces.

Already shared a second link to state that.

OP:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours as punishment.
Other:
-Was kept in the shower for 2 hours because he refused to use it to remove all the feces covering his body.

Again this what the officers said...and the DA believed.  Thanks.

OP:
-Makes sure to include race in the title.
Other:
-Uses the person's actual name rather than just "black man".

Again...diversion.  Thanks.

OP:
-Claims the man was "boiled to death".
Other:
-Claims the man died due an undiagnosed heart disease.

A guess...no better than than Op.  Thanks.

OP:
-Shower was "rigged" so they could turn it from scalding hot to icy cold, making it sound like some kind of unofficial modification used specifically for torture.
Other:
-Shower is operated from another room to prevent people from turning it off.

And it was 40 degrees hotter than it should have been.  (See second story.)  Thanks.

OP:
-Makes judgement on the case "But in an unconscionable decision" as in the article right now is telling you that the decision was wrong. Even refers to it as a "medieval-era boiling".
Other:
-Just states what happened and lets you make your own decisions.

Thanks for making your own decision.

- - - - - - - - - - -

That's just me quickly glancing over the two for some differences. But you're right, they're basically the exact same! ...you know, minus the reasoning, the context, the judgement, the presentation of information, and sensationalism, among other things. Yup, totally the same....

That's just me reading three different accounts and one man still being dead and no one being charged for doing anything wrong.

Thanks.

[Dill]

(03-20-2017, 06:05 PM)Benton Wrote: LeonardLeap's noting of the differences pretty well covers the "more believable" part. There's a lot of editorializing in the first one, some interpretations, some omitted information. My wife was an RN in a psychiatric unit. From her experiences, I find it more believable a mental patient would cover himself or his stuff in feces and he was forced to clean himself up, as opposed to some guards didn't like a black guy so they tortured him.

It's still hard to tell exactly what happened.  But I don't see a path from "covered with feces and refused to wash" to "scalded to death" which does not involve serious negligence at the least. 

I don't automatically distrust a DA's version in such cases either.

[Dill]

(03-20-2017, 05:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Admittedly my agenda is not to divide us along lines of race; unfortunately, not everyone shares this agenda. I felt race played no part in this story and definitely didn't need to be in the headline. How about you?

I didn't "feel" anything about race until people started complaining it was mentioned.

The best way to end racial division is to get rid of racism, not censor any mention of race. 

[Dill]

(03-20-2017, 05:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Again, like clockwork.  The usual suspects engaging in their usual behavior. 

LOL, might as well as add "sad" if you don't have a point.

[*bfine32*]

(03-20-2017, 10:11 PM)Dill Wrote: I didn't "feel" anything about race until people started complaining it was mentioned.

The best way to end racial division is to get rid of racism, not censor any mention of race. 

Cannot say I'm surprised that you chose not to answer the question that challenged your baseless assertion. 

Mentioning something is calling attention in a casual or inadvertent manner. Race was not mentioned in the OP it was stressed. 

Your dismissal of it being stressed in the OP is either intentional or not. If you are truly as concerned about race relations as the facade you present, my hope is that it was not intentional and you are just blind to it.

Actually the best way to end racial division is not the highlight it (or as some may say "mention") in every situation; especially when it is obvious to even the simplest of reader, that race was not a factor. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2017, 10:19 PM)Dill Wrote: LOL, might as well as "sad" if you don't have a point.

I've made plenty of cogent points in this thread.  In the post you quoted I pointed out how I precisely predicted how people like you and GMDino would react.  It's fun to be right.