Evidence in Chauvin case contradicted first police statement

[McBell]

There's also a legal expectation that cops would tell the truth, as lying is irresponsible. But I guess we don't get that either.

I am fairly certain that it is not being claimed that NOONE ever gets to look at the video.
But there are some legalities concerning rights of individuals that have to be taken into consideration before releasing videos.

 

[McBell]

Do suspects actually enjoy such legal protection of their image in the US, or is this argument entirely hypothetical?

Seriously?
The police enter the wrong house and handcuff an innocent woman while naked and you are asking if she has had any rights violated?

Where the hell do you live that that would not be a violation of her rights having the video of her false arrest and her naked body all over the news?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Evidence in Chauvin case contradicted first police statement (apnews.com)

Experts say the problem of inaccurate police reports is widespread. The initial report made no mention of Chauvin's knee in Floyd's neck; it just attributed Floyd's death to "medical distress." A similar report was cited in the Eric Garner case.



The article notes a growing chorus of complaints about police misinformation, which is being thwarted by video evidence and body cams.



However, police departments still sometimes withhold video footage, refusing to release it to the public.





The implication here is that, without video evidence, police probably would have gotten away with even more killings. Video technology exposes these police departments as liars.



"Have police now begun to lose the default position that they’re truthful?"

Yes, in my opinion. Of course, many of us already knew the brutality of police departments and their corrupt, mendacious ways. This is why more oversight and transparency are needed. All video feeds should be managed by a third party agency and released immediately upon public demand.

Police don't like to be policed themselves.

So much so...

They know to intentionally shut off the cameras before they commit crime themselves.

Now they can put out a story of their own. .

 

[Kooky]

Seriously?
The police enter the wrong house and handcuff an innocent woman while naked and you are asking if she has had any rights violated?

Where the hell do you live that that would not be a violation of her rights having the video of her false arrest and her naked body all over the news?

You know, there is no reason to be so rude over this.

Compared to other areas of the world, America has far reaching protections for freedom of speech in spite of people's rights to their own image, that's why I asked.

And US media seems pretty cavalier about releasing images and names of crime suspects and victims alike.

 

[Stevicus]

Seriously?
The police enter the wrong house and handcuff an innocent woman while naked and you are asking if she has had any rights violated?

Where the hell do you live that that would not be a violation of her rights having the video of her false arrest and her naked body all over the news?

Should this picture have remained hidden and never seen by the public?

Spoiler: Photo from Vietnam War

 

[Revoltingest]

Do suspects actually enjoy such legal protection of their image in the US, or is this argument entirely hypothetical?

I don't know.

 

[McBell]

Should this picture have remained hidden and never seen by the public?

Spoiler: Photo from Vietnam War

I do not know.
Did she give permission for the photo to be taken?
Did she give permission for the photo to be released?

 

[Revoltingest]

Should this picture have remained hidden and never seen by the public?

Spoiler: Photo from Vietnam War

She's a foreigner, & had no legal right to privacy here.

BTW....
Vietnam War's 'Napalm Girl' Kim Phuc Sees Her Scars as Beautiful Following Burn Treatment

 

[Kooky]

She's a foreigner, & had no legal right to privacy here.

Is that how it works in the US? I thought basic human rights existed for everyone, not only US citizens.

BTW....
Vietnam War's 'Napalm Girl' Kim Phuc Sees Her Scars as Beautiful Following Burn Treatment

And...? What do you think about that?

 

[Revoltingest]

Is that how it works in the US? I thought basic human rights existed for everyone, not only US citizens.

To not have one's photo published is a "basic human right" now?
Laws in a country typically are about what's done in the particular
country. Ameristan is that way too.

And...? What do you think about that?

She seems to be doing well after enduring that horror.
What say you?

 

[Kooky]

To not have one's photo published is a "basic human right" now?

It is an extension of both copyright and freedom of expression. Presumably, those are valid for foreigners as well?

Laws in a country typically are about what's done in the particular
country. Ameristan is that way too.

Laws in a country typically do not distinguish between foreigners and citizens, in terms of whom they apply to, where it would make no sense to make such a distinction. I would have expected America to be that way, too, but you seem to think otherwise.

She seems to be doing well after enduring that horror.
What say you?

She's had to have extensive surgery to get rid of the physical scars, and we may never know the extent of her emotional scars.
"Doing well" seems almost euphemistic in that light.

But what do I know, perhaps it wasn't such a big deal to burn people alive, because America almost saved them from communism.

 

[Revoltingest]

"Doing well" seems almost euphemistic in that light.

She strikes me as having a positive attitude about
what she endured. That's better than the alternative.
It's useful & interesting to know her story.

 

[Kooky]

She strikes me as having a positive attitude about
what she endured. That's better than the alternative.
It's useful & interesting to know her story.

Well I'm glad you posted a link to her story in a thread ostensibly about police brutality.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well I'm glad you posted a link to her story in a thread ostensibly about police brutality.

I sense some superfluous sarcasm.