Chicago officer didn't question witnesses in 2005 police shooting

Thanks SFC. In your opinion, would having an outside agency really be an end all be all to this? I ask being that Ferguson now has outside agencies that investigate police misconduct, but the issue I see with it, could it used as a vendetta based system against cops, and if the DOJ investigates, they make recommendations if things are found to be in error, there is still no action taken by the PD, there is no "real" repercussions for not doing the recommendations. It also makes it seem to the populace and many news pundits that the DOJ/FBI have nothing better to do with their time, then to run frivolous investigations into state PD's. In your opinion, do you think my comments have merit? Not speaking on particulars, being like you, I'm not privy to every single detail.

I don't think it will ever end. Some will never believe police have a desire to do the right thing and work to help the communities regardless of the conditions that are put in place and regardless of outside agencies involvement. As far as the recommendations go, it is hard for the FBI and DOJ to provide recommendations that will always be able to be completely followed. Many in the FBI have never worked local law enforcement therefore don't know what is truly feasible in patrol operations. Another issue, which occurred in Ferguson is the recommendations cost to the city, which the city council stated their city couldn't afford.

When it comes down to it I believe a small amount of law enforcement are criminal just like a small amount of priests are criminals.

Communities and law enforcement just have to find ways to work together to acceive their goals effectively.

Thanks SFC. Assist, Protect, Defend. Hallmarks of ANY MP. But in the Corps, we have redundancy in regards to actions taken by MP's on the populace. You have the PMO, who can deal with you, and you have your unit who can make your life hell at the same time. Both can take rank, and both will have you looking through bars or living as a civilian. Those together keep most MP's honest. Now in the civilian world, there isn't the "double redundancy" MP's have. It's one group of folks and as long as they're happy with you, make your quota, and show up for work, what happens at work "stays" at work. Also as an MP the "thin blue line" wasn't as prevalent as it is in the civilian world. For me, none of us believed in snitching on another, but if you were really f*ckin up, business would be handled in house. I don't see that looking at this single case. I see the line corrupted some, allowed practices that are questionable to become "normal". If a large PD like this condones this action, how many others are allowing it? OK had a Sherriff wanna be shoot and kill a man, and no one really batted an eye. And his excuse was he grabbed the wrong weapon? He was looking for a taser? I haven't been on the road in 20 years, but my weapon was on ONE side, and my club or other issues items on the other. There was NEVER a case where I could make a "mistake" like that. How do you think these "norms" could be undone and effectively done away with, OR can they?

SSG Warren Swan - This is why I think this process of civilian oversight is beginning to take hold in so many communities. I don't 100% agree with it as civilians don't fully understand LE and the law. What I would like to see is an oversight by retired LE personnel. Us old guys holding the feet to the fire. Keeping the LE officers honest and professional. These retired officers cannot be from the agency that they have oversight of so there could not be any perception of the thin blue line. Just my two cents.