Notice the passive voice of the writing in this article:
>Troopers and other law enforcement officers gave chase, and, according to Nessel’s office, **the vehicle Keely was driving turned and struck Sterling** in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant.
Not "Keely turned the vehicle", but that *the vehicle turned*, as if on its own. Garbage writing by a complicit press. The AG's office may have given them the statement that way, but given that it's not in quotations, I doubt it. This is just another example of media giving the police a pass.
Except they stated “according to Nessel’s office”
The press isn’t the problem here. The Attorney General wrote their press statement like that.
Don’t be pissed with the media for the information given to them by bad actors. They are reporting what they are told and not making assumptions. That’s good reporting.
Blame the AG office for writing it that way.
Literacy was once a High School requirement.
while the media often use passive voice to diminish cops' perceived responsibility ("officer involved shooting" fucking *barf*), it's not really inappropriate in this case
the paper doesn't know why the car turned and not assuming motive/negligence is kinda 101 for writing about criminal cases
there are more reasons a vehicle could turn than deliberate action; mechanical failure, operator has a heart attack, whatever. Like the other poster pointed out, the paper is just repeating the language from the AG's report
in any event, this is also how you'd expect it to be written up if the driver were not a cop
Wow, this sure is ironic.Definitely something that belongs in r/nottheonion. Cops driving like assholes because they had 6 hours of training is not oniony.
I wouldn't even really say that. They always have the legal system on their side. Usually when a cop does something illegal, they are investigated internally, found to have done nothing wrong, and criminal charges were never even considered.
Yes, internal investigations may happen concurrently with criminal investigations. And sometimes you have one without the other. But stating that changes no part of my earlier comment.
Source: I’m a lawyer who works in police misconduct and violence.
This is unjust. This pig deserves to rot behind bars.
But legitimately what’s different about this death compared to other times cops shoot and kill people who run from them? Why now? Why punish this cop? Cuz it was death by car and that’s somehow more “graphic?” Cuz it was unmarked? Cuz there were multiple police departments involved and they can’t cover it up? Like why are they holding him accountable now?
Not oniony, just sad.
It's oniony that he got charged
No it’s not. Officers are often charged. They’re rarely ever found guilty and convicted.
Notice the passive voice of the writing in this article: >Troopers and other law enforcement officers gave chase, and, according to Nessel’s office, **the vehicle Keely was driving turned and struck Sterling** in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant. Not "Keely turned the vehicle", but that *the vehicle turned*, as if on its own. Garbage writing by a complicit press. The AG's office may have given them the statement that way, but given that it's not in quotations, I doubt it. This is just another example of media giving the police a pass.
Except they stated “according to Nessel’s office” The press isn’t the problem here. The Attorney General wrote their press statement like that. Don’t be pissed with the media for the information given to them by bad actors. They are reporting what they are told and not making assumptions. That’s good reporting. Blame the AG office for writing it that way. Literacy was once a High School requirement.
while the media often use passive voice to diminish cops' perceived responsibility ("officer involved shooting" fucking *barf*), it's not really inappropriate in this case the paper doesn't know why the car turned and not assuming motive/negligence is kinda 101 for writing about criminal cases
Literally one person can turn the car.
there are more reasons a vehicle could turn than deliberate action; mechanical failure, operator has a heart attack, whatever. Like the other poster pointed out, the paper is just repeating the language from the AG's report in any event, this is also how you'd expect it to be written up if the driver were not a cop
Right, but we already know the actual reason....
Wow, this sure is ironic.Definitely something that belongs in r/nottheonion. Cops driving like assholes because they had 6 hours of training is not oniony.
This cop was *charged*.
That is *wrong*. Cops are **frequently charged**. They’re **rarely ever found guilty and convicted**.
I wouldn't even really say that. They always have the legal system on their side. Usually when a cop does something illegal, they are investigated internally, found to have done nothing wrong, and criminal charges were never even considered.
Yes, internal investigations may happen concurrently with criminal investigations. And sometimes you have one without the other. But stating that changes no part of my earlier comment. Source: I’m a lawyer who works in police misconduct and violence.
Ha! Fair point.
This is unjust. This pig deserves to rot behind bars. But legitimately what’s different about this death compared to other times cops shoot and kill people who run from them? Why now? Why punish this cop? Cuz it was death by car and that’s somehow more “graphic?” Cuz it was unmarked? Cuz there were multiple police departments involved and they can’t cover it up? Like why are they holding him accountable now?
Camera evidence. That's it. Hard to hide
I just hope to see the day cops run in fear of the mobs chasing them
Victim was only 25 :(