The Glade 4.0

Even if one agent wanted to be malicious how can all those checks fail.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

If he's never input into a tracker, then when the shift changes, the oncoming shift doesn't know he's there. So, the only way to know he's there is when he makes noise, and then people are inclined to get to it "when they can". Normally that isn't a problem, because 90% of the demands for attention from inmates are bullshit. In this case.. it wasn't, but the oncoming people had no way to know that.

They SHOULD have been doing a count and caught it, but evidently did not. This entire thing screams an institution with lazy staff and inept, slipshod leadership.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yeah, but based on my limited experience, how do you bring someone into holding without "booking" him and putting him into said tracker? And not being fed?

I know it's totally irrelevant , but It just occurred me that even KSM got a couple of protein shakes and a copy of the Koran.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Not being fed is a result of him not being put in the tracker. As for him not being put in the tracker, basically the same way you mislay your keys or your ball game tickets, or something like that. One person is about to take care of him, they get distracted with something else they need to do, pass him off to someone else, that person thinks it's already been done... stuff like that.

This is why you HAVE TO have systems in place to prevent crap like this, because it can happen easily. Keeping track of people is never easy in any environment. If you are careless about it you will lose accountability very easily. It's true anywhere, not just correctional facilities. Ever seen cadets try to load a bus? It may be the most complicated military procedure on earth because they are learning to keep accountability and the term "chinese fire drill" is very generous.

Correctional personnel should not be learning, or having a chinese fire drill. We somehow managed to avoid losing anyone while accounting for 800 aliens who were coming and going on a minute-by-minute basis, and in our facility we don't have corrections personnel; we do it ourselves. These people are retards, and its amazing they haven't killed anyone.



Trust me, NO ONE was going to lose track of KSM.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Exactly, and exactly why I don't think he should have settled. I'm concern that nothing is going to be done to fix it. Our current Justice Department has little desire to clean its own house, and the media by and large doesn't want to peruse any story that could make the Administration look incompetent (not that I think the President has anything to do with the incident), especially when both of them can point at the settlement and say It's been taken care of.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Something will be done to fix it at the local level. This has nothing to do with the overall JD situation, and bad publicity always invites fixes. In fact, there will probably be somewhat of an overreaction. This doesn't affect the administration at all; only the most rabid anti-Obama lunatic could think accountability procedures at a particular jail could merit White House attention.

Him getting more money wouldn't change anything; if 4.5 million for some reason didn't make them fix anything, 5 or 6 million wouldn't either. The settlement is about the harm done to him as a civil matter. It isn't his job to hold out for fixes to the system; he should take the money and walk away a rich man.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I didn't mean he should get more money. I just think a trial would better force attention and therefore a resolution of the underlying issues. For me it wouldn't be about the money, it would be about being as sure as possible that doesn't happen to someone else.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Never arrested.

So, what do you call unwillingly holding a person against their will without lawful reason to do so? That's kidnapping.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Kidnapping requires intent. Otherwise every shopkeeper that ever detained a non-shoplifter by mistake would be in prison for kidnapping.

Kidnapping requires transporting or at least the intent to transport.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

They intended to detain him. There isn't such a thing as "accidental kidnapping" is there? If so, what's that called?



Fair enough, although they "transported" him to the cell.

What charge would holding someone without their will without being "transported" be?

[Real questions]

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

He was arrested. Putting him in a cell where he was not free to leave constitutes constructive arrest. Therefore, false arrest is a possibility. Kidnapping is not.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

He was not arrested, unless you don't need charges to arrest people. Which, if so, undermines my belief here but supports my belief that the police powers in this country are ridiculously out of control.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

????

You don't. You arrest someone on suspicion of a crime, then charge or release them.

He was arrrsted. Period. Look up constructive arrest. Arresting without ever issuing charges is a problem of false arrest. You evidently have decided police powers are out of control without actually knowing what they are and how they work. Constructive arrest is a protection for the citizen, not a way to arrest people without charges.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

This. Arrests must be supported by probable cause. By constructively arresting this guy, the agents obligate themselves to show what probable cause they have. If they had none, then they violated his Fourth Amendment rights even before they forgot about him. The fact that some people think that this means you can arrest people without charges indicates a great deal about the level of understanding on the part of those doing the complaining.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

What's the difference, then, between arrest and detain? I thought detained was without charges, and arrest was with.

The police should not be able to arrest without charges, if I don't have a crime being held against me the idea that the government can then take from me without consequence to the government is very much unjust.

Edit: Also, don't be a pussy if you wanna call me ignorant. Just do it. Don't nancy around with this "some people" or "those doing the complaining" thing.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Police officers don't press charges. Prosecutors do. And I think you're being unreasonable. If a cop sees you breaking into a house, with a gun, and you kick the dog and point the gun at someone's face, he's going to arrest you. At that point, he has a general idea of what laws you have broken, but it is unreasonable to expect him to know that he will charge you with these 8 specific charges. Further, 4 hours later he discovers it was a cap-gun. The appropriate charges have now changed.

You have to give the officers a chance to nullify a perceived threat, detain, question, and investigate. They need to figure out what's going on before pressing charges.

I didn't say that it was; I said that I have a hard time believing it was completely accidental. Which is to say:


The article doesn't specify exactly what he yelled, but I have to imagine that it was along the lines of, "help! I haven't had food or water for 2 days! Can anyone hear me?", etc. I'm sure corrections officers heave all kinds of crazy **** yelled at them, and no shortage of prisoners making bogus claims about "chest pains" or whatever. But that's not the kind of thing you just blow off with "I'll get to it later". And it's definitely not something that you just forget. They may not have believed his pleas for help were genuine, but the point is that they didn't even check. That elevates things to deliberate negligence rather than innocent, if horrible, mistake.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.

I agree entirely. Except for two things. First, "Investigate," unless a threat is imminent and clear, should happen first. Police are not about crime or harm prevention. Second, if detain and question doesn't lead to charges, that person should immediately be let go.

Is this harder for police? Yes. That's the price of a free society where you cannot be locked for days at a time without charges.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

That's ridiculous. The average person cannot be expected to protect themselves against all potential crimes.

Preventing crime, despite the slogans on cars and niceties from officials, is not the duty of the police force. Their actions or presence may deter crime, but prevention is not their job.

Of course, your thoughts on that are encouraged and supported by the tendencies of certain political positions that it is in fact the duty of government to protect you, and there you dont need the means to do it yourself.

Have you seen the movie The Purge? Because that's exactly what I'm thinking of when people say stuff like this. In fact the writer has gone on record as saying he wrote it as a satire of this particular view.

The police are not going to be able to protect you from little crimes like theft, but you certainly need them to protect you from crimes like, "seven angry armed guys want to invade your house, tie up all the occupants in the basement, rape them to death individually, load all your **** onto a truck, and set the place on fire." Are you going to protect yourself from that? Bullshit. You're relatively safe from that because all someone has to do is reach 911 and the police will show up and prevent it from happening.

Are you saying that deterring crime is different than preventing crime, or that even if they do deter/prevent crime, doing so isn't actually part of the job description?

It is not in the job description of any law enforcement officer to prevent or deter crime.