Here’s a piece on Nevada’s new attorney general Adam Laxalt and his priorities for the job–but, be warned Jon Ralston says this article doesn’t have a “scintilla of news.” [RJ]
KTNV got fined $115,000 by the FCC for running “Special Reports” that were really just ads for car dealerships. [RJ]
In light of the recent NY grand jury decision relating to the chokehold related death of Eric Garner, here’s a look at Metro’s chokehold policy. [8NewsNow]
We missed this one a few weeks ago when it first ran, but Cal Potter is representing a clerk with the DA’s office who is suing Clark County over daily searches upon entering the courthouse. [8NewsNow]
Based on your comments, something is definitely going on at LSC, but no one has quite said what yet…
Jesus Christ, why does Jon Ralston have such a hard on for Laxalt? Ralston's "coverage" of Laxalt during the campaign was, well, less than ethical. Ralston gunned hard to take Laxalt out, and apparently hasn't given up. What a liberal hack.
Man, I couldn't agree more. I'm an R, so I figured it was my bias, but I did not understand why Ralston decided that Lucy Flores and Ross Miller needed votes so bad that he would spend the entire election cycle targeting Laxalt and Hutch. And with Laxalt, Ralston seemed hell-bent on ruining his career.
Guest
Anonymous
December 8, 2014 5:15 pm
I agree. Ralston's tiresome on this subject and marginalizing himself with it.
The gravitas of Ralston's show has been over estimated by Nevada politicos for quite some time. Nobody but a handful of political junkies were watching. It was insider baseball that had no impact or influence on the general populace. If it were otherwise, it would have an audience and wouldn't be cancelled this week.
Guest
Lawyer Bird
December 8, 2014 6:10 pm
Ralston saying it or not, the RJ piece is non-news.
Guest
Anonymous
December 9, 2014 12:10 am
More importantly, anyone have any more news on Lionel Sawyer & Collins?
Brin Gibson is also fleeing the sinking ship. He's off to head the gaming division of the AG's office. From the RJ article: "Longtime firm partner Ellen Whittemore left in the spring to form her own practice. Mark Clayton joined Greenberg Traurig in August and Jennifer Roberts became a partner at Duane Morris LLP in October"
@11:11a most of the non-partner staff are already looking for jobs
Guest
Anonymous
December 9, 2014 6:24 am
Okay, let's be clear. If an officer is properly trained, the chokehold is an excellent tool in the escalation of force tool box. The problem is that officers in many jurisdictions are not properly trained any more because the move is frowned upon. Let's face it, the fuzz is here to use violence to enforce the laws of the land. Sure, the laws are often ridiculous and stupid, but such is the fate of those who visit or live in the Republic. Do not demonize the cops. Yes, many of them are morons. Yes, at any given time any given cop could be acting like a petty dictator. It's a stretch, however, to say that there is a problem with rogue cops. By narrowing the range of options in a cop's options for use of force, you invite more horrible accidents, like what happened to the guy in New York. (On the other hand, Michael Brown needed a cap in his punk ass. There was a time when punks knew to toe the line. It's on Brown's violent parents, friends, family and teachers that he thought roughing up a cop after roughing up a businessman was okay.)
"Although the city instructs its officers that use of a chokehold does not constitute deadly force, since 1975 no less than 16 persons have died following the use of a chokehold by an LAPD police officer. Twelve have been Negro males […]
It is undisputed that chokeholds pose a high and unpredictable risk of serious injury or death. Chokeholds are intended to bring a subject under control by causing pain and rendering him unconscious. Depending on the position of the officer’s arm and the force applied, the victim’s voluntary or involuntary reaction, and his state of health, an officer may inadvertently crush the victim’s larynx, trachea, or hyoid. The result may be death caused by either cardiac arrest or asphyxiation. An LAPD officer described the reaction of a person to being choked as “do[ing] the chicken,” in reference apparently to the reactions of a chicken when its neck is wrung. The victim experiences extreme pain. His face turns blue as he is deprived of oxygen, he goes into spasmodic convulsions, his eyes roll back, his body wriggles, his feet kick up and down, and his arms move about wildly[…]
The training given LAPD officers provides additional revealing evidence of the city’s chokehold policy. Officer Speer testified that in instructing officers concerning the use of force, the LAPD does not distinguish between felony and misdemeanor suspects. Moreover, the officers are taught to maintain the chokehold until the suspect goes limp, despite substantial evidence that the application of a chokehold invariably induces a “flight or flee” syndrome, producing an involuntary struggle by the victim which can easily be misinterpreted by the officer as willful resistance that must be overcome by prolonging the chokehold and increasing the force applied. In addition, officers are instructed that the chokeholds can be safely deployed for up to three or four minutes. Robert Jarvis, the city’s expert who has taught at the Los Angeles Police Academy for the past 12 years, admitted that officers are never told that the bar-arm control can cause death if applied for just two seconds. Of the nine deaths for which evidence was submitted to the District Court, the average duration of the choke where specified was approximately 40 seconds."
The more things change the more they stay the same. Also, Thurgood Marshall thinks you're a fucking idiot.
I have a serious question for 10:24, 9:03, and 9:14. What should an officer do when he/she has made the decision that an individual needs to be taken into custody and that individual has made it clear that he/she is not going peacefully? When answering, please don't get into whether the officer correctly decided to take the individual into custody–that's a separate issue.
The officer should not use lethal force (choking, shooting) against an unarmed person. Lesser alternatives (taser, baton, assistance from other officers, recognition of mental health issues and proportionate response) must be used. On occasion, absent a danger to the community, allowing the person to leave and apprehending at a later time is appropriate. The shoot first, fail to give aid after approach is never right.
Seeing as the academy class for use of force requires 80+ hours including private practice time there is no way the reality of law enforcement use of force can be rationally debated in this forum. That said there are a few issues that need to be clarified. This was not and is not a "choke hold." It was and is a lateral vascular neck restraint. The windpipe is not impacted. The combination of venous compression and vagus stimulation is used, not cutting off air flow. The vast majority of LVNR uses do not result in the subject losing consciousness.
In restraint techniques, any number of things can lead to death. In fact, level 6 on the force continuum (the deadly force level) includes firearms, impact tools, PIT, l/l shotguns and empty hands to name a few. Simply put, if the officer is at level 6 where deadly force is authorized it does not really matter how it is applied. That said, the LVNR is not in and of itself deadly force. It falls into temporary incapacitation because when performed properly it has a very low (statistically negligible) possibility of death. There is an issue with Sudden Death Syndrome that historically has impacted minority males more than all other groups. Science cannot say for sure why but it is a known issue that all officers are instructed about. And before you say "but if anyone could die it is lethal force" let me remind you that people have died as a proximate result of chemical agents too, but those are also classified as non-lethal force, as are electrical stimulation devices like the Taser used here by many agencies.
Simple answer is we ask the police to do a large number of things, including taking truly bad people into custody. People who occasionally don't want to be in custody. We give them a wide array of tools to do so. LVNR is one of them. We can debate all day long if the recent use was appropriate or not. I personally think the real tragedy in this case was that in New York selling cigarettes individually and without a license is criminal, or at least so criminal the cops actually send a bunch if guys to arrest you.
Jesus Christ, why does Jon Ralston have such a hard on for Laxalt? Ralston's "coverage" of Laxalt during the campaign was, well, less than ethical. Ralston gunned hard to take Laxalt out, and apparently hasn't given up. What a liberal hack.
Man, I couldn't agree more. I'm an R, so I figured it was my bias, but I did not understand why Ralston decided that Lucy Flores and Ross Miller needed votes so bad that he would spend the entire election cycle targeting Laxalt and Hutch. And with Laxalt, Ralston seemed hell-bent on ruining his career.
I agree. Ralston's tiresome on this subject and marginalizing himself with it.
He'll be even more marginalized now since his show is cancelled.
The gravitas of Ralston's show has been over estimated by Nevada politicos for quite some time. Nobody but a handful of political junkies were watching. It was insider baseball that had no impact or influence on the general populace. If it were otherwise, it would have an audience and wouldn't be cancelled this week.
Ralston saying it or not, the RJ piece is non-news.
More importantly, anyone have any more news on Lionel Sawyer & Collins?
Brin Gibson is also fleeing the sinking ship. He's off to head the gaming division of the AG's office. From the RJ article: "Longtime firm partner Ellen Whittemore left in the spring to form her own practice. Mark Clayton joined Greenberg Traurig in August and Jennifer Roberts became a partner at Duane Morris LLP in October"
http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/laxalt-taps-lionel-sawyer-attorney-head-gaming-division
That's some big fire power for the AG's office.
um…how long has he been practicing??
Gibson has been practicing for 6 years (admitted 2008). Worked as "Special Assistant" to Oscar Goodman a decade ago after graduating BYU.
Family connections help.
Is LSC really closing by year end?
@11:11a most of the non-partner staff are already looking for jobs
Okay, let's be clear. If an officer is properly trained, the chokehold is an excellent tool in the escalation of force tool box. The problem is that officers in many jurisdictions are not properly trained any more because the move is frowned upon. Let's face it, the fuzz is here to use violence to enforce the laws of the land. Sure, the laws are often ridiculous and stupid, but such is the fate of those who visit or live in the Republic. Do not demonize the cops. Yes, many of them are morons. Yes, at any given time any given cop could be acting like a petty dictator. It's a stretch, however, to say that there is a problem with rogue cops. By narrowing the range of options in a cop's options for use of force, you invite more horrible accidents, like what happened to the guy in New York. (On the other hand, Michael Brown needed a cap in his punk ass. There was a time when punks knew to toe the line. It's on Brown's violent parents, friends, family and teachers that he thought roughing up a cop after roughing up a businessman was okay.)
Thurgood Marshall begs to differ:
"Although the city instructs its officers that use of a chokehold does not constitute deadly force, since 1975 no less than 16 persons have died following the use of a chokehold by an LAPD police officer. Twelve have been Negro males […]
It is undisputed that chokeholds pose a high and unpredictable risk of serious injury or death. Chokeholds are intended to bring a subject under control by causing pain and rendering him unconscious. Depending on the position of the officer’s arm and the force applied, the victim’s voluntary or involuntary reaction, and his state of health, an officer may inadvertently crush the victim’s larynx, trachea, or hyoid. The result may be death caused by either cardiac arrest or asphyxiation. An LAPD officer described the reaction of a person to being choked as “do[ing] the chicken,” in reference apparently to the reactions of a chicken when its neck is wrung. The victim experiences extreme pain. His face turns blue as he is deprived of oxygen, he goes into spasmodic convulsions, his eyes roll back, his body wriggles, his feet kick up and down, and his arms move about wildly[…]
The training given LAPD officers provides additional revealing evidence of the city’s chokehold policy. Officer Speer testified that in instructing officers concerning the use of force, the LAPD does not distinguish between felony and misdemeanor suspects. Moreover, the officers are taught to maintain the chokehold until the suspect goes limp, despite substantial evidence that the application of a chokehold invariably induces a “flight or flee” syndrome, producing an involuntary struggle by the victim which can easily be misinterpreted by the officer as willful resistance that must be overcome by prolonging the chokehold and increasing the force applied. In addition, officers are instructed that the chokeholds can be safely deployed for up to three or four minutes. Robert Jarvis, the city’s expert who has taught at the Los Angeles Police Academy for the past 12 years, admitted that officers are never told that the bar-arm control can cause death if applied for just two seconds. Of the nine deaths for which evidence was submitted to the District Court, the average duration of the choke where specified was approximately 40 seconds."
The more things change the more they stay the same. Also, Thurgood Marshall thinks you're a fucking idiot.
Where's the "like" button for 9:03? I totally agree, 10:24 pm is a fucking idiot – and probably part of the DA's metro-violence-excuse-squad.
I have a serious question for 10:24, 9:03, and 9:14. What should an officer do when he/she has made the decision that an individual needs to be taken into custody and that individual has made it clear that he/she is not going peacefully? When answering, please don't get into whether the officer correctly decided to take the individual into custody–that's a separate issue.
The officer should not use lethal force (choking, shooting) against an unarmed person. Lesser alternatives (taser, baton, assistance from other officers, recognition of mental health issues and proportionate response) must be used. On occasion, absent a danger to the community, allowing the person to leave and apprehending at a later time is appropriate. The shoot first, fail to give aid after approach is never right.
Seeing as the academy class for use of force requires 80+ hours including private practice time there is no way the reality of law enforcement use of force can be rationally debated in this forum. That said there are a few issues that need to be clarified. This was not and is not a "choke hold." It was and is a lateral vascular neck restraint. The windpipe is not impacted. The combination of venous compression and vagus stimulation is used, not cutting off air flow. The vast majority of LVNR uses do not result in the subject losing consciousness.
In restraint techniques, any number of things can lead to death. In fact, level 6 on the force continuum (the deadly force level) includes firearms, impact tools, PIT, l/l shotguns and empty hands to name a few. Simply put, if the officer is at level 6 where deadly force is authorized it does not really matter how it is applied. That said, the LVNR is not in and of itself deadly force. It falls into temporary incapacitation because when performed properly it has a very low (statistically negligible) possibility of death. There is an issue with Sudden Death Syndrome that historically has impacted minority males more than all other groups. Science cannot say for sure why but it is a known issue that all officers are instructed about. And before you say "but if anyone could die it is lethal force" let me remind you that people have died as a proximate result of chemical agents too, but those are also classified as non-lethal force, as are electrical stimulation devices like the Taser used here by many agencies.
Simple answer is we ask the police to do a large number of things, including taking truly bad people into custody. People who occasionally don't want to be in custody. We give them a wide array of tools to do so. LVNR is one of them. We can debate all day long if the recent use was appropriate or not. I personally think the real tragedy in this case was that in New York selling cigarettes individually and without a license is criminal, or at least so criminal the cops actually send a bunch if guys to arrest you.