There may come a day when cops are automatically assumed to be the bad guys

    

I wonder if it's time for a new song.....

It's unlikely that police officers would turn on each other during a trial, due to the loyalty that typically runs through departments, David A. Harris, a University of Pittsburgh law professor and an expert on racial profiling, told The New York Times.

Jurors are often "inclined to give [police officers] the benefit of the doubt," according to The Times, because behavior "such as beating or even shooting another person" is assumed to be part of a cop's job.

"It's always difficult to get a guilty verdict against a police officer except in the worst and strongest cases," Harris told The Times. "A police officer comes into a courtroom not just presumed to be innocent, but presumed to be the good guy."

That's been true for a long time, but as the number of people who have this sort of experience mount....

I had no idea why I might be getting pulled and I was extremely surprised when the officer told me it was for not stopping at the stop sign.

I said, "I absolutely did stop."

He said, "Sir, you didn't even slow down."

Simply put, that was a bald-faced lie. (And also utterly ridiculous — the cop was claiming that I approached an intersection, going 20 or 30 miles per hour, and executed a 90-degree turn without braking, in an SUV.)

I had this sort of experience, but at a somewhat-lesser level, a number of years ago. There was a "no right turn" sign that was intentionally hidden behind a tree that had become very overgrown in the direction of the sign such that it was flatly impossible to see the sign until after you had committed to the turn. There was no other indication that the street was one-way or the turn was otherwise restricted visible; in fact it was a two-way, normal street — you just couldn't turn right there at that particular intersection.

I did, and there was a cop waiting right there who immediately pulled me over and issued a ticket. I fought it, complete with coming to court with a bunch of pictures (film shot, developed, printed; this was before the rise of digital photography and cellphones) documenting that it was flatly impossible to avoid knowing that the turn was prohibited until you were already committed to it.

every single one of them, roughly a dozen before my case was called was for the same violation at the same intersection.

The city was simply using this sign placement as a means of extortion, and making a hell of a lot of money doing it, with the cops all in on it. It was a flat-out extortion racket complete with guns.

As a result I'm sure you can guess what my expectation is if I am ever asked to sit on a jury with regard to whether the cops are telling the truth — or are the "good guys." Our numbers are mounting by the day, and this means that eventually the cops, when they show up in a courtroom, are going to be presumed to be the bad guys, and while the case will still have to be proved that "halo" will be flat out gone.

Is it time yet? No, but it's coming folks, and while it may not quite get to the level where the common man with a cup of water who sees a cop on fire will drink it, it doesn't have to go that far for the thug cop problem to disappear. No, only the halo needs to be quashed, and the more of their union reps and captains stand up and "support" cops who cause a man to die from a nearly-severed spine never mind arresting people without probable cause, the closer this day comes......

[embedded content]