Slashdot Mirror


Suspect Freed After Exposing Cop's Facebook Status

longacre writes "A man on trial in New York for possession of a weapon has been acquitted after subpoenaing his arresting officer's Facebook and MySpace accounts. His defense: Officer Vaughan Ettienne's MySpace 'mood' was set to 'devious' on the day of the arrest, and one day a few weeks before the trial, his Facebook status read 'Vaughan is watching "Training Day" to brush up on proper police procedure.' From the article: '"You have your Internet persona, and you have what you actually do on the street," Officer Ettienne said on Tuesday. "What you say on the Internet is all bravado talk, like what you say in a locker room." Except that trash talk in locker rooms almost never winds up preserved on a digital server somewhere, available for subpoena.'"

24 of 653 comments (clear)

  1. What the hell? by DurendalMac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That defense actually WORKED? Sorry, but that is nothing more than "locker room talk". If silly bits and pieces like that are valid in court, then the idiotic judge just opened a massive can of worms. Nice precedent, asshole. No more joking on the internet because someone could take it seriously!

    1. Re:What the hell? by Stoutlimb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All that's usually needed is a reasonable doubt.

    2. Re:What the hell? by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Due to the fact that it was made as a public announcement on a publicly viewable board, it looses the "locker room talk" argument. Officer Ettiene admitted to bias in his police work and judgement. Training Day is a prime example of extremely poor police work, judgement, and ethics; needless to say outright criminality. By not sending a message to this officer, we silently condone him. An officer that exhibits bias cannot be trusted to fairly and impartially enforce the law and has therefore abused the public trust put in him. Officer Ettiene showed incredibly poor judgement and will most likely loose his job for it.

    3. Re:What the hell? by east+coast · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No more joking on the internet because someone could take it seriously!

      Show me where I can joke in front of a cop without taking the chance of him taking it seriously and taking action based on it.

      And you know, I agree, it sucks that it's come down to this but everyone is so uptight anymore and the cops like to flex their muscles a little too much. This is the end result of a bunch of old high school jocks with a chip on their shoulder and the people who get sick of their 10th grade antics with a badge.

      Sorry for any cops that read this and think they're above that kind of thing, you just might be, but too many of your brothers in blue are nothing less than what I've described above. Most of us know police only when they meet them in a bad situation and all too often the asshole cops are the ones to be the most vocal. We rarely see the cop that lets small infractions slide.

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    4. Re:What the hell? by pugugly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've known too many cops - hell yes that defense would work.

      One thing I've noticed about assholes with authority is that they *do* brag about how they are assholes with authority, and how they're going to screw up someones life. I've learned over the years - when someone claims that's the way they are, they are generally being honest.

      Quite often, that's the only warning you receive, before they screw up your life.

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    5. Re:What the hell? by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Police are there to enforce the law. Not interpret it.

      Impossible. Just by the fact that you can define an event (such as a crime) you've already built a personal interpretation. Why do you think there is so many squabbles around here that sound like two lawyers going at it in a court room?

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    6. Re:What the hell? by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think GP meant that letting small infractions slide is what distinguishes nice cops from the assholes.

      The point I believe he was making was that cops who enforce with overzealousness the black letter of the law to the point where adherence is impossible are being unfair. The choice is that the law has to either stay well clear of the actual boundaries and allow for leniency, or go right up to them and enforce them rigorously.

      Take speed limits. Do we want cops armed with super accurate speed detectors (assume they have such devices) trailing a car for 100 miles while it traveled under the limit, only to pull it over for breaking the limit by 0.5mph for a few seconds as it went down a steep hill? Personally, that's a small infraction that I think society as a whole would be better off letting slide because it would engender resentment towards law enforcement and, also, remember that issuing fines and the admin overhead of enforcement is a net cost to society. Having thousands of such cops on the streets means police resources are no longer used to track down real crime.

      The specific principles of the Rule of Law as conceived in a modern society must take into account the reasonableness of expecting compliance, and to what degree compliance is possible. To put it bluntly, sufficiently small infractions can, and should, be let slide.

      --
      I hate printers.
    7. Re:What the hell? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If we, as a society give you a gun, a badge, and powers of arrest, I think we can fairly hold you to a reasonably high standard of behavior.

    8. Re:What the hell? by Marful · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly how many laws are on the books in the state where you live?

      20,000?
      50,000?
      What about federal laws?

      Does anyone honestly know?


      The point is, that there are so many laws on the book, it is impossible to not be guilty of one of them. And also given the fact that a vast majority of them are punctuated with discretionary conditions in them, such as "what an average person would believe" or "Probable Cause" or "Credible Suspicion", etc., who is to say definitively? Afterall, the officer has sole discretion in interpretation of these conditions.

    9. Re:What the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Police are there to enforce the law. Not interpret it.

      This attitude is why I left civilian law enforcement. Policing is not law enforcement, too many people in policing these days think they are a soldier, the job is that of a community protector, not the kings solider to be used upon the subjects. I was taught Officer Discretion; not every drunk needs a dui, not every speeder needs a ticket, not every pot head needs to go to jail. You examine the circumstances and make a judgement call, this art is being replaced with mindless enforcement.

      Most of the kids that start the job these days are more interested then finding criminal acts to enforce as they ignore protection of the community. A good example of this is traffic, although there are no quotas, it is a highly encouraged enforcement activity due to the enormous amount of dollars it brings home to the local government. Were I worked a dedicated traffic car brought in 4x its annual operation cost in fine revenue. That isn't policing, that's being an armed tax collector.

      As far as the original story, no surprise, kids these days need a little humbling. There will be a pile of AC's who will endlessly post pointless defences of the police, most of them will be cops or have some kind of police affiliation, they will all be under 35, with no military service. They are trained this way, to feel that this is how it should be, its normal, challenging this assumption will result in them "teaching" you a lesson.

      Its too bad they don't understand their oath, or likely even remember taking it, much less understand how to keep it.

    10. Re:What the hell? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, it is MUCH worse than a little "testilying", which is frankly bad enough. Did you read the TFA?(I know, but I got bored). Check out this quote from the cop after watching a video of another cop roughing up a handcuffed suspect:"If he wanted to tune him up some, he should have delayed cuffing him." He added: "If you were going to hit a cuffed suspect, at least get your money's worth 'cause now he's going to get disciplined for" a relatively light punch."

      Now does THAT sound like a cop just joking around to you? Sure as hell don't to me. Sounds like somebody who likes to take his roid rage(yes he is also on steroids) out on the occasional suspect. Add to the fact that he felt comfortable enough with these beliefs to post them under his own name on the Internet and I'd say we got a cowboy here. As someone who has had his skull cracked because some cop didn't like "damned long haired freaks" I may be a little biased here, but he sure as hell don't sound like one of the good guys to me just by his own words. He sounds like another bully with a badge.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:What the hell? by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would you, a free and presumably upstanding citizen of the community call a public servant "Sir" - in a manner that's really a bit too close to groveling for comfort?

      My mannerism to a public servant (be it Police, Fire, EMT, Politician, and Military) is out of respect in that they put their life on the line for me, or have been elected in a democratic fashion.

      An American police officer is a very risky job and comes with shitty hours, high divorce rate, and a paycheck that doesn't match. While I may not agree with how they conduct themselves at all times, the profession has earned my respect. In no way is my mannerism toward them groveling.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    12. Re:What the hell? by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "An American police officer is a very risky job and comes with shitty hours, high divorce rate, and a paycheck that doesn't match."

      The same could be said of the guy working at the QuikyMart. Do you treat them with the same 'respect' that you do the police?

    13. Re:What the hell? by hkmwbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I also slur my speech when I haven't slept in over 24 hours.

      In which case you shouldn't be driving in the first place. Fatigue is as bad as alcohol in traffic, research shows.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    14. Re:What the hell? by damburger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cops are in it for the power. Remember the kids at school who swaggered down the halls looking to pick on any kid who looked a bit different? Back then they were 'policing' the school (i.e. beating up smaller kids) in the name of the 'community' (i.e. the consensus of normality reached by the population of the school which few if any people really adhered to).

      Someone just gave them a uniform is all.

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    15. Re:What the hell? by packeteer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is such a misunderstanding of alcohol related injuries I am not sure how to get through to you. I can however start explaining. Alcohol related crashes are almost never when a drunk person cannot stay on the road and goes off and hits something/someone. It is almost always a situation that might have caused a sober person to crash but definitely will cause a drunk person to crash. Someone not seeing the drunk driver or the other way around. All kinds of other risks are involved here and alcohol is just the one that seals the deal.

      One of the big reasons we have so many alcohol related crashes is because people get up to somewhere above the legal limit but they say "hey the law doesn't know wtf they are talking about, I'm fine to drive". Then once they get home they don't trust the limits at all. Eventually someone is going to get hurt doing that and in your entire life it may never be you. It's when people think they are the exception that things really start to get dangerous.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    16. Re:What the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's unfair to call someone corrupt because of a status in My Space. Are cops never allowed to be in a devious mood? This could have been attributed to a countless number of scenarios the cop was in. I agree getting rid of bent cops is the only way to prevent corruption, but I don't think it's fair to say this man is a bent cop because of his My Space status.

    17. Re:What the hell? by Norwell+Bob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Way to generalize.

      As it so happens, every single police officer I know on a personal level is the polar opposite of that stereotype.

      But then, I've never personally been molested by a Catholic priest, or had my money embezzled by a Republican, or lacked rhythm because I'm white or been in any other way victimized by one of the stereotypes that it's OK to believe in.

  2. I get it by SupremoMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So when the system uses this kind of bs to keep you from a job it's fine and dandy. But as soon as you turn it around on the system, all of a sudden people are outraged?

  3. Re:Personal Responsibility by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes, protecting the rights of suspects means following a process that fails to convict a criminal. The justice system is imperfect. Crank up the sensitivity high enough to eliminate false negatives and you'll get a whole pile of false positives.

    Concern for the innocent should be reason enough; but if it isn't, remember that every innocent person convicted for a crime means a guilty person not convicted for that crime.

  4. Of course that defense worked. by jeko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What you say in a public forum, ESPECIALLY as a public official in a critical position of trust, matters. Make a joke about crashing planes on the TSA website, see what happens. Make any kind of joke in any kind of public forum about possibly harming the president of the United States and the Secret Service will absolutely pay you a visit.

    How would you feel to know your doctor cruelly jokes about involuntarily euthanizing people over 40? A kindergarten teacher making jokes about molesting the kids? A contractor who jokes about building houses to fall in the first earthquake? I'm a network engineer, and I can assure you I don't joke about crashing the 911 systems or bringing down the hospitals and airports I'm the lead engineer for.

    I love Bill Hicks. I thank God for Penn Gillette. Richard Pryor is a certified genius. We will not see the like of Jonathan Swift again. But when my wife is in the middle of a c-section, I don't wanna hear the anesthesiologist go "Hey Dude, do you want a hit of this too?" It would be hilarious, and I would have to kill him.

    A police officer who jokes about beating people and planting evidence does not have the temperment or trustworthiness for the job.

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  5. A "Weapon" isn't what you think it is... by jeko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hard-core gadget geek here. If it says Surefire, Victorinox, Wenger, Leatherman, Nitecore or Spyderco, it's probably a good Christmas present idea for me. I doubt I'm alone on this on this board. I routinely carry a Surefire E1B (a very bright small flashlight the size of a roll of Lifesavers) and a Leatherman. You can't trace a cable you can't see, and the usefulness of a Leatherman around networking gear should explain itself.

    The problem is that the laws as they are written define a weapon roughly as "anything the officer wants." People have been arrested for carrying Swiss Army Knives the officers chose to call a "hidden dirk or dagger." People have been arrested for carrying Surefire 6Ps (a six-inch long flashlight. Turns out the officer wanted to "confiscate" an expensive piece of gear). A couple of summers back, an off-duty police officer working private security told my wife she couldn't bring a six-pack of cokes into the amusement park because the aluminum can could be used as a weapon. The vendors were selling cans of cokes not 50 feet from the gate, of course.

    When you hear "weapons violation," you used to think hidden foot-long boot daggers, rifles illegally converted to full auto, sawed-off shotguns, live grenades and the like. Today, more often than not, being arrested for "carrying a deadly weapon," means you were holding a Maglight to see your way to your car in a dark parking lot.

    You think I'm joking? Anyone remember the terrorist Lite-Brite Toy Incident in Boston?

     

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  6. Re:'Locker Persona' is Real Persona by martinX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His job doesn't require more "discretion", it requires ethics and honesty. "Discretion" implies it's OK to be unethical and dishonest as long as you can get away with it.

    --
    When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  7. Re:One of My Experiences with the Police by bentcd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That may not mean what you seem to be implying. It could mean they really didn't have anything to arrest him on. More likely it means there were so many different possible charges they didn't know where to start.

    It could also be that they were assisting in an arrest where someone else had the lead while they themselves had little idea how the whole thing started or why the guy in question needed to be arrested.

    --
    sigs are hazardous to your health