• N0t_5ure@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    The lawsuit faulted Jacksonville Beach Police for hiring and putting O’Connell on a sensitive case despite his own legal history.

    “O’Connell is an officer with a documented history of volatility and poor judgment, having previously been terminated from the St. Johns County Sheriff’s Office for threatening to ‘blow up’ the agency, later reinstated, then arrested for domestic battery before resigning under the weight of those charges,” the lawsuit said. “Jacksonville Beach PD hired him anyway, assigned him as lead investigator on a sensitive child-luring case, and later promoted him to corporal after his investigation resulted in the wrongful arrest and prosecution of an innocent man.”

    So, a shit cop who has no business having a badge and a gun does a shit job. Who’d have figured? In my opinion, all settlements of claims against improper policing should come from police retirement funds, not public funds. Put the liability on those capable of making the changes necessary to correct the situation.

    • Sarah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      It seems like a lot of cops are into domestic violence. And these are the people who are trusted to keep us safe.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve seen it proposed that cops should have to start carrying essentially malpractice insurance that they pay for out of their own pocket and that would cover payouts in the event that they get sued. This would have the added advantage that all those “bad apples” that somehow always seem to end up transferred to new precincts instead of fired and banned for life wouldn’t be able to get anyone to insure them effectively banning them.

      • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        While that’s the hope, if an insurance agent refused to cover a cop (even if for good reason) that agent would spend the next six months to a year having to buy new headlights every time they drive.

        • Mirshe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          If an insurance company refused to carry a cop, they’d be sued out of existence by every police union and booster org in the nation.

        • kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          That’s stalking and illegal. I also don’t think I’ve ever known the full name of any insurance rep but i didn’t use local ones.

          • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 hours ago

            The agent is a local, usually small business, and acts as a buyer on your behalf. They guide you on coverage to get, and the options available to you.

            Those quotes come from the major insurance companies you always see advertised. They are the ones underwriting your coverage. These are almost invariably faceless corporations, with decisions by faceless computers.

            The local agent can’t do anything but recommend coverage elsewhere.

    • ToiletFlushShowerScream@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 days ago

      I very much agree. A more just solution would see settlements from cases such as this should come from the police unions funds, or as you suggested - not from taxpayers.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Unfortunately they’re probably scraping the bottom of the barrel for people willing to do such a terrible job.

  • Brem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well hell, I look 93% identical to Frank Zappa.

    If that’s all it takes to be somebody else, I might be movin’ to Montana soon…

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Aren’t all humans 99.9% similar already?

    If 93% is enough you could just take any ape at that point.

    • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      IIRC there are an estimated roughly 1 Billion different allele combinations that deal with appearance so hypothetically you should have 6-8 doppelgängers somewhere in the world.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s no objective measure for quantifying similarity. We can measure relative similarity, though—but that scale will vary depending on what it’s relative to.

      We could measure genetic similarity relative to a typical unrelated person, or relative to the nearest non-human animal, or relative to the most distantly-related living organism, or relative to random noise. (And you can do the same for facial similarity.)

  • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    This should be the response in every incidence of false arrest (a lawsuit), especially when involving these dystopian Big Brother surveillance systems.

  • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    If the cops are unhappy I will make them an “AI” that only spits out 100% matches.

    It may never spit out any results though. Or maybe it’ll always say 100

  • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Pro: Now he can jerk off anywhere. Anyone catches him he can be like “it’s the AI again” and the judge have to let him off.

    Lucky bastard getting of and letting off repeatedly while the rest of us over here aren’t jerking it.

  • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    I think this cop can only be condemned if it can be proven that he was knowingly doing something illegal ?

    So essentially, he will just say he trusted the recognition software to be accurate and that he isn’t liable for that.

    As long as that kind of immunity is there it’s incredibly difficult to sanction cops for stuff like that.

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      The suspect just doesn’t look like him. I get what you mean but I think it’s expected of the cop to at least review whatever it gives him. He didn’t even give it a glance.

      • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        My point is that it’s not about competency of the cop it’s about his intent. Qualified immunity can be brought down if and only if you can prove ill intent which is a very high bar to pass.

        I’m no lawyer or prosecutor though so that’s just my understanding of the qualified immunity in the US. It’s an extremely strong shield for even the most incompetent cop that has ever existed.

    • FilesForWallabies@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I love this world where we can be arrested and jailed and have our lives ruined because cops can’t be arsed to verify whether somebody was anywhere else at the time because a machine said ”It’s him…I guess.”

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      What’s with the downvote barrage lemmings? Tetsuo didn’t endorse the situation, they just stated reality.

      Some people really will jump off a bridge just because the person in front of them did, huh.

      • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Don’t shoot the messenger ;p

        I indeed don’t endorse how qualified immunity works and I commiserate with victims of police abuse that ends up losing their case because of it. It’s not my fault if the system favors so heavily the cops :/