Description

The Baltimore police department has found themselves in a bit of trouble thanks to body cameras. What did they do now? This is the forty-sixth episode of The LAVA Spurt, Baltimore Police Are On Crack.

Twice in two weeks, the Baltimore public defender’s office has released police body camera footage showing police officers planting drugs at scenes and then finding them. The first time the actual act of planting the drugs was caught on the camera because the officer clearly missed the briefing where he was told that the cameras were always on record but, when the record button was pushed, it kept the 30 second prior to the time the button was pushed. In that 30-second window, the officer planted drugs in a back alley and then walked out to the street with his cop buddies. He then pushed the button to start the recording and proceeds to go search for the drugs that he happens to find exactly where his camera showed him planting them. Imagine that shit.

The second video shows officers allegedly placing drugs in a car. The officers searched the scene, they said, after they supposedly witnessed a drug deal. In the video, the officers are shown thoroughly searching a car — apparently finding nothing. The cameras are then turned off. But they turn on a bit later, showing an officer squatting by the car. After a while, the officer backs off. Then 30 seconds later, another cop searches the same spot the officer was squatting at, and — suddenly! — finds a bag of drugs.

As of August 2nd, 41 cases have been dropped because the credibility of these involved officers is now in question. Apparently, over a hundred more are being reviewed, all of which are criminal cases that would have relied on testimony from the three officers that have been caught red-handed framing innocent citizens. The cases that have been dismissed involved drug-related felonies and weapons possession.

One of the three officers has been suspended and the other two were placed on administrative duty.

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

Rodger is a long-time libertarian activist, the founder of PaxLibertas Productions, host of The LAVA Flow podcast, Vice Chairman of the NHLP, Regional Captain for the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence and former Chairman and Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Arkansas. Rodger has also served on the national Libertarian Party Judicial Committee.

discussions

  • Let me get your thoughts on this. I’m not a philosopher but I’ve noticed it seems like people – even professional philosophers are confused about what they can and can’t know. You know Descartes guy? asked, “what can I know for sure” eventually came to, “I think therefore I am.” He thought (correctly) that the only thing you can know for certain is that you’re having a subjective experience. You might not know what that experience means but you know you’re having it. You know you exist because to experience is to exist, but everything else you think you know is not what you know but what you believe. I think that’s right but if you think I’m off base, let me know. So here’s where people seem to go wrong: they seem to think that means everything is up for grabs – that there is no truth, that all other things are equally uncertain. This assumption to me seems to manifest in such things as post modernism. But the assumption is not true is it? Some beliefs we may hold about what our subjective experience means may be true and others are almost certainly not. See, after that subjective experience we have to use tools to discern the difference between those beliefs that are probably true, and those beliefs that are probably not true. Its these tools that help us decide what to believe as “true.” And what are those tools? Logic mostly, which is usually dependent on evidence and reason. But anyway, my whole point is this is theory is very simple, its easy to understand and intuitive. It seems to me that if philosophers and thinkers would just recognize this basic fact about the scope, composition and nature of knowledge a lot of confusion and ill-conceived beliefs would be weeded out of the dialogue and civilization. What do you think? Is my premise right? Would it make a difference at all?

    Jump to Discussion Post 6 replies
  • For the past few years, police departments have been on something of a power trip in the United States. Only citing the lesser-known instances that come to my mind, cops have assaulted autistic teenagers and murdered unarmed civilians, and were subsequently cleared of all charges and let back on the force. A zealous, dogmatic conservative “fanbase,” alongside a legal system that actively defends police from facing charges of murder, manslaughter, or assault, assures that these men and women never see justice for their actions. It’s awful what police are doing in society, but it’s even worse that they can get off scot-free for it. Of course, most of you already know this. So here’s my question: has any United States representative or senator proposed a bill designed to fight against unjust acquittals or introduce charges that are harder to to be overturned? As an agorist, I’m partially convinced that this has never happened and that anyone who gets elected for public office in this day and age is a vapid authoritarian, but a sliver of hope remains for me somewhere. Have any of you heard of such legislation on a federal level? If not, then what about on a state level?

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • Its seems they always skip over the issue. There is always this refusal to acknowledge or “give-in” in to the reality of what its happening on their part Does anyone know why this mentality exists? Is there anyway to stop it? Or try to get through to these people that’s its tyranny that is the enemy?

    Jump to Discussion Post 11 replies
  • When people are foolish into thinking that the “law” (police, written laws) protect them, does that afford them to not protecting themselves, because they think that the police, and or “law” is always going to be there for them? I feel this will only influence these ‘types’ of people to provoke others whom they dont like, because they know the “law will be on their side.” So as an example: When the person reacts, naturally, the instigator can turn around and say, “Help, help, police!” I feel that this is an abuse and exploitation of law and policing. When police and or law protects people, do people foolishly think that the law is on their side and they can bend it to their will, against their enemies AKA: people they dont like in society, and do they? My conclusion is that people use the police and law, to get THEM what they want against their enemies, because they KNOW the law will “protect” them in the process. So in many cases you find for example, bad co-workers, bosses, friends and family, who deliberately instigate a provocation KNOWING FULLY the other persons reaction, so that person they targeted, can be sent to jail or fined.  The police or laws are exploited as a mafia type agency for these types of people. One could say the strong arm of these types of people. All the while these people, DONT PROTECT THEMSELVES! Your thoughts?

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies
  • So… yesterday I had to interact with one of our town’s finest. My company experienced a theft, one of our trailers was stolen off of our lot. It is my responsibility to file the police report and the insurance claim. So… I do what I need to do. Give him the details of the crime. As he’s leaving he says “So, you’ll want to be sure to let us know right away if it turns up. Like, if one of your employees just forgot to tell you where it is, we would sure hate to have them experience 12 guns pointed in their face.” WHAAT THE FUCK?? I laughed him off… thinking that was his very poor attempt at a joke. He didn’t laugh. So I assured him that would indeed be something to try and avoid, and said I’d be sure to “warn” all of my employees. But why? Why haven’t the cops learned anything yet? Why on earth would he suggest that they would take someone by gunpoint for being in possession of a stolen trailer? And why would it be like a whole damn brigade of them pointing their guns?? Is this just going to get worse before it gets better? Ugh. I hope not.

    Jump to Discussion Post 50 replies