http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Dooley

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106674)

They naturally would have jurisdiction for violations of federal law.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107238)

@UghKara Try living in Israel. The war on Jews from Palestine is even worse, and we don't even deserve it.

180

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106752)

Frankly, I don't like police dogs at all. They totally fucking suck at sniffing drugs (their % of false hits is staggering), their handlers can "read" hits from them when they don't hit, and using them for crowd control is very Naziesque and I don't like it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106709)

http://www.hightimes.com/read/dog-days-how-accurate-are-police-drug-dogs

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106720)

http://www.hightimes.com/read/dog-days-how-accurate-are-police-drug-dogs

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106794)

www.hightimes.com/

High Times

The definitive resource for all things marijuana, from cultivation and legalization to entertainment and exposing the War on Drugs.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106805)

"A recent study conducted by the Chicago Tribune analyzed three years of data from police departments in the suburbs of Chicago and found that just 44% of dog alerts resulted in the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia, and that the average false alert resulted in a stop lasting almost a half hour. The numbers are even more staggering for Hispanics drivers -- the success rate was a mere 27%."

"A recent study conducted by the Chicago Tribune analyzed three years of data from police departments in the suburbs of Chicago and found that just 44% of dog alerts resulted in the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia, and that the average false alert resulted in a stop lasting almost a half hour. The numbers are even more staggering for Hispanics drivers -- the success rate was a mere 27%."

"A study conducted by researchers at the University of California at Davis and published in January states unequivocally that “handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes,” and that detector dogs are cued by their handlers 85% of the time. Lawrence Myers, an associate professor of animal behavior at Auburn University’s College of Veterinary Medicine told HIGH TIMES that he’s “disturbed by the number of dog-handler teams that are not well trained,” while Steven D. Nicely an expert at K9 Consultants of America – who started training dogs in 1973 as a military policeman, became a police officer in Texas, and has been a professional dog trainer since 1989 – says that he’s convinced that “the majority of detector dog trainers are not very knowledgeable.

In a Japanese university study published in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior in 2009, researchers state clearly that “a dog’s response to commands is influenced not only by the relationship with its owner, but also the owner’s dog-handling ability.” The ability of law-enforcement trainers can seriously be called into question then when Nicely says that in his review of “approximately 30 drug detector dogs’ field performance … the average probability of non-trace amounts [of drugs] being seized is 39%.”"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106835)

"A recent study conducted by the Chicago Tribune analyzed three years of data from police departments in the suburbs of Chicago and found that just 44% of dog alerts resulted in the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia, and that the average false alert resulted in a stop lasting almost a half hour. The numbers are even more staggering for Hispanics drivers -- the success rate was a mere 27%."

"A recent study conducted by the Chicago Tribune analyzed three years of data from police departments in the suburbs of Chicago and found that just 44% of dog alerts resulted in the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia, and that the average false alert resulted in a stop lasting almost a half hour. The numbers are even more staggering for Hispanics drivers -- the success rate was a mere 27%."

"A study conducted by researchers at the University of California at Davis and published in January states unequivocally that “handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes,” and that detector dogs are cued by their handlers 85% of the time. Lawrence Myers, an associate professor of animal behavior at Auburn University’s College of Veterinary Medicine told HIGH TIMES that he’s “disturbed by the number of dog-handler teams that are not well trained,” while Steven D. Nicely an expert at K9 Consultants of America – who started training dogs in 1973 as a military policeman, became a police officer in Texas, and has been a professional dog trainer since 1989 – says that he’s convinced that “the majority of detector dog trainers are not very knowledgeable.

In a Japanese university study published in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior in 2009, researchers state clearly that “a dog’s response to commands is influenced not only by the relationship with its owner, but also the owner’s dog-handling ability.” The ability of law-enforcement trainers can seriously be called into question then when Nicely says that in his review of “approximately 30 drug detector dogs’ field performance … the average probability of non-trace amounts [of drugs] being seized is 39%.”"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106836)

Everywhere else in the country when this kind of shit happens its either a state agency or an outside-the-jurisdiction local agency that investigates.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26106845)

In this circumstance it seems reasonable that St. Louis PD's IA could investigate if there's no appropriate state agency - I'm not from Missouri, thank god, and have no idea what would be the right agency there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107138)

Also, even though you and I might not think its a big deal, the st Louis county executive has to deal in reality, and the reality is black people are pissed.

Where did you hear the officer was black? I cant find his identity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107173)

I get that black people are pissed. It's not like he's the first government executive to deal with a situation like this. He's the first I've seen to go running immediately to the feds, though.

I thought I saw it in a news report, but it must've been on social media.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107219)

Who said the FBI was going to be the "primary" investigators? I think the case is already with the St. Louis county prosecutor, and I fail to see how the FBI now investigating hinders that process

I get that you think the whole thing is bullshit, but you seem misinformed

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107253)

You clearly have no experience dealing with federal agencies in state court if you don't see how the FBI taking a lead role could jeopardize a state case.

The county executive so quickly inviting the FBI in sends a clear message to his local law enforcement officers that he does not trust them. Like I said before, I'm not from Missouri so I don't know the local politics, but I have experience working with police departments that are accused of civil rights violations at the drop of a hat. When the politicians and police end up on opposite sides of each other in a public dispute, it often does not end well for either side.

I admit to making a factual error above, it happens from time to time on chatweetblogs. Here is an interesting article from a reliable outlet on the investigation.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/shooting-an-unarmed-suspect-could-be-justified-according-to-the/article_e9b5412f-2283-512e-8636-0d2bbe958c5c.html

It sounds like Missouri is one of those jurisdictions where the prosecutor doesn't have a large role in the investigatory stage, but rather reviews what the investigation brings in.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107306)

here is the text of 18 usc 242: Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

it is clear that 18 usc 242 may have been violated, in direct contradiction to your previous claim.

I noted above that there is no indication that the FBI is taking the lead role. Ever source I've seen indicates the FBI inviestigation will be parallel to the local investigation. However, you continue to assert without support that the FBI will be taking the lead role. heres something that syas the investigations will be parallel: http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-missouri-st-louis-police-shooting-teen-20140811-story.html#page=1

I don't mind you making factual errors, but I don't understand why you think the FBI's involvement is in any way unusual, inappropriate, or harmful. It didn't surprise me at all, and I explained to you both the legal basis and the practical reason for their involvement. If such investigations are rare, that's probably because race riots are rare too

Are you a cop or something? County prosecutor?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107360)

That's why, at this point, there's no clear reason for the FBI to be involved.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107378)

I know you understand the practical reason for the FBI's involvement. Do you really think they lack jurisdiction? Because it looks like there's at least a question of whether race was a factor in many people's minds

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2642096&forum_id=2#26107402)