Re: Dillhole P.D.

1

agree completely.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 5:57 AM
horizontal rule
2

It's interesting that the video was stored off-site. I think that's the smart thing to do with surveillance video for reasons that are obvious from reading the story in the OP, I guess.

I had an app on my previous (Android) phone that uploaded video to the cloud as it was recorded. I can't seem to find it again in the Google play store. Anyway, it seemed like the ideal thing for recording at demonstrations and such, where there is a danger of having one's phone confiscated if it happens to capture a cop tuning up a protestor.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:10 AM
horizontal rule
3

Crossing over from the previous thread, Qik video is the best app I've seen for this purpose. Launch and immediately start shooting video that's stored off site if you have a connection- if not it will upload as soon as it finds one, which means if the cops take your phone back to the station it still has a chance to upload before they try to erase it.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:20 AM
horizontal rule
4

I don't know about other big cities,but Chicago police seem to be either extra-brutal or unusually inept at covering up bad behavior. Chicago has a long history of both high levels of crime (esp murder) and systematic police misbehavior. Police brutality was a huge factor in the death penalty moratorium in the 90s, after several well-publicized "interrogations" (where suspects were beaten by officers using phone books to keep from leaving marks) led to confessions followed by convictions and death sentences.


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:21 AM
horizontal rule
5

And she did try to slap their hands off of her initially so I'm sure the 9 200+lb guys felt their safety was threatened by the 110lb woman. (Seriously, not to perpetuate stereotypes or fat shame, but everyone one of those guys looks like they've been spending a lot of time at the donut shop.)


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:24 AM
horizontal rule
6

Pushing back slightly: I would completely agree that there's a national problem with police behavior. But the post is really hyperbolic: the problem isn't anything like that all police are sources of unjustified violence and so on, it's that an intolerably high percentage of them are, and an intolerably high percentage can still be objectively quite low.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
7

Ogged, You decided to move to a Chicago neighborhood. These are dirty people. Don't you know that?

Anyways, body cams are increasingly the norm and Taser's latest money maker. The real crime here though is a raid being carried out in cargo shorts.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:30 AM
horizontal rule
8

They've just this month started trialling this, more or less, in London. The individual officers still control when the cameras are switched on or off and the police control the footage so presumably it won't do much to prevent concerted wrongdoing, but it might have an impact at the margins.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:31 AM
horizontal rule
9

3: Qik is the app I was thinking of. I just searched for it in the Google Play store and could not find it, though there is something else called QikCam that does not to do the same thing. Googling around indicates that the company was acquired by Skype and then the streaming functionality was shut down, along with the associated website. Well done Skype, you assholes.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:38 AM
horizontal rule
10

Clearly Chicago is bad, but I've never lived in a city where the police didn't have a similar reputation (granted, in SF it was more for incompetence than brutality); look at the riots in ABQ recently. Body/taser cams are good (and in fact what finally made a difference in Albuquerque) but like Ginger says, they're only truly effective if the cops don't control when they're on and who has access to them.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:40 AM
horizontal rule
11

not all policemen.

I don't see anything wrong with police being on camera all the time. From a law-and-order perspective, it should also make legitimate prosecutions easier.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:41 AM
horizontal rule
12

Also, gswift, I don't expect you to tell us about this, but you seem like a non-crooked cop in a non-horrible department, but I would still bet lots of money than in a few years on the force, you'll be forced to choose between telling a substantive lie and letting down a colleague on the force, and and I'd bet somewhat less money that even you would, at least part of the time, justify the lie and tell it.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:42 AM
horizontal rule
13

8: The reduction in complaints is typically rather large, and no small part of it is the party lodging the complaint finding out there's video and changing his/her mind.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:44 AM
horizontal rule
14

8: The reduction in complaints is typically rather large, and no small part of it is the party lodging the complaint finding out there's video and changing his/her mind.

Everyone wins!


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:53 AM
horizontal rule
15

Huh, the Qik app is still on my phone, but I haven't tried using it lately. Haven't gotten any beat downs in the last few months.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:56 AM
horizontal rule
16

8: The reduction in complaints is typically rather large, and no small part of it is the party lodging the complaint finding out there's video and changing his/her mind.

This is actually the reason the Met is giving for the trial, and a lot of the coverage references the so-called Plebgate incident.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:56 AM
horizontal rule
17

Yeah, it still records but is stuck on pending upload- I guess the server is gone. Fucking skype.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
18

12: Sure, it might happen, but my experience has been consistent with Moskos in Baltimore.

http://www.copinthehood.com/2008/04/cops-tell-truth.html


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:59 AM
horizontal rule
19

Isn't Skype just MSN now?


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:00 AM
horizontal rule
20

And going to network connection settings brings you to a Skype FAQ:
"What happened to Qik?"
"As of 30 April 2014, Qik has been retired. You can now enjoy the full Skype experience with features such as audio and video calling, instant messaging, and video messaging with contacts in your Skype and Microsoft networks."
That's a pretty nice Fuck You message- the app you had doesn't work any more, but here are a bunch of totally unrelated things you probably don't want to do!


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:00 AM
horizontal rule
21

|| wtffffffff.

1. My premiums and deductible both went up a lot last year. Now I have a 2k individual deductible. (Plus separate family deductible.)

2. Ob admin says: our new policy is that you must pay off your deductible by the time you're 32 weeks pregnant. So you owe $400/appt or she won't see you.

3. Me: sputtering, that's insane. I haven't run up 2k of bills. What if I go to the ER and owe them the deductible?

4. Her: do you want to get seen today? Then pay up. Office policy.

How can you be denied prenatal care unless you pay charges you haven't yet incurred??? I'm spitting nails.

|>


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:01 AM
horizontal rule
22

Sorry to hijack. On my phone. Had this thread open.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:02 AM
horizontal rule
23

Even the "crazy guy waving a gun" case is apparently not a legitimate use of force.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:02 AM
horizontal rule
24

I was asked to lie by a Chicago cop literally minutes before testifying in a probable cause hearing. He was very casual about the request, nbd!, and walked away before I could respond. I was in fact asked the (completely banal so far as I could tell) question in question, but the prosecutor objected and the judge sustained. Who knows! (The guy whose hearing it was was caught sitting in the front seat of my car with my stereo halfway in his lap and the brick he used to break my window next to him, as witnessed by like all my neighbors and CA. So this wasn't about framing an innocent or anything. No clue.)


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:04 AM
horizontal rule
25

21: WTF? This is your OB's office saying this? Why should they care whether you've paid deductible or not, and why should they have anything to say about it?

I guess they might prefer your cash in hand to the insurance company's promise of payment in 3-6 months. But $400 is literally overcharging, right? From the insurer's POV, they're making it more likely that you exceed the deductible later on, not to mention probably violating the contract. Perhaps you should tell the insurer and see if they smack the doctor down.

Also prenatal might count as preventive and be copay-free under federal law - I'll check.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:09 AM
horizontal rule
26

Or maybe they want your delivery (if it's going to be the same OB) to be past-deductible. Either way, Not Done.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
27

2. Ob admin says: our new policy is that you must pay off your deductible by the time you're 32 weeks pregnant. So you owe $400/appt or she won't see you.

Whaaaaat what on earth??? This is insane.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
28

And really, these days you have to be an idiot to be making up stuff on reports or doing shady shit when security cams are everywhere and damn near every citizen around literally has a video camera in their pocket.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
29

25 seems right.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
30

I am so wildly mad that I'm trembling. It felt like extortion. I have to see the actual doc in a few minutes and compose myself because I don't have a well-articulated rant yet.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
31

Minivet is the expert here, but certainly when I was pregnant I was told by billing right after the appointment confirming the pregnancy that I no longer had co-pays.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:13 AM
horizontal rule
32

I thought prenatal counted as preventative, but I can't find that on my phone at least.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:14 AM
horizontal rule
33

Honestly, everything I hear about the health insurance industry in the US leads me to conclude that it's basically a criminal enterprise and should be dealt with as such.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:14 AM
horizontal rule
34

Covered as preventive under ACA:

Well-woman preventive care visit annually for adult women to obtain the recommended preventive services that are age and developmentally appropriate, including preconception care and many services necessary for prenatal care. This well-woman visit should, where appropriate, include other preventive services listed in this set of guidelines, as well as others referenced in section 2713.

Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:15 AM
horizontal rule
35

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/17/no_charges_no_trial_but_presumed_guilty.html

This topic of 20 year old charges, not convictions, being used to keep people from entering school or employment has been a hotly debated one among a group of bookface acquaintances. Is the state of play in the states similar?


Posted by: uncle rameau | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:15 AM
horizontal rule
36

And:

Q10: What is included in a "well-woman" visit?
The HRSA Guidelines recommend at least one annual well-woman preventive care visit for adult women to obtain the recommended preventive services that are age- and developmentally-appropriate, including preconception and prenatal care. The HRSA Guidelines recommend that well-woman visits include preventive services listed in the HRSA Guidelines, as well as others referenced in section 2713 of the PHS Act. HHS understands that additional well-woman visits, provided without cost-sharing, may be needed to obtain all necessary recommended preventive services, depending on a woman's health status, health needs, and other risk factors. If the clinician determines that a patient requires additional well-woman visits for this purpose, then the additional visits must be provided in accordance with the requirements of the interim final regulations (that is, without cost-sharing and subject to reasonable medical management).

Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:15 AM
horizontal rule
37

It feels like they were like "no co-pays? Fuck obamacare, we're going to make this as financially unpleasant as possible so it will feel like your copay went through the roof."


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:16 AM
horizontal rule
38

Not sure, maybe well-woman in the prenatal context just means the basic checkup plus all the associated screenings and lactation counseling.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:18 AM
horizontal rule
39

33: This doesn't sound like an insurance company problem.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
40

The official policy: obstetric patients must keep their account balances paid throughout their care. Any deductibles or co-insurance amounts due for delivery must be paid 2 months prior to due date. The deductibles and co-insurance estimates will be calculated and monthly payments must be kept current.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:19 AM
horizontal rule
41

Even the "crazy guy waving a gun" case is apparently not a legitimate use of force.

Murdered for the crime of eating his dinner! Neighbor please.

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Man-killed-by-S-F-police-was-inspiration-but-5344159.php


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
42

My heart is pounding because I feel like I need to address this with the OB and it feels confrontational.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:21 AM
horizontal rule
43

Any deductibles or co-insurance amounts due for delivery must be paid 2 months prior to due date. The deductibles and co-insurance estimates will be calculated and monthly payments must be kept current.

I see. So they're asking you to pre-pay for your delivery even though it's entirely possible that you'd have used up the deductable on something else in the interim. What incredible shitheads. I know changing OBs is awful, but is there any way you can tell them to go fly a kite?


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:22 AM
horizontal rule
44

So the due date is 2 months before the due date?


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:22 AM
horizontal rule
45

I don't know the kosherness of asking for prepayment in general, but withholding the appointment unless you prepay is ridiculous.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:23 AM
horizontal rule
46

Also wondering in lines along 43.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:25 AM
horizontal rule
47

I dunno, there are major problems with policing, and obviously the job of the police is a difficult one that needs to be closely regulated. No question that there are bad cops out there and that the job can attract authoritarian dicks; I also strongly support mandatory videotaping where possible, both to guard against bad behavior and just in the service of accurately recording what happens. IME, though, many Internet liberals hold an almost religious hatred of the cops, one that is both pretty unrealistic and that almost totally ignores the massive public benefits that the mostly competently run US police departments provide. Most police forces, especially big city police forces, are very professionally if imperfectly run organizations and the stereotype of the corrupt racist donut eating monsters is now about 50 years old (doesn't mean you can't find examples, even lots of examples, but it's a big country with lots of cops). "Infinite generosity for teachers, infinitesimal generosity for cops" seems to be a common attitude here and elsewhere, but both jobs are pretty similar -- incredibly important, incredibly difficult public service jobs where there's a constant risk of harm from lazy or authoritarian assholes. I'm not saying that anyone should stop being vigilant about the police (or teachers, for that matter), because you need watchdogs to maintain professionalism, just that the attidunal thing always bugs me.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:25 AM
horizontal rule
48

21 is insane. Is this some red state revenge-on-Obama-for-getting-the-socialized-medicine-ball-rolling thing?


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:27 AM
horizontal rule
49

Shit, now that I'm searching I'm finding other testimonials of this practice, and even people saying it's normal. Ugh.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:27 AM
horizontal rule
50

But, let's also acknowledge that the Chicago PD in particular has long had old-school problems and could use a healthy dose of reform.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:28 AM
horizontal rule
51

just that the attidunal thing always bugs me.

I agree with this. I have various friends who are good lefties and consider themselves deep social justice types but who have taught their children open contempt for police officers. It comes across to me as less "social justice" and more "sneering classism." And so that pisses me off, but then runs head first into stories like the OP.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:32 AM
horizontal rule
52

47: when was the last time you heard of a teacher shooting an unarmed kid?


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:33 AM
horizontal rule
53

47: Analogy ban, seriously. The sanctioned use of force is something that deserves a level of scrutiny all its own.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:35 AM
horizontal rule
54

21 is insane. Is this some red state revenge-on-Obama-for-getting-the-socialized-medicine-ball-rolling thing?

Maybe we all underestimated the extent to which health care providers in places like Texas would start just doing whatever the hell they want to, in the knowledge that they can tell outraged customers it's been forced upon them by that darned Obamacare.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:37 AM
horizontal rule
55

52: well, neither teachers nor policemen are normally armed over here, but I know a lot more victims of beatings by teachers than victims of beatings by policemen. And everyone I know who was beaten by a policeman was an adult at the time, not a nine-year-old child.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
56

47: when was the last time you heard of a teacher shooting an unarmed kid?

Cops more likely to shoot a teen, teachers more likely to bone one. I guess people just use whatever tools are at hand.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
57

They want to make sure that there isn't going to be any patient responsibility left at the time of delivery? I'd imagine they've been stiffed plenty often over the years. Still, a dick move.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
58

Is this the same doctor's office that's blamed other crap on Obamacare that's really just them being assholes?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
59

Everything about the American health insurance system makes me want to shoot people in the face.

I need periodontal surgery because of weird bone growth in my jaw that led to an unbelievably painful infection a couple of weeks ago. But because your jaw is considered somehow different from the rest of your skeleton, this is covered only under dental insurance which, for me, has an annual maximum payment of $1000. The surgery is $1700, and having already had one check-up with x-rays, two fillings, an extra set of x-rays for the infection, a trip to the endodontist to make sure it wasn't an abscessed tooth, and then acute treatment for the infection, I'm most of the way there already.

Which means I have to put this off until January, when I can adjust my contributions to my FSA to cover the cost of the operation. In the meantime, I have 7 months for the infection to recur and make the eventual treatment more difficult.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
60

57: personally, I would want to be several thousand dollars behind on my payments to the obstetrician by the time I went into labour. That way, he's got a massive financial incentive to ensure I survive the process. Making sure that you're fully paid up well in advance of the due date doesn't say much for their confidence in their own ability to provide a safe delivery.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:44 AM
horizontal rule
61

One of the many psycho things about demanding prepayment is that you might not even deliver with this guy. You could go into labor unexpectedly when you were out of town, your car could break down and you could give birth in the back seat, the hospital where he practices could be destroyed by a gas explosion, anything could happen.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
62

At the very least, based on the policy as stated, the payment should only be reflecting an estimate of future obligations, and you should expect a refund if you go on to fill up your deductible with unexpected pre-delivery care, or delivery at an unexpected location.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
63

59- You should go to one of those third-world free health clinics that have become more and more popular to offer in various parts of the US.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:50 AM
horizontal rule
64

your car could break down and you could give birth in the back seat
That's why you should have AAA on top of health insurance.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
65

Kind of cop related, holy shit, that guy who played the big black gay cop on The Shield was arrested for shooting his wife.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-michael-jace-shooting-children-home-20140520-story.html


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
66

It's weird what gets chunked out of regular health insurance. For some reason, my son's eye doctor is covered but mine isn't. Or maybe I'm not trying hard enough.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:52 AM
horizontal rule
67

51 is spot on. Thanks for 50, Halford. They really are a department with huge problems under enormous pressure.


Posted by: ydnew | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:55 AM
horizontal rule
68

I know a lot more victims of beatings by teachers

Physical assault by (public) school teachers in the US is almost literally unheard of in the last 30+ years. Every once in awhile a district (usually in deep Redstatia) says they're going to reinstate corporal punishment, and then everyone freaks out and it goes away again.

If an administrator in any UMC suburb or major city proposed corporal punishment there would be, literally, a parent riot.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:55 AM
horizontal rule
69

So, she said:

1. Good luck going elsewhere, everyone within an hours drive has the same policy.

2. What happened is that 80% of deductibles go unpaid. Formerly, hospitals had to file claims within 30 days and docs within 90 days, so docs would wait until hospitals filed, and then hospitals would eat the unpaid deductible. Then hospitals changed their filing deadline to be 365 days, so now docs eat the unpaid deductibles. Hence the birth of these policies. Aaargh. 32 weeks because that's when emergency deliveries really begin.

.....unrelated but:

3. The town hospital is fighting with BCBS and it will not be resolved this year, so I'm going to have to deliver in a different fucking town altogether. The OB is applying for admitting privileges at a hospital which is not yet finished being built yet, so what could go wrong.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaargh.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
70

68: it hasn't happened recently in this country either, not in the last 25 years or so. But before that it was fairly prevalent and, in my parents' generation, almost universal.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:58 AM
horizontal rule
71

I used to be much more cop-sympathetic until I stumbled on three of them taunting a homeless person, and they tried to seize my phone as evidence of a crime that hadn't actually happened at that point, and then threatened to arrest me if I didn't erase video from it - video that they claimed was evidence of a crime, so they were demanding that I pervert the course of justice.

After I knuckled under, at least one of them then falsified his notebook (because he wrote out an evidence ticket for the phone, and if he didn't dispose of the ticket he'd have needed to explain why he'd apparently stolen it). Fuck the Met.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:00 AM
horizontal rule
72

68 also depends on your definition of physical assault. ISTR a discussion on this blog about a Mississippi school that used stress positions as a punishment method. If a copper tried that in this country it would count as "inhuman and degrading treatment" under the Human Rights Act.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
73

Oh and while this is a different doc than the one from 58, she clarified that she too does not accept Obamacare - because the deductibles are too high. I did not pursue this because she was lobbing a whole lot of bullshit at me about how, at the end of the day, she has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
74

The M/dw/fe Center here recently switched to a prepay policy, but now I'm not remembering all the details of implementation. Essentially, they develop an estimate of likely amount owed, a counselor meets with the client to go through it, and (usually), the client puts it on a credit card. I know we talked about how to handle clients who don't have that kind of credit.

Obviously, excess charges are refunded.

It's done wonders for cash-flow, and deadbeat clients are a thing of the past.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
75

Has anyone else just thought that the obvious solution to the US medical profession is the other great US institution, the law. heebie should insist on bringing her lawyer to see her doctor, as you would before answering police questions.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
76

I found a Medicare claiming manual saying that with them, the practice is allowed as long as the deductible is routine and expectable, prepayment is requested with no undue pressure, and treatment or admission is not withheld. If Medicare doesn't ban the practice, it's unlikely any private insurer does. Christ.

I bet that 80%-unpaid thing is bullshit. Every component of our medical system has its own mechanism of special pleading.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
77

did not pursue this because she was lobbing a whole lot of bullshit at me about how, at the end of the day, she has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first.

!


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
78

70: Oh, no doubt. I rather doubted the UK was still into principals with paddles, but who knows.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
79

I really think you should see a different doc just on that score.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
80

What 77 / 79 said.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
81

There isn't a great deal of choice for obstetricians in most parts of the U.S.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
82

"for" s/b "in", I think.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
83

2. What happened is that 80% of deductibles go unpaid. Formerly, hospitals had to file claims within 30 days and docs within 90 days, so docs would wait until hospitals filed, and then hospitals would eat the unpaid deductible. Then hospitals changed their filing deadline to be 365 days, so now docs eat the unpaid deductibles. Hence the birth of these policies.

Imagine a world in which they had communicated this to you in any kind of thoughtful or humane way! What the FUCK is wrong with everyone.

did not pursue this because she was lobbing a whole lot of bullshit at me about how, at the end of the day, she has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first.

"That's what medicine is all about!" FUCK YOUUUUU.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
84

she has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first.
The hypocritic oath- First, worry about your family, then your employees and business. Patients come somewhere after those.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
85

It seems reasonable that insurance companies should have to eat the unpaid deductible, since deductibles are a concept that they pulled out of their assholes. But what do I know.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
86

Trying to imagine pulling that employees / family line on a client ... what is with the victim mentality of the medical profession? Isn't their professional lobby a big reason we still have this insane rent seeking private insurance extortion system? And taking the time to really stick it to you by explaining you have no options is super special. What an asshole. Hope you have a problem free delivery in the car on the way to the hospital and can give the doctor the finger over a sweetly wrapped newborn.


Posted by: dairy queen | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
87

What happened is that 80% of deductibles go unpaid.

I don't understand this. If the obstetrician bill remains unpaid, can't they just repossess the baby?


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
88

86: China, where the problem is even worse, is seeing a rising trend of attacks on doctors by patients enraged at their corruption, peculation, rent-seeking or ineffectiveness - see here for abundant links http://chinadigitaltimes.net/china/doctors/


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:39 AM
horizontal rule
89

And, indeed, 87 is common practice in China. They won't let the father in to see mother and baby, or let the mother or baby leave the hospital, until bills are paid in full. I will try to dig up the NYT article about it, complete with photo of lots of new fathers standing in a car park looking up at the barred third-floor windows where their impounded wives were holding up their impounded babies to show to Daddy.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
90

88,89 Mass Group Incident!


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
91

She also kept trying to tell me that my problem was with the insurance company, not her office, and that I needed to take it up with them. NO IT'S WITH YOU.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
92

She also kept trying to tell me that my problem was with the insurance company, not her office, and that I needed to take it up with them. NO IT'S WITH YOU.

Oh my lordy.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:48 AM
horizontal rule
93

This drives me insane. We can't have a normal health care delivery system like all the rest of the goddamned industrialized world, because we can't penalize the poor doctors and hospitals, and we must maintain the centrality of private health insurers to any system because freedom.

But shitting all over teachers year after year is obligatory.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
94

90: indeed. Next meetup: outside heebie's doctor's office, RIGHT NOW.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
95

89: Yes. The pictures from the baby hatch where families were/are leaving (I don't want to say "abandoning," because even though that's technically the right term it doesn't get at the absolute horror of the choice) their young children were just overwhelmingly awful to see.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
96

That's because teachers are government employees and therefore suck, except for those at private and charter schools, and doctors are private employees and therefore holy, except for those at the VA who suck.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:07 AM
horizontal rule
97

95 is a different health care problem but even more heartbreaking than the impounded-baby story.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
98

Not to be "that guy" or anything, but how about that 9/11 museum gift shop? And the director makes $378K/year? And their total operating budget is $63 million/year? Only in America!


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
99

I think they're linked, though. Impounding (AFAIK) is basically for newborns, and this is the flip side of it for kids who are older.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
100

I don't get that- impounding is for newborns when you can't pay the delivery charges, and the hatch is for older kids when you've, what, taken out an equity loan on them and can't afford to repay it?


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:19 AM
horizontal rule
101

The hatch is for older kids who have serious illnesses which the parents cannot afford to treat. They're both linked, I suppose, in that they're both the results of inadequate health-care provision and funding.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
102

Oh my god, how horrific.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
103

Re: Health care: Wow. That's messed up.

Re: Cops: I dunno, I mean, yeah, of course there's no benefit for cops lying about the mundane day-to-day cases. If you jack up enough kids in the ghetto, obviously some of them are going to be holding. So you arrest them, get 'em in the system, and then they never get out. No perjury required. High-profile cases are, I think, a completely different animal. A lot of the situations that result in a big investigation are a little confused to begin with. What with the whole 48-hour "cooling down" period thing, I'm sure a lot of cops convince themselves to a high degree of moral certainty that they did the right thing and any memory of incompetence or malfeasance by themselves or other cops is conveniently suppressed.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
104

Three things going on here:

1. The rate of bad debt (unpaid deductibles and coinsurance) is statistically higher for patients with the now commonplace high deductible plans, so providers across the board are getting much more aggressive about collection practices: asking for prepayment (there are services to facilitate this), asking to put credit card numbers on file, asking for payment of past due balances every time you walk in the office, sending overdue balances to collections sooner.

2. OB-GYNs have a particularly high rate of bad debt - I have seen data that show they are among the highest of all specialties - on the order of 20% of fees, which makes the claim of 80% of deductibles plausible.

3. Doctors in Texas are always on the leading edge of whatever mercenary trend is sweeping the profession at the moment. Not that all Texas doctors are looking out only for themselves, but if there is a practice that enhances physician incomes, it was either invented or first became widespread in Texas.


Posted by: kermit roosevelt, jr. | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:40 AM
horizontal rule
105

I love the graphic design in the linked PDF in 104.1


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
106

Pastel colors, soft focus, so friendly and family oriented. And we'll help you break those kneecaps that need breaking.


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
107

I ask people to prepay me, unless I'm convinced that they're good for the bill. And have guessed wrong often enough to have become a lot less flexible.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:27 AM
horizontal rule
108

Its nice that a team of dedicated IT healthcare professionals have been working hard to bring us the "which of your patients might be deadbeats calculator" in 104.1. I'm sure that was the most socially beneficial use of their skills.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
109

Heebie, your OB is a shithead.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:36 AM
horizontal rule
110

109- If that's the case, I think he's sitting in the wrong position during deliveries.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
111

And really, these days you have to be an idiot to be making up stuff on reports or doing shady shit when security cams are everywhere and damn near every citizen around literally has a video camera in their pocket.

Even when video-taped doing bad stuff, my perception is that cops rarely get in trouble. I'd be surprised if there are many examples of cops getting into actual trouble. Lying on the stand is perjury. An actual crime. Yet, we seem to accept that it is not uncommon for cops to do it.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
112

I ask people to prepay me, unless I'm convinced that they're good for the bill. And have guessed wrong often enough to have become a lot less flexible.

Sure. Moving to some kind of prepayment requirement is one thing, springing it on people in a preemptively super hostile, extremely under-explained way is really something else.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
113

the whole 48-hour "cooling down" period thing

Yea, unless you are a FSU quarterback, the average person isn't given 48 hours to calm down.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
114

Cops more likely to shoot a teen, teachers more likely to bone one. I guess people just use whatever tools are at hand.

It's a poor carpenter who blames his tools.


Posted by: beamish | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:15 AM
horizontal rule
115

she has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first

You need a new doctor. And you should probably write a note about her to whatever state board there is in Texas (probably none, right, because that would be the boot of tyranny on the neck of fredom).


Posted by: Von Wafer | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:18 AM
horizontal rule
116

No kidding, a doctor who doesn't understand that her patients come first isn't to be trusted.


Posted by: Von Wafer | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:19 AM
horizontal rule
117

Sorry, I just saw 84. No kidding, this doctor is bad news, heebs.


Posted by: Von Wafer | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
118

a doctor who doesn't understand that her patients come first isn't practicing a profession.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
119

56 bodes ill for teens acquainted with Animal Control officers.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 11:24 AM
horizontal rule
120

The objine practice that treated me required pre-payment for the eventual maternity bill at every prenatal checkup. But it was explained at the first checkup and $50 each month. Heebie, your doctor sounds like an ass.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 12:20 PM
horizontal rule
121

I just feel completely out of options. I'm pretty sure she's the only non-aggressively interventionist ob short of going into Austin, and getting in and out of Austin can be hellacious.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
122

Lying on the stand is perjury. An actual crime. Yet, we seem to accept that it is not uncommon for cops to do it.

See the link in 18. People's perceptions are way outstripping the reality. (with my usual caveat about parts of the south)


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 12:32 PM
horizontal rule
123

See the link in 18. People's perceptions are way outstripping the reality.

That link in 18 doesn't actually prove anything if you don't already agree with the dude who wrote it. (And check the comments for bonus "any ghetto kid who gets murdered deserved it" bullshit.)


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:13 PM
horizontal rule
124

Even Moskos's defense (I like Moskos, by the way) is qualified.

All cops don't tell the truth all of the time. But cops tell the truth a lot more than many people seem to think.

Great!


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:17 PM
horizontal rule
125

Re 123:

gswift said above that the link in 18 is consistent with his experience. So, yes, he does agree with it, based on his experience. And since gswift heretofore has been a levelheaded, reasonable, and candid commenter, that counts for something, at least with me.


Posted by: bill | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:23 PM
horizontal rule
126

I think LB and gswift are right: it's not like cops just walk around telling lies, but it doesn't take many liars, or many lies, to amount to a corrupt department. I don't want to draw analogies, but I think this basic rule generalizes: think of other enterprises/businesses, and think about how many people would have to be unreliable in order to undermine your faith in the enterprise. Now, imagine that enterprise arms its employees, gives them extraordinary powers, backed by the power to put you in jail, and you see the problem.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:27 PM
horizontal rule
127

121: This is your last baby. I'd settle for the pricey, assholish doctor you know and will have to overpay if there aren't any obvious better choices, because you don't want to be driving too far in case of need or anything like that and then in a few more months you'll never have to see this doctor again.


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:38 PM
horizontal rule
128

A friend of a friend knows a guy who says some research is going to be published showing that five siblings are happier than four.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:40 PM
horizontal rule
129

gswift said above that the link in 18 is consistent with his experience.

Let's not forget that gswift works in an environment heavily influenced by Mormon piety. His jurisdiction frequently scores near the top on various comparative measures of morality and integrity.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:46 PM
horizontal rule
130

Briscoe v. LaHue -- absolute immunity for police officers testifying as witnesses.


Posted by: Bave | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 1:55 PM
horizontal rule
131

I would be interested/horrified to learn how that was justified.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:11 PM
horizontal rule
132

Hm, wikipedia summarizes that as "A defendant in a criminal trial is not entitled to civil damages under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 for perjured testimony against him by police officers."; is the officer really not on the hook in any other way for perjury? I assume that if I perjure myself in a trial, I'm not merely liable for civil damages?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:14 PM
horizontal rule
133

I think you're right -- there could still be criminal prosecution.


Posted by: Bave | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:25 PM
horizontal rule
134

It's immunity from a civil suit brought by the wrongfully imprisoned person against the cop for testifying falsely. That's not a special immunity for cops; generally, if you testify in any case you have immunity from a civil suit based on statements you made under oath, even if you perjured yourself under oath.

There's an issue of whether or not cops should be treated specially, and whether civil suits directly against police officers should be permitted for lying under oath. There are decent arguments for and against. (The argument for you can all figure out, the argument against is that any time a criminal defendant claimed a cop was lying, which is basically all the time, they would bring a civil suit).


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
135

...if you testify in any case you have immunity from a civil suit based on statements you made under oath, even if you perjured yourself under oath.

This strikes me as deeply fucked up. Perjured testimony ought to be punished both criminally and civilly.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:55 PM
horizontal rule
136

127 is what I'm thinking. And it's not exactly any pricier than anything else - my insurance is just a lot shittier now for mysterious reasons.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 2:58 PM
horizontal rule
137

134 --- but in the US, you can't bring private prosecutions, right? So how are you meant to bring a perjury charge if the claim is that the DA was complicit? Agree that the duplication of civil and criminal proceedings is unwelcome, but it seems to me that a defendant who wants to bring suit against perjurer can be frustrated by complicit DA --- can you seek judicial review of decisions not to prosecute in the US?


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:07 PM
horizontal rule
138

137 is basically part of my general conviction that a state monopoly on prosecution is a Bad Idea.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:09 PM
horizontal rule
139

You aren't suggesting a DA would be complicit in such a thing??? I am SHOCKED.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:14 PM
horizontal rule
140

137: If it's a state or local officer, you could go to higher-ranking state prosecutors, or try to get the feds involved (Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division). They might conceivably go after a bad DA with a pattern of using perjured testimony. If it's a federal officer and a federal prosecutor, you could try DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility. Any of this is pretty uphill, though.

Allegations of perjured police testimony in a criminal case are more likely to come out in post-conviction review (the defendant tries to get the conviction or sentence thrown out by alleging a violation of constitutional rights). In some (rare) cases that leads to judicial findings that are sufficiently forceful to prompt broader investigations.

There is no judicial review in the US federal system of decisions not to prosecute (and I can't think of a state that does it either).


Posted by: widget | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:18 PM
horizontal rule
141

140.1 -- I know a county prosecutor who says that the feds lack jurisdiction to look over his shoulder. A statutory hole, it seems. I suspect that his suit for a declaratory judgment to that effect is going to be resolved without a ruling on the question.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:27 PM
horizontal rule
142

Standing problem, I assume?


Posted by: widget | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:45 PM
horizontal rule
143

Oh yeah I forgot you guys had the zany federalism thing: but it would be very much pushing uphill to even get into a court, right?

Seems very hard to say: we can't let you bring a civil suit, because that would be too easy, but hey, at least you can bring a prosecution via the DA who was, ah, probably complicit in the stitch up...


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:51 PM
horizontal rule
144

the zany federalism thing

As a professional employed in the field of zany federalism, this makes me so happy.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 3:54 PM
horizontal rule
145

One of our county prosecutors was in court today complaining about a sentence issued by a lower court upon a convicted person who at the time was justice of the highest court (in this state).

Confused. You won't be after this week's "Soap."

Or maybe this link.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 4:07 PM
horizontal rule
146

143: I don't disagree. There are some hard choices involved in figuring out how to deal with the problem, but the current setup is pretty far over in the direction of protecting officials -- into the realm of what should be easy choices, but aren't treated that way.

This piece by Radley Balko seems like a good summary of the current state of the law in the area of immunity and the current pressure points - which mostly have to do with the circumstances (if any) under which you can sue a prosecutor who knowingly fabricates evidence to be used at a criminal trial. I had some (very) tangential involvement in the Pottawattamie case he mentions, a few years back.


Posted by: widget | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 4:23 PM
horizontal rule
147

146: yeah, I agree. One of those annoying issues where there's an interesting theoretical problem way over in the distance and a really fucking dumb one right here.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 5:28 PM
horizontal rule
148

The junk shop on the way to the bar has in its window two swords for sale, $35 each. Fortunately, it's closed by the time I'll walk par past going home.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 5:56 PM
horizontal rule
149

Are they matched for dueling, or just two random non-matching swords? Because if you bought them on the way to the bar, you'd be prepared if anyone insulted you.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 5:59 PM
horizontal rule
150

They are identical swords. Look like cavalry sabers from when that was a thing.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:02 PM
horizontal rule
151

They look like they are from before 1910 or, on chieftain difficulty, 1790.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:06 PM
horizontal rule
152

There's a guy here who looks just like Rick Springfield did in the 80s. He's with a woman whose hair is exactly like what you'd expect in a woman with a guy who looks like Rick Springfield. They can't be older than 35.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:12 PM
horizontal rule
153

Are they furtively trying to get a look at newspapers to figure out what year it is? Boggling at cellphones?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:17 PM
horizontal rule
154

They're making out, kind of.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:21 PM
horizontal rule
155

La ta da ditty da.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:22 PM
horizontal rule
156

||

Fine, Whole Foods, don't have guanciale and in fact give me a WTF look when I ask. I'll just not make buccatini.

He said, and became the most loathsome person ever.

|>


Posted by: Mister Smearcase | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:51 PM
horizontal rule
157

The guy I was talking to is now explaining himself to a drunk Russian woman young enough to be his daughter. It's going well, so far as I can tell.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 6:57 PM
horizontal rule
158

I could ask them about Guanicale, but it would be intrusive at this point.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:00 PM
horizontal rule
159

I could be really intrusive and ask about current events near Russia. She has the flag of the Russian Federation tattooed on her shoulder.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:13 PM
horizontal rule
160

||

I read the pilot script for Stalker, Kevin Williamson's new show. I didn't catch it on my first read, but a fellow writer pointed out that there's a scene where Say Anything is on in the background, validating a minority opinion held with some enthusiasm in TFA.

|>


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:25 PM
horizontal rule
161

Heebie, you comments took my wife on a journey from incredulity, to outrage, to utter contempt. Maybe you should come to Chicago and have her deliver you right in our living room. The kids would love it, unless you got too loud, which might scare them. But since this is your sixth, the problem will probably be that it's all over too soon.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
162

152: Why are you drinking in Mon/roe/ville?


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:38 PM
horizontal rule
163

Have I mentioned that I really like your wife? (From what you've shared)


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
164

Yahoos from the panhandle gotta stick together.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:53 PM
horizontal rule
165

Googled to inform myself about the concept "looks just like
Rick Springfield did in the '80s," read on Wikipedia that he toured entertaining Australian troops in Vietnam. I remember, although I bet a lot of people never knew that there were Australian troops in Vietnam. It was a "SEATO," South East Asia Treaty Organization action, and Australia was a member, as was South Korea, another participant.


Posted by: idp | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 7:58 PM
horizontal rule
166

162: Zombies.
165: I think Rick wasn't touring there by the 80s.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:13 PM
horizontal rule
167

Also, how do you know so much about fashion in Monroeville?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:22 PM
horizontal rule
168

167: I lived not far from one of your regular bars for a while.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 8:48 PM
horizontal rule
169

So I made puttanesca because I'm that kind of girl.


Posted by: Mister Smearcase | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:20 PM
horizontal rule
170

The prostitution thread is down the page.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 05-20-14 9:26 PM
horizontal rule
171

Let's not forget that gswift works in an environment heavily influenced by Mormon piety. His jurisdiction frequently scores near the top on various comparative measures of morality and integrity.

The point though is that Moskos had much the same experience in Baltimore which is a much larger dept. in a city very unlike Salt Lake.

No one's saying untoward things aren't happening in police departments. But along the lines of 47 and 51, a hell of a lot of liberals reflexively disbelieve the cops to a ridiculous degree. Maybe from time to time they could stop and reflect on the fact that they do not in fact live in a town owned by the Mafia or a Mexican drug cartel.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 2:07 AM
horizontal rule
172

But along the lines of 47 and 51, a
hell of a lot of liberals reflexively disbelieve the cops to a
ridiculous degree.

I don't have any patience for attitudes like oudemia describes (at least among UMC whites). I would submit, though, that such people are vastly outnumbered by those who reflexively believe the police and defer to them unquestioningly, and that is a much bigger problem, given that police departments are populated by the same imperfect human beings as any other institution.


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 4:22 AM
horizontal rule
173

It's not that we (speaking as anti-police liberals) think all the police are corrupt, it's that we think there are contexts in which they systematically believe they're allowed to say untrue things as a normal part of doing their job properly.

Think the stop-and-frisk policy in NYC. Thousands and thousands of stops, and an incredibly low percentage of finding weapons or anything else criminal. But for each stop, a cop had to fill out a form with the reason for the stop. Either NYC cops are morons with no idea of what's genuinely suspicious, or they systematically lied saying that they had adequate reasons when instead they were stopping people pretty randomly (or, on the basis of illegitimately broad demographic categories).

That's not corruption, that's policy, and the individual liars probably didn't think of themselves as doing anything but good policing. But what they were trained to think of as good policing included lying as part of the job.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 4:30 AM
horizontal rule
174

172: Oh, I agree with this entirely. I just have on more than one occasion seen (UMC, white) people recount with pride the outlandishly-rude-not-to-be-borne-in-interactions-with-anyone-I'd-have-thought things their kids have said to cops.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 4:48 AM
horizontal rule
175

Doesn't the spirit of charity compel you to note that we had such an experience a few weeks ago on this blog?


Posted by: FL | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:10 AM
horizontal rule
176

I thought that was the ghost of Christmas Past.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:18 AM
horizontal rule
177

[S]he has to put her own family and the people who work in her clinic first.

Let me guess: At your resistance, she seemed on the verge of tears and was talking very quickly, breathlessly and repetitively, with reliance on phrases and rhetorical figures that Milman Parry would have recognized.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:43 AM
horizontal rule
178

177: It's alameida who is rosy-digited. Not heebie.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:45 AM
horizontal rule
179

Idea: Pretty in Pink. Only, instead of Blane ... BANE.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:45 AM
horizontal rule
180

178: He would recognize the reliance, not the actual philological units oh why I am arguing.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:47 AM
horizontal rule
181

180: Indeed(, said ox-eyed oudemia to strong-greaved Flippy).


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:53 AM
horizontal rule
182

Oh, 181 is the perfect epithet for selvage denim!


Posted by: Thorn | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 6:55 AM
horizontal rule
183

Tell me about it. These 16 oz jeans are goddamned killing me, two months in.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 7:08 AM
horizontal rule
184

. People's perceptions are way outstripping the reality.

Maybe, but I can't really speak for other's perceptions.

Having been in the court system for a long time, I think that almost every court system has a police officer lie in every single week.

But I think a lot of officers don't view exaggerating probable cause or leaving out critical information as lying.

Also, I agree with 173.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
185

I'm overly late to the party, but recommend this opinion relevant to the discussion:http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11694676154744659924&q=Denise+turnipseed&hl=en&as_sdt=400006

I enjoy the dissent immensely.


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 05-21-14 4:59 PM
horizontal rule