Abuse of Power Thread (Cops, Governments, Etc.)

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Do Not Use TurboTax This Tax Season

If you haven't already filed your taxes, you're probably considering TurboTax, the widely used software that makes filing a return easy for our nation of babies and dimwits. Consider an alternative: according to two former high-ranking employees, the company ignored rampant refund theft because it could take a cut.

Intuit, the corporation that owns TurboTax, is an unequivocally evil firm that's spent millions of dollars lobbying the IRS to make sure filing your taxes is enough of a pain in the ass that you'll continue using TurboTax. The company also took some heat after widespread fraud and identity theft was discovered inside the system—so much heat, in fact, that TurboTax had to briefly stop processing state returns. Now, two Intuit insiders say the existence of mass fraud wasn't just an oversight, but intentional negligence from the top: TurboTax was able to rake in revenue from faked filings.

Robert Lee and Shane MacDougall, both former security executives at Intuit, spoke with KrebsOnSecurity.com about the company's dubious practices: Identity thieves have been creating fake accounts in droves to cash in on strangers' legitimate refunds. It's a simple maneuver: plug in someone else's Social Security number and other tax identification, then go through the same TurboTax steps as normal—only they bank the refund deposit, not you:

Lee said he was mystified when Intuit repeatedly refused to adopt some basic policies that would make it more costly and complicated for fraudsters to abuse the company's service for tax refund fraud, such as blocking the re-use of the same Social Security number across a certain number of TurboTax accounts, or preventing the same account from filing more than a small number of tax returns.

"If I sign up for an account and file tax refund requests on 100 people who are not me, it's obviously fraud," Lee said in an interview with KrebsOnSecurity. "We found literally millions of accounts that were 100 percent used only for fraud. But management explicitly forbade us from either flagging the accounts as fraudulent, or turning off those accounts."

It's a near perfect online scam: with hacked social security numbers and other personally identifying fragments flooding the web, fraudsters need only create a free TurboTax account to siphon away someone else's refund. And because TurboTax allows filers to pay for the price of the software with their refund before they actually receive it, there's no need to submit or falsify a credit card number—it's free money for both Intuit and crooks.

Even more disturbingly, MacDougall says he was brushed off by management when he told them their company was providing an extremely easy and effective way to steal from the very people it purports to help:

"Complainant repeatedly raised issues with managers, directors, and even [a senior vice president] of the company to try to rectify ongoing fraud, but was repeatedly rebuffed and told Intuit couldn't do anything that would 'hurt the numbers'," MacDougall wrote in his SEC filing. "Complainant repeatedly offered solutions to help stop the fraud, but was ignored."

Intuit denies that it has a large fraud problem, or that it deliberately allowed fraud to take place because it was good for its bottom line. Which, of course, because that's the response from every thoroughly evil corporation when they're caught with their pants down. I suggest using a certified accountant, because there's a statistically much lower chance that you'll be letting a sociopathic entity handle your taxes.

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/02/turbotaxs-anti-fraud-efforts-under-scrutiny/

Won't be using those jerks anymore. Glad I didn't have any of my refunds stolen in the last 2 years since I used them

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

UPDATE: City of Cleveland Argues Tamir Rice Caused Tamir Rice Shooting

In court documents filed Friday, the City of Cleveland formally denied responsibility for the police shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, arguing his death was "directly and proximately caused" by his own actions.

Responding to the Rice family's wrongful death lawsuit, the city listed 20 defenses against their claims, saying, in part, that "all injuries, losses, and damages complained of" were a result of Rice's failure to "exercise due care to avoid injury."

According to that lawsuit, police acted "unreasonably, negligently [and] recklessly" when they shot the boy carrying an airsoft gun in a Cleveland park last November. As evidence of the city's negligence, the suit cites the Justice Department's recent report on excessive force by Cleveland police and the hiring of Rice's shooter, previously assessed by another police force as unfit for duty.

Attorney Walter Madison, who represents the Rice family, reaffirmed his belief in the lawsuit's merit Friday, telling The Plain Dealer, "I do believe that a 12-year-old child died unnecessarily at the hands of Cleveland police officers and I do believe that certain officers shouldn't have been entitled to wear the uniform."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tamir-rice-caused-his-own-death-city-of-cleveland-argues-in-court-doc/

That's a load of BS and I hope his family takes the city to the freaking cleaners for this garbage

 

[childeroland]

Video Exonerates Man Set Up By Louisiana Cops And Prosecutors

If not for cell phone video, 47-year-old disabled veteran Douglas Dendinger could be going to prison — because of an apparent coordinated effort by Washington Parish, La. cops and prosecutors who falsely accused him of battery and witness intimidation.

As New Orleans’ WWL reports, Dendinger’s two-year nightmare began on Aug. 20, 2012, when he was paid $50 to serve a court summons on behalf of his nephew against Bogalusa police officer Chad Cassard in a police brutality lawsuit.

Dendinger handed Cassard a white envelope containing the documents and says he went on his way. But 20 minutes later, police showed up to Dendinger’s house and arrested him. He was put in jail on charges of simple battery, obstruction of justice and intimidating a witness.

Two of those charges are felonies, and a prior cocaine conviction on Dendinger’s record threatened to land him in jail for a long time as a repeat offender.

But Dendinger was confident that a mistake had been made and that he would be released without cause since two prosecutors and several police officers had seen him hand over the summons peacefully.

But that’s not what happened.

A year after the incident, then-District Attorney Walter Reed brought charges against Dendinger. His case was backed by two prosecutors who asserted that Dendinger had assaulted Cassard. Seven witness statements also supported the case.

Cassard made the same claim, writing in a voluntary statement that Dendinger “slapped him in the chest” when he served the summons.

Pamela Legendre, a staff attorney who witnessed the hand-off, said she thought Dendinger had punched Cassard.

Bogalusa police chief Joe Culpepper said that Dendinger had used “violence” and “force.”

And another witness said in a deposition that Dendinger used such force when he served the summons that Cassard flew back several feet.

“It wasn’t fun and games, they had a plan, the plan was really to go after him and put him away. That is scary,” Philip Kaplan, the attorney representing Dendinger in his civil rights case, told WWL.

“I realized even more at that moment these people are trying to hurt me,” Dendinger told the news station.

Luckily for Dendinger, his wife and nephew had filmed him that day in order to prove that the court papers had been served.

Grainy video of the exchange shows Dendinger handing Cassard the summons and the former police officer walking away in the opposite direction. Though the video aired by WWL does not show the entire encounter, what it does not show is Dendinger slapping anyone or acting aggressively during the crucial moment when he served the summons.

The video also shows that the witness who claimed that Denginger’s force pushed Cassard back several feet had his back turned as the scene unfolded.

After Reed was forced to recuse his office from the case, it was referred to the Louisiana attorney general who quickly dropped the charges against Dendinger.

Rafael Goyeneche, president of the New Orleans Metropolitan Crime Commission, told WWL that after viewing the video he did not see Dendinger commit battery on Cassard and that the officers and prosecutors involved could be looking at serious ethics charges.

“I didn’t see a battery, certainly a battery committed that would warrant criminal charges being preferred,” Goyeneche said.

“It’s a felony to falsify a police report,” Goyeneche continued. “So this is a police report, and this police report was the basis for charging this individual.”

Kaplan made the obvious point: ”If this was truly a battery on a police officer, with police officers all around him, why isn’t something happening right there?”

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Wow that's scary. Good thing they had video or he would have been screwed

 

[Teelie]

And the police still insist they don't need to be recorded...

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

LAPD Officers Shoot Man Five Times in Broad Daylight

A video posted to Facebook Sunday night shows several LAPD cops struggling with a man before eventually shooting him on the street in downtown L.A. The man, still unidentified, was reportedly homeless.

According to Officer Jack Richter, police were responding to a call regarding an altercation between two people on Sunday morning.

As several of the officers wrestled the man to the street, a woman approaches from behind and grabs a baton one cop appears to have dropped. He runs up to the woman shouting, "You have my stick! You have my stick!" before two officers slam her to the ground.

Still struggling to subdue the first man, it looks as though officers begin to taser him. One of the officers is then heard repeatedly shouting, "he's going for my gun!" before five shots are fired.

The original video was reportedly uploaded to Facebook by a man named Anthony Blackburn. As of this posting, it has been viewed upwards of 100,000 times. It has not yet been confirmed whether the shooting was fatal.

Update: According to reports, the man was taken to a hospital; he was pronounced dead shortly thereafter.

WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO AT THE LINK:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1009126519115252

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-police-fatally-shoot-homeless-man-20150301-story.html

The homeless man was clearly having a psychotic episode and acting out against the police but they already had him on the ground and then just shot him cold blood. He had no weapon. Pretty horrible.

 

[Tempest]

I'm glad the officers were caught out, but I'm really confused about why a civilian was allowed to handle a summons in the first place. Especially in a case about police brutality.

I feel like that should be done by someone employed by the courts, if for no other reason than to try to cut down on this sort of situation.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

LAPD Officers Shoot Man Five Times in Broad Daylight



WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO AT THE LINK:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1009126519115252

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-police-fatally-shoot-homeless-man-20150301-story.html

The homeless man was clearly having a psychotic episode and acting out against the police but they already had him on the ground and then just shot him cold blood. He had no weapon. Pretty horrible.

He was pronounced dead at the scene - that article is wrong. Also he doesn't say "he's going for my gun" he says "Get off my gun! Get off my gun!!!" Although I'd like to say it would have been prudent to shoot his legs or something, but there's a lot to keep in mind:
1. The perp was swinging at like six cops after he was under arrest
2. The perp kept resisting after getting tackled
3. Cops attempted to subdue him then with force, by hitting him and using their tasers
4. Perp grabs officer's gun, officer's hand is also on his gun
5. Officer (seemingly scared ****less) tells perp to let go of the officer's gun
6. Officer shoots the man, six times (not sure how may make contact
7. Man is pronounced dead at the scene

It's easy for us to say what should and should not have been done, but when someone is fighting you for a gun after being tackled by six cops and tasered, I'm sure fear and adrenaline get the best of you.


Solution?
Should the cop be charged with murder? I don't think so. Not in this case. I think he should be given a temporary leave, and get counselling after going through a traumatic event like that and he should go through some rehab before going back to work. No one knows how they'll react in a situation like this, and he proved that his reaction was probably not the best, so they've gotta fix that.

Anyway, I guess we'll see what comes of all of this...

 

[Tempest]

He was pronounced dead at the scene - that article is wrong. Also he doesn't say "he's going for my gun" he says "Get off my gun! Get off my gun!!!" Although I'd like to say it would have been prudent to shoot his legs or something, but there's a lot to keep in mind:
1. The perp was swinging at like six cops after he was under arrest
2. The perp kept resisting after getting tackled
3. Cops attempted to subdue him then with force, by hitting him and using their tasers
4. Perp grabs officer's gun, officer's hand is also on his gun
5. Officer (seemingly scared ****less) tells perp to let go of the officer's gun
6. Officer shoots the man, six times (not sure how may make contact
7. Man is pronounced dead at the scene

It's easy for us to say what should and should not have been done, but when someone is fighting you for a gun after being tackled by six cops and tasered, I'm sure fear and adrenaline get the best of you.


Solution?
Should the cop be charged with murder? I don't think so. Not in this case. I think he should be given a temporary leave, and get counselling after going through a traumatic event like that and he should go through some rehab before going back to work. No one knows how they'll react in a situation like this, and he proved that his reaction was probably not the best, so they've gotta fix that.

Anyway, I guess we'll see what comes of all of this...

No. I'd say the appropriate action was taken. What if the guy had managed to get a hold of an officer's weapon?

 

[Kar]

They need to do better at training these cops. You mean to tell me all of those officers had trouble restraining one man?

 

[ShadowBoxer]

I get mad at those people the post comments of NBC, CNN Facebook page on articles like the recent on about the police and the homeless guy. They always are like obey the law and you will be fine. Well I live in Virginia and I can tell you that I have been harassed by the police for no reason at all other than being a black guy on a few occasions. Pulled over by the cops because I was driving a nice car in a "white neighborhood". Being questioned at a wal mart because they "thought I was stealing" with no proof to back up there claims etc. Just because YOU haven't been harassed doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Anyway, 5 vs 1 homeless man is excsssive and it's really causing a divide in the U.S between citizen and Law Enforcement.

 

[Tempest]

They need to do better at training these cops. You mean to tell me all of those officers had trouble restraining one man?

Yes. They even used, or attempted to use, a taser. You can hear it in the video.

As for training, what kind of training would you recommend?

 

[CaptainWagner]

They need to do better at training these cops. You mean to tell me all of those officers had trouble restraining one man?

Did you watch the video?

 

[Kar]

Did you watch the video?

Yeah, I saw it. I saw he put up a struggle, I'm not gonna even try and argue that. But the lethal force? That's the better training I'm suggesting. Something that doesn't end with them firing multiple shots. So you can't keep him down, so the only answer is to air him out?

 

[CaptainWagner]

Yeah, I saw it. I saw he put up a struggle, I'm not gonna even try and argue that. But the lethal force? That's the better training I'm suggesting. Something that doesn't end with them firing multiple shots. So you can't keep him down, so the only answer is to air him out?

Unless I'm wrong, we don't know how many shots actually made contact. In the end, they had tried to arrest him peacefully, tried to use a tazer, and he was still attacking them and trying to take a gun. At this point, guns aren't the ONLY option, but you can't really fault him for the decision he made.

 

[Kar]

Unless I'm wrong, we don't know how many shots actually made contact. In the end, they had tried to arrest him peacefully, tried to use a tazer, and he was still attacking them and trying to take a gun. At this point, guns aren't the ONLY option, but you can't really fault him for the decision he made.

I honestly don't think it matters HOW many shots made contact. He fired repeatedly. I think that indicates he was trying to take him out, whether it would have been with one shot or several. And yes I think I can fault him for that because he's the only one that made that decision. No other cop got up and decided to follow up with shots.

Yeah, the homeless shouldn't have resisted, but the cop didn't have to shoot him. This is what it boils down to. And to me, its honestly unclear who the officer was shouting "drop the gun" to ("drop the gun" is what I heard, correct me if I'm mistaken though). Because while it could have been the homeless man it could have also very well been the shooting officer he cried "drop the gun" to. Just a thought I took into consideration.

All in all, its sad regardless.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

No. I'd say the appropriate action was taken. What if the guy had managed to get a hold of an officer's weapon?

What exactly are you saying no to? I said the remainder of your response in my initial post. Did you solely come in here to flame and start an argument?

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Well first off, it's usually not very easy to pull an officers weapon out. Most cops have a latch on the holster to keep the weapon secure. Even if that isn't the case here he already had multiple cops on top of him so for them to not be able to maintain control is laughable. They should have been able to subdue the man without firing 6 shots into him. If this were just one or two officers in the same instance I could almost see how it would have been justifiable

 

[Destructus86]

Well first off, it's usually not very easy to pull an officers weapon out. Most cops have a latch on the holster to keep the weapon secure. Even if that isn't the case here he already had multiple cops on top of him so for them to not be able to maintain control is laughable. They should have been able to subdue the man without firing 6 shots into him. If this were just one or two officers in the same instance I could almost see how it would have been justifiable

Honestly...i'm on the cops side on this one. Seems pretty justified. The guy clearly seemed to be on something and was acting insane...plus going for an officers weapon? He was pretty much asking for extreme force.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Well I agree in the fact that if you are trying to get an officers weapon than you are asking for lethal force but the problem is going by that video and the way the man was acting I highly doubt the man had coherent thoughts much less knew he was going for a weapon. It looks, to me, like he was just doing anything he could because he was insane and trying to fight off the police. I highly doubt he thought he was going to get an officers weapon.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Justice Dept Finds Years of Racial Discrimination By Ferguson PD

According to the forthcoming report on the Justice Department's investigation into the Ferguson, Mo. police department for alleged civil rights violations, the department has demonstrated a history of racial profiling that has intensified race relations in the St. Louis suburb.

The investigation was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder last September after the shooting and killing of unarmed, black 18-year-old Michael Brown by a white Ferguson police officer, Darren Wilson, and the ensuing violent protests that erupted in the city in the days thereafter.

Officials familiar with the report tell the New York Times that the Justice Department has found the Ferguson police department to be pulling over and ticketing a disproportionate number of the city's black residents and using those incurring fines to pad the city's budget:

Blacks accounted for 86 percent of traffic stops in 2013 but make up 63 percent of the population, according to the most recent data published by the Missouri attorney general. And once they were stopped, black drivers were twice as likely to be searched, even though searches of white drivers were more likely to turn up contraband.

For people in Ferguson who cannot afford to pay their tickets, routine traffic stops can become yearslong ordeals, with repeated imprisonments because of mounting fines. Such fines are the city's second-largest source of revenue after sales tax. Federal investigators say that has provided a financial incentive to continue law enforcement policies that unfairly target African-Americans.

The report, to be released as early as this week, the Times reports, "will force Ferguson officials to either negotiate a settlement with the Justice Department or face being sued by it on civil rights charges."

Justice Department officials have previously indicated that Wilson, the Ferguson police officer that shot and killed Brown last year, will be cleared of civil rights charges.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/02/u...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

I don't think anyone is going to be surprised by this

 

[Kar]

We still don't even know who the one cop was saying "drop the gun" to. It could have been the officer who fired the shots he was giving the order to.

And yeah, several cops not being able to subdue an unarmed man is what leads me to say they need some new sort of training. Suggesting the victim was "on something" is plausible but until we get a toxicology report (if that will be released to the public) we can't assume that.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

It's also completely possible the man was having a psychotic break and as someone who suffers from schizophrenia myself it's scary to think that this is the best way these cops know how to handle a situation like that

 

[Tempest]

What exactly are you saying no to? I said the remainder of your response in my initial post. Did you solely come in here to flame and start an argument?

Sorry, I quoted the wrong one.

It's also completely possible the man was having a psychotic break and as someone who suffers from schizophrenia myself it's scary to think that this is the best way these cops know how to handle a situation like that

To be fair, we didn't see the whole exchange. And we do know that they tasered, or at least attempted to taser the man, and that it didn't work. Even if he's having a psychotic episode, the officers were running out of options when he reached for a weapon.

I'm deeply sorry that a man has lost his life. And if he was in a psychotic moment, then that compounds the tragedy. Perhaps there could be more training, but I really think the officers responded to the best of their ability.

 

[Howlett]

Well I agree in the fact that if you are trying to get an officers weapon than you are asking for lethal force but the problem is going by that video and the way the man was acting I highly doubt the man had coherent thoughts much less knew he was going for a weapon. It looks, to me, like he was just doing anything he could because he was insane and trying to fight off the police. I highly doubt he thought he was going to get an officers weapon.

But now you're getting into mind reading territory. Whatever the guy was thinking is irrelevant, it's what he was actually doing that matters. He was wrestled, tazed, and then was still strongly resisting and went for a gun. That's a clear danger.

He's overpowering 5 officers and is now wrestling one of them for his gun? Yeah, that's scary enough to warrant shooting him. They tried all options to restrain him. It totally sucks and is sad and unfortunate, but that seems to be what happened in the very short few seconds of the encounter.

I keep hearing that at least one of the officers had a body cam that was on, so maybe we'll eventually find out more about what happened, but as it looks right now, the guy didn't give the officers much choice.