Police Abuse

The Chicago Police Department Has a 'Black Site'

People detained for hours without being charged or being able to contact lawyers.

|

Homan Square
The Guardian

Dog bites several area men. Via The Guardian:

The Chicago police department operates an off-the-books interrogation compound, rendering Americans unable to be found by family or attorneys while locked inside what lawyers say is the domestic equivalent of a CIA black site.

The facility, a nondescript warehouse on Chicago's west side known as Homan Square, has long been the scene of secretive work by special police units. Interviews with local attorneys and one protester who spent the better part of a day shackled in Homan Square describe operations that deny access to basic constitutional rights.

Alleged police practices at Homan Square, according to those familiar with the facility who spoke out to the Guardian after its investigation into Chicago police abuse, include:

  • Keeping arrestees out of official booking databases.
  • Beating by police, resulting in head wounds.
  • Shackling for prolonged periods.
  • Denying attorneys access to the "secure" facility.
  • Holding people without legal counsel for between 12 and 24 hours, including people as young as 15.

At least one man was found unresponsive in a Homan Square "interview room" and later pronounced dead.

Read more here. There's also an accompanying video interview with somebody who had been detained there for 17 hours, handcuffed to a bench, without any access to his lawyer. Reporter Spencer Ackerman previously wrote a two-part investigation of Chicago Police Detective Richard Zuley, detailing his role in bringing Chicago's brutal interrogation techniques to Guantanamo Bay.

Advertisement

NEXT: WATCH: Hacking Life's Code and Creating New Organisms with 3-D Printed DNA

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Good reporting, Shackford.

    1. Don’t you mean Spencer Ackerman?

      1. It’s like that episode of “The Simpsons” where Bart gets praised for coming up with the idea of asking Lisa to solve a problem.

  2. There are psychopaths on both sides of the law. One side has virtual immunity for their crimes.

    1. By “virtual” you mean “literal,” right?

      1. I think “absolute” is the word we’re looking for.

        1. “Sovereign.”

      2. I think he means nearly complete.

        As the pursuit of Christopher Dorner showed, cops who kill other cops sometimes *are* held accountable.

        1. Yeah, only because killing a fellow gang member (without authorization from the top) is the ultimate crime.

          I also think part of the pants-shitting by cops over Dorner was that they believe their own retarded hype and think that the average cop is actually a skilled combatant. So having Dorner supposedly gunning for other cops really put them into pants-shitting mode.

          1. Now that Bo is blocked, *someone* has to take up the guidon of pedantry.

            1. Oh no you didn’t!

            2. I thought that was a job for your mom.

              1. My mom rose from documentation writing for a computer company to managing the documentation department of a major software company.

                I tried to reject the brain-washing about punctuation and the tortures used to punish poor grammar. I tried…. and failed.

                She broke me, man! She broke me! /starts wailing

            3. What is this Bo is blocked? What did I miss?

              1. Not by Reason’s staff.

                But so many of the people who have installed reasonable and/or fascr have reported blocking him that he might as well be.

                Poor guy has been reduced to ‘conversing’ with the non-sentient Shriek. And by poor guy, I mean he deserves everything he is getting.

                1. The blocking thing is just so puerile.

                  It is unworthy of those who pride themselves on being intellectually robust.

                  Besides, its not as if one could credibly argue that Bo contributes less here than posters like Warty.

                  1. Some of us do this as a means of encouraging him to get treatment and counseling. Bo has a path toward a more normal life.

                  2. There’s intellectual robustness, Libertymike and there’s wasting people’s time.

                    My experiences with Bo are that he is usually a waste of time.

                    Even worse, I don’t enjoy reading his contributions which are full of blistering illogic, weird fixations expressed through pedantry, poor reading comprehension, strawmanning and substitution of his emotions for reasoned argument.

                    And if one wants robust debate, one can find worthier opponents with the likes of Tony. Personally, I found my arguments with Bo to be like King Arthur’s fight with the Black Knight. A waste of time.

                    1. Puerile is all they’ve got LM. These are grown men who think like teenage girls. Not only do they seem obsessive about who talks to whom, but they can’t stop talking about me period.

                    2. And if one wants robust debate, one can find worthier opponents with the likes of Tony.

                      I understand each and every one of those words…..just not arranged in a sentence like that!

                  3. I generally agree with you about blocking, but it does have it’s place for the true griefers like Mary Stack, and to a lesser extent Tony and the ‘Plug.

                    1. Tony and the Plug are stupid and dishonest. No treatment for that. Bo has something treatable, or at least a syndrome that can be ameliorated with behavioral therapy.

                    2. Pathetic as well as puerile.

                    3. Bo, when many people make the same observations about you, then it’s probably you, not them.

                    4. That’s laughable, and incredibly insular of you. If you were to go on HuffPost and start posting regularly you’d get exactly the same treatment. It’s what happens when cliques on the internet, especially ideological ones, encounter someone they disagree with. I mean, the same tired tropes are used despite the ideology. It’s the basest groupthink.

                    5. The perceived dissenter gets called dishonest, arguing in bad faith, a shill (and a paid shill sometimes), crazy, off their meds, etc. I’ve seen it happen to conservative dissenters on liberal sites and vice versa, but amazingly with the same, tired tropes and progressions.

                      Lots of people have fragile egos and philosophical worldviews and want people to back slap them there instead of go ‘wait, what?’ They really don’t like anyone who sees it different.

                      Add to it that my dissent actually falls in line more with what the Reason writers tend to argue than these commenters and you get the added tension of them being outed as just squatting and using the site for their own contrary visions and/or backslapping support sessions and you get some people who really work the program, so to speak.

                    6. Talk about missing the point. As usual.

                      It’s not disagreement that puts people off. It’s the manner in which you disagree.

                      I don’t enjoy reading his contributions which are full of blistering illogic, weird fixations expressed through pedantry, poor reading comprehension, strawmanning and substitution of his emotions for reasoned argument.

                      Nothing there is false, and nothing there says anything about disagreement.

                      We welcome disagreement, so long as it is put forth in a logical and reasoned manner without straw man arguments and other fallacies.

                      But I expect that will fly right over your head and you’ll go back to mommy who will assure you that you’re a likeable boy and that it’s all us, not you.

                    7. sarc, the number of posters here who strawman and substitute emotions for reasoned argument are legion. Usually, they do not argue anywhere near as well as Bo.

                      Often, posters will argue “strawman” where none exist and only as a means of deflecting the substance of the other’s argument.

                      What are his weird fixations?

                      The pedantry? Yeah, but is that enough to want to block him?

                    8. Mary, Tony and the ‘Plug – not quite the same ring to it as Mr. Cashman’s “Willie, Mickey and the Duke.”

                    9. not quite the same ring to it as Mr. Cashman’s “Willie, Mickey and the Duke.”

                      And Mary can’t hit a major league curve.

                  4. I’m entitled to scroll past emails from various posters who I think are a waste of my time. I don’t see how automating this with a plug-in makes any difference.

                    Does increasing the signal to noise ratio detract from, or increase, intellectual robustitude?

                    1. Yes, you have the right to scroll past any e-mails you like and if you want to automate this, fine.

                      However, you should know better: did I put that issue in play by my post? Put another way, why the invocation of a red herring?

                  5. You fool! Now Warty will invade your very dreams…

  3. I’m sure Obama’s Justice Department will get right on this.

    1. If the Illinois AG is too gutless to investigate, then the U.S. AG should.
      One more reason to elect a Rand Paul who could appoint an AG to rein in state and local prosecutorial misconduct. Paul needs to make this a major plank in his campaign. It would appeal to minorities who tend to bear the brunt of this kind of injustice.

      1. Make it a predatory agency, that has no source of funds other than what it gets from its victims. That should do a lot to keep it from being “captured” by the cop-industrial complex.

        Also, make a successful rotation through this agency a requirement for promotion to the upper ranks.

        1. Make it a predatory agency, that has no source of funds other than what it gets from its victims.

          How is that different from today? Taxation and asset-forfeiture are not all that different.

        2. Like a Bureau of Sabotage?

      2. The IL AG is the daughter of the Iron Fist, er…Speaker of the IL House and Supreme Donkey in IL. If it makes Rahm Emmanuel’s Chicago look bad, it will get spiked.

  4. You. Are. Welcome.

    /Chicago PD

  5. Those confessions aren’t going to beat themselves out.

  6. Our very own American Lubyanka, how lovely.

    Rahm Emanuel is on the phone to Obama right now, asking, “How do you do that thing you do where you pretend to not know about something until you just read it in the papers?”

  7. Goddamn right-wingers and their disdain for civil liberties!

  8. Why do you need an attorney? Only guilty people need an attorney. /Tony/Buttfuck

  9. I guess I didn’t give them enough credit. I figured the only black site they’d be able to keep secret was the single recliner, tissues and DVD’s of Law and Order.

    1. *”one with the” single…

      1. The edit button was renditioned to a black site.

  10. This is incredible. That is, I really don’t find it credible. I’m cynical as hell about the police (and Chicago), but this kind of flagrant, organized lawbreaking is difficult to believe.

    1. Cops can do anything they want. Who’s going to stop them? The cops?

    2. BY COPS?!?!?!? I find it more credible, actually… remember that cop that was running a prostitution ring out of the official undercover cop apartment? And that was like 1-3 dudes… imagine if you just got the whole department on board by saying “Well, we need extraordinary measures to get these criminals”, I guarantee that they would do something like this.

    3. Dude, there is a LONG history of the CPD and beating/torturing people. Like Jon Burge. It seems to be systemic within the department, even more so than other police departments.

      1. Yes, we are the worst.

        1. So not only are you a chick, but you are a cop also?

          1. Nikki is the worst, but she’s still human.

            1. Barely. Plus she’s a chick. Did tarran already cover that?

              1. I hear that those types don’t have a tootle or bing-bongs.

                1. Whoa…just like your mom!

          2. I’m just working on my REGION WAR routine.

            1. I’ll bet you were eating some deep dish pizza when you decided to do that. You disgust me.

              1. There is no such thing.

                1. As Region WarzZz?

                  Oh, you meant “the non-pizza pizza”.

                  *throws box of foreskins at crowd and runs*

                  1. *throws box of foreskins at crowd and runs*

                    *collects foreskins, sells them to cosmetic company for tidy profit*

      2. I think the “black site” may be too perfect, so I’ll be skeptical, because I don’t want to fall into the “it fits my narrative on cops” trap. Mostly because cops can violate your rights in broad daylight on film with no consequences, so why would they need a black site.

        1. They don’t need one. They also enjoy dropping people off in rival gang territory for funsies.

        2. “Black Site” is a bit sensational. But in this case, I’m OK with it.

          It might actually help draw mass media attention to the fact that the CPD is disappearing people.

          1. I don’t doubt they are detaining people and denying legal counsel, it’s the secret facility part I have an issue with. Especially since the guarding article shows the sign designating what the building is.

            1. Well, yeah. It’s on google maps, and there are dozens of police vehicles parked outside. So not exactly secret.

              But there are very strict rules regarding the handling of prisoners that they have to pretend to follow.

              If this story has legs, they’re actually going to be in a lot of trouble.

              1. In trouble with who?

                1. In this case, it might be bad enough that the feds will step in and force CPD into a consent decree.

                  But maybe not, given our current president’s connections to Chicago.

              2. I’m sure they’ll weasel out of it with some technical bullshit. “No one was arrested, just detained.” “You don’t get Miranda rights and legal counsel for a terry stop” blah blah.

                1. There are some pretty strict limits on how long you can reasonably detain someone. If they’re holding people long enough that they have to feed them, then it’s going to be an issue that they can’t sweep under the rug.

                  1. And how can those limits be enforced?

              3. The problem with a black site isn’t that nobody knows it exists.

                It’s the abuses that take place where one doesn’t have the protections of outsiders knowing where one is.

                Black sites are kept secret to *further* obscure the objectionable things happening within their walls. They don’t magically stop doing the objectionable and abusive stuff simply because the site’s existence and location are known.

            2. The issue isn’t that the building’s existence is secret. It’s that the list of people in it is secret.

              1. Everyone know about Lubyanka, after all. It wasn’t a secret.

                What defines a black site, as mentioned, is that you go off the grid and are completely in the hands of the cops, with no recourse.

          2. jesse? Put your dog back on a leash, please.

            1. I eat my own poo

      3. I hear that CPD even beat protesters right on live TV. That’s even more difficult to believe.

        1. The last time I was in Chicago was maybe 2002 and my friend was showing me around. There were a bunch of pro- and anti-war protesters penned into a square (I don’t recall the name). I recall thinking “I’m surprised they’re hanging out so peacefully together.” Not a minute later cops started goose-stepping down multiple streets to converge on the square in full riot gear. My friend dragged me away.

          1. Yeah, Chicago cops have an odd tendency to make peaceful situations vastly more dangerous through their presence.

            That seems like the opposite of what you’d want from a police department.

            1. Yep, and the way that my friend (who’d grown up in the Chicago area) was desperately trying to get me out of the area was telling, and unnerving.

              1. The CPD was wearing T-Shirts for the NATO Summit in 2012 that read “We kicked your grandfather’s hippy ass in 1968, we’ll kick yours too”.

            2. They’re here to preserve disorder.

      4. Beating and torture, sure. That’s old news. This sounds like an organized way to completely circumvent all procedures. It’s not just turning off the camera or destroying a piece of evidence as needed. Even in our messed up system, everyone involved in this “black site” is liable to be completely fucked over, right?

        1. Are…are you joking? Nothing will happen to any of them.

          1. Civil judgments totaling at least 8 figures or more, and no admission of wrongdoing.

          2. Again, this is not standard corruption. If the reporting is accurate, this is a huge deal.

    4. The problem is that it’s not “lawbreaking” – if the cops do it, that means it’s not illegal. It’s also not illegal if you can get away with it by slinging enough bullshit to obfuscate the issue. And have legal advice that whatever it is you want to do is totally cool – you think Bush had the only John Yoo in the world?

      For example, I see mention of people not being allowed to talk to a lawyer. You only have the right to an attorney if you’re arrested – and the article says there’s nothing put into the record that these people were arrested. They were just being ‘detained’, which is totally not illegal. Sure, maybe it will later be determined in a lawsuit that it was wrong to detain them for this long in this manner, but how were the cops supposed to know that?

    5. No matter how cynical you are, it’s hard to keep up.

    6. MJ – I know a few Chicago cops from time in the ILARNG – yeah, I believe it. As others have mentioned, Commander Burge ring a bell?

  11. Looks like they were just practicing overseas, so they could perfect it for us!

  12. The Chicago police department operates an off-the-books interrogation compound

    It’s called The Obamas’

  13. Why do we even need laws?

    1. A better question is, do we ever actually have “laws” if they’re systematically ignored, and don’t apply to those in power?

      Law is a fiction. But people are so scared of what they think exists without it that they’re willing to pretend there are laws to stave off their fear, even if it gives cover to strongmen and gangs and whatnot to hide behind those “laws” and pretend that they’re legitimate and not just strongmen and gangs and whatnot.

      1. Law and legislation are not the same thing. Legislation is an attempt to codify law and put government force behind it, but law is just a set of rules that society agrees upon. For example murder is not illegal because legislation makes it so, but because society will not tolerate it. Governments can attempt to create law with legislation, but that doesn’t make it so. For example legislation prohibiting marijuana isn’t law, because society tolerates it’s use.

      2. Rule of law exists when people believe in it enough to demand it be enforced uniformly.

        In a just society every cop involved in this operation would be tried and either put away for a very long time or, in the case of those responsible for the prisoner who died, publicy executed as an example to the other pigs.

        1. The just society you describe never existed and never will. Rule of law is a bullshit smokescreen, because even if the system was created with the best intentions, the worst possible people will immediately seek out positions of power and will subvert it.

          Rule of law is facade behind which warlords and strongmen hide their true nature and fool the general populace into thinking they’re on some kind of fair and equal footing. Are you going to fall for that? Or are you going to look at the world as it exists and realize “rule of law” is a lie?

          1. But, Epi, they tell me they have legitimacy!!!

            1. I AM THE LAW!!!!!

              /obligatory

            2. They can point to some words on paper (that they themselves ignore whenever they want)! They must be legitimate! What was I thinking?

        2. Rule of law means the law is applied equally to everyone, without exception.

          The problem is that those tasked with enforcing the law will always exempt themselves from it.

          1. Which means there is no such thing as rule of law.

  14. OT, but related to cops: if you can, try to catch Dead Man Talking in A&E. It is about the reinvestigation of a rape-murder in Bumfuck, TX. Guy is set to be executed March 5.

  15. Can’t make an omelet without breaking a few ribs.

    1. Mmmm. Rib omelette.

      1. Soylent McRib

  16. USA USA USA!

  17. And yet the police and their mindless supporters just can’t understand why there’s just such a lack of public support for our fine boys in blue.

    Again, what the hell do they think the consequence of hearing shit like this is going to be? Even the sort of people they would normally be relying on for public support start to walk away on this sort of thing.

    1. Tell me why they need public support, again?

      They can pretty much do whatever the fuck they want, regardless.

      1. They can pretty much do whatever the fuck they want, regardless.

        For now they can. But, at least in principle, this sort of lawlessness could get punished.

        You’ll note the police have taken to whining about the declining level of public support and approval.

        1. Yeah, but police also complain about the rising wave of crime so…

          1. True. But, the declining public support thing seems new. Before, if you were citing abuse, you were just a malcontent on the side of the criminals. Now, you’re a meanie picking on our poor snowflakes in blue.

            I think they’ve lost control of the narrative. And they’re starting to realize it.

            1. I think they’ve lost control of the narrative.

              Nope. The narrative is just fine. A few bad apples here, some racists over there. Nothing systemic to see here.

              1. I’m not so sure. My sense is that a lot of the middle class no longer views the police with the halo you’re talking about. Is it as far along as it should be? Nope. But, I think it has hit a turning point.

                1. This is why the middle class is shrinking.

          2. It would take me the rest of my life to find 3 police who never complain about their jobs.

        2. You’ll note the police have taken to whining about the declining level of public support and approval.

          It’s a vicious cycle. Cops can’t understand that their own callousness creates resentment, so they respond by becoming even more aggressive.

          1. “….. their own callousness creates resentment, so they respond by becoming even more aggressive.”

            That is the kind of people they are. It is all they know.

      2. Well sure it is fun to do whatever you want and get away with it, but the shine goes off if people don’t also shower you with adulation.

        You feel so good after you get done slapping around some homeless guy and throwing him in jail for trespassing in a public bus terminal and then you go home and find out that a good 25% of the people think you are an ass. How would that make you feel Tundra?

        They want to be LOVED and FEARED. Can’t they have both?

        1. That just means a good 25% of the people are criminals, which means you need to be more aggressive.

        2. Machiavelli said it was better for a prince to be feared than loved, but they need to avoid being hated.

    2. Again, what the hell do they think the consequence of hearing shit like this is going to be?

      Consequences? What are you talking about? Police do what they need to do to keep us safe. Anyone who questions what they do is simply identifying themselves as a criminal, and no one cares what criminals have to say.

      1. 30 years of 12 different Law & Order shows pretty much proves this.

      2. Anyone who questions what they do is simply identifying themselves as a criminal, and no one cares what criminals have to say.

        Oh, I don’t think they need to be afraid of anyone questioning them. It’s just the case that the police rely on their halo with the general public to be seen as “special”. I think that halo’s getting more and more tarnished as time goes on.

        1. It’s just the case that the police rely on their halo with the general public to be seen as “special”.

          When a halo won’t work, military gear will. They don’t care what the public thinks of them. They care only for their power to use violence without consequence.

          1. They care only for their power to use violence without consequence.

            And how’s that power going to work out on, say, police pensions getting lumped in with municipal workers more broadly? Or. say, altered budget priorities?

            Not really very satisfying justice, I know. But, I don’t think we’re that far off from the point where those sorts of things are political winners.

    3. To be fair, Chicago cops are vastly worse than cops anywhere else in the country.

      I have no love of the NYPD or LAPD, but I don’t think either of them are as bad as the CPD. The number of stories out of this department are absurd.

      Jon Burge. Black sites. Guantanamo torturers. Code of silence. Threats directed towards a bartender after she was almost beaten to death by a drunk cop.

      We’re the gold standard for police abuse.

      1. Radley also had an article about an off duty Chicago cop propositioning a woman at a bar, getting shot down, following her out of the bar and killing her with a single shot to the back of the head with no warning, having it all caught on video and getting away with it.

    4. Makes me wonder what it’s like in countries that are already well-known for the people having to fear the police. Imagine how much worse it can get here.

  18. I don’t know if this is credible either, but if true, I expect quite the slew of indictments to come out of it.

    Fortunately, this sort of flagrant violation of constitutional rights doesn’t happen very often. And when it does it is dealt with.

    What I find more worrisome are the abuses that are ignored and tolerated by the public on a routine basis, like civil asset forfeiture and police “force protection” shootings.

    1. I expect unicorns with free Monty Python DVDs to arrive at my door. I wonder who’ll be waiting longer?

      1. Probably you.

        1. I’m still warming up for “the lumberjack song” just the same. They already get away with too much and since the president and attorney general are going to be needing jobs in a couple of years they don’t want to make any waves in their old stamping grounds right now.

          1. I’ll sing the Lumberjack Song….

            Can you hear me now??

            /unclear on the concept

    1. That looks exactly like it does in SimCity when you let your neighborhood go to shit.

      1. Wow, you weren’t joking.

        1. I like how Google Maps says, “This place has closed or relocated.”

          1. “On the South Side, yeah, they will kill ya – but on the West Side, they will kill ya and do shit to your body afterwards”

            – IDOC Parole Officer (6’5″ 300lbs guy) in 1995 explaining why he didn’t like going on the West Side.

      2. No. In Sim City the area surrounding a police station doesn’t look this bad.

  19. When a Guardian reporter arrived at the warehouse on Friday, a man at the gatehouse outside refused any entrance and would not answer questions. “This is a secure facility. You’re not even supposed to be standing here,” said the man, who refused to give his name.

    That reporter has some serious balls. I’d be scared shitless.

    1. Probably never saw The Untouchables.

    2. Yeah, he’s probably lucky they didn’t bring him inside.

    3. That reporter has some serious balls. I’d be scared shitless.

      I’d arrange to have a daisy chain of videos being taken and uploaded to the cloud. Tell the cop:

      “See that car there? They are videoing this encounter. And there’s somebody else videoing them, and so on. So don’t get stupid on me.”

    1. Thanks. I liked this:

      Most of our local MSM are stenographers for the #CPD.

  20. my friend’s aunt makes $62 an hour on the computer . She has been laid off for five months but last month her pay was $14934 just working on the computer for a few hours. Visit this site………
    ????? http://www.work-mill.com

  21. I did not think I was shockable, but this story really did shock me. I’m not sure what to do with this information, other than be very scared.

  22. For the record, I’m very skeptical of this particular story as told.

    I am skeptical for several reasons:

    1. You have a ‘black site’ and you park massive military style police vehicles outside? You know…in full view? That doesn’t seem like a very impressive black site.

    2. This ‘black site’ has been operational for 20 something years and is an ‘open secret’ among local defense attorneys. So everyone who is actually an attorney knows it’s there. It seems like they would have moved a black site once the people they were allegedly hiding the prisoners from knew where it was.

    3. I searched on google for this place, and found multiple stories about stuff that happened at Homan Square, including a cop accidentally injuring himself in a firing range accident. There was also a cop who filed a lawsuit claiming he was demoted for reporting a supervisor’s misconduct, and he says he was demoted to Homan Square.

    Now, if this is really an important ‘black site,’ why would you demote someone to guard duty at Homan Square when they just reported a supervisor’s misconduct? He’s shown a willingness to blow the whistle on officer misconduct, so wouldn’t the last place you sent him be your secret black site where you engage in torture?

    It’s the CPD so anything is possible, I just am not going to immediately assume the Guardian’s version of events given their ideological biases.

    1. Of course, it’s always possible cops are just immensely stupid and did all of the dumb shit listed above because they weren’t sharp enough to realize what a bad idea it was.

      1. It’s not even so much that they’re dumb…it’s that they have absolutely zero fear of the populace, the media, anyone. When you can get away with just about anything, your decisions on what is appropriate are probably skewed pretty badly. Why not put military vehicles outside? It just makes the place even scarier for any non-cop to even think of coming near. And so on.

    2. Perhaps in this case, “black” refers to the extrajudicial activities and not a secret location.

      1. Bingo.

        To me, the only real reason for doubt is that the defense bar knows all about it. Depending on the dynamics with the PD and prosecutors, that may or may not mean much as to the credibility of the story.

    3. As usual, you say it prettier than me.

      1. You have a pretty mouth though.

        1. I considered a Deliverance crack, then decided against it, but seeing you make it I’m full of regret.

          1. Go with the Blazing Saddles crack instead:

            You use your mouth prettier than a $20 whore!

            1. I don’t want Florida Man to get *too* full of himself.

        2. Why thank you!
          *blushes*

  23. What I find to be more troubling than the indifference such police misconduct often receives from the public is the actual celebration of it. Even on television shows which I think are a cut above the usual network fare you see characters like Marshall Givens or Sheriff Longmire engaging in things like abusing forfeiture laws, denying suspects access to their counsel, etc., as if it’s ‘cute’ or we’re supposed to applaud their cleverness. It always makes me angry when I see it.

    I really thought that in the most recent season Justified was going to show some of the negative consequences of Givens tactics towards the Crowe family, but in the final episode they disappointedly backed off from that and gave us the standard cops and robbers ending.

    1. Yeah, I’m glad this is the last season of Jusitified. I’m having a harder and harder time seeing Raylan as a good guy.

      1. Raylan isn’t a good guy, and isn’t even the most interesting or sympathetic character on the show.

        And that’s OK by me.

      2. I stopped watching after (or during?) season 2 because I was so sick of his abuses. And that show has Natalie Zea in it. And I still stopped. That’s how bad it got.

  24. I knew this shit was coming back in 2001 when I turned on the television and saw all of the Senators standing on the steps of the Capitol with their hands on their hearts saying the pledge of allegiance. Everyone I said that too just gave me blank stares.

    It will get worse still.

  25. Great that this story was broken by a British paper. I guess the US Press is too busy with important tasks like asking Republicans their opinion of Obama’s religious views to be bothered with such a penny ante story like this.

  26. I think this is outrageous but a couple of points should be made. First, there is nothing unconstitutional about keeping someone out of the booking database. Second, police have an obligation to allow someone to meet with an attorney “as soon as practical” not immediately. I would be very surprised if a court says 24 hours was so long as to violate the person’s rights.

    I can tell you right now what the police side of the story is going to be. We use this facility to handle co-conspirators and snitches who are arrested and can’t be sent through the normal booking processes safely or without compromising an investigation. They will of course deny any coercive interrogation. And in fairness, it’s Chicago, its not like they don’t engage in that kind of shit anyway. Why the hell would they need a secret place to do what everyone knows they do anyway?

  27. detailing his role in bringing Chicago’s brutal interrogation techniques to Guantanamo Bay.

    Seems plausible that these interrogation techniques were used in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. Now, perhaps as military interrogations one could possibly justify it in a war theatre, but I wouldn’t be surprised if these techniques were in the so-called Iraqi Police training.

    Which would mean that there was likely zero difference in the way Saddam wanted policing done. Which means the support for the American troops would either fall to zero or at best only gain support from the exact same sociopaths that supported Saddam. Which explains why so many Iraqi police either quit or made the easy switch to ISIS.

  28. I learned it by watching you, Dad(Prez)!!

  29. As a resident of Illinois, I have concluded that this state is the epitome of a communist state. At one time we in southern Illinois weren’t attentive to the strange and X-File happenings in Cook county with the exception that we knew all of the tax dollars we sent to Springfield ended up in some black hole in Chicago below Wrigley Field. However, over the years as more and more strange men kept coming from Chicago to the Capital and the State House in Springfield and even Washington, DC, before ending up in Federal Prison, we began to realize that there were some very strange people living up there, and some very strange things taking place. We have concluded that surely aliens have came through the black hole, and taken over Chicago, lock, stock and barrel.

  30. Homan Square? Isn’t that where the USPS use to burn undelivered Chicago mail?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.