During instances of high profile police misconduct, there's a linear way the media and punditry reports on it:

They take the initial report as gospel and, over months and even years, new information contradicting those reports trickle in but, by then, another story hits. https://twitter.com/robferdman/status/1301894232278536198

It happened with Oscar Grant when PD said he was violent but an investigation proved, 10 years later, that the LEO escalated the situation.

Sandra Bland? They had her cell phone footage for years before trickling out that she actually WASN'T the one belligerent and uncooperative

It's that way even with less fatal encounters as well. Body cam footage, eye witnesses, internal investigations all contradicting the initial reports parroted in newspapers and news feeds.

In doing so, they're complicit in creating this slow drudge to any semblance of justice.

I'm just saying: if you ever see any of these cases or stories of brutality, bookmark them.

I can guaran-damn-tee you that months down the line, you'll see someone had bodycam turned off or the footage withheld or witnesses intimidated or charged to not come forward...

... or the LEOs, police chief, or PD as a whole has a rap sheet of corruption and misconduct charges a mile long.

We as a society and journalism as a profession need to stop taking their word as gospel. They're proven liars. They're proven to protect their own first and foremost

Adding onto this thread with another thread: https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1302283149209202688