FMR Asst. D.A.: Planting Weapons Was Standard Operating Procedure

What Would Standard Operating Procedure Look Like in a Police State?

April 8, 2015—The statute of limitations must’ve been up when Fox News Legal Analyst Arthur L. Aidala said he witnessed police corruption during his legal career and chalked it up to “standard operating procedure.”

Like what you’re reading? Keep going by contributing to the cause of freedom.

Aidala volunteered his anecdotal evidence during Fox News Channel coverage of the Walter Scott police shooting video. In the video, captured by a bystander’s cell phone, the police officer shoots the unarmed black man in the back eight times. The shots came a full second after the man was running away from the officer. After emptying his gun, the officer placed his taser on the dying man’s body. Before this video was released, the officer, his lawyer, and other cops lined up to defend the officer’s lie that he was in fear for his life.

Aidala, in a joshing tone (you know, like you do), explained the officer’s actions:

“It looks like he runs back to the initial scene of the altercation, picks up the taser, then runs back and drops it next to the body. And, I mean, guys, when I was in the DA’s office in the 80’s, 90’s, that was like standard operating procedure. Police officer would keep —I mean, I hate to say this but you can read about it in books— they would keep a second gun nobody knew about on their ankle and so if they ever killed someone who they shouldn’t have then, they would then take that gun out and—”

Steve Doocy, one of the Fox News co-hosts, then saves Aidala, interrupting with, “You’re talking about dirty cops here.” Captain Obvious to the rescue. But Aidala’s nervous smile creeps up again as he stammers, “I’m talking about dirty cops in, in, in the 70’s and 80’s and corruption and there was, ya know, all kinds of trials having to deal with that.”

70’s and 80’s? Didn’t Aidala just say the 80’s and 90’s before that? Whatever. What’s important to question on the Fox News program at this point is sympathy for (who else?) the police officer. After all, aren’t we forgetting as Aidala reminds us in an ever-escalating tone, “he’s a 33 year old human being who’s getting paid $40,000 to protect his own life and protect everyone else’s life.”

The killer cop is a human being. Thanks Aidala. But of course the dead man was a human being too. What makes the difference is which human being is the cop. By the end of the segment, Brian Kilmeade has to calm down the hysterical Aidala whose cognitive dissonance, propped up by a childish myth of the hero cop, was intensifying to the point of near-eruption.

What do you think Arthur Aidala’s actions and words say about the current debate about a police state?

This article is hosted, designed, and promoted with the assistance of readers like you. Give a gift to keep VoicesofLiberty moving the message of liberty forward.

The Walter Scott Video: Will It Re-Spark a Debate on the Police State?
Perpetuating the Police State: Cops Support the Bad Laws They Enforce
Police State Exposed: Criminals Let Go to Protect Surveillance