Why Did Other Cops Fail To Stop the Lethal Assault on Tyre Nichols?

Published

3 years ago

February 1, 2023

admin

The Memphis, Tennessee, police officers who lethally beat, pepper-sprayed, and tased Tyre Nichols after a January 7 traffic stop were clearly out of control, delivering punishment for what they perceived as “contempt of cop” in the guise of making an arrest. Yet during the 13 minutes that elapsed between the stop and the police radio report that Nichols had been taken into custody, no one else who was present intervened to stop the blatantly illegal use of force.

That sort of failure is familiar from other notorious cases of police abuse, including the 2020 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Even when officers recognize that a colleague is using excessive force, they do not necessarily act on that knowledge. Given the strong social and institutional pressures against second-guessing a fellow officer, that problem cannot easily be remedied through legal reforms. But there is reason to think that training in “active bystandership,” which builds on psychological research that illuminates the barriers to intervention in situations like these, can make a difference.

Nichols ostensibly was pulled over for reckless driving, although Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn Davis says she has not seen any evidence to support that charge aside from one officer’s statement. Davis fired the officers directly involved in what she called the “heinous, reckless and inhumane” treatment of NicholsTadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin, Desmond Mills Jr., and Justin Smithon January 20, about a week and a half after Nichols died from his injuries. Last Friday, they were charged with second-degree murder, aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, official oppression, and official misconduct. But the responsibility for Nichols’ death goes beyond what these five officers did; it extends to what other people at the scene failed to do.

Video released by the Memphis Police Department (MPD) on Friday evening shows other officers milling about as Bean et al. pummel Nichols, kick him, and strike him with a police baton. “The available footage does not show any sign that the officers present intervened to stop the aggressive use of force,” The New York Times notes. “If anything, it shows the contrary. At one point, footage captured an officer saying ‘I hope they stomp his ass’ after Mr. Nichols’s attempt to flee the scene.”

After viewing the body and pole camera recordings on Friday, Shelby County Sheriff Floyd Bonner Jr. said he had “concerns about two deputies who appeared on the scene following the physical confrontation between police and Tyre Nichols.” Bonner said he had “launched an internal investigation into the conduct of these deputies to determine what occurred and if any policies were violated.” The deputies “have been relieved of duty pending the outcome of this administrative investigation.”

Although Bonner said the conduct that bothered him occurred “following the physical confrontation,” the video shows a squad car from his office arriving after Nichols, who at that point had been tackled, tased, and pepper-sprayed, fled police. That suggests deputies were present during the vicious beating that Nichols received after the cops caught up with him. Body camera video also shows at least eight MPD officers at the scene of the initial confrontation before the second assault.

Last week, Davis said the internal investigation prompted by the deadly traffic stop was not limited to the officers “directly responsible for the physical abuse of Mr. Nichols.” She said it includes an unspecified number of “other MPD officers” who “are still under investigation for department policy violations.”

Davis did not say exactly which “department policy violations” she had in mind. But the MPD’s policy manual includes an admonition that “any member who directly observes another member engaged in dangerous or criminal conduct or abuse of a subject shall take reasonable action to intervene.” It adds that “a member shall immediately report to the Department any violation of policies and regulations or any other improper conduct which is contrary to the policy, order or directives of the Department.”

Disregarding that duty can be a criminal offense as well as a policy violation. Official misconduct, one of the charges against Bean et al., occurs not only when a “public servant” does something that exceeds his legal authority but also when he “refrains from performing a duty that is imposed by law or that is clearly inherent in the nature of the public servant’s office or employment.”

Discipline or prosecution, of course, happens only after an officer fails to intervene. What can be done to increase the likelihood that an officer will do what he is supposed to do when he sees a colleague “engaged in dangerous or criminal conduct or abuse of a subject”?

Active Bystandership for Law Enforcement (ABLE), a training program that was established in 2021 and so far involves more than 300 law enforcement agencies, offers one potential answer. ABLE, which was developed by Georgetown University’s Center for Innovations in Community Safety, grew out of a New Orleans program known as EPIC (Ethical Policing Is Courageous) that was launched in 2014 under the guidance of Ervin Staub, an emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst. It is based on insightsgained fromresearchinto why people either intervene or fail to intervene in emergency situations. The obstacles to intervention include deference to authority, diffusion of responsibility, and fear of retaliation and ostracism.

Jonathan Aronie, a partner at the law firm Sheppard Mullin, which sponsors ABLE, co-founded the program and chairs its board of advisers. He says ABLE, which includes a weeklong certification program for officers who conduct eight hours of training for their colleagues, is based on principles that have proven effective for hospitals and airlines seeking to prevent surgical and pilot error. The challenge in those contexts is similar to the one exemplified by police officers who fail to question the use of excessive force: overcoming the natural tendency to go along rather than risk negative consequences by challenging the judgment of colleagues and superiors.

ABLE, which demands explicit and conspicuous buy-in from police executives, local politicians, and community groups, strives to create a culture that reinforces the duty to intervene. The program, which is free to police departments thanks to support from Sheppard Mullin and several corporate donors, uses case studies and role-playing scenarios to identify and overcome barriers to intervention.

Does it work? “It is difficult to quantify the success of active bystandership training,” ABLE concedes, “because, in most cases, when it works, nothing news-worthy happens.” But the organization cites research in other fields that “confirms the skills necessary to intervene successfully can be taught and learned.” It says “extensive field experiments” by Staub and other researchers have shown that “the inhibitors to an intervention can be overcome even in hierarchical, high group-cohesion environments, like policing.” ABLE also cites testimonials from officers who have participated in the program and says it is conducting surveys and collecting policing data that could provide more rigorous and specific evidence.

So far, ABLE’s listof participating agencies includes the Knoxville Police Department but not the MPD or any other law enforcement agency in Tennessee. As the MPD’s code of conduct illustrates, police already theoretically know they are not supposed to tolerate illegal conduct by fellow officers. But the brief, pro forma instruction they receive on that point during standard training is plainly no match for the countervailing pressures they encounter on the job. Additional training that focuses specifically on the skills needed to resist those pressures seems like a promising approach that agencies such as the MPD should consider if they are serious about preventing horrifying incidents like the one that killed Tyre Nichols.

US

US in ‘active pursuit’ of third vessel off Venezuelan coast, officials say

Published

2 hours ago

December 22, 2025

admin

US in 'active pursuit' of third vessel off Venezuelan coast, officials say

The US is in “active pursuit” of a third oil tanker near Venezuela in the Caribbean Sea, officials have said.

It comes amid escalation from the Trump administration against Nicolas Maduro’s government, and as the US builds up a naval military presence in the region, including the USS Gerald R Ford aircraft carrier and its support group.

The status of the attempted interception is unclear, according to Sky’s US partner network NBC News, but reports first emerged at around 2.30pm in the UK that the operation was under way.

As it happened: US in ‘active pursuit’ of third vessel

Two officials told NBC News the US Coast Guard was in “active pursuit” of the vessel, which is sanctioned by the US.

One told the outlet it was “a sanctioned dark fleet vessel that is part of Venezuela’s illegal sanctions evasion”.

“It is flying a false flag and under a judicial seizure order,” they said, adding that dark fleet vessels usually do not operate exclusively for one country.

It is understood the vessel is sailing under the name Bella 1, according to British maritime risk management group Vanguard, according to NBC News and Bloomberg.

Sky News has seen Bella 1 is sanctioned by the US government, according to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) website, and has been included on the list since June 2024.

One US official told NBC the vessel was sanctioned under the counterterrorism authority for its involvement in the network of Houthi financial facilitator Sa’id al Jamal.

Another US official separately told the New York Times the ship did not submit to being boarded and continued onward.

If successful, it would mark the third such interception near Venezuela in the past two weeks, with a tanker being seized on Saturday and near the start of the month.

Explained: The US-Venezuela crisis

Trump’s ‘blockade’ of tankers

Earlier this week, the US president declared he had ordered the “blockade” of oil tankers into and out of the South American country.

He said the US military would remain in place until Venezuela returns “all of the oil, land, and other assets that they previously stole from us”.

In the social media post following months of escalating tensions in the Caribbean, Donald Trump said Venezuela was surrounded by the “largest armada ever assembled in the history of South America”.

Venezuela’s government has accused Mr Trump of “violating international law, free trade, and the principle of free navigation” with “a reckless and grave threat” against the South American country.

China’s foreign minister Wang Yi later accused the US of “bullying” Venezuela, and said on Wednesday: “China believes the international community understands and supports Venezuela’s position in defending its legitimate rights and interests.”

Washington has also announced sanctions on numerous oil tankers, shipping companies and family members of Mr Maduro.

President Trump has been ramping up pressure on the Maduro regime, accusing it of involvement in the drugs trade.

As part of his efforts, he has also authorised deadly strikes against vessels he claims are trafficking drugs in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.

President Maduro claims Mr Trump is trying to overthrow him with a view to seizing Venezuela’s oil reserves.

US

Image of Trump among documents reposted on Epstein files release after apparent removal

Published

2 hours ago

December 22, 2025

admin

Image of Trump among documents reposted on Epstein files release after apparent removal

Pictures of Donald Trump were included among at least 16 documents that disappeared from the Epstein files released by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The Democrats from the House Oversight Committee drew attention to the apparent removal of an image showing two printed pictures of Mr Trump in a desk draw.

One picture had Mr Trump standing surrounded by women in bathing suits, while the second appears to be an already known picture – partly obscured – of him, his wife Melania, Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein.

After the Democrats flagged the missing image on Saturday, Sky News went back to the files online and confirmed that it did appear to be missing, despite the fact they downloaded it when the files were initially released on Friday.

The other photos removed from the trove of documents were almost all nude paintings of women in Epstein’s home.

In a post on X on Sunday, the DOJ said the image including pictures of Mr Trump has since been reposted on to the Epstein Files page.

Sky News has seen that file number 468 is once again listed online. Mr Trump is still visible in the latest version of the image, and there is no immediate difference from the original upload.

The DOJ said that “the Southern District of New York flagged an image of President Trump for potential further action to protect victims”.

“Out of an abundance of caution, the Department of Justice temporarily removed the image for further review,” the department added.

“After the review, it was determined there is no evidence that any Epstein victims are depicted in the photograph, and it has been reposted without any alteration or redaction.”

Mr Trump has not commented on the release of the files and has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein’s case.

Questions over heavy redactions

Thousands of documents relating to the dead paedophile financier were made public by the DOJ on Friday – hours before a legal deadline following the passing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Many of the pages were either partially or fully redacted, which the DOJ says is to protect the more than 1,200 victims and their families identified in them.

Some of Epstein’s victims, legal experts and members of the public have questioned whether this is the sole reason for the redactions, while the Oversight Democrats have claimed: “This is a White House cover-up.”

Ashley Rubright, who was abused for several years after meeting Epstein in Palm Beach when she was 15, told Sky News: “Seeing […] completely redacted pages, there’s no way that that’s just to protect the victims’ identities, and there better be a good reason. I just don’t know if we’ll ever know what that is.”

Gloria Allred, a lawyer who has represented some of Epstein’s victims, says she has been told that despite the heavy redactions, some compromising pictures of survivors and their names were left in the files released on Friday.

“We have had to notify the Department of Justice about names that should have been redacted that weren’t redacted,” she told Sky News.

“So this is further trauma to survivors, and apparently also some of the images of some of the survivors appear not to have been redacted, and they are nude or not completely dressed.

“This is a major concern because the law clearly indicates, and the judges have indicated, that the names and any identifying information of the survivors must be redacted.”

In a letter to the judges overseeing the Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases, US attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton acknowledged that a review “of this size and scope is vulnerable to machine error [or] instances of human error”.

He also said the DOJ had opted to redact the faces of women in photographs with Epstein “even where not all the women are known to be victims,” as it was not viewed as practical for the DOJ to identify every person in all the photos.

The methodology has led to some confusion and misled speculation online.

Many celebrities and public figures appear with Epstein in the photos published by the DOJ, often included without context.

There is no suggestion that these pictures imply anyone has done anything wrong, and many of those featured in them have denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein.

Through its release, the Trump administration has claimed to be the most transparent in history, despite the fact Congress forced their hand by voting to make the files public by 19 December.

But some have been held back, with Todd Blanche, deputy attorney general and a former personal lawyer for Donald Trump, saying more would follow in the coming weeks.

Many Democrats and some Republicans have criticised the partial release as failing to “comply with law,” as have lawyers including Ms Allred.

“So clearly, the law has been violated. And it’s the Department of Justice letting down the survivors once again,” she said.

She labelled the incomplete release of the files a “distraction”, adding: “This is not over, and it won’t be over until we get the truth and transparency for the survivors.”

Environment

Five for Five: Kia PV5 scores 5 star European safety rating

Published

2 hours ago

December 21, 2025

admin

Five for Five: Kia PV5 scores 5 star European safety rating

Kia PV5 Cargo Achieves Maximum Five-Star Rating in 2025 Euro NCAP Commercial Van Safety Assessment

For serious fleet buyers, safety isn’t a “nice-to-have,” it’s an absolute must – and Kia’s new PV5 electric van meets that need with a positively stellar, five-star safety rating on the tough European NCAP safety test.

The new “do-it-all” Kia PV5 showed strong performance across a number of key safety categories, including Occupant Protection, Safety Assist/Crash Avoidance, and Post-Crash Safety. The PV5’s robust suite of standard ADAS technologies that includes AEB, Lane Support System, and Speed Assistance System also helped the new electric work van to deliver top marks in the NCAP’s “real world” test scenarios.

“The PV5 opens a new chapter in practical, electrified mobility, offering generous space and modular versatility for everyday use,” explains Sangdae Kim, Executive Vice President and Head of the (relatively) new PBV Business Division at Kia. “Achieving the top Euro NCAP five-star rating is clear validation of its safety performance and will serve as strong momentum as Kia expands its PBV lineup across Europe.”

The Euro NCAP tests highlighted the strong performance of a number of the PV5’s ADAS features, specifically calling out the following:

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Demonstrated strong responsiveness in vehicle-to-vehicle scenarios
Provides additional protection for pedestrians behind the vehicle
Avoided collisions in most pedestrian and cyclist test cases

The Kia PV5 slots into familiar territory for US buyers, landing roughly in the same size class as the Ford Transit Connect or Ram ProMaster City, with ~180 cubic feet of interior cargo space available, which is plenty to make it attractive for last-mile delivery and trade work in tight urban markets.

Globally, the PV5 is offered with a number of battery options, including a smaller 43.3 kWh Lithium-Iron-Phosphate (LFP) pack, as well as larger Nickel-Cobalt-Manganese (NCM) packs at 51.5 kWh and 71.2 kWh. The longest-range versions are good for about 250 miles of estimated range – more than enough for Kia to make a case for it as a practical, city-focused alternative to much larger (and pricier) electric vans.

Larger vans, by the way, that may not have that 5 star Euro NCAP rating.

Kia PV5

SOURCE | IMAGES: Kia; photo by Scooter Doll.

If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.