posted on July 9, 2002 09:32:43 PM new
Here's an interesting related article.
quote:
In every academy class I teach, especially supervision classes, the key to remember is, you know that when an officer responds to a call, the siren is on. The adrenaline gets pumped up that an officer is responding.
The siren is on? If I understand correctly, either the car was parked at a gas station, or was pulled over ... for having an expired license plate.
Siren blazing? Adrenaline pumping? Yeesh.
I got stopped on the 4th for having an expired registration. Actually, I was pulling into a Jack In The Box. Come to think of it, lucky I wasn't shot on sight.
posted on July 10, 2002 08:36:52 AM new
I believe this sort of thing happens all the time all over the country- this was caught on tape and everyone is amazed something like this could happen.
--ignorance must be bliss.
posted on July 10, 2002 08:49:41 AM new
meat one point the SJ police arrested one of these drug dealers...he died on the way to the hospital. Everyone screamed about police brutality....bs...he was found to have been high on PCP, swinging from a tree with a knive, and had threaten the life of a young boy riding his bike home.
youThe source of this information being, the very police officers in whose custody the suspect died. Hans Christian Andersen couldn't come up with a better fairy tale.
No fairy tale here, twinsoft. The coroner who testified in the family's lawsuit against the SJ police department, ruled his cause of death to be from one of his lungs being punctured by a rib bone. Testimony showed his ribs were broken from running through all the fences he did. Not from police abuse. But hey....who cares what the trial testimony said....you KNOW the police were responsible.
posted on July 10, 2002 09:08:48 AM new
Linda, excuse me but you're being naive if you think the coroner's office, drug lab, courts, etc., aren't as corrupt as the police department itself.
Here's a couple of links I found to the whistle-blower cop in East Palo Alto: Here and here (scroll down).
posted on July 10, 2002 09:24:29 AM new
BTW, yet ANOTHER videotape of a separate police brutality incident has surfaced. I wasn't paying attention to the details. The video shows a cop beating a suspect with a nighstick. The suspect was already on the ground and not resisting.
posted on July 10, 2002 09:40:20 AM new
I saw that, Twinsoft. I also saw the mayor on the morning show earlier, and when matt asked him about the other black guy who had a complaint against that one officer, he said that that one was "suspicious" and kinda hedged about it (as if the the black guy wasnt telling all the correct story about his situation). I liked him (the mayor). He was saying the same thing I have been saying...that there is no reason under the sun that that kid was abused like that after being subdued. He also said he didnt think the attack on the kid was racial...he said it wouldnt matter what color the person is or was..the cop should be fired, tried and punished for what he did and he thinks the cop would do it to any race of person. I agree. The man is a "bad" cop no matter how you look at it.
THe airing of the other case you mentioned, Twinsoft, was also shown. Two cops beating a guy as he laid there. With their batons. Hard. THe one as hard as he could. No struggles from the guy on the ground at all..just curling up in a fetal position.
[ edited by hepburn101 on Jul 10, 2002 09:42 AM ]
posted on July 10, 2002 08:52:08 PM new
A police union official said tonight that the reason the cop sucker punched the kid was because the kid had grabbed the cop's gonads. Yeah right. The original excuse was that the kid was kicking, which wasn't supported by the video. The kids hands were no where near that area. I have yet to see a man who was able to throw a punch when someone has a grip in that area.
They were unable to provide an excuse yet as to why the kid was slammed on the car.
The first lie doesn't stand a chance with the cops.
posted on July 11, 2002 01:12:42 PM new
yesterday my wife and I were watching the news and they showed back to back the two tapes, first the kid being slammed, then the big guy being pummeled without resisting...our 9 year old had come in from doing his chores behind us and said "dad, why are the police hurting those people?".......we turned to him and I saw real, uncomprehending FEAR in his eyes.....what could I say that would make him once again believe that policemen are there to protect us, like he's been taught ?
there aren't any police where we live...the nearest sherrif is an hour away and my family and property are protected by a 12 guage double barrel and a .44.....in light of current events, I feel darn safe.
I just hope he'll also be able to watch the tape on the news where these bastards are put into prison forever.......
posted on July 11, 2002 05:02:11 PM new
They've arrested the guy who taped this thing for warrants, and the cops lawyer is hard at work:
"INGLEWOOD, Calif. (AP) - A police officer who was videotaped
slamming a handcuffed teenager's head onto a patrol car and punching
him in the face was justified and "restrained" in his use of force, his
lawyer said Thursday.
The attorney, John Barnett, said during an
interview with CNN that the videotape of the
arrest needs to be put into context.
"You cannot see what the subject is doing with
his hands just prior to being hit in the face,"
Barnett said. "He took action which required
that he be punched."
The lawyer added: "the facts will show that the
use of force was restrained given all of the
circumstances."
The Inglewood officer, Jeremy Morse, is on
paid leave as federal, state and local agencies
investigate Saturday night's arrest of
16-year-old Donovan Jackson and his father
at a gas station.
The amateur cameraman who videotaped the
arrest was taken into custody Thursday on
outstanding warrants. Mitchell Crooks, 27,
was arrested outside CNN's television studio
in Hollywood.
A spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney, Sandi
Gibbons, said Crooks was wanted in Placer County for petty theft and
driving under the influence with a hit-and-run. Placer County sheriff's
Capt. Rick Armstrong said he had no details about the warrants.
At a news conference Thursday, Inglewood Police Chief Ronald Banks
said he was "quite concerned" after watching the videotape.
"It was not reflective of our normal practices and way of doing
business," Banks said.
Mayor Roosevelt Dorn has said the officer should be fired and charged
with assault. But the police chief said Thursday it is too soon to
determine whether Morse should be fired.
Before his arrest, Crooks had been subpoenaed to appear before a county grand jury investigating the
arrest."
posted on July 11, 2002 06:35:31 PM new
It can't get any worse. Now, the photographer, Michael Crooks is in jail and the abusing police officer is not.
According to the photographer's lawyer, he had not received a subpoena.
They arrested Crooks in front of CNN and he was screaming as they drove him away.
posted on July 12, 2002 12:55:24 AM new
A friend of the photographer said tonight that the photographer was arrested for jay walking last Fall by the LAPD and they ran his ID through the state data bases and it came up with nothing. He was ticketed and let go.
It is against the law to resist a lawful arrest, but it seems that there may be a lot of arrests that aren't lawful.
Even if that kid had a hold of that cops balls, the cop deserved it for slamming the hand cuffed kid on the car. I just wish the kid had had a better hold of them.
In any event, I sure wouldn't submit to arrest in a non-public place if I were a minority.
This crap has got to stop, we have enough petty tyrants in the world without our police joining their ranks.
posted on July 12, 2002 04:27:35 AM new
Sorry but when you are laying bent over a car with your arms cuffed behind you palm up I doubt if you can move your hands 2 inches. The only way the kid had the cops balls in his hands if the cop bent over the kid from behind and leaned on him. That is not the kids fault is the cop presses on him.
If LA is like our area there are thousands of outstanding warrents for small offenses the cops never try to run down unless they want the guy for something elso.
I suspect some departments charge people who they want a "handle" on with small offenses that are impossible to defend. Later it is enough to pressure them if they want information or suspect them in something bigger but can't justify bringing them in for.
[ edited by gravid on Jul 12, 2002 04:34 AM ]
posted on July 12, 2002 06:43:53 AM new
The morning news just said that the guy they arrested yesterday (the one who filmed the beating) has been taken to the hospital for xrays. I didnt catch it all, so dont know whats going on.
posted on July 12, 2002 07:17:05 AM new
Spokesman for the department says he has no idea what he was taken to the hospital for - that it might hqve been a pre-existing condition.
If I were him I would have immediatly got my butt out of the state.
posted on July 12, 2002 08:02:08 AM new
Video man,
The poor guy was yelling Please help me,Someone help me! Maybe all the publicity will save him.
The big guy on the ground was resisting arrest on the film I saw.He was 2 times the size of the cop trying to handcuff him.
The big guy,kept turning and twisting everytime the cop tried to cuff the other wrist.
posted on July 12, 2002 09:14:00 AM new
[i]The big guy on the ground was resisting arrest on the film I saw.He was 2 times the size of the cop trying to handcuff him.
The big guy,kept turning and twisting everytime the cop tried to cuff the other wrist[/i]. Must be the same tape I saw.
Sometimes if the subjects would just cooperate with the requests of the police, these incidents wouldn't happen. I've seen many who just allow the police to cuff them, and once things are straightened out, they remove the cuffs. But there's always the person who thinks if they put up a fight/resist, they're going to come out ahead.
posted on July 12, 2002 09:25:17 AM new
Picture this:
An animal gets out of the zoo..or out of a pasture. The keepers or owners try to catch it. They get it cornered. It cowers, or avoids having the rope around its neck to be led away, but does not kick, bite, attack. It just keeps running from one corner to another, trying to avoid. Now, these same owners or keepers get frustrated and start to beat the animal. They hit and hit and hit. They are angry they cant catch it. It wont hold still. So they hit some more, and the animal gets more frantic. It knows it will be caught eventually, but its being beaten. What would YOU do if you saw this? Would you say the animal deserved to be abused that way because it was avoiding the rope? Whats the difference with a 6 ft 5 inch tall man who isnt fighting, but laying there as the "small man" (small in mind, too, I might add) beats and beats and beats him? I dont care if he was avoiding. The little "man" could have called for backup and they all tackled him, but to BEAT him? I dont think so.
posted on July 12, 2002 09:40:15 AM new
Hi Hep - I see humans differently than the animals in your example. Humans can understand what they're being asked to do, while animals can't.
I don't think either animals or humans should be beaten.
I'm just saying that humans make a choice either to cooperate or not. When one is asked to put their hands either out straight, behind their back or told to drop to the ground, they understand the request....where an animal wouldn't.
posted on July 12, 2002 09:43:08 AM new
Then again, maybe the human CANT understand? Maybe they are deaf, or mentally challenged, or drunk, or whatever. What Im saying is, NOBODY should be beaten when they arent fighting back. Laying there and being hit with a baton must not feel good..I dont know how they do it. But to lose control to BEAT them because they wont hold still is not a good enough reason. Period.
A small child understands HOLD STILL when you are trying to put their shoe on. They fidget. So you (general you) lose your cool and start slapping them around because of it? Same thing.
[ edited by hepburn101 on Jul 12, 2002 09:44 AM ]
posted on July 12, 2002 09:48:27 AM new
Hep - Would you tell me how you think those being arrested, who are not cooperating, should be dealt with? When they let the suspect know they want to cuff them and the suspect refuses, what do you think they should do then?
posted on July 12, 2002 10:10:27 AM new
I am trying to understand what the 16 year old kid DID that required him to be told where he could sit or stand or put his potato chips or anything when the police were dealing with his father? Why say a word to him? Did he look unhappy with them? Did he expect him to smile at them?
Was he such a threat just being associated with the father that they needed to physically restrain him? I see it as an abuse of authority to start telling bystanders that they have to go or stay or any action when they have done nothing and are not going to be arrested or charged with anything.
The cops should have been concerned with stranding a 16 year old away from home by the act of arresting the father and been making arangements for him to be escorted home to adult supervision or taken to a social services temporary custody instead of treating him like an adult who had just committed a felony. His crime was riding to the store with his dad and not accepting being ordered around when he had done nothing.
It is a kind of self - fulfilling drama. Start ordering people around and treating them rough like they are being arrested for nothing and they will resent and resist it.
Circular logic - Why did you arrest them - they were resisting arrest! That's why.
If you want to see rage - watch a cop doing an arrest and when he tells you it is none of your business and move along - tell him everything you do is my business - and that is an unlawful order. They have a mind set that what they say is law, and they can make it up as they go along.
posted on July 12, 2002 10:16:13 AM new
I don't believe that any unusual force was necessary in this arrest. But in cases in which the suspect is violent or on drugs such as pcp, it would make sense that a lone officer could use pepper spray under the prescribed guidelines.
"NYPD regulations on pepper spray state that it should be used as the first line of defence in situations where substantial force is necessary, after verbal reasoning has proved ineffective; that it must be fired directly at the face to be effective; and that its recommended frequency is "two (2) one-second bursts". They also provide that a warning should be given where possible before using pepper spray against unarmed suspects; and that it should not be used in small contained areas or in the presence of pregnant women, infants, the elderly or people with "chronic respiratory problems".
The task force concluded that there were no serious health risks associated with pepper spray and that "despite earlier reports, no person has died as a result of being exposed to pepper spray". This conclusion was based on a survey of the use of pepper spray by other US police departments, and two reports commissioned by the US National Institute of Justice (NIJ), published in March 1994, which discounted the role played by OC in some 30 in-custody deaths reported nationwide at that time."
posted on July 12, 2002 10:27:24 AM newI am trying to understand what the 16 year old kid DID that required him to be told where he could sit or stand or put his potato chips or anything when the police were dealing with his father? Why say a word to him? Gravid, please understand that I am speaking in generalities here. We weren't there to know what he said or did. And when we see a little bit of video, inany situation, we are only seeing part of what occurred.
Police have to feel they have the situation under control, for their safely and everyone else's. I know you and I think differently about authority, but I don't find doing as asked in a situation similar to this was too much to ask of the son.
posted on July 12, 2002 10:44:59 AM new
lindak, the police are NOT god. Some seem to think so by their actions. If someone dares to get too nosey, or stands there watching and the cop tells them to go away or move along and the person refuses to do so but is not doing anything to hinder an arrest or whatnot, SOME cops take matters into their own hands. And I said SOME. Not all. Also, to subdue someone who is violent and a danger to officers, then they need to do what they can to protect themselves as well as getting the person under control. HOWEVER, beating a man that has not laid one hand on them or anyone else is NOT what I call "getting under control". If they can spend millions on parts for space stations, they can spend millions by thinking up something to do it without beating the snot outta someone.
This topic is 7 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new
]