posted on July 12, 2002 10:47:27 AM new
Ok..lets go another way then, lindak. What if it were YOU who didnt pay a ticket and the cops pulled you over. Your 16 year old son or daughter is with you. Knowing 16 year olds like to roll their eyes or sigh or be mouthy, the cops tell your kid to quit staring/move away/bugg off and your kid cops a tude. Then they commence to beat the crap out of her/him. Would you be so lenient that the cops "must get control"? I dont think so. That kid didnt warrant being slammed around. Period.
posted on July 12, 2002 11:05:55 AM new
"HOWEVER, beating a man that has not laid one hand on them or anyone else is NOT what I call "getting under control". "
So then, how did the officer get that nasty cut on his head?
I'm reserving judgment on this until I have some idea what happened before the video tape started rolling.I do not believe the 16 year old deserved a punch but I really have no idea what happened prior.
It does look fishy though when the police arrest the photographer. Really fishy. Almost like a warning to the public to not film them again or else.
posted on July 12, 2002 11:06:23 AM new
To me these issues are usually about perceptions/points of view/mind sets in regards to authority in general.
I think you know, I've said before I'm not talking about police that have/do abuse. But what is abuse to one person is discipline to another. Like some think it's okay to spank a child on their rear, and others think any hitting is abusive. [Trying to use as a comparison]
In your question, I would have either paid that ticket or would have requested a court date to fight it. So.. in that sense it wouldn't have even been an issue. But let's say I forgot to pay a lot of tickets. Then I was pulled over. I would be well aware that those tickets were outstanding and when the officers want to handcuff me, I would have allowed them to do so. As far as saying our son was in the car, I wouldn't have felt differently. They've been raised to respect those in authority. So while I'm sure he'd have been upset, he would have done whatever I asked of him, out of respect for me. And I wouldn't have encourged him to cause additional problems.
posted on July 12, 2002 11:13:07 AM new
Hep - Just thought of another example I wanted to run by you.
When we first moved to San Jose [1976] my husband was pulled over by the SJ police. They asked him to step out of the car and turn around. He did. They handcuffed him and when he asked what this was all about, they told him there had just been a rape in the area and the suspect was said to have been driving a car like ours. And they said he also matched the suspects description.
After a few minutes of questions, and getting a radio call, they released him. No problems. Of course, Jon was very relieved. But what I'm trying to say is that same situation could have gone a whole other direction, if he had given the police a hard time, or refused to get out of the car BEFORE they told him what was going on. Or, once out of the car had he resisted being cuffed....see what I'm saying. Had he acted different the whole situation could have had a negative result.
That's what I mean when I speak to the issue of responsibility. If one doesn't go straight into battle with the authority, things can be handled in a way that is peaceful.
posted on July 12, 2002 11:14:25 AM new"They've been raised to respect those in authority. So while I'm sure he'd have been upset, he would have done whatever I asked of him, out of respect for me. And I wouldn't have encourged him to cause additional problems".
posted on July 12, 2002 11:16:24 AM new
This is true that I hate belligerent authority.
The first thing many a cop does if you don't sweetly agree with him is put his hand on the damn gun.
That defines what his authority is. What's to respect about that?
I think of the cop as serving the state not me.
I have never called a policeman to come protect me. If you really need protected it is not a situation that can wait for them to answer a call come out and protect you. The door will have been kicked down or the gun fired and it will be over and they can at most write a report. That is why personal protection orders are a joke.
All the authorities can do is punish another that harms you, and frequently deny you the right to protect yourself as if it infringes the states right to act.
To pretend this is a deterant to anyone is silly. Criminals usually have learned by their early teens there is little fear of punishment. It is not fear of the law but moral training in early life that keep most people from doing serious wrong.
Now it is true I have been arrested. I never have been rude or threatening. And I will tell you something else. They have never put cuffs on me. Never asked to do so. Isn't that intersting? I also nicely asked a cop once if he was really SURE he wanted to arrest me because it would 100% sure have serious legal consequences? and he decided not to if I would give him a statement for his report.
[ edited by gravid on Jul 12, 2002 11:24 AM ]
posted on July 12, 2002 11:32:03 AM new
Tell you a funny. Cop in Ohio arrested a fellow where I worked. Guy was a weight lifter and rock climber. He had the guy sit in the car for awhile then came back and said he was taking him down town, and said put your wrists out. He slapped the cuffs on the guy and he gave a little giggle. "Whats so funny the cop asked?"
Nothing personal the guy said I will go with you OK - but these things - he looked down at the cuffs- took a deep breath and grunted - jerked his arms each way and ripped the cuffs in two. See why they are silly? he asked?
Cop sat with his gun on him all the way downtown scared to death of the guy.
posted on July 12, 2002 11:34:33 AM new
Hep said, "Your 16 year old son or daughter is with you. Knowing 16 year olds like to roll their eyes or sigh or be mouthy, the cops tell your kid to quit staring/move away/bugg off and your kid cops a tude" krs, if this is the question you're referring to, it wouldn't have happened. That's why I said they were raised to respect authority. He wouldn't have been mouthy to a police officer. He would have seen what was going down as being caused by my not taking responsibility for my tickets [the example used here]. That's the way we raised our sons.
Not questioning authority is frightening in my opinion. What if the police officers began to abuse you as they did in this case. I suspect that your children might protest and possibly find themselves on the hood of the car. How would you feel about that?
posted on July 12, 2002 12:07:58 PM new
Los Angeles County prosecutors seek original tape
LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) --The Los Angeles County district attorney's office is convening a grand jury to look into the police beating of an African-American teen-ager that was caught on videotape as prosecutors struggle to get the man who shot the tape to cooperate with the investigation.
Tensions related to the incident were illustrated Wednesday in a terse exchange between Chief Deputy District Attorney Curt Livesay and videographer Mitchell Crooks on "The John and Ken Show" on KFI radio in Los Angeles.
The amateur tape -- shot by Crooks from a hotel across the street from the incident -- showed a handcuffed Donovan Jackson, 16, being slammed onto the trunk of a patrol car, then hit in the face by an Inglewood police officer. Authorities are interested in obtaining the original videotape to see what it shows.
Law enforcement officials have insisted that the altercation was started by Jackson.
Attorneys for Jackson and his father, who filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday, said the incident was provoked by deputies and was racially motivated.
Crooks was discussing the tape on the syndicated radio program when the show's hosts also brought on the deputy district attorney. The following is an excerpt:
"The John and Ken Show": "So has the police ever looked at [ the original tape ]?"
Crooks: "No."
"The John and Ken Show": "Are you going to give it to them?"
Crooks: "Sure, I mean, I'm not going to give it to them, but I'm going to allow them to have a copy of it. I'll show it to them. I just want to make sure that I have an attorney present. I have talked to a couple of people with the ACLU. ..."
"The John and Ken Show": "Well, we have a chief deputy DA for Los Angeles County on the line here, [ who ] I think has something to add to this. Curt Livesay, welcome to 'The John and Ken Show.' Curt, Mitchell is on the line here. I assume you're up to speed on what we were discussing."
Livesay: "I think so, I haven't heard the entire conversation, but Mitchell, let me assure you that there's a grand jury subpoena for you, and I suggest that you honor it and you show up at the criminal courts building. That's downtown, 210 West Temple, and you be here promptly at 8:30 [ Thursday ] morning at the grand jury. That's the 13th floor of the building."
Crooks: "Well, I hope the city of L.A. rallies behind me because I don't have anybody, you know what I mean?"
"The John and Ken Show": "What do you mean, rally behind you? What do you want people to do?"
Crooks: "They're just coming after me because I shot the video. That's basically what this is boiling down to now. I'm fearing for my life. They're going to kick my ass in the cell or take turns on me probably."
Livesay: "Mitchell, Mitchell, this is Livesay, DA's office. We want you before the grand jury. We don't want you in a cell somewhere. We want you before the grand jury, and we want that original tape."
Crooks: "OK, wonderful, I already talked to you about that. I don't know why we have to go on air to talk about this sort of thing. I totally told you that, and I've told everybody that I've talked to that I'm willing to cooperate with everybody. I want the best possible outcome, except for Jeremy Morse [ the police officer seen hitting the teen-ager in the video ]."
Livesay: "OK, Mitchell, off the air, I want you to tell my investigators, who are standing by at this station, where you are, right now. If you want to cooperate -- off the air -- you tell DA investigators the address where you are right now."
[ The sound of a phone hanging up is heard.]
"The John and Ken Show": "Who hung up there?"
Livesay: "Well, it must have been Mitchell."
"The John and Ken Show": "I guess the answer was no."
[ edited by clarksville on Jul 12, 2002 12:16 PM ]
posted on July 12, 2002 12:14:01 PM new
IMO the question is not "what you think if that (criminal) was your son or even yourself" but:
"what if the police officer is your husband/wife or if one of your loved ones was a bystander who was hurt or killed because a police officer didn't use enough force to control the criminal, or to let the criminal get away with 'murder' and you or a loved one of yours the next victim all because the police had to treat the criminals like a priceless Ming vase on eBay."
posted on July 12, 2002 12:14:04 PM new
Helen - Not questioning authority is frightening in my opinion. What if the police officers began to abuse you as they did in this case. I suspect that your children might protest and possibly find themselves on the hood of the car. How would you feel about that?
To not question authority is not what I'm saying. It's HOW one questions it. Some can do so by asking a question, other's start sprewing their threats and trying to intimidate or resist until the police do it their way.
The police officers wouldn't have abused me, as you say they did in this case. I would have been allowing them to handcuff me. And our youngest son has found himself on the hood of a police car. He knew he deserved it.
posted on July 12, 2002 12:26:01 PM new
I dont have balls, and Im not very squeezable. However in response to your query, I asked the question originally that composed of NON VIOLENT people being beaten with batons or slammed on hoods of cars. Can any of you tell me that you SAW that kid fighting? What about when the cop picked him up just before slamming him down? Was he twisting and turning? Was he mouthing words or grimacing or anything that gives the impression of fighting? No. He was stiff as a board. STIFF. THen he is laying there stunned, with his head turned, his arms locked behind his back and hes sucker punched. We all can come up with scenarios. I know what I saw. And obviously Im not the only one that saw it, eh? My question to lindak isnt clear enough I guess. She insists that her son is polite and doesnt DO what other kids may or may not do. Thats all fine and dandy. Im sure the father of that boy says the same thing but look what happened. If one stays still and stiff, or if they fight, they are still gonna get the crap beat out of them by some guy with a badge that shouldnt be wearing one.
posted on July 12, 2002 12:32:14 PM new
Linda's quote...
"The police officers wouldn't have abused me, as you say they did in this case."
Unfortunately, black people and immigrants in this country cannot afford to have such confidence. Because of incidents such as this, they are afraid of police officers and this fear does not lead to respect.
I taught my children to question authority in any way necessary.
posted on July 12, 2002 12:37:11 PM new
Hep - We all can come up with scenarios. I know what I saw. And obviously Im not the only one that saw it, eh? My question to lindak isnt clear enough I guess. She insists that her son is polite and doesnt DO what other kids may or may not do.
I saw that teen being hit too, and have said I agree that was wrong...no matter the reason. In that one case I totally agree with you and the others. Although I am always open to the fact that there are two sides to any story.
The other posts I made I said they were being said "In general".
posted on July 12, 2002 12:40:34 PM new
Yes, lindak, I know. Me too. Its generalization. I just find no excuse good enough for someone "in authority" to abuse it the way that cop did. Doesnt mean all cops are bad..it means that the bad actions and conduct of ONE ruins what all the others strive for and they have to start all over again. Its not fair to the decent cops.
by the way..I was replying to clarksville, who thinks I have balls and am squeezable. Heh.
[ edited by hepburn101 on Jul 12, 2002 12:42 PM ]
posted on July 12, 2002 12:45:30 PM new
Unless I read it out of context? I took it as clarksville asking me about another scenario, squeezing to get my response, yadda yadda. Or,now that I read it again, it could be that clarksville was refering to the kid supposedly squeezing the COPS balls and the reaction was getting smacked. Either way..I just confused myself.
posted on July 12, 2002 12:54:18 PM new
"IN GENERAL" I don't think any of us think this is how most arrests go down. The vast majority involve no real violence.
I do think that it happens often enough to be a concern - especially if unlike me you are black /brown or ethnic it is frightening.
I once had an auto accident with a fellow who had just came here from the soviet bloc and his wife was so frightened when she learned that a policeman was coming that she was shaking. I never want it to be like that here.
posted on July 12, 2002 02:02:45 PM new
In the historical context of law enforcement in dealing with the African American community, why wouldn't African Americans resist arrest ?
And if you're black and the subject of an unlawful arrest, the cops just make up something to arrest you for.
All authority must have limits, that includes cops. There is no way that a white middle class family would have received the treatment that that black man and son got for an expired registration. The immediate thought in the cops minds was that the father was a ner-do-well criminal and the son was a gangster, all due to the color of their skin.
Police can not do whatever they want, to whoever they want, for whatever reason they want - and that is basically the situation we have. The institution must be challenged or we have a lawless and criminal element in our communities that is far worse for all of us than any other criminal element.
The police know who they can beat up and get away with it. You never hear about the Timothy McVeigh's getting street justice. But take a simple misdemeanor arrest with a black person and it is a free-for-all to rough them up and show them who the master is.
posted on July 12, 2002 04:04:14 PM new
reamond that was one of your most poorly thought out posts.I'm sick of liberals telling people who do or have lived in the ghettos what goes on there, Blacks slide for a lot that a rural white would sit for
They've been raised to respect those in authority. So while I'm sure he'd have been upset, he would have done whatever I asked of him, out of respect for me. And I wouldn't have encourged him to cause additional problems".
Yiou better wake up the day of the friendly Irish cop on the conrer are gone. Co operate by talking to these self important thugs and what you will get the shaft big time. Keep your mouth shut until some semblance of a lawyer is in front of you.I speak from first hand experience.
and while we are at it a lot of whites are victums of brutality at least as many as blacks, If Blacks want more acceptance they need to set down the malt liquor and gang colors and get some responsibility, at least thats what the working middle class blacks I know have to say about it.
posted on July 13, 2002 10:05:28 AM new
hepburn101
[b]Unless I read it out of context? I took it as clarksville asking me about another scenario, squeezing to get my response, yadda yadda. Or,now that I read it again, it could be that clarksville was refering to the kid supposedly squeezing the COPS balls and the reaction was getting smacked. Either way..I just confused myself.
Sorry Clarksville if I read it wrong.[/b]
Well, kinda sorta hepburn101.
(Maybe if I enlarge my smilies maybe my posts will be taken differently?)
I wasn't directing it at YOU specifically, nor anyone else at RT. It was indeed a scenario and retorical.
This is a HOT - HOT - HOT issue so we all can have our emotions heightened.
When I read your response to my posts I just thought that you were just stating your opinion.
I was simply throwing into the discussion a different viewpoint. That's all. Yes it was in reference to the allegation of the criminal squeezing the police officer's family jewels.
I know exactly what you and others are saying about the "bad" cops. "Been there, done that" believe you me, but I also understand the officers' viewpoint and their families and loved ones. It is a slippery slope. Like other jobs, no one really knows what it is like to be a police officer unless they have been one. Also, for that specific officer or his fellow officers with him at the time of the incident, we don't know what it is like to be in his shoes.
Many years ago, way before all of us were born, police officers were actually "recruited" from groups of people who were "expendible" to do the dirty work for the community. And I think that the police do the dirty work that the rest of us don't want to do, for many reasons.
One hand we want them to go out and nab the bad guys. Well, folks, sometimes WE are the bad guys which is different isn't it from when another person is the bad guy?
Also, it helps to be "cooperative" when a police officer is dealing with us. Yes, there has been times I have yelled at a officer or two when they were in the wrong. I have also thanked police officers when they did something right, IMO.
posted on July 13, 2002 11:31:06 AM new
Yes a cop's job is high-pressure. Yes it is dangerous. Is that an excuse to beat an innocent suspect into submission? IMO it is not.
We can wave vague generalities in the air like flags, but what was depicted on the tape was not a generality. It was one specific incident. It should be treated as such. If a cop's reaction to his high-pressure job is to go around beating up blacks, that cop should be removed from duty and charged with a crime, just as you or I would.
I don't care what the cop ate for breakfast, whether he's getting any from his wife, or how pressured he feels. If we start allowing cops special privileges or exemptions from the law, based on those infinite variables, then we really do have a slippery slope.
It is a fact that the police officer on tape appeared to use exessive force on a 16-year old suspect. That fact is indisputable. The police officer claimed the suspect grabbed the officer's gonads. There is no evidence whatsoever to support that claim, other than the statements of the officer himself and the other officers. Is there some reason you can think of that we should believe the officers' testimony, while discounting the testimony of the boy and his father?
It is our job as citizens to monitor the actions of our police departments. If we ignore that responsibility, and are willing to accept the word of cops, then a group of vigilante cops becomes untouchable.
posted on July 13, 2002 11:37:08 AM new
Perhaps they could all be moved over into the Home Security forces where they are not subject to any review. It would save conditioning a new recruit and keep them out of the unemployment line without measurably effecting the outcome of the agency's actions.
posted on July 13, 2002 11:10:26 PM new
It was reported on tonight's local news that the offending officer (Morse?) has two previous complaints of brutality. Also, another officer admitted punching the kid twice in the face because the kid wouldn't let go of the officer's uniform.
This topic is 7 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new
But what I'm trying to say is that same situation could have gone a whole other direction, if he had given the police a hard time, or refused to get out of the car BEFORE they told him what was going on. Or, once out of the car had he resisted being cuffed....see what I'm saying. Had he acted different the whole situation could have had a negative result.
!