It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cops who tazed innocent naked man 16 times in his own shower killing him will not be charged

page: 4
59
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: spite

Wouldnt they still need a warrant to break down the door.. 1 phone call from someone and the police have right to circumvent all of our rights and just come in?




posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

In most cases I side with the cops because most if not nearly all of them are the good guys. These situations are very rare in fact considering the massive numbers of interactions people have with them each year. Almost meaningless statistically. I'm not going to agree with hyped generalities.

In this single case I do think something wrong has happened here and it needs closer scrutiny.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: spite

And the wiki page is also full of information leading one to believe it's an actual condition.

Much like the real world, there is no consensus on the issue. Some groups accept it as a condition, other groups don't. Trying to skew the information to fit the narrative is a disservice.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

In my uncles case in California they told me they can only come in if there is no response like in this video. Helpful if the person is unconscious or something. Someone just has to call with legitimate concern for the well being of someone. No warrant, all pefectly legal... according to them.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

I may be mistaken but wasn't there something about water running down into the unit below his apartment or something? Flooding out through a door? Something along those lines?

If so, between that and the 911 call about erratic behavior and possible self-harm, I think they'd be able to articulate exigent circumstances under emergency aid. Flip it around: they get 911 calls about him, there's the flooding issue, and no response to the knocks, so they apply for a search warrant and wait for it to get there, then enter and find him drowned in his bath tub. Had they entered under exigent circumstances, they would have potentially been able to render aid.

Obviously that's not what happened, just using it as an example to illustrate the exigent circumstances argument. I don't think the 4th applies to the entry. The half-hour long ride on a Taser? Yea, the 4th could probably apply there.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I get that.. But they should have to at least wait for a paramedic to get there if its a medical emergency.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: spite

Wouldnt they still need a warrant to break down the door.. 1 phone call from someone and the police have right to circumvent all of our rights and just come in?


I think they had sufficient cause to enter the apartment, but once they had eyes on him they should've left him alone until the paramedics got there.

At the very least, they should've cuffed him after the first time he was tased. Isn't that what they are for?



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

Why should they have to wait for EMS? If he's face down in a tub and they wait another five or six minutes for EMS to show up when they could have entered and pulled him out of the water, stopped bleeding, etc., how does that help anybody? EMS wouldn't have been able to enter the apartment until it had been secured anyway.

Here, if there's a call for a mental episode, EMS gets dispatched automatically but isn't allowed to enter the area (whatever the area may be) until PD has it secured. If there's an officer from the Crisis Intervention Team available, they're supposed to be dispatched as well. But that's the policy here, and I have no idea what the policy is where this incident happened.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6




Why should they have to wait for EMS?


Because they are not trained for medical emergencies obviously..



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: notsure1

Why should they have to wait for EMS? If he's face down in a tub and they wait another five or six minutes for EMS to show up when they could have entered and pulled him out of the water, stopped bleeding, etc., how does that help anybody? EMS wouldn't have been able to enter the apartment until it had been secured anyway.

Here, if there's a call for a mental episode, EMS gets dispatched automatically but isn't allowed to enter the area (whatever the area may be) until PD has it secured. If there's an officer from the Crisis Intervention Team available, they're supposed to be dispatched as well. But that's the policy here, and I have no idea what the policy is where this incident happened.


That is alot of what ifs Sham..



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Shamrock6




Why should they have to wait for EMS?


Because they are not trained for medical emergencies obviously..


And EMS isn't allowed to enter a scene to treat patients till it's secured. They're not going to send EMTs in first, and they're not going to have EMTs right behind them when they're dealing with an unknown situation. That's why EMS stages somewhere other than "in the way."
edit on 1-5-2018 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: notsure1

Yes, because it's a hypothetical scenario. You didn't have a problem with the hypothetical when I first introduced it to explain why they don't wait for EMS before entering, having one now doesn't really make much sense. Or negate what I said.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

Oh, and that "administrative leave" referenced in your article is PAID administrative leave...in other words, sorta like an extra two months of "PAID vacation".

Some discupline, huh?



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: notsure1


In this single case I do think something wrong has happened here and it needs closer scrutiny.


The problem is in these few cases where something is most surely wrong the cops most of the time get off with the one over used statement that they were justified because they "felt threatened". Not that the guy was a threat of had a weapon, that they felt threaten and so deadly force or over use of a tazer is justified.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Blaine91555

Oh, and that "administrative leave" referenced in your article is PAID administrative leave...in other words, sorta like an extra two months of "PAID vacation".

Some discupline, huh?







It's not discipline, it's more like incentive to do it again.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yeah, I think the word coverup is in play here.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

I'd suspect it's most common in smaller police departments in tight knit groups. Although I admit there was a time, going back to the 60's and 70's where large cities like Los Angeles were hotbeds of abusive behavior by cops who knew the courts were in the tank with them. These days though, with all the scrutiny, I'd think larger cities have less chance of seeing something systemic going on.

I'd lay this one at the feet of the Chief and the Council that appointed him. Something smells in how this was handled.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Xtrozero

I'd suspect it's most common in smaller police departments in tight knit groups. Although I admit there was a time, going back to the 60's and 70's where large cities like Los Angeles were hotbeds of abusive behavior by cops who knew the courts were in the tank with them. These days though, with all the scrutiny, I'd think larger cities have less chance of seeing something systemic going on.

I'd lay this one at the feet of the Chief and the Council that appointed him. Something smells in how this was handled.


I don't call it so much of a fix as much as the way the cops and courts see things as a norm now. They feel threaten and they can, and will, go full metal jacket in a heart beat with the court ruling they were justified. Many times it is when a person doesn't instantly act to their demands that could be totally based on confusion in the situation. Just like the guy in the shower.

You watch this or the case with the young boy playing with an air soft not bothering anyone and the cops shoot him within a second of the car pulling up, the kid could not even flinch much less follow any directions, and once again those cops felt threatened.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

I think the problem here is generalizing as if this is a common occurrence. I see no evidence of it being the norm. Just look at how many people cops deal with in this country in a year and how many legitimate cases there are of badge abuse in a year and like I said, it's going to be statistically insignificant.



posted on May, 1 2018 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Xtrozero

I think the problem here is generalizing as if this is a common occurrence. I see no evidence of it being the norm. Just look at how many people cops deal with in this country in a year and how many legitimate cases there are of badge abuse in a year and like I said, it's going to be statistically insignificant.


Just maybe that because you cant file a complaint.



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join