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.

 

(Video) Victim of alleged police brutality still in custody: family

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Yeah, I didn't think that law went through.

Although with the way our boys in the 2 party crime family have been using the constitution as toilet paper, I wasn't sure.

Thx for the clarification Xcath...What do you think about this one?




posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Those cops.. they do get kick-y.

Here's another example. Obviously the guy in this video has done something and is running, but he gives up and I don't think he deserves the kick to the head he gets for it. Also the cops high-five like the did something.

NSFW due to language.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


The most dangerous things to anyone is police and gov. They organised gang stalking of my life for 19 years now, absolutely wrecking it.

This video shows what these people are about.

Be careful also police destroy lifes for there friends mainly, and also down pubs they plan alot with friends.

I have never committed any crimes in my life, and its been proven, and the police have targeted me, so why can they not target more innocent people.
edit on 1/21/2011 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Yeah, I didn't think that law went through.

Although with the way our boys in the 2 party crime family have been using the constitution as toilet paper, I wasn't sure.

Thx for the clarification Xcath...What do you think about this one?



Well with the most recent supreme court decision based on cases out of the 11th Circuit scare the hell out of me now. The Supreme court has ruled courts can ignore the Constitution in the court rooms. I still need to research specifics on it,. but as of now it conerns me.

As far as The video posted, based on the video its an over reaction in my opinion. However, k nowing how Canada and gun control are, when they do come across a person who is armed the response is a little more aggressive. Its hard to hear audio, and one of my other issues is the fact there are other units still responding code even though the situation looks stable.

Kind of leads me to beleive there might have been something else going on thats not present. Also, the video itself seems conviently placed. A person in the right spot at the right time, it raises some questions.

Based solely on the video though, ignoring all my other questions / concerns its excessive as hell. Absent information we dont know about the officers involved should be investigated and charged, as well as paying for any medical expenses that resulted from their behavior.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Actually in reference to Illinoise the law is on the books. Its their version of wiretap / audio recording. Illinoise if I remeber right is a 2 party consent state, and the last person who recorded the cops was charged under it. The UCLA has taken up the case, and in this one instance I agree with the UCLA and their argument.

It should be struck down in state court. If they are stupid enough tp uphold the use of the wiretap law in this prosecution, the FEderal Appeals will end it.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


The most dangerous things to anyone is police and gov. They organised gang stalking of my life for 19 years now, absolutely wrecking it.

This video shows what these people are about.

Be careful also police destroy lifes for there friends mainly, and also down pubs they plan alot with friends.

I have never committed any crimes in my life, and its been proven, and the police have targeted me, so why can they not target more innocent people.
edit on 1/21/2011 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)




Care to share why exactly the cops decided to "pick on you"?



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Absolutely appalling! This little note above my post says I am an experienced contributor to ATS, and to be an example for our newer members. . .but it is near impossible to contain myself to diction that respects the terms and conditions of ATS!! There's no excuse for this kind of behaviour! Even if this guy was running around as an disgruntled employee randomly firing a gun. . .there's no reason to kick and unarmed man in the face!

Oh, let it be that this man comes across this post. . .and I will risk the potential to have a post removed by saying to this sorry excuse of a police officer and a horror of humanity that you will get yours. A time will come and you will suffer the same fate. As a matter of fact, cops who do this sort of thing have to be one of the lowest forms of life on this planet.

They must have sad, and pathetic little lives, and they're so angry that only that little shiny badge gives them power. They're not like those who have the power of intelligence and compassion.


I have never said a negative thing about anyone on ATS, ever. . . but



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Divine Strake
 


Innocent until proven guilty. The Camera, as I have argued in many threads, does not always show the entire story. While I agree with the level of disgust, refrain until more info comes out on this.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
I am sure that the police action will be "justified" because the policeman (reluctant to call them an "officer" as if they were in the military they would surely be "enlisted") probably yelled "get down!" to the man who was already on the ground on his hands and knees and then didnt give him a nanosecond to comply. Whatever happened to put your arms on the vehicle and spread your legs? Not a good policy for those who wear nice clothes and have to get down on a dirty street so some policeman can exercise greater power over a citizen who has not threatened them. Again....all police personnel should undergo rigorous psychological testing and be eliminated from patrol duties if they are mentally unfit and all police should be held accountable for breaches of the public trust - especially for brutal assaults (not justified unless the arrestee is resisting and I dont mean by putting up a hand to protect himself from a beating either).



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
To those who said we should not judge as we dont know all the facts (ie, cant hear the audio) I say that "a picture is worth a 1000 words." The actions of the police speak for itself. Not necessary and caused serious injury. Even if the person being arrested was disrespectful to the arresting police it is no license to commit assault.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
To those who said we should not judge as we dont know all the facts (ie, cant hear the audio) I say that "a picture is worth a 1000 words." The actions of the police speak for itself. Not necessary and caused serious injury. Even if the person being arrested was disrespectful to the arresting police it is no license to commit assault.


Generally speaking, any type of offensive action towards the head could fall under deadly force use. I use the term generally because it depends on what was going on, and the type of action taken, movement of suspect etc. A kick to the head, absent imminent danger to the cop and while on the ground, would be hard pressed to justify the action.

As far as a picture or video worth a thousand words, they dont always show the entire story. As I am sure you would be a little torqued if you were guilty till proven innocent, anger and disgust aside, they are innocent until proven guilty.

Also there seems to be a discrepancy on the video. If you watch it, the guy is origionally in the drivers seat of the truck. When the first officer arrives on scene, the cop starts to walk towards the backup, and you can see the driver is still in the front seat.

When the person recording gets out of the car, we loose a few seconds of video. When it comes back up, you will notice the cop has his gun out giving commands for the guy to get on the ground. Here in the states if I did a traffic stop, make contact with the driver, then start to walk back to my vehicle and the driver starts to get out, he would get my duty weapon pointed at him.

You should never get out of your vehicle during a traffic stop unless told to do so by the Officer, if you request it and its granted, or there is sometype of medical emergency. You will be pistol pointed for the emergency one. Anytime someone gets out of a vehicle, the actions is taken as a threat, regardless of intent. Its an officer safety issue.



An example of your picture worth a thousand words. When you watch just one of the dash cam videos, you will see the suspect running away from an officer, and the officer then shoots the individual in the back, with no apparent offenseive action taken by the suspect. When you watch the other officers dash cam video, you will see that the officer who fired his weapon was actually completely justified.

**Graphic - NSFW**


**Graphic - NSFW**



edit on 21-1-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonSpirit2
 


Any attempt on your part to do what you just described would result in your death. You have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on, so to presume you do and decide to interject yourself into a situation where you are completely in the dark, you just made it a deadly force encounter towards yourself. In most states you cannot resist an unlawful arrest. That is what the lawyers are for if it occurs as well as your right to redress of grievances against a government employee acting under color of law. Of course my comments here are for the US, and not Canada.

I find it intresting that you are disgusted by the officers actions, yet absolutely ok in exercising the exact same actions you you find disgusting on the officer. What makes it ok for you to do what you described, while it not being ok for the officer?

As a side note, as far as this incident:


McKinnon says police are conducting a criminal investigation into excessive use of force and a code of conduct investigation. The officer shown in the video has been placed on administrative leave while the investigations are carried out.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
As a side note, as far as this incident:


McKinnon says police are conducting a criminal investigation into excessive use of force and a code of conduct investigation. The officer shown in the video has been placed on administrative leave while the investigations are carried out.



Oh yeah? and does the RCMP still conduct their own internal investigations?



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:20 AM
link   
Why are they still holding him? He was called in for displaying a shotgun at a golf range. As it turns out it was his job. He had to shoot it there to scare birds away. I don't get this at all.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


I was about to ask the same question. You beat me to it. Why are they still holding him, if it has been proven that, he used the shotgun at the golfcourse to scare away birds. Are they still withholding him to cover up what they have done to him? Where is his lawyer in all of this.

Rather disgusting to say the least. Those police officers will get away with it again as per usual.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Can't we as citizens implement a citizen justice coalition and support both legally and physically, the defense of victims to authority? Or maybe people should start shooting cops who violently attack them? I mean, a cop would shoot you if you were to attack them. I don't feel I am out of line appealing for the same line of defense from criminal elements.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Personally I think everyone with a camera, cell phone or video camera who witnesses an encounter between LEOs and citizens should ALL film it, legal or not! Multiple views, multiple angles, no guessing what was missing on the video. Citizens need to fight back with all of the available tools at their disposal. Let them prosecute hundreds of people for filming an event.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SeenMyShare
 


I see we are still trying to fear monger over cameras. Did the person who filmed this scene in Canada get arrested? Every state in the US with the current exception of Illinois allows for the recording of LEO's in action. Illinois is having their law challeneged, and they will loose their argument to keep the law in place as is.

As I have said many times before, we are wired from head to toe, up to and including body mics, body cameras, duty weapon cameras and audio, Taser viudeo and audio, CCTV, Dash Cams, cellphones, media etc etc etc.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Thx for chiming in here as usual xcath-Always appreciate your honest take on things.

This is one case that I have to admit ( opinion only, based on what I see ) that I simply can not justify this guy's actions, no matter WHAT led up to it, because this 'suspect' is in a prone, submissive position, and at the point this kick is delivered into his face is not acting the least bit combative. Even if he got into a heated, violent exchange prior to this with this officer, it does not justify over the top brutality like this during the moment he IS complying and following instructions to get on the ground, particulary when he already has a firearm fixed on him like this.

But hey, at least in this instance, it wasn't one of our own.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


If you actually did some research you woul have your answer, which is to say NO the RCMP is not investigating the incident. The Abbotsford Police Department is the lead agency investigating the Kelowna RCMP detachment member. They have setup phone numbers and have asked for any person who was present, driving through the area etc to contact them to be interviewed.

Police seek more witnesses in beating, arrest of Buddy Tavares - January 14th 2011 update




As far as why he is still in Police custody:



He has been charged with careless use of a firearm in relation to a domestic violence “situation,” that is still under investigation. He appeared in a Kelowna court Monday for a first appearance on the charge.


Kelowna resident Buddy Tavares speaks out about the RCMP kicking him

Intrestingly enough, while he has absolutely no problem recalling events prior to the stop, and what happened to him after the stop, he cannot remember what occured when the Officer took action against him.


He alleged that he couldn't remember what happened next. Video clearly indicates the officer giving him a swift kick. "I didn't see the foot coming. I didn't see anything."


Amnesia or selective memory?

The domestic violence charge is beiung disputed by his ex-wife, who was present when all this occured. He claims he had a vlaid permit for the weapon, the police are saying he did not.

Signs of a Police coverup? Anything is possible, but we still dont have all the answers. The one issue that strikes me is the recalling every detail elading up to the stop, and detailed info after the stop, but cannot remember what was occuring when he was kicked. A memory block can occur, but I cant see it being that specific.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join