Smackdown: Police officer 'takes out drunk girl, 15, outside school in violent attack'

This is why people hate cops,I use to give to the Fraternal Order of Police every year till I was harassed by a cop who stopped me for speeding..
That cop in this video will prolly get away with it like the Seattle cop did for killing that wood carver..

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by pityocamptes

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by pityocamptes

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.


She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!


he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.

Precisely!

Once again your looking at it from a SIDE view, NOT from BEHIND. Angles can make a huge difference on how things are perceived...

This is common sense and protocol:

If an officer assumes that a person has a gun, they DO NOT rush them. Instead they pull out their firearms and command them to drop their weapon.

They will from behind if they can safely contain you before you pull it out. So your a cop, someone in front of you has been suspected of a crime. You tell them to halt, Police, they keep walking. You run up behind them to detain them because you believe they are fleeing. As you get closer you notice that they quickly reach into their jacket or front chest area (remember you are coming up from behind). What do you do? You either pull your gun, or if you believe that you can get to them before they completely pull a weapon, turn and fire, you take the chance. You know why the late is always on the cops mind? Because no one wants to kill a kid, especially since these type of situations are dynamic and your eyes could be "fooling you". Most cops error on the side of caution and usually get shot.

Another contradiction. Your first line "They will from behind if they can safely contain you before you pull it out" How would he know she had a gun if he can't see one? Didn't bother to read the rest of your post cause it's irrelevant.

Like I said earlier, the brain (from training) focuses on movements, certain movements are almost exactly the same each and every time. It takes a few seconds for the brain to fully comprehend everything, down to the detail. I did not contradict myself. He assumed she had a weapon based on her movements and actions. No one wants to find out when its too late...

While I recognise that it's the in thing to talk down any sort of authority here, he has the right to do this.

Let's think about it.

The girl attacked the other girl, now she's walking away. She's committed assault.

The police officer obviously wants to arrest the girl. Now I can't hear if he yelled out to her to stop or not, but regardless, she's walking away from the scene after assaulting someone, and he has the right to do what he did.

Who knows what else she's already done, she may be extremely dangerous, have a weapon or whatever and sometimes you need to use force, so again, since I couldn't hear him, she may have resisted arrest, even if she didn't, he had the right to go after her like that and honestly considering what she did to the other person, I say good on the cop, knock some sense into her.

I'm sorry but you can't just attack someone and expect the cop to go "Ah it's alright mate, have a nice day". You may think this is the end of your freedom or whatever, but let me assure you that as far as I can recall, it's always been illegal to assault someone.

Have a nice day.

EDIT: Plus she walks just fine after getting tackled.

EDIT2: Plus she's intoxicated, which is illegal at her age.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
how would you hide a gun in your shirt?

....lol, the things some people say are priceless!

apparently you are not over it.

edit on 5/6/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

Naiveity is also how cops die, in addition to assuming someone is not armed -

reply to post by argentus


my brothers a cop and trust me they deserve that label,besides i love bacon in the mornings so its not that dergatory lol, and another thing,what happened to the second amendment,they can call everyone criminals and guilty til proven innocent but i cant call them names? and yes they do,like i said my bros a cop and he says that as well as his cop buddys,they are huge cynics,somethings fishy ATS whose side are you on, its not a race or a sexual preference or anything like that, its a gang like any other,welcome to reality

reply to post by Xcathdra

In this case, the only reason he is being investigated is because another Police employee found the youtube footage and turned it in. No other complaints were filed by any party, including 3rd parties who witness what occured.

The only person who could have pressed charges was her mom. You know, the woman she was beating up. No wonder her mom didn't want to press charges. I wouldn't either. Somebody should have reported this, no matter how bad the girl was/is.

What would you have done in this situation? Just curious.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


She deserved it.
Punk kid acting up. The officeR just ran up on her to knock her off balance.
I'm sure she ignored his repeated calls to stop.

I know those who are police officers take the side of the gorilla saying that he was in an unseen danger,To me is just a direct shame to any police department in the country,she could just be killed for the slamming thank good she was drunk,because her body just went with the inertia of the cops move on her,otherwise if she was sober the result probably could be murder.So those guys from the force'PLEASE' we all see what we see.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
how would you hide a gun in your shirt?

....lol, the things some people say are priceless!

apparently you are not over it.

edit on 5/6/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

Naiveity is also how cops die, in addition to assuming someone is not armed -

Oh, you mean someone who is 15 years old, female, and only walking away from you? BTW, who also does not know you are closing in on them at a fast pace? I'd turn around in defense too! Does that mean I have a gun? Does that mean you should ram me into a wall possibly putting me into a coma? I guess that counts as justified in some peoples eyes, not mine.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Why would he assume she had a gun in the first place? what motivation did he have to determine that? thanks for proving my point for me. much appreciated!

How about the fact she was walking away from the scene as law enforcement arrived and refused to comply with verbal commands to stop. Her intoxication is a factor in what action is taken. Without intoxication, a person goes into a fight or flight response, and you get the adrenaline dump. A person goes into visual and auditory exclusion, which is why you hear officers yelling at a person, repeating the same thing over and over.

Introduce alcohol or drugs into that situation, and chance are verbal commands become less effective, forcing a change in strategy by an officer. We are trained to change tactic if its evident the one we are using is not effective. The officer yelled t her, started walking after her, and then eventually had to jog to cover the gap. At that point she half turned, brought hands up then back down to where the officer could not see them.

Split second decision to make. dwell to long on that decision, and its possible you wont be going home at the end of the night.

Originally posted by DONTBEIGNORANT
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

She deserved it.
Punk kid acting up. The officeR just ran up on her to knock her off balance.
I'm sure she ignored his repeated calls to stop.

You mean his lame single attempt to tell her to stop? I have headphones and I barely heard him say anything, yet I could hear the sound of her hitting the ground.

But your right, Punk kids deserve this kind of treatment. After all, they are not human.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

In this case, the only reason he is being investigated is because another Police employee found the youtube footage and turned it in. No other complaints were filed by any party, including 3rd parties who witness what occured.

The only person who could have pressed charges was her mom. You know, the woman she was beating up. No wonder her mom didn't want to press charges. I wouldn't either. Somebody should have reported this, no matter how bad the girl was/is.

What you are failing to understand though is how "pressing charges" work. A crime has to be commited in order for her to have standing. If the officer was within law and policy, he cant be charged. Regardless of how people view his actions and what their personal opinions are on the matter.

Force was used to take the person into custody. The department is reviewing that use of force, whcih as I stated before wont make any person in here happy because o fthe requirements in plce for reviewing that use of force.

What would you have done in this situation? Just curious.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Why would he assume she had a gun in the first place? what motivation did he have to determine that? thanks for proving my point for me. much appreciated!

How about the fact she was walking away from the scene as law enforcement arrived and refused to comply with verbal commands to stop. Her intoxication is a factor in what action is taken. Without intoxication, a person goes into a fight or flight response, and you get the adrenaline dump. A person goes into visual and auditory exclusion, which is why you hear officers yelling at a person, repeating the same thing over and over.

Introduce alcohol or drugs into that situation, and chance are verbal commands become less effective, forcing a change in strategy by an officer. We are trained to change tactic if its evident the one we are using is not effective. The officer yelled t her, started walking after her, and then eventually had to jog to cover the gap. At that point she half turned, brought hands up then back down to where the officer could not see them.

Split second decision to make. dwell to long on that decision, and its possible you wont be going home at the end of the night.

I urge you to watch that vid again. She has walked off before the police car has even arrived. She doesn't know they are there. They don't even have time to determine that she has been drinking. Are cops psychics now?

I know you are catching up with this thread as we speak. But please look at the pics I posted and tell me that he would have stopped if she didn't move her hands. I get the feeling no matter what she did, he would have done the same thing.

reply to post by PsykoOps


Not really. I've had a coworker tell me how he told a guy to take his hands out of his pockets out of concern that he might have a weapon. He didn't want to. He then punched him several times in the head until he finally took his hands out of his pockets and then hooked him up. Turned out the guy did have a weapon after all--a gun.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

In this case, the only reason he is being investigated is because another Police employee found the youtube footage and turned it in. No other complaints were filed by any party, including 3rd parties who witness what occured.

The only person who could have pressed charges was her mom. You know, the woman she was beating up. No wonder her mom didn't want to press charges. I wouldn't either. Somebody should have reported this, no matter how bad the girl was/is.

What you are failing to understand though is how "pressing charges" work. A crime has to be commited in order for her to have standing. If the officer was within law and policy, he cant be charged. Regardless of how people view his actions and what their personal opinions are on the matter.

Force was used to take the person into custody. The department is reviewing that use of force, whcih as I stated before wont make any person in here happy because o fthe requirements in plce for reviewing that use of force.

What would you have done in this situation? Just curious.

Ok I used the wrong term. I meant: pursued legal action. Which she easily could have.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Oh, you mean someone who is 15 years old, female, and only walking away from you? BTW, who also does not know you are closing in on them at a fast pace? I'd turn around in defense too! Does that mean I have a gun? Does that mean you should ram me into a wall possibly putting me into a coma? I guess that counts as justified in some peoples eyes, not mine.

Age in this case is irrelevant, and I fail to understand why you guys think it matters. A 15 year old can be just as dealy as a 40 year old can be just as deadly as a 95 year old. Assuming that just because she is a minor things will go smooth is just asking for a problem.

The officer yelled at her, and she refused to stop. The blame will fall on her for refusing to stop when told to do so. When the officer closed the gap, the girl half turned, brought her arms up and then back down. The officer does not have xray vision, and cannot see what she was doing when her hands came down. He changed the channel and she went down.

As far as your last comment goes, that is exactly what I am talking about. Some people are reviewing this situation with emotion based on their own percetion and NOT law.

That is a problem.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Why is it that different places, word things loosely? Yet others clearly would of stated it was wrong? Can't we all agree that regardless of resisting arrest or not, smashing her head in a wall is wrong. Like others have said he put his body weight in to it. Just because you have a nice scapegoat to hide behind (not you, I read about you not having any of those problems while on the force) doesn't mean you are justified, maybe by the law, but he's still a major D bag in mostly everyone's eyes. I just get tired of seeing this.

It honestly seems to me these loosely worded definitions of what resisting arrest is defined as, is a joke. I know some will say it was for his protection, well glad he's safe, and in the process of that he could have ended a girls life before it truly even could of started. I don't mean to go off I just don't get why the definitions change so much, it seems like it gives good reason for officers like him to abuse that. I ask you cause I think you would be able to tell me more then other people.

Respectfully

TSIR

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand


Ive watched the vdeo from start to finish a few times, and am giving you my thoughts based on my experince and training. I have explained the legalities involved, and how people who view the incident are basing their intepretation off of personal experience and emotion, and not what the law requires.

My opinion from wha tI saw is the office clsoing the gap, the girl half turning and bring her hands up, then bringing them back down to where they could not be seen be the officer. All the officer knows, according to the article, was an intoxicated minor had attacked a teacher.

Attacked with what? When we use the term weapon, we arent neccissarily refering to a gun. Anything that can cause personal injury or harm can be considered a weapon. A pencil can be considered a weapon if used in the right manner.

Ever see what a pen can do to a person if jammed into a persons eye? Ever see what a set of keys can do when placed into the palm of your hand with the keys hutting out near your knuckles (think wolverine). Even loose handcuffs can be considered a deadly weapon if unlatch and swung at a persons head.

As I said, im not condoning the officers actions. I am offering a differeing view as to why the officer may have taken the action he did based off of established law governing use of force. The fact the girl is 15 has no bearing at all on officer actions.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Law ironically has a lot to do with logic wouldn't you agree? I mean they must teach logic in law school, yet the first thing the this guy does is crash her in to a wall after one warning? Of course she put her hands up, she was being mowed down by a guy running full speed at her. He runs at her he finally gets close, she turns to see him running, she does what most people do by instinct and covered herself. In my opinion she didn't hear him or was to drunk to, and got sacked like she was playing madden. She could of handled it better, he could of handled it better, she was 15 and drunk, he's a grown man. He gives good cops bad names.