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

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
If she had been a few more inches closer to the wall, it would have been lethal. You are new here so I will bite my tongue this time.

But you are right, there is nothing to see in your post. So move along.

Could of... would of.... should of.... wished I did..... why not this...... why didnt he do that....

All hindsight 20/20 and not allowable when reviewing a use of force.

What did the officer perceive the moent force was used.
What was the person doing that resulted in the officers use of force?

We cna play hypotheticals all day, but they cant be translated into this situation at all.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by SpookyFox
Some stupid girls got drunk and starting fighting, the police officer stopped the fight using non-lethal force.
I don't see any problem here. I think the officer did exactly what was his duty to do, to keep the peace.

Maybe if the kids mommy and daddy had taught her how to treat people and not to drink at 15 then she wouldn't have got a beatdown from officer bauldy.

"Move along, nothing to see here."

If she had been a few more inches closer to the wall, it would have been lethal. You are new here so I will bite my tongue this time.

But you are right, there is nothing to see in your post. So move along.

What's with all the "what if this" and "what if that" nonsense. This was not a 75 year old man getting beaten by police with batons or a car ramming a 15 year old prom queen into a wall for littering, stay on topic.
This is a CLEAR case of propoganda and political correctness. The media caught wind of a video on youtube and now want to make a bogey man out of the police because it sells issues, gets web-hits and keeps TPTB who control the media rich.
Wake up and realise that by buying this nonsense you're aiding in a culture of the dregs in society being allowed to ruin the working man, while at the same time being a puppet to the people running the system who tell you what to think.

Originally posted by Shamatt
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

We see too much of this sort of thing. This disgusting [SNIP] shhould be locked up for asault.

edit on 6/5/11 by argentus because: removed derogatory comment

When I see police brutality, when I see a big, well built, supposedly well trained man with a side arm loaded with live amunition attack a slightly drunk 15 year old girl, and throw her visiously to the ground, I feel I have a right to make a derogatory comment about that pathetic peice of [I'll SNIP it myself]

This man is a pig. I am not saying police officers are pigs, my father was a police officer for 35 years, and very nice man he is too. But this officer happens to be a pig too. And should be jailed.

So - Even the ATS Police want to sensor us. What is the world comming to? I am shocked and very angry about being SNIP'd here, I feel it is shoking. What happened to free speach? If I see a disgusting man I will call him a pig. Why is that such a problem?

reply to post by unbanable123


Enjoy assault on an officer charges. Most cops are trained to kick your ass anyways.
Regardless, he definitely should face charges and be stripped of his uniform.

Obviously if you have ever been intoxicated before you would understand what I posted. If you haven't then I suggest you take the training necessary to deal with intoxicated or otherwise impaired persons.I will not get into an argument with you as I can gather by your post that you haven't been there and just want to argue in favor of police officers in general. Having come from a family of law enforcement, military etc. I will only suggest that you before acting in the given situation to try and think what your actions may mean. Were they appropriate? Was the force used necessary? Was it proportional to the outcome you wished to achieve. By the the way I am 60 and those that I mention are proportionately older and much more experienced.If you still want to blab away, go for it. It just means you are part of the problem and not the solution. Find some gurus with more experience.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

If I give loud clear verbal commands and he refuses to stop, I might employ a different method to get the person attention, but agian that is based on what I, and only what I perceive.

So you are conceding that his use of force was excessive, and had another officer been involved, would have ended differently. You are saying he is in the wrong. Thank you! My point has been proven.

Good night all.

.......Please don't blanket all cops as being bad. There are far more good ones out there than there are ones like the officers in the videos posted. We need the good cops on our side when and if the SHTF.

Im not conceeding anything. What I explained was how I would handle your hypothetical with the 90 year old man. You can ask that same question to 20 different officers, and you most liekyl would get 20 different answers. Its all going to be based on what the officer perceives, is their a history between the officer and the suspect, some people are btter able to talk to people than others across the entire age spectrum.

I was not present for the op video, none of us were. We dont know what type of info made it to the officer, or what he perceveied when he arrived on scene. He deserves the benefiet of the doubt until a investigation says otherwise.

Whether you agree with that or not is certainly up to you.

I am just trying to explain how the use of force works and how its reviewed.

I hate cops because I smoke drugs and don't want to get caught, however I don't hate them when they are protecting people from assault and anyone with half a brain can see that the two girls were attacking each other.

If you want to play pretend, then officer beaker, please tell me what you would have done if the two people fighting were male, 15 years old and in an area known for gang firearms crime?

Also, would anyone have cared if they had been young hispanic males?

No. Because it doesn't sell papers.

Officer beaker, if you'd like to come and beat me up for smoking a joint I'd really appreciate it, you'll get famous and could write a book about it and I can sue the system and get $500,000 to sit at home on a nice big TV and smoke joints all day long.

reply to post by Shamatt


Should the same standard been applied to dylan and eric cliebold from the columbine shooting? Based on your interpretation, since these kids were young teens and skinny, they shoujld hav e been dealt with with kid gloves?

What about the kid who just killed his father, who was a neo nazi? The kid was under 10 years old..

Let me rephrase something I said.. A person age is considered, but its dependant upon the situation at hand. Should I treat a 17 year old kid who is drunk and behind the wheel any different from a 55 year old who is dunk behind the wheel?

Should I treat a 16 year old killer any different than I would treat a 86 year old killer?

The answer to all of those questions will be -

Its dependant on what is going on at the time, and what the officer perceives when he is on scene.

Hypotheticals are nice, and we plays those all the time.. What if we go get food and someone comes in with a gun, what if i go into the gas station and its being robbed, what if i come around the corner and I see a person stabbing another.

In this case, what did the officer perceive when the female didnt stop, turned around, showed her hands, then faced forward and brought her hands back down.

Thats the question being asked....

reply to post by ModernAcademia


I have said it at least a thousand times...ALL COPS ARE CORPORATE SECURITY GUARDS AND NOTHING MORE. They do NOT exist to protect and serve the public, they protect and serve the Corporation/State. They arrest and detain "code breakers". If there is no victim there is no crime. ALL cops are criminals as they are IMPERSONATING AN OFFICER. Having NOT filed an oath of office with the city/county/state, they are guilty of impersonating a law enforcement officer. The sheriffs should be arresting these idiots.

The cop is clearly one of many in this country abusing steroids and hormones.

It's clearly visible.

They need to put an end to allowing police to use steroids, some departments even encourage their officers to take testosterone enhancements. It's probably the most idiotic idea imaginable, but it's true.

I'm just in such disgust after watching that.

In the Marine Corps we HAVE to use the escalation of force when dealing with individuals. This is that we do NOT use more force than the opposing party. If they don't have knives, we don't use knives. Etc, etc.

A full grown adult man had no reason to tackle a young woman who was obviously not a threat or really fleeing. I will give the officer that she was trying to leave the scene, however, really? Full face masking football tackle? She did not make any sudden moves or anything!

Martial Law preview!!!!

Originally posted by michial
Obviously if you have ever been intoxicated before you would understand what I posted. If you haven't then I suggest you take the training necessary to deal with intoxicated or otherwise impaired persons.I will not get into an argument with you as I can gather by your post that you haven't been there and just want to argue in favor of police officers in general. Having come from a family of law enforcement, military etc. I will only suggest that you before acting in the given situation to try and think what your actions may mean. Were they appropriate? Was the force used necessary? Was it proportional to the outcome you wished to achieve. By the the way I am 60 and those that I mention are proportionately older and much more experienced.If you still want to blab away, go for it. It just means you are part of the problem and not the solution. Find some gurus with more experience.

I do this for a living, in addition to having a background working in a level 1 trauma facility where we dealt with mentally / emotionally disturbed, suicidal etc etc etc. I know full well what the consequences of my actions can be when doing my job. I also understand what can happen to me when I do a traffic stop at 2 in the morning and assume the 95 year old blue hair behind the wheel doesnt have what it takes to shoot me dead when I approach the window (check Michigan State Police incident).

The fact you are 60 only supporst the notion that when you were my age, things were different, with different if no court rulings were present to guide an officers use of force.

The latest SUpreme Court ruling governing an officers use of deadly force occured in 1989. I am very much aware of what happens if I screw something up. While I respect the knowledge and wisdom you offer, to lecture me to the extent of assuming I dont know what I am talking about speaks volumes and reinforces the idea some people wear blinders when they dont like what they see.

There is nothing I can do to change your mind on that, and based on your reponse I dont think it would even be possible to change your mind, and if you were ever involved in law enforcement or the military you would know that a mindset like that can get people killed.

I have condemed police action in other threads, and supported it in others. That comes from reading the information available and forming my opinion based on that info, just as I have done so here. Listening to people make comments that the cop should be killed while not understanding the law or guidelines is more reason to engage in thgese forums in an effort to open some eyes and minds, while at the same time listening to what people on that side of the fence have to say and how they perceive things.

It goes along way when I do my job, allowing me to reference from here and other places when dealing with a person. Just because I see it one way, doesnt mean a person will see it that way.

When communication breaks down, then we are all screwed.

So again while I repsect your knowledge and background, dont presume to understand or know what my background is. As I ahve stated before, take the time to understand updated case law and supreme court decisions before condemning a person.

and with this, I am going to bow out of this thread. If anyone has any questions feel free to send me a pvt message and I will respond.

Thanks

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by thesolutionisrevolution

 

Actually the first thing the officer does is give her verbal commands, which she refused. The officer then closed the gap, and she half turned. She could have easily stopped at that point, knowing the officer is there. Instead she continuede, raising her hands, then lowering them where the officer could not see them.

If she knew an officer was behind her, why did she complete those actions?

Do this:

Time the cop in the video.

This is a typical case "let's get with this over quick so I can get back to my doughnuts" or screwing someone else's wife or whatever.
Seriously. Time him.
We still don't know how other officers happened to find this video and present it to authorities.

After you timed each step of the action you broke down in your own post then remember that the target was drunk. Has slow responses. That it was 15 and a female. Hardly someone that needs to be pushed with it's head to a wall to be apprehended.
It's clear to me that guy had to get over with this quick to go back to whatever he seem he was doing and that whatever it was that he was doing seemed it was WAY MORE IMPORTANT than his payed job to protect and serve.

She got knocked the F$%^ Out!!!

reply to post by Xcathdra


You are making the mistake of thinking that the officer even stopped to think. He just reaceted (In my opinion) to a situation of perceived disrespect in a violent manner. He had already spoken to the other person fighting and other wtnesses. It must have been very obvious to him what the situation was.

If it was not then he needs further training.

All your hypothetical situations are irrelivent - every situation is unique.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


I dont care what she did you dont hit a 15 year old drunk or not

reply to post by Julie Washington


her head bounced off the wall then the concrete thats some major bs

reply to post by Xcathdra


The cop could have shot her in the back of the head and Xcathdra would defend him. 'well the law gives him the right to do whatever the heck he wants during an arrest, so I'm going defend his right as a cop to be a p.o.s. human being, it's the law you peasants. Now line up, bend over and take it.'

Originally posted by Evanzsayz
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

I dont care what she did you dont hit a 15 year old drunk or not

en.wikipedia.org...
www.copinthehood.com...
privateofficernews.wordpress.com...

Yeah why would you hurt an innocent 15 year old? You can trust people, all people, nomatter what, based purely on their age, race, sexual or religious belifes. I agree. NOT

reply to post by Xcathdra




Xcat...


I know about the thin blue line. But dude, you don't have to conform to something you believe isn't right.


The guy clearly overstepped his bounds. He could have just grabbed the girl. He didn't have to check her head into a cement wall.


The alpha male mentality doesn't help. You can be stern without being aggressive.


We he did is called ASSAULT.