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.

 

Female Officer LITERATELY Beats The Shoes Off A Man With Her Baton

page: 12
25
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


No, I am not making assumptions. Fact: He is on top the officer.
Fact: he is not complying, and resisting.

No assumptions.




posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ProphecyPhD
 


Beating into submission is cruel and barbaric, but it is indeed the protocol used in order to place someone resisting arrest, into custody. Striking someone should only occur if that person intends to, or is, striking you.

Police Officers should be trained in some form of judo, or restraint without physical abuse, until they're given a device more affective at causing temporary paralysis than those deadly and often ineffective taser guns.

As far as the officers in the video, the woman should be imprisoned for assault with intent to kill and the male should be reprimanded and given a pay cut. She could have killed that guy, by hitting him with the billy club, for simply resisting arrest. I might be wrong, but the penalty for resisting arrest shouldn't be abuse with the possibility of death.



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Lots of sexism on this thread.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by PhantomLimb
If someone is pummeling me with a baton I'm probably going to find it hard to just freeze up and not move. That has to hurt.
Yeah, this is really nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy. Plus, I highly doubt the people in this thread saying it was justified probably would not have simply complied if in the same situation.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by technical difficulties
 


Well, had they complied in the first place, this would not have happened



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by chancemusky
reply to post by technical difficulties
 


Well, had they complied in the first place, this would not have happened


Thats like saying "if i pull a gun on you just give it up and you won't get shot". What if i don't want to give it up because it's mine and i worked hard for it



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Just do what i say or just comply is something a thug or bank robber would say, True or Not



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous Avatar
 


i would think more of heroin.... the one that they don`t sell



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Smacking someone in the face with a baton, baseball bat, or any other object, is NEVER OK. I don't care who you are or what kind of indicia of authority you happen to be displaying at the time.

If you do that, you waive any claim to be considered a respectable member of human race. You have thereby labeled yourself as an irredeemable piece of #.

To all you authority ass-kissing imbeciles who condone that sort of police conduct, I hope each one of you gets smacked full force in the face by a police baton some day, just so you know how it feels, and so that you can look at the results every time you look in the mirror for the rest of your lives. After you've had that well-deserved experience, please report back to us and let us know whether it induces a change of attitude on your part.
edit on 8/9/2011 by dubiousone because: Clarification



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Rodney King redux



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   
It amazes how far people will go to justify this sadistic world we live in..Not enough information, what did he do before..Does it matter? They are trained to subdue without undue harm being inflicted..at best these officers are incompetent and should be fired..at worst they are sadistic pricks and should be fired.

As long as it is not your door they are kicking in it is fine..RIGHT? As long as the baton is your hand it is fine..RIGHT? We were shocked when we saw the Rodney King video..we were even disgusted..sane people anyway. Now we just laugh..as long as it is not me..Surely he deserved it.

Getting fed Up.

Peace



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 03:13 AM
link   
You know, I don't care if I was originally in the wrong or not. I don't care of the person beating me relentlessly with a baton is a cop or not. At some point in my mind, it's not about good and bad, right and wrong, or cops and bad guys. It's about life and death. Somebody wants to beat me senseless with a metal stick, they're gettin shot. Badge or not.

I'd say it's about time for a pig roast.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Well it looked to me that he was resisting. But he was defending his life more than resisting. Who wouldn't put their hands up to block their face from being bashed in?

A few more questions here.

If you were trying to render a person immobile would you aim for their head and face and risk killing them by fracturing their skull in multiple places and causing massive brain swelling and injury?

Or would the proper protocol be to aim at the very limbs that they are trying to resist with?

Is it just me or does this appear that the person giving the beating is trying to inflict severe injury or death intentionally?

It does appear to me that she is not using proper protocol and in fact the way she is hitting the man of whom which is at most times unable to defend himself is totally unethical, it is abuse of power thinking that she has the right to get away with such a thing, it is inhumane, and it is down right sickening.

It doesn't matter what happened before the film started. Every person in the U.S.A. has a right to a fair trial. He has the right to not be tried, jugged and sentenced by one singular person.

Watch the film again and really think about the points that I have made.

-Alien
edit on 8/9/2011 by Alien Abduct because: spelling correction



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
Wowowow... A heated discussion... Luv it...


Ok there are basically three possible reactions to a (more ore less violent) arrest:

1. You comply and hold still.
2. You resist and defend yourself.
3. You get hysterical.

The guy in the video went for no. 3 obviously. I know there are lot of guys here who would have beaten the crap out of those two cops (keep dreaming!) but the most likely reaction of a person who got arrested is in fact getting hysterical when beaten. That is of course only IF he's not used to arrests and the arrest was unjustified... You don't believe me? Ask your local shrink...



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by chancemusky
reply to post by Jezus
 


No, I am not making assumptions. Fact: He is on top the officer.
Fact: he is not complying, and resisting.

No assumptions.


So regardless of what happened earlier in the video; resisting being hit with a baton = resiting being arrested.

That doesn't make sense...

Also, you keep saying "he is on top of the officer".

Did you actually watch the video?

He is trying to get away from the officer; he makes no attempt to hurt either of them...

The only time is "kind of" on top of either of them is when he is been held....



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by chancemusky
reply to post by w3nd1g0
 


Ever seen a man on PCP? They can break cuffs and are way stronger than normal. And just because they had to use JUSTIFIED FORCE, or pain compliance, doesn't mean they shamed us. They've done us proud by getting him off the streets, hopefully



thats a lie no human has ever broken handcufs in the entire history of handcuffs secondly pcp does not increase strength in any way this is a lie probably generated by cops to excuse their illegal bahavior.think about it how can u increase strength with a drug? the laws of physics simply stop? no need to increase muscle mass?

justified use of force? where is your american spirit and the concept of innocent until proven guilty? shame on you and everyone who thinks like you! stop watching faux news and move to mexico where its guilty untill proven innocent youe kind of place.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by beltemps
Wowowow... A heated discussion... Luv it...


Ok there are basically three possible reactions to a (more ore less violent) arrest:

1. You comply and hold still.
2. You resist and defend yourself.
3. You get hysterical.

The guy in the video went for no. 3 obviously. I know there are lot of guys here who would have beaten the crap out of those two cops (keep dreaming!) but the most likely reaction of a person who got arrested is in fact getting hysterical when beaten. That is of course only IF he's not used to arrests and the arrest was unjustified... You don't believe me? Ask your local shrink...


Good point. However it really depends on what the captive person did originally that would lead to point 3. I don't think you would immediately jump to hysterical . If the police arrest you and you hold still and they start beating you, then you will get hysterical . If you resist arrest, then your getting beat down for sure and then comes the hysteria. Usually if you comply, the cops wouldn't beat you up like this (unless your black or Hispanic then you have a greater chance of getting beat up ). Therefore this guy in the video was most likely resisting arrest. He gets beaten up, he then says several times, "enough, ok", but they continue to beat him.

When you finally comply and do what the police are telling and you still get beat up, then the hysteria sets in. Because now all you want is the pain to subside, but since you keep getting beat, your mind is telling your body to react. Think of it as being trapped in a corner with the thing you fear the most. You become so desperate that you want to get out of that corner by any means nessary. Now in this video, the police continue to attack him, thus mentally and physically cornering him. He wants to get out, thus now he will do anything possible to get out of this proverbial corner. So he attacks more and more until he thinks he will be free of this. However he will not,
the police know this and they bring more police to beat and "subdue" the perp. When he is finally aprrehened, the charges against him will be more than when the perp "said enough".

To the previous poster who is an police officer, is this why a beating like this is "protocol " or is it something more? Know question you guys see a lot of barbaric crap out there but is this nessary, when the perp continues to be beat up after he says enough? You guys are better than these people, don't be like them.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Lightrule
 




I'm only choosing to respond to this part of your post.

Is that because you have no response to the rest? If you were really trying to argue your point you would have started with the rest of it.


My general area of expertise is corporate and tax law.

Noted. So you do not work or have any experience in law enforcement like you stated in your first post. You work in civil litigation.


Still passed criminal law tho.

Simply passing a criminal law course would only give one a working knowledge of the subject and not an expertise or even experience.

If fact, all police officers are given a criminal law course in the police academy. So I would say that you have about the same working knowledge on criminal law as any police officer on the street. That working knowledge combined with the application of it on a daily basis gives any veteran police officer more knowledge of criminal law than you have.


Do I post and sound like an attorney tho? Absolutely not! I can't. I'm not allowed, its constituted as legal advice as it comes from a professional.

I will admit, I do not know the rules when it comes to this so you may have a defense for not going as far as providing "legal advice." You have no defense, however, to be completely ignorant on the subject.

Also, stating your opinion and supporting it with fact in this mostly anonymous forum would be a hard stretch for someone to take it as "legal advice."


as it comes from a professional.

Oh really?


This is what the good old quick, hand on each side of her head, make a sharp twisting motion, neck snapper move is for.

Real professional. In which year of law school did you learn this?


I have to "dumb it down" so to speak.

Unfortunately, I believe you have "dumbed it down" for us a bit too much. In fact you have "dumbed it down" so much that you come off as completely ignorant and without knowledge on the subject. Or maybe that is because you are a corporate and tax attorney and not a criminal law attorney.


Something I love to do in order to allow the majority of ATS members to understand. You see if I were to approach a forum like ATS in my professional capacity, you or anyone else without at least 2 years of law school would be blindsided.

In my experience with members of ATS, they are more intelligent than you give them credit to be. You can still make intelligent argument without going as far as providing "legal advice."


When I come to ATS all I need to do is post my feelings in my own words, not stupid legalese that is intentionally hard to understand.

Anyone can post feelings. Many people do that here and do not get a reply of argument. When one posts their feelings and masquerades them as fact or insider knowledge by providing their supposed expertise (lawyer), that is when it will be met with argument.


When I use the legal system I end up sounding like I'm defending the police because that is how the system has been designed.

The same legal system that convicts police officers in criminal court and grants hefty sums of money in settlements and judgements to people who claim police brutality and excessive force? There are lawyers out there that make a living on cases such as these. Those same lawyers know exactly where to look in order to make a case against the police department and police officer in civil court.


That is why I don't use the BROKEN CORRUPT RULES to attack police, I CAN'T they are designed to protect the police and only allow the most blatant and heinous rule breakers to be punished while protecting the ego fueled baton jockeys with massively broad legal terms.

Oh really? Those same broken corrupt rules that defended these police officers and police departments from paying hefty sums of money to those that made civil suit against them?
Settlement for $725,000
Settlement for $90,000
Settlement for $505,000
Judgement for $17,000
Or those same broken and corrupt rules and laws that defended these police officers from criminal prosecution?
5 Officers Convicted
Another Officer Convicted
Another Officer Convicted
It would seem that if the system was so stacked against the public and for the police I would not simply be able to type "police settlement," "officer convicted" or "judgement against police" into a google search and find so many. In fact, it would seem if the rules were "written to obfuscate" as you stated, then no one would be getting any sums of money in civil litigation against police departments and no police officers would be convicted of criminal charges. It seems that the facts are to the contrary.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ProphecyPhD
 




And it's a possibility that he was innocent too!!

Again, belief of innocence is not a valid reason to resist arrest. If you are innocent, then go along with the arrest, contact an attorney, say nothing to the police and you will be exonerated in court.

The only justification to resist arrest, which was tested and upheld by the Supreme Court, is if the arrest is immediately unlawful.

Like I stated before, if the police approach you and say "put your hands behind your back you are under arrest," then you have no lawful justification to resist.

If the police approach you and say, "we are going to beat you, arrest you, hold you indefinitely without trial and probably kill you," then by all means resist. The Supreme Court has even said that a citizen will not be charged with murder if the resistance to an unlawful arrest results in the death of the officer.




top topics



 
25
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join