Cops Right or Wrong?

[femurphy77]

Not making excuses for the cop screaming in his ear but it is possible that there was more to the story prior to the camera rolling. The guy might have gotten lippy, resisted in some way or made threats although his demeanor on the ground, the demeanor of the other cops and his appearance and responses to the videographer after the fact don't tend to support the cops actions. I'd really be interested to hear miss piggys reason for stomping on the guys leg well after the initial attack.

Cop one should have charges filed against him and job loss, cop two should at the least receive some type of severe disciplinary response just short of losing her job.

Of course we don't know the whole story. . . . . . . . . . . .

 

[hornadylnl]

Not making excuses for the cop screaming in his ear but it is possible that there was more to the story prior to the camera rolling. The guy might have gotten lippy, resisted in some way or made threats although his demeanor on the ground, the demeanor of the other cops and his appearance and responses to the videographer after the fact don't tend to support the cops actions. I'd really be interested to hear miss piggys reason for stomping on the guys leg well after the initial attack.

Cop one should have charges filed against him and job loss, cop two should at the least receive some type of severe disciplinary response just short of losing her job.

Of course we don't know the whole story. . . . . . . . . . . .

If these guys on the ground were a threat to the cops, why were they not cuffed?

 

[E5RANGER375]

i didnt see anything "abussive" or out of line in the video except the cop that was verbaly abussive. i dont think the other cop was trying to stomp the guy, he was just trying to control his hand.

videos dont always show you 100% of what happened. camera angles and distance make things look different too.

 

[deanr]

i didnt see anything "abussive" or out of line in the video except the cop that was verbaly abussive. i dont think the other cop was trying to stomp the guy, he was just trying to control his hand.

videos dont always show you 100% of what happened. camera angles and distance make things look different too.

I would have to agree. The stomp to the head, to me, appears to be an attempt to controll the guys hand. The stomp to the guys knee, to me again, appear to be an attmpt to controll the guys leg. If you rewatch the video just prior to the female office controlling the guys knee he is kicking his leg up and down.

While I do agree that the first office should not have said what he did and can not find or think of any acceptable reason for it.

Again we are only getting one side of the story and it appears that it has been slanted against the police. Was there a better way to handle the situation, probably. Is it convient that we hear one excerpt of the officer when he threatens the guy on the ground? What else did they say to him? Did they tell him to not move? Did he go to wipe his eye several times after being told to not move his hands? Did they tell him to stop kicking his legs? Did he keep kicking his legs after being told to stop kicking? We really need to hear the complete audio of the video also.

 

[lashicoN]

I would have to agree. The stomp to the head, to me, appears to be an attempt to controll the guys hand. The stomp to the guys knee, to me again, appear to be an attmpt to controll the guys leg. If you rewatch the video just prior to the female office controlling the guys knee he is kicking his leg up and down.

While I do agree that the first office should not have said what he did and can not find or think of any acceptable reason for it.

Again we are only getting one side of the story and it appears that it has been slanted against the police. Was there a better way to handle the situation, probably. Is it convient that we hear one excerpt of the officer when he threatens the guy on the ground? What else did they say to him? Did they tell him to not move? Did he go to wipe his eye several times after being told to not move his hands? Did they tell him to stop kicking his legs? Did he keep kicking his legs after being told to stop kicking? We really need to hear the complete audio of the video also.

Yeah, I mean, all kinds of things could have happened. The guy could have just robbed a bank. He could have just murdered a child. He could have just shot at a police car. He could have stolen a cops gun. He could have been a demon. He could have verbally threatened someone on the street. He could have been rowdy at a bar. He could have just shot fire out of his eyes. He COULD HAVE just done a trillion different illegal things, except for the fact that he didn't...because they let him go. Remember that part? At the end...when they let him go. If he had done anything threatening during the...arrest type thing, then even if he was the wrong guy to begin with, he would still have gotten thrown in jail for threatening the police at any part of the situation. So, he obviously didn't.

Call me crazy, but I recall these things called handcuffs. They are normally used to keep a detained person from freely moving his/her arms around. But hey, we're in a recession. Good handcuffs aren't cheap...not as cheap as a nice STOMP on the hand, anyway.

 

[Prometheus]

I would have to agree. The stomp to the head, to me, appears to be an attempt to controll the guys hand. The stomp to the guys knee, to me again, appear to be an attmpt to controll the guys leg. If you rewatch the video just prior to the female office controlling the guys knee he is kicking his leg up and down.

While I might give some leeway to this sort of apologetic B.S., no way on this one. Maybe, MAYBE they would need to if there was just one or two of them and they deemed the situation too dangerous to try and cuff, but there were at least SIX of them. One, two, three, four, five, S I X of them (6). No way they didn't have enough man power to control the scene and safely cuff'ed up.

NO EXCUSE. Your pathetic attempt falls flat on it's face.

While I do agree that the first office should not have said what he did and can not find or think of any acceptable reason for it.

Thats a good start...

Again we are only getting one side of the story and it appears that it has been slanted against the police. Was there a better way to handle the situation, probably. Is it convient that we hear one excerpt of the officer when he threatens the guy on the ground? What else did they say to him? Did they tell him to not move? Did he go to wipe his eye several times after being told to not move his hands? Did they tell him to stop kicking his legs? Did he keep kicking his legs after being told to stop kicking? We really need to hear the complete audio of the video also.

Why? Seriously, why? Lets go with your guess they told him not to move and he is disobeying (sort of), why don't they cuff him? Plenty of cops to do the job or is one small "drunk Mexican" too much for 6+ cops to handle?

Serious question, if he is "repeatedly disobeying commands and a threat" then why wouldn't he be cuffed? Or at least held at gun point?

I saw it on several occasions in South Florida as a FF/EMT when city PD responded to something and found a drunk Mexican/Haitian/Guatemalan in the area. They were like cats with a mouse. Toying and having fun "it".

Like I said, 2 cops need to be in prison and 4 need to be fired if supervisors or suspended w/o pay for a couple weeks if subordinates. This is NOT acceptable behavior.

 

[TK421]

But hey, we're in a recession. Good handcuffs aren't cheap...not as cheap as a nice STOMP on the hand, anyway.

In that case, +1 to the police for saving taxing payers some money.

i didnt see anything "abussive" or out of line in the video except the cop that was verbaly abussive. i dont think the other cop was trying to stomp the guy, he was just trying to control his hand.

videos dont always show you 100% of what happened. camera angles and distance make things look different too.

I hate having to highlight my sarcasm in purple too, either that or you just forgot to because there is no way in hell you can possibly think that you can gain control of a situation by blueberry stomping it out.

I'm just trolling here, but how does one "see" verbal abuse? And did verbal abuse scrape flesh from that man's head? It's probably just the quirky camera angles, but it looks to me like the guys on the ground were taking a nap right where the cops were having a dance party just like the one in this video: YouTube - Stomp The Yard - Final Dance ( Battle )

 

[Manan]

Oh ya, stomping on a perps hand is a proper or effective way to maintain control of a subject. If control of the detainees is what they were seeking, all of the officers standing around should have been on top of the detainees and working as quickly and safely as possible getting them into restraints.

Either way, the cops need a little retraining and I'll say again, a few days off to think about proper procedure.

 

[public servant]

I saw it on several occasions in South Florida as a FF/EMT when city PD responded to something and found a drunk Mexican/Haitian/Guatemalan in the area. They were like cats with a mouse. Toying and having fun "it".

Did you file a complaint? If so...what was the outcome? If not...why not?

 

[Prometheus]

Did you file a complaint? If so...what was the outcome? If not...why not?

I was in my early 20's and just off probation and assigned to some of the crappiest areas in the county (floating sucked)... You know the answer to those questions. No and because I wanted help when things turned bad, which was about 50% of the time when SO/PD wasn't dispatched with us. FWIW I never saw that sort of behavior from the Deputies.

Was it right for me to keep quiet? No. Did I? Yes. Sucks, but I was looking out for myself first and to be quite honest, a couple of the times I found it funny back then for our frequent fliers.

 

[public servant]

I was in my early 20's and just off probation and assigned to some of the crappiest areas in the county (floating sucked)... You know the answer to those questions. No and because I wanted help when things turned bad, which was about 50% of the time when SO/PD wasn't dispatched with us. FWIW I never saw that sort of behavior from the Deputies.

Was it right for me to keep quiet? No. Did I? Yes. Sucks, but I was looking out for myself first and to be quite honest, a couple of the times I found it funny back then for our frequent fliers.

But yet you call for the firing of the 4 cops standing around who did not stop it??

 

[Prometheus]

But yet you call for the firing of the 4 cops standing around??

Yep. I've matured quite a bit since then and I'm also not dependent on them for my survival (on a work related basis, I'm not talking about societal) any more either.

 

[j706]

Simply not true. I speak with the combined experience of being a former LEO who was the equivalent of a shop steward in our collective bargaining unit and now a current lawyer who has successfully defended police officers from criminal charges.

When a cop gets charged with a crime the whole system turns against them.

They get roasted by the media. The newspaper will publish every little disclipinary incident that they have ever been involved in and whip the public into a frenzy over why such a "bad cop" is still on the streets.

Everybody is afraid of showing favoritism so nobody will give them a break. They get worse offers on plea bargains than other criminals who commit the same offenses.

Add to that when a cop gets arrested they are typically suspended without pay. Imagine losing your job at the same time you need to pay a lawyer to defend you.

If anything cops are far more vulnerable to the system that they work for than the average citizen.

Very true!! As for the video,as usual we only see the part that is questionable. I was not there and neither was anyone on here.

As far as the racial part,the officer that made the statement of kicking his mexican behind sounded like he was mexican himself.

Kick to the head? Not by anyone imagination. A kick is a forward movement. A stomp might be bringing the foot downward flat. It appears to me that the officer was in fact attempting to keep the guys hand/arm down. Why? Don't know. Best method of doing so? Probably not.

As far as calling rescue to check the guy out, that is some major BS. His scuff injury's and his face are minor. His being unsteady on his feet? Look at his eyes in the video interview. He is clearly trashed.

As stated We were not there. I would be willing to wager that these guys met the description of the persons involved in the incident. The police made contact with them and were met with an attitude. Speculation on my part but makes more sense than some jack booted thugs head kicking a poor guy.

 

[Joe Williams]

Yep. I've matured quite a bit since then and I'm also not dependent on them for my survival (on a work related basis, I'm not talking about societal) any more either.

But those cops ARE still dependent on their fellow cops for their survival. Does it seem right that you take an actions you were unwilling to take?

 

[public servant]

So we'll just call those other 4 immature and dependent on the other 2 and call it all good?

My point I'm making is never be sure of what you'll do in any situation. From what I see in the video...several people screwed up. Were there circumstances that occurred off video that could justify their actions? Possibly...but I wouldn't stake my career on it.

Neither would I lose my job over the actions of another and I sure as hell won't go to jail for one of my own because of my deliberate indifference.

But I also won't pronounce someone's guilt or innocence by viewing a short, incomplete video. No matter how bad it appears. That's up to people way above my pay grade.

 

[Prometheus]

But those cops ARE still dependent on their fellow cops for their survival. Does it seem right that you take an actions you were unwilling to take?

Like I said, I've come a long way since then. Also you don't see it a bit differently in my unarmed position being completely dependent on them.

In any event, I've owned up to my issues and spelled them out. Your simpleton one liners are getting old, either you've got zero reading comprehension or just cherry pick to make your own perverse reality.

You must still be reeling from those general comments on census workers. Still haven't gotten over that, have you?

 

[lashicoN]

Well, I'm pretty much out of things to say here. Other than, how many of you guys who are saying "boohoo this guy just got a tiny cut" are willing to lay on the ground, let some pi*sed off cop stomp on your hand/forehead and then stomp on your knee? For no reason at all. Keep in mind, he was the wrong guy.

I'm willing to say that polls results would be pretty one-sided. No one likes being stomped on, especially when they did nothing wrong.

 

[femurphy77]

If these guys on the ground were a threat to the cops, why were they not cuffed?

Exactly, like I said, we don't know the whole story.. ...

 

[Joe Williams]

Like I said, I've come a long way since then. Also you don't see it a bit differently in my unarmed position being completely dependent on them.

In any event, I've owned up to my issues and spelled them out. Your simpleton one liners are getting old, either you've got zero reading comprehension or just cherry pick to make your own perverse reality.

You must still be reeling from those general comments on census workers. Still haven't gotten over that, have you?

I am soooooo sorry you don't like my so called "one liners." Didn't take any more than that to point out the heart of the issue, though, did it?

BTW, does "come a long way" mean that you no longer have to deal with the reality and dangers those folks do, so you think that makes it ok to demand they take actions you weren't willing to risk? Them being armed really doesn't make a difference in the real world... aside, perhaps, from giving you some comfort in dealing with the stark contrast between the stance you take on the internet, and your actions in the real world.

 

[lashicoN]

I am soooooo sorry you don't like my so called "one liners." Didn't take any more than that to point out the heart of the issue, though, did it?

BTW, does "come a long way" mean that you no longer have to deal with the reality and dangers those folks do, so you think that makes it ok to demand they take actions you weren't willing to risk? Them being armed really doesn't make a difference in the real world... aside, perhaps, from giving you some comfort in dealing with the stark contrast between the stance you take on the internet, and your actions in the real world.

When he said he "came a long way" I took it as, he no longer thinks it's okay for a group of cops to hover over an innocent guy laying on the ground, who isn't restrained, then stomp on his hand, forehead, and knee when he makes a tiny movement, and was innocent. They let him go, don't forget that part. I'm not sure how you got your interpretation of our "came a long way". Care to explain it?