Titanium_Frost
Grandmaster
Ironic since I was there at the Night Out at the Park and chatted with a few officers and everyone was pleasant. I thought things were on the upswing.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Evansville Cops At It Again
- Thread starter mrjarrell
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Ironic since I was there at the Night Out at the Park and chatted with a few officers and everyone was pleasant. I thought things were on the upswing.
So you're saying your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused with any facts?
Or that you'll give the guy a fair trial, and only THEN will you hang him?
Aren't you just perpetuating the very "us vs. them" mentality rgrimm decried upthread?
We've been told many times about how constant exposure to the seedier side of society could make Mother Teresa a bit jaded.
Blessings,
Bill
CathyInBlue
Grandmaster
What more could it be? Honestly? Even if the youth pastor/fire fighter flipped them the bird, there's no call for pulling him over to even talk to him, let alone prone him out and cuff him.
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
You are right, they probably thought he was white grandmother but they didnt have any grenades with them
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
So you're saying your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused with any facts?
Or that you'll give the guy a fair trial, and only THEN will you hang him?
Aren't you just perpetuating the very "us vs. them" mentality rgrimm decried upthread?
We've been told many times about how constant exposure to the seedier side of society could make Mother Teresa a bit jaded.
Blessings,
Bill
I just reread the article and do not see where Madison was charged with anything or a reason for being stopped. I am going to have to take the firemans side on this one.
I'm pretty sure we've heard all the relevant facts, Bill. The PD has had plenty of time to respond to the allegations yet they've chosen to remain silent on the issue. I see no reason to doubt the fireman/pastors story over that of the guys who detained him for no reasonable reason. If this perpetuates the so-called "us vs. them" paradigm, then so be it. We didn't start it in this case, they did.So you're saying your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused with any facts?
Or that you'll give the guy a fair trial, and only THEN will you hang him?
Aren't you just perpetuating the very "us vs. them" mentality rgrimm decried upthread?
We've been told many times about how constant exposure to the seedier side of society could make Mother Teresa a bit jaded.
Blessings,
Bill
LANShark42
Master
So the LEOs make a righteous stop and then get wrongly called out for it in the news. Do you really think they aren't going to break their necks getting their side of this out to the public???
Surprise, surprise, surprise....
Department investigation clears police officer of wrongdoing in bicycle stop » Evansville Courier & Press
Department investigation clears police officer of wrongdoing in bicycle stop » Evansville Courier & Press
Colour me surprised. When you set the fox to investigate his buddy the fox it usually turns out in favour of the fox. This is just business as usual.
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
So the police were found innocent by the police and we still do not know why the man was stopped?
Now I am confused, now they say all parties agree he ran a stop sign. Would have sworn and apparently been wrong that he had stopped because the cops were turning in front of him
Now I am confused, now they say all parties agree he ran a stop sign. Would have sworn and apparently been wrong that he had stopped because the cops were turning in front of him
Last edited:
Lordy, Lordy. I stand corrected.
LANShark42
Master
From EPD FB page:
The Internal Affairs unit has conducted an investigation at the request of Evansville Fire Department Firefighter George Madison. The complaint was filed after Mr. Madison was stopped by two Evansville Police Officers on August 13th.
In his formal complaint, Mr. Madison alleges that Officer Jasen Clegg was unprofessional in the way he spoke to him and that he was stopped only because the officers believed he had given them a rude arm/ hand gesture. In his complaint, Mr. Madison only requested that only officer Clegg’s actions be investigated.
The officers initiated a stop after Mr. Madison failed to stop at a posted “4-way” stop sign as required by law. The officers were southbound on Weinbach and had stopped at the “4-way stop” at Riverside. As the officers were making a left turn onto Riverside, they saw Mr. Madison approaching on a bicycle in the northbound lanes. They had no reason to believe he was not going to stop and continued through their turn as normal.
As the officers were about to clear the intersection, Mr. Madison entered the intersection without stopping and passed behind the police car. Mr. Madison has stated that he did, in fact, run the stop sign.
As he passed, he raised his arm. The officers saw that and would later question him as to why he did that. Again, the officers never claimed that they were given the finger, only that an aggressive gesture was made.
After Mr. Madison was clear of the intersection, the officers turned around and initiated a stop for the traffic violation on Weinbach about 1 ½ blocks north of Riverside. Mr. Madison has publically stated that he does not believe the stop was racially motivated.
The core of Mr. Madison’s complaint is that he was stopped only because of his arm/ hand gesture and on how and what Officer Clegg said during the initial contact. In his complaint, Mr. Madison expressed his opinion that Officer Clegg was “angry and aggressive.” Mr. Madison felt the things being said were not professional and felt “intimidated” by Officer Clegg.
While the exact words spoken by Officer Clegg are in dispute, there are some things that are not. Mr. Madison said Officer Clegg never used profanity, derogatory names, or racial slurs.
Based on his opinion that Officer Clegg was being unprofessional, Mr. Madison decided to make a phone call. When officer Clegg instructed him to put his phone away, Mr. Madison refused. Officer Clegg made several request to get Mr. Madison to put the phone away. According to Mr. Madison, he told the officers he was calling Chief Bolin and they would have to wait a minute.
Officers are not required to allow individuals to make phone calls while they are legally detaining them, regardless of who they are trying to call. Individuals do not have a guaranteed right to call other people while they are temporarily detained by a police officer.
Because Mr. Madison was not complying with his instruction to put the phone away after several requests to do so, officer Clegg attempted to prevent Mr. Madison from placing a phone call. Officer Clegg reached towards Mr. Madison’s hand to take the phone away from him.
According to both Mr. Madison and Officer Clegg, Mr. Madison physically reacted when Officer Clegg reached for the phone.
Mr. Madison says he flinched. Officer Clegg says Mr. Madison pulled his arm back in the manner of someone preparing to throw a punch. Officer Clegg stepped back away from Mr. Madison and un-holstered his “Taser.” Officer Clegg told Mr. Madison to get on the ground and, per EPD policy, gave a use of force warning.
Mr. Madison went to the ground and was handcuffed. In his formal complaint, Mr. Madison did not claim he was thrown to the ground or that any force was used.
After identifying and speaking with Mr. Madison about the original violation. They also talked about the intent of his arm/ hand gesture, and the reasons why we do not allow people to make phone calls while being detained. He was released and was not issued a citation.
While investigating the complaint, it became apparent that the complaint was based on Mr. Madison’s opinion of Officer Clegg’s communication skills, not his actions.
When looking into the communication between Officer Clegg and Mr. Madison, we had to look at what the rules and regulations prohibit. Officers are prohibited from using profanity, derogatory terms, and racial slurs. The investigation found that Officer Clegg did not violate policy in regards to those regulations.
What we looked at next was Mr. Madison’s claim that, while things Officer Clegg allegedly said were not in violation of department policy, were they done so in a tone and manner that could have caused Mr. Madison to feel the way he felt. For that, there is no easy answer. Each person responds differently when involved in something they feel is confrontational. Some will feel anger, some will feel fear, and some will not be impacted at all. What we do know is this. There are lessons to be learned from this incident.
This is a job of constant communication. It is also a job that revolves around conflict. We as police officers, are expected to be the calm during the chaos, the voice of reason in an unreasonable situation, and aware of how our tone, demeanor, and actions affect those we are in contact with.
Sometimes, despite our best efforts, people still feel as though we have not lived up to those expectations. While those situations are unfortunate, they are a reality.
In this incident, we have classified the complaint as “non-sustained”. That means there is nothing that has been presented to prove the officer was in violation of department policy. There is no evidence to support the claim that Mr. Madison was stopped because of his gesture. That claim is purely speculation and has been classified as unfounded.
That does not mean however, that we have not heard Mr. Madison’s message. That message is that we all need to be aware that when we leave an incident, everything we said and did was interpreted by the people we were dealing with. That interpretation is the foundation of their thoughts and beliefs about the Evansville Police Department and police officers in general.
The Internal Affairs unit has conducted an investigation at the request of Evansville Fire Department Firefighter George Madison. The complaint was filed after Mr. Madison was stopped by two Evansville Police Officers on August 13th.
In his formal complaint, Mr. Madison alleges that Officer Jasen Clegg was unprofessional in the way he spoke to him and that he was stopped only because the officers believed he had given them a rude arm/ hand gesture. In his complaint, Mr. Madison only requested that only officer Clegg’s actions be investigated.
The officers initiated a stop after Mr. Madison failed to stop at a posted “4-way” stop sign as required by law. The officers were southbound on Weinbach and had stopped at the “4-way stop” at Riverside. As the officers were making a left turn onto Riverside, they saw Mr. Madison approaching on a bicycle in the northbound lanes. They had no reason to believe he was not going to stop and continued through their turn as normal.
As the officers were about to clear the intersection, Mr. Madison entered the intersection without stopping and passed behind the police car. Mr. Madison has stated that he did, in fact, run the stop sign.
As he passed, he raised his arm. The officers saw that and would later question him as to why he did that. Again, the officers never claimed that they were given the finger, only that an aggressive gesture was made.
After Mr. Madison was clear of the intersection, the officers turned around and initiated a stop for the traffic violation on Weinbach about 1 ½ blocks north of Riverside. Mr. Madison has publically stated that he does not believe the stop was racially motivated.
The core of Mr. Madison’s complaint is that he was stopped only because of his arm/ hand gesture and on how and what Officer Clegg said during the initial contact. In his complaint, Mr. Madison expressed his opinion that Officer Clegg was “angry and aggressive.” Mr. Madison felt the things being said were not professional and felt “intimidated” by Officer Clegg.
While the exact words spoken by Officer Clegg are in dispute, there are some things that are not. Mr. Madison said Officer Clegg never used profanity, derogatory names, or racial slurs.
Based on his opinion that Officer Clegg was being unprofessional, Mr. Madison decided to make a phone call. When officer Clegg instructed him to put his phone away, Mr. Madison refused. Officer Clegg made several request to get Mr. Madison to put the phone away. According to Mr. Madison, he told the officers he was calling Chief Bolin and they would have to wait a minute.
Officers are not required to allow individuals to make phone calls while they are legally detaining them, regardless of who they are trying to call. Individuals do not have a guaranteed right to call other people while they are temporarily detained by a police officer.
Because Mr. Madison was not complying with his instruction to put the phone away after several requests to do so, officer Clegg attempted to prevent Mr. Madison from placing a phone call. Officer Clegg reached towards Mr. Madison’s hand to take the phone away from him.
According to both Mr. Madison and Officer Clegg, Mr. Madison physically reacted when Officer Clegg reached for the phone.
Mr. Madison says he flinched. Officer Clegg says Mr. Madison pulled his arm back in the manner of someone preparing to throw a punch. Officer Clegg stepped back away from Mr. Madison and un-holstered his “Taser.” Officer Clegg told Mr. Madison to get on the ground and, per EPD policy, gave a use of force warning.
Mr. Madison went to the ground and was handcuffed. In his formal complaint, Mr. Madison did not claim he was thrown to the ground or that any force was used.
After identifying and speaking with Mr. Madison about the original violation. They also talked about the intent of his arm/ hand gesture, and the reasons why we do not allow people to make phone calls while being detained. He was released and was not issued a citation.
While investigating the complaint, it became apparent that the complaint was based on Mr. Madison’s opinion of Officer Clegg’s communication skills, not his actions.
When looking into the communication between Officer Clegg and Mr. Madison, we had to look at what the rules and regulations prohibit. Officers are prohibited from using profanity, derogatory terms, and racial slurs. The investigation found that Officer Clegg did not violate policy in regards to those regulations.
What we looked at next was Mr. Madison’s claim that, while things Officer Clegg allegedly said were not in violation of department policy, were they done so in a tone and manner that could have caused Mr. Madison to feel the way he felt. For that, there is no easy answer. Each person responds differently when involved in something they feel is confrontational. Some will feel anger, some will feel fear, and some will not be impacted at all. What we do know is this. There are lessons to be learned from this incident.
This is a job of constant communication. It is also a job that revolves around conflict. We as police officers, are expected to be the calm during the chaos, the voice of reason in an unreasonable situation, and aware of how our tone, demeanor, and actions affect those we are in contact with.
Sometimes, despite our best efforts, people still feel as though we have not lived up to those expectations. While those situations are unfortunate, they are a reality.
In this incident, we have classified the complaint as “non-sustained”. That means there is nothing that has been presented to prove the officer was in violation of department policy. There is no evidence to support the claim that Mr. Madison was stopped because of his gesture. That claim is purely speculation and has been classified as unfounded.
That does not mean however, that we have not heard Mr. Madison’s message. That message is that we all need to be aware that when we leave an incident, everything we said and did was interpreted by the people we were dealing with. That interpretation is the foundation of their thoughts and beliefs about the Evansville Police Department and police officers in general.
avboiler11
Master
I'm sorry, I have a really hard time believing a police officer is going to initiate a stop for a "traffic violation" by a bicycle.
Just another victim of contempt of cop or at least they thought he was with his "agressive hand gesture", they couldn't let him get away with that. If it was anybody else reacting that way it would be road rage.
It happens often. Downtown, those that deliver Jimmie johns subs cause accidents all the time running lights and such. Bikes are subject to the same rules of the road as cars... and a bicyclist running a stop sign and getting mad at the cop for blocking his path as he ran the sign is likely to get stopped. I don't find this that shocking.
yep that's what it was.
Looks like one of the officers had a shirt camera. But didn't turn it on till after the subject was already cuffed.
Raw Video Of Incident Involving EPD Officer, Fireman - Tristatehomepage-Eyewitness News
Raw Video Of Incident Involving EPD Officer, Fireman - Tristatehomepage-Eyewitness News
It happens often. Downtown, those that deliver Jimmie johns subs cause accidents all the time running lights and such. Bikes are subject to the same rules of the road as cars... and a bicyclist running a stop sign and getting mad at the cop for blocking his path as he ran the sign is likely to get stopped. I don't find this that shocking.
yep that's what it was.
Yep, pretty sure it was.
