• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Students, governor want U.Va. student arrest investigated

faithful_servant said:
That's what I can't believe either. I would bet money that there is a cell phone video of the whole incident that shows what really happened. So the question is" "Why isn't it getting released?" Is there some kid who's hoping to paid for it?? Is there someone who wants to see this get blown up and hates LE (as a lot of college age people do) and simply decided to delete it so that they can join the protest?? I'd like to get some answers to this.
Click to expand...

But if the stories are even close to accurate, the 'encounter' went from 0 to 100 very quickly. It takes a little while to recognize that something is getting out of hand, pull out your phone, hit camera, switch to video, and hit start recording. It's irrational and unfair to assume with no evidence someone is hiding a recording that exonerates the officers.

I can just as easily assume the reason the ABC cops don't wear body cameras is so they'll leave no video trace of acting like jack booted thugs.
 
JasperL said:
I don't know this, which is why I said it "appears to be" not showing the proper respect. He (apparently) wasn't drunk, wasn't using a fake ID, wasn't charged with using or threatening any force against the cops, but was bloodied and arrested and charged with BS crimes.
Click to expand...

You don't know the whole story, so your conclusions can be wrong. Why not wait until we know the whole story before jumping to a conclusion?? I can put together a lot of scenarios where what happened to him was entirely justified. If he was pulled off to the side because he wouldn't step away from the door and when the officers pulled him aside, he yanked his arm back, got loud and belligerent and started calling the officers "******* racists", the officers asked him to stop and he kept doing it, so the officers took him to the ground and in the ensuing scuffle, he scraped his head against a sharp edge of part of the officer's equipment. I've got the EXACT same amount of backing for scenario as you do for yours. The difference is that I don't think that mine is the absolute truth, while you think yours is.
 
JasperL said:
The problem for the police in this case is he actually WAS an honor student, and on the honor committee (which is a very high post for a student at UVa that reflects directly on his overall character), and otherwise a respected student leader with no history of anything like this.
Click to expand...

So what?? Sometimes nice people act like jerks.
 
faithful_servant said:
Pathetic. Find a pic that makes him look as sweet and innocent as possible and then juxtapose it against the image of him bleeding.
Click to expand...

You see this nice looking preppy man with his lovely fiancée, in his Ralph Lauren oxford shirt posed in front of the yacht club?

craigslist-likker-2.png


This is what he looked like a few months later:

alg_markoff-arraignment.jpg


That's him after he was arrested for killing a prostitute in Boston. You know him as The Craigslist Killer.

Of course, we all know those "before" shots prove everything.
 
JasperL said:
But if the stories are even close to accurate, the 'encounter' went from 0 to 100 very quickly. It takes a little while to recognize that something is getting out of hand, pull out your phone, hit camera, switch to video, and hit start recording. It's irrational and unfair to assume with no evidence someone is hiding a recording that exonerates the officers.

I can just as easily assume the reason the ABC cops don't wear body cameras is so they'll leave no video trace of acting like jack booted thugs.
Click to expand...

You don't spend much time around this age group, do you? I've seen kids whip out cell phone and have it recording in a couple of seconds. Most people in the age group that was there live for that moment when they can get a video like this. To think that no one there was able to get a video of the whole incident just sounds wrong to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but this just doesn't add up....
 
JasperL said:
But if the stories are even close to accurate, the 'encounter' went from 0 to 100 very quickly. It takes a little while to recognize that something is getting out of hand, pull out your phone, hit camera, switch to video, and hit start recording. It's irrational and unfair to assume with no evidence someone is hiding a recording that exonerates the officers.

I can just as easily assume the reason the ABC cops don't wear body cameras is so they'll leave no video trace of acting like jack booted thugs.
Click to expand...

Actually it takes about 5 seconds to do that. I just tried it.

By the way, it's also irrational and unfair to assume with no evidence that someone is hiding a recording that shows the officers delivering a beating on him.
 
faithful_servant said:
You don't know the whole story, so your conclusions can be wrong. Why not wait until we know the whole story before jumping to a conclusion?? I can put together a lot of scenarios where what happened to him was entirely justified. If he was pulled off to the side because he wouldn't step away from the door and when the officers pulled him aside, he yanked his arm back, got loud and belligerent and started calling the officers "******* racists", the officers asked him to stop and he kept doing it, so the officers took him to the ground and in the ensuing scuffle, he scraped his head against a sharp edge of part of the officer's equipment. I've got the EXACT same amount of backing for scenario as you do for yours. The difference is that I don't think that mine is the absolute truth, while you think yours is.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious why you think even in that scenario that taking him to the ground is appropriate use of force.
 
tres borrachos said:
Actually it takes about 5 seconds to do that. I just tried it.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what this proves. The working theory is now, in an era of cell phones, that if the entire encounter with police isn't released, someone is hiding a recording of it, because we can assume that some kid will ALWAYS record something like this?

By the way, it's also irrational and unfair to assume with no evidence that someone is hiding a recording that shows the officers delivering a beating on him.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is irrational, which is why I'm not making such an assumption.
 
What does one wish to remain unexposed by opposing an investigation. Obviously if there has been no wrong doing, it will be dropped (that's assuming a fair and independent investigation was conducted). And if wrong doing is found, then there's a problem that needs to be addressed and someone needs to be held accountable. What reasonable person would oppose that. Seems that an investigation is a win win.
 
faithful_servant said:
You don't spend much time around this age group, do you? I've seen kids whip out cell phone and have it recording in a couple of seconds. Most people in the age group that was there live for that moment when they can get a video like this. To think that no one there was able to get a video of the whole incident just sounds wrong to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but this just doesn't add up....
Click to expand...

But the kids have to assume that the encounter is going to end very badly before they throw him to the ground, and anticipate that, and start recording as soon as the cops or ABC agents approach him. The safe assumption is he'll be escorted out, told to go on about his night, but not in that bar. Who would EXPECT that he'd be thrown to the ground, bloodied, and arrested, and they'd NEED video evidence of that? He wasn't even doing anything wrong - he showed a valid ID and was denied entry. The reasonable expectation is that's the end of it.
 
JasperL said:
I'm not sure what this proves. The working theory is now, in an era of cell phones, that if the entire encounter with police isn't released, someone is hiding a recording of it, because we can assume that some kid will ALWAYS record something like this?



Yes, it is irrational, which is why I'm not making such an assumption.
Click to expand...

It doesn't prove anything except that the idea that there is no video of the actual police brutality because it takes time to capture it on video is ridiculous. For all we know the bouncer did that to him. Or his roommate. Or he tripped and fell and hit his head on a railing. But unlike other people, I haven't decided anything is true without proof.

But you are determined to say that the cops DID brutalize him because you don't need video or anything else to prove it. His word is good enough for you.
 
Gaius46 said:
First I think the kid was of age and had a valid ID. Even if he didn't underage kids sneaking into bars is as old as drinking age laws. BFD. There's no reason it should have escalated. There's no reason for the heavy hand of the law here.
Click to expand...





You guys make so many assumptions. WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE that we didn't see in the video?


Are drunk people never violent and/or belligerent?
 
tres borrachos said:
It doesn't prove anything except that the idea that there is no video of the actual police brutality because it takes time to capture it on video is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It's not ridiculous at all. Are you suggesting that almost all encounters with cops and teens are recorded from start to finish?

For all we know the bouncer did that to him. Or his roommate. Or he tripped and fell and hit his head on a railing. But unlike other people, I haven't decided anything is true without proof.
Click to expand...

But there is no witnesses alleging any of that. They do allege two officers took him to the ground - not the bouncer, not his roommate. But If you want to make up scenarios, it's also possible the officers used a billy club on his head - same number of witnesses allege that as it was the bouncer or a roommate, or he tripped and fell and hit his head.....

But you are determined to say that the cops DID brutalize him because you don't need video or anything else to prove it. His word is good enough for you.
Click to expand...

It's his word and the word of bystanders. Should I assume they're lying. The kid was on the honor committee. He knows lying can get him expelled - that's what the honor committee does as a matter of fact...
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You guys make so many assumptions. WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE that we didn't see in the video?

Are drunk people never violent and/or belligerent?
Click to expand...

Several articles have reported he passed a breathalyzer test. We're not even sure he was drunk.
 
JasperL said:
Classic - too bad we don't have an "authoritarian" lean option, because it's only an authoritarian who would cite NOT being tazed or shot :shock: as some kind of evidence of cops behaving appropriately.
Click to expand...
I see the context of my posts are flying way above your head. I'll certainly go "ducks and bunnies" in the future.

JasperL said:
The circumstances as to how he got that injury are what we're discussing - he showed a valid ID, and wasn't charged with using force against the police.
Click to expand...
Already addressed this.
JasperL said:
Somehow he ended up with 10 stitches.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's what happens when he's drunk and resists arrest.
JasperL said:
That he might not have been "beaten" are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
It's very relevant when such accusations are lies.
JasperL said:
Their use of force caused that injury.
Click to expand...
And Johnsons resistance to that force caused his injury.

JasperL said:
Oh, right, it's irrelevant unless the person has a record, then we can damn him based on his past, but when the record shows he's unlikely to be the kind of person to take on the police for no reason, we can disregard that and assume the cops acted entirely appropriately. Got it.
Click to expand...
That's very unlikely - the majority of your posts show you certainly don't "got it" or much of anything for that matter. Whether or not he had a prior record is irrelevant because it was not cited as a contributing factor for restraining him. Simple.

JasperL said:
The resisting police and belligerence are allegations.
Click to expand...
No it's fact, shown in the video. Watch the video.

JasperL said:
We don't have any belligerence on tape, unless that includes protesting what the kid believed was a BS arrest.
Click to expand...
Watch the video.

JasperL said:
It's not that you don't "hate the state in all cases."
Click to expand...
Well that's good!

JasperL said:
But in this case you're going out of your way to give the benefit of the doubt to the police state.
Click to expand...
I'm going by what facts are available... sorry that doesn't fit with your predisposed attitude towards the police and all.... I apologize as I'm not ruled by any one emotion or set of emotions and would rather discuss issues based on facts and not the baggage you seemed to have brought with you in this thread. You're baggage is also irrelevant.

JasperL said:
And, unbelievably for a conservative/libertarian, claiming that he wasn't SHOT means the police were properly trained!!! Seriously - that's insane.
Click to expand...
Yes because all libertarians HATE cops isn't that right? And we're all "anarchists" and should be cheering cops being investigated and busted.... you're childish posts of libertarianism are amusing I'll give you that.

JasperL said:
They didn't even charge him with using any force while "obstructing justice." They didn't charge him with using a fake ID. He did nothing wrong, and you're defending idiots who escalated what should have been a kid being turned away and going about the rest of his night into a bloody arrest. At a minimum, the bar you expect the police state to meet is so low as to be nearly non-existent. That's a very odd view for someone who otherwise distrusts the exercise of state power.
Click to expand...
Charges can be added after arrest at the DA's discretion. :coffeepap: Already addressed.
 
Montecresto said:
The evidence has been shown. The photo is evidence of excessive force.
Click to expand...

Only in bizzaro world - not in the United States court of law. I see you don't know much about the law. It's okay - an easy mistake to make.
 
tres borrachos said:
It doesn't prove anything except that the idea that there is no video of the actual police brutality because it takes time to capture it on video is ridiculous. For all we know the bouncer did that to him. Or his roommate. Or he tripped and fell and hit his head on a railing. But unlike other people, I haven't decided anything is true without proof.
.
Click to expand...


Actually the Virginia ABC has admitted injuries occurred during the arrest per an article from 2 days ago


The Cavalier Daily :: University student, Honor Committee member Martese Johnson arrested


Virginia ABC issued a statement on the incident Wednesday afternoon.

"The uniformed ABC Agents observed and approached the individual after he was refused entry to a licensed establishment," the statement read. "A determination was made by the agents to further detain the individual based on their observations and further questioning. In the course of an arrest being made, the arrested individual sustained injuries. The individual received treatment for his injuries at a local hospital and was released."
Click to expand...
 
JasperL said:
Several articles have reported he passed a breathalyzer test. We're not even sure he was drunk.
Click to expand...


Can't find that at all, the lawyer makes no mention of that during the statement.

UVA's Martese Johnson is known as leader in Chicago, not problem for police - Chicago Tribune


If you watch the lawyer make the statement, you'll start to notice something, all he talks about is how wonderful a kid he is.... Interesting.

Note also at 3:27 Martese Johnson, tries to read the statement and his lawyer cuts him off doing the statement himself. This is being very careful, smart actually.



Look, obviously Martese Johnson is an outstanding student, and an all around stand up guy. Johnson, could have done something stupid, we don't know. The cops very well may have used too much force, but we don't know this, if there is evidence other than the eyewitness and the media guessing, I can't condemn these cops. we simply don't know.
 
Ockham said:
I see the context of my posts are flying way above your head. I'll certainly go "ducks and bunnies" in the future.
Click to expand...

Not being shot or tazed in that scenario should be the lowest possible bar imaginable, IMO. We can agree to disagree that they deserve credit for NOT shooting him....

Already addressed this. Yeah it's what happens when he's drunk and resists arrest.
Click to expand...

The lawyer said he passed the breathalyzer and he wasn't charged with resisting arrest.

It's very relevant when such accusations are lies. And Johnsons resistance to that force caused his injury.
Click to expand...

Alleged obstruction of justice without force is what he was charged with.

That's very unlikely - the majority of your posts show you certainly don't "got it" or much of anything for that matter. Whether or not he had a prior record is irrelevant because it was not cited as a contributing factor for restraining him. Simple.
Click to expand...

The point is obvious - if someone is arrested by the cops and he DOES have a bad history, it's relevant - or people say it's relevant, and use that history of thuggery to justify use of force by police. If it matters when the history of the alleged perp is bad, it should matter when it's exemplary, as in this case.

No it's fact, shown in the video. Watch the video.
Click to expand...

I've seen the video, and I don't see a crime there. It's a crime to call the cops "f'ing racists?" What crime is that? He's only allowed to praise the police? If one objects to what one believes is police misconduct, that objection is a CRIME? That's not my idea of a free society....

Yes because all libertarians HATE cops isn't that right? And we're all "anarchists" and should be cheering cops being investigated and busted.... you're childish posts of libertarianism are amusing I'll give you that.
Click to expand...

Of course I didn't say that at all - nice strawman. I'm objecting to one very specific assertion - that because he wasn't SHOT or TAZED indicates cops behaved appropriately/were well trained.

Charges can be added after arrest at the DA's discretion. :coffeepap: Already addressed.
Click to expand...

Sure, and maybe he'll be charged with dealing drugs, rape, murder... As of now, the evidence we have at this point, they haven't made that allegation.
 
JasperL said:
It's not ridiculous at all. Are you suggesting that almost all encounters with cops and teens are recorded from start to finish?



But there is no witnesses alleging any of that. They do allege two officers took him to the ground - not the bouncer, not his roommate. But If you want to make up scenarios, it's also possible the officers used a billy club on his head - same number of witnesses allege that as it was the bouncer or a roommate, or he tripped and fell and hit his head.....



It's his word and the word of bystanders. Should I assume they're lying. The kid was on the honor committee. He knows lying can get him expelled - that's what the honor committee does as a matter of fact...
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that all encounters are recorded. I'm also not the one who is relying on the recording which happened after he was already injured as proof that the cops brutalized him.

Okay, they "allege". Great. Let's see it. And by the way, it's obvious why I said that. Nobody on here knows what happened. We weren't there. I don't know any more than you know. I'm not the one who is stating what happened there. You are.

Can you show me where he can get expelled from UVA for lying? Link or something?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Can't find that at all, the lawyer makes no mention of that during the statement.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what's true, but here's one report: Beating of UVA student prompts call to disempower alcohol officers | Reuters

Johnson apparently was showing the agents his Illinois ID when he was grabbed by the neck and pushed onto a hard brick surface in front of a pub he was attempting to enter, UVA's vice president for diversity, Marcus Martin, told CNN.

A breathalyzer test showed that Johnson was not intoxicated at the time of his arrest, Martin said. He said the student ended up with 10 stitches, lacerations on his forehead, multiple bruises and facial swelling.
Click to expand...

So it's a VP at UVa making that claim. He could be mistaken, I don't know - haven't seen any evidence either way.

If you watch the lawyer make the statement, you'll start to notice something, all he talks about is how wonderful a kid he is.... Interesting.

Note also at 3:27 Martese Johnson, tries to read the statement and his lawyer cuts him off doing the statement himself. This is being very careful, smart actually.

Look, obviously Martese Johnson is an outstanding student, and an all around stand up guy. Johnson, could have done something stupid, we don't know. The cops very well may have used too much force, but we don't know this, if there is evidence other than the eyewitness and the media guessing, I can't condemn these cops. we simply don't know.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what scenario indicates these cops handled this correctly. It's possible, I guess, but I can't imagine a classroom where the instructor says this is the right way to deal with a student in a college town turned away from a bar because he's underage and MIGHT have a fake ID.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Can't find that at all, the lawyer makes no mention of that during the statement.

UVA's Martese Johnson is known as leader in Chicago, not problem for police - Chicago Tribune


If you watch the lawyer make the statement, you'll start to notice something, all he talks about is how wonderful a kid he is.... Interesting.

Note also at 3:27 Martese Johnson, tries to read the statement and his lawyer cuts him off doing the statement himself. This is being very careful, smart actually.



Look, obviously Martese Johnson is an outstanding student, and an all around stand up guy. Johnson, could have done something stupid, we don't know. The cops very well may have used too much force, but we don't know this, if there is evidence other than the eyewitness and the media guessing, I can't condemn these cops. we simply don't know.
Click to expand...

The rest of your post was interesting, but the bolded part at the end sums it up.

Back to the attorney. I saw the presser they gave and noticed that the attorney really didn't seem to want him to talk, and you're right - that's very smart.
 
JasperL said:
Not being shot or tazed in that scenario should be the lowest possible bar imaginable, IMO. We can agree to disagree that they deserve credit for NOT shooting him....
The lawyer said he passed the breathalyzer and he wasn't charged with resisting arrest.
Click to expand...
Who's lawyer - HIS lawyer? Of course he would say that.... is there a different source for that like the police who would use the readings and add it to the arrest record?

JasperL said:
Alleged obstruction of justice without force is what he was charged with.
Click to expand...
Not quite accurate, there were two counts not one. My own source in the OP cites:

"Johnson was charged on two counts: obstruction of justice without force, and public swearing or intoxication, Charlottesville General District Court records show."

JasperL said:
The point is obvious - if someone is arrested by the cops and he DOES have a bad history, it's relevant
Click to expand...
That is only given evidence after the fact. At the initial stop and arrest, they had no knowledge of his prior or if he had any at all. Can you provide facts and a source that shows the police ran a background on him before they arrested him and restrained him?

JasperL said:
I've seen the video, and I don't see a crime there. It's a crime to call the cops "f'ing racists?" What crime is that? He's only allowed to praise the police? If one objects to what one believes is police misconduct, that objection is a CRIME? That's not my idea of a free society....
Click to expand...
The video doesn't show the crime only the restraint, beligerence and resistance. If it had the crime on it we wouldn't be having this discussion and this would probably be edited for a "COPS" special on television.

JasperL said:
Of course I didn't say that at all - nice strawman. I'm objecting to one very specific assertion - that because he wasn't SHOT or TAZED indicates cops behaved appropriately/were well trained.
Click to expand...
No it's not a strawman, you mentioned your surprise more than once.... and here they are:

JasperL said:
And, unbelievably for a conservative/libertarian, claiming that he wasn't SHOT means the police were properly trained!!!
Click to expand...

JasperL said:
It never ceases to amaze me how the people who claim to distrust the 'state' and the exercise of state power rush to the defense of the police 'state.'
Click to expand...

Perhaps if you didn't call into question my supposed "lean" and then accuse me of being authoritarian, I wouldn't have mentioned it.

JasperL said:
Sure, and maybe he'll be charged with dealing drugs, rape, murder... As of now, the evidence we have at this point, they haven't made that allegation.
Click to expand...
I would have went with resisting arrest, causing a public nuisance, drunk and disorderly... something along those lines but hey - whatever floats your boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom