Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 49

Thread: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

  1. #31
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    In San Diego it is.

    They shot a homeless guy for raising a "stick" maybe three quarters of an inch at the base a dwindling to maybe a quarter inch in two feet at a police dog.

    Shot the dog too in the process.

    Maybe its better where you are.
    Somehow I get the impression that you aren't telling the full story on that incident, but it's ok. People will find every reason they can to hate the police, even if it involves manipulating the truth. It's really no wonder why cops are constantly on edge and pissed off all the time.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  2. #32
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    In San Diego it is.

    They shot a homeless guy for raising a "stick" maybe three quarters of an inch at the base a dwindling to maybe a quarter inch in two feet at a police dog.

    Shot the dog too in the process.

    Maybe its better where you are.
    Found an article of the incident you're referencing here.

    If you're holding something in your hands, and you run towards police, bad things are going to happen. Especially when that person has a history of violence, and that something is a three foot branch (which he used to assault people at a McDonald's restaurant).

    The position of the K-9 unit suggests that killing the guy wasn't the intention, they surrounded him to make sure he couldn't evade arrest.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  3. #33
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord of Planar View Post
    Time for disbarment proceeding... maybe?
    Obviously 1.) an appeal and 2.) a complaint to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct seeking removal from the bench.

  4. #34
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    The judge wouldn't watch the video. Isn't that just special? It clearly shows the officer hit him for no reason whatsoever. The kid didn't lunge at him. No way.

    As to the union fighting to get his job back? They'll probably win, and he'll have had a nice soon-to-be vacation on the taxpayers.

    This points out the impunity judges have on the bench. Whatever the process is for judicial review should be initiated here. The judge should be held accountable. And responsible if this guy gets back on the force (which he will) and hurts someone else. She's incompetent.

    But since I always say, "Follow the money," I'd say she's in bed with the union.

    I just wish the kid would sue the former LEO civilly. He'd win.
    Sue in federal court as a civil rights violation to avoid local politics in the court.

  5. #35
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    No, I'm not kidding. It's right there in black and white, he did something stupid and got punished for it. At the end of the day, all he did was punch someone in the face. I've done the same, and all I got was a night in jail. Same for a lot of people and it's "lol, he mad". A cop does it and you people break out the pitchforks and torches looking for a new witch to burn.
    If you did that to a cop you wouldn't just "get a night in jail." Nor do you get to handcuff someone before slugging him.

    This is an officer who absolutely should be fired and should have been prosecuted. He isn't just a bully, but also a bully coward waiting until the teen was handcuffed and shirt pulled down over his arms while the other officer was holding him.

    By the comments the officers made, there appears no reason to have arrested the kid in the first place. They were convinced they'd find drugs and by what was said that is the reason he was handcuffed. I have little doubt but for the video that officer also would have charged the kid with resisting arrest and with assaulting him.

  6. #36
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,460
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    Found an article of the incident you're referencing here.

    If you're holding something in your hands, and you run towards police, bad things are going to happen. Especially when that person has a history of violence, and that something is a three foot branch (which he used to assault people at a McDonald's restaurant).

    The position of the K-9 unit suggests that killing the guy wasn't the intention, they surrounded him to make sure he couldn't evade arrest.
    We were in the area working and went to lunch on the street where it happened. Just after. Talked to people that were there.

    They showed the "branch" on local tv. Think "switch". Palm wood.

    SD has had issues with police brutality for as long as I can remember. I have seen truly appaling things with my own eyes. Seen cops lie in court. Go door to door in a latino neighborhood warning people to keep quiet or face the consequences.

    I still don't hate cops. Wanted to be one once.

    But sweeping misbehavior under the rug is extremely counterproductive.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  7. #37
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,700

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckBerry View Post
    St. Louis police officer found not guilty of hitting handcuffed teen : News

    As I suspected, the reality is a bit more complex than the slanted OP headline. The judge didn't "refuse" to watch the video, it wasn't allowed in to evidence. Read the link to find out why.

    Also, the teen was twice arrested by cops in possession of drugs and guns. In the videotaped incident in question the teen had turned a gun on the officers. But of course you don't see that part.
    I understand the ruling on evidence and will cut the judge some slack but what the kid did to get into that situation is immaterial to the assault. Once the suspect is in custody the cops have a responsibility to protect him as long as he doesn't take any more hostile actions. The cop in the video pretty obviously chose to forgo that part of his job for the opportunity to administer a little "off the record justice".

  8. #38
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckBerry View Post
    St. Louis police officer found not guilty of hitting handcuffed teen : News

    As I suspected, the reality is a bit more complex than the slanted OP headline. The judge didn't "refuse" to watch the video, it wasn't allowed in to evidence. Read the link to find out why.

    Also, the teen was twice arrested by cops in possession of drugs and guns. In the videotaped incident in question the teen had turned a gun on the officers. But of course you don't see that part.
    1. The teens two prior arrests are irrelevant because neither charge seems to have resulted in a convinction. In fact, the term used by the PBA rep. was "twice skated" on those charges, meaning he was released and never convicted.

    2. No, the defense was going to offer self-defense based apparently on the officers claim at the time of arrest the teen turned a gun on them. It's not in any video or that would have been stated too.

    3. It wasn't allowed into evidence cuz Folwer, the one office who did testify stated "that wasn't how I recollected events." WOW! Really? Not admit you let your partner strike a handcuffed suspect? That's a stretch. Video out! LOL The prosecution couldn't locate the teen to validate it either. Should I testify: "Hmm, I've been arrested twice before by these guys, beaten at least once, they denied it and have buddies still on the force. Oh yeah, let me go in, testify, and make myself a permanent target." LOL

    The video is clear, at the time of the battery the teen was standing completely still and handcuffed behind his back. The Blow was simple brutality. No excuse.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The darkside of the moon
    Last Seen
    05-24-14 @ 05:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,905
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    So what was wrong with the other officer present testifying? This case makes no sense at all.
    Here is the actual problem which the papers did not present. The camera is an object and cannot charge assault. Assault needs the charge of a victim or a witness. The assaulting officer will not charge himself, and his partner said his interpretation of the events differed from what was on the camera. That leaves the only witness as the victim. This puts the victim in a precarious place. If he starts speaking and revokes his right to silence he endangers his own criminal case by perhaps allowing questions as to why he was in cuffs which he may have to answer after making a claim. So it seems the victim tried to avoid the case and eventually just took the fifth which means that there is no witness or victim left to file the charges. Since the camera cannot be cross examined as is the right of the defendant there can be no charges made by it.

    You are right the case seems to be riddled with crappy legal technicalities. The officer may very well know the spot he would be putting the victim in to potentially revoke his right to self incrimination in other charges by speaking as a victim in the assault trial. I know it seems the judge should look at it, but if no one can press charges, or the officer's self defence claim would stand because there would be no one to refute his claims, then they have to drop it. I am not defending the position, just trying to explain what happened.

    As for the rehiring that may be a lot more problematic for the officer. He may not be legally guilty of assault, but the state has evidence of very improper actions by him which they could introduce into a legal case for his job back. They have cause to fire him and evidence to present as that cause even without the witness to back it up. Civil trials tend to have much lower standards for admittance of evidence and claims of guilt. Since the state is claiming the video as their reason for termination they should be allowed to enter that in any employment challenge. That is if they are serious about getting rid of the cop which all this publicity will probably make them, but it is not guaranteed. needless to say if the guy remains terminated his options for future hiring become much slimmer given a web search would completely destroy him in a background check.

    yes, it is not the best situation, but I am pretty sure the cop knew what was going on and that he could hit the suspect without too much danger to himself due to the conflict of the charges against the victim. He did wait until he was probably in a bay, out of view of most officers, and the only witness against him would have been his partner since the victim's lawyer would probably tell him to plead the fifth. The justice system is skewed to be in favor of the defendant, too bad that seems to be reliable only for law enforcement.

  10. #40
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Judge refuses to watch police brutality video, lets cop off

    Quote Originally Posted by tererun View Post
    Here is the actual problem which the papers did not present. The camera is an object and cannot charge assault. Assault needs the charge of a victim or a witness. The assaulting officer will not charge himself, and his partner said his interpretation of the events differed from what was on the camera. That leaves the only witness as the victim. This puts the victim in a precarious place. If he starts speaking and revokes his right to silence he endangers his own criminal case by perhaps allowing questions as to why he was in cuffs which he may have to answer after making a claim. So it seems the victim tried to avoid the case and eventually just took the fifth which means that there is no witness or victim left to file the charges. Since the camera cannot be cross examined as is the right of the defendant there can be no charges made by it.

    You are right the case seems to be riddled with crappy legal technicalities. The officer may very well know the spot he would be putting the victim in to potentially revoke his right to self incrimination in other charges by speaking as a victim in the assault trial. I know it seems the judge should look at it, but if no one can press charges, or the officer's self defence claim would stand because there would be no one to refute his claims, then they have to drop it. I am not defending the position, just trying to explain what happened.

    As for the rehiring that may be a lot more problematic for the officer. He may not be legally guilty of assault, but the state has evidence of very improper actions by him which they could introduce into a legal case for his job back. They have cause to fire him and evidence to present as that cause even without the witness to back it up. Civil trials tend to have much lower standards for admittance of evidence and claims of guilt. Since the state is claiming the video as their reason for termination they should be allowed to enter that in any employment challenge. That is if they are serious about getting rid of the cop which all this publicity will probably make them, but it is not guaranteed. needless to say if the guy remains terminated his options for future hiring become much slimmer given a web search would completely destroy him in a background check.

    yes, it is not the best situation, but I am pretty sure the cop knew what was going on and that he could hit the suspect without too much danger to himself due to the conflict of the charges against the victim. He did wait until he was probably in a bay, out of view of most officers, and the only witness against him would have been his partner since the victim's lawyer would probably tell him to plead the fifth. The justice system is skewed to be in favor of the defendant, too bad that seems to be reliable only for law enforcement.
    Terrific explanation. Makes perfect sense.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •