Colorado Cop Body Slam: Footage will be release after trial

[blackjack50]

I dont report people. I am pointing out your post was disrespectful and dishonest and that you are aware of it. That is a reflection of a persons character.

You mean the reflection where someone openly stated they won't answer questions in a manner so as to stonewall any forward discussion on a topic? Lol.

Care to explain why he wasn't allowed to detain the suspect use control holds and takedowns based on that use of force continuum?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[VanceMack]

No rules meaning level of threat assessment. Cops that can body slam a girl like that and the same response is acceptable for a guy with a knife... well. Those rules are so broad as to be meaningless.

You are still responding out of personal bias.

 

[Bodi]

You mean the reflection where someone openly stated they won't answer questions in a manner so as to stonewall any forward discussion on a topic? Lol.

Care to explain why he wasn't allowed to detain the suspect use control holds and takedowns based on that use of force continuum?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are bringing in false evidence... assumption... conjecture and disrespect.

You lost the debate long ago...

 

[Bodi]

You are still responding out of personal bias.

Not anymore than the cop's actions were appropriate...

 

[Maccabee]

Rights? Like innocent til proven guilty... due process... where in the Constitution are the police given the power to body slam little females because they are bot complying fast enough?

Innocent until proven guilty is for the courts decide. The cop's job is to find probable cause. As for the body slam, most of it was her tripping over her heels.

 

[Bodi]

Innocent until proven guilty is for the courts decide. The cop's job is to find probable cause. As for the body slam, most of it was her tripping over her heels.

Yep. Him wrist locking and flipping her over his leg/hip? Nothing...

She tripped in her high heels.... :lol:

 

[Maccabee]

Yep. Him wrist locking and flipping her over his leg/hip? Nothing...

She tripped in her high heels.... :lol:

Even if she didn't, she struck and choked the officer. Choking someone is cause enough for lethal force.

 

[blackjack50]

You are bringing in false evidence... assumption... conjecture and disrespect.

You lost the debate long ago...

Lmao! Now you are just making wild accusations. Every thing I have put in here can be backed up. You won't commit to letting me know if he was justified based on the use of force continuum. That tells me you know your position is weak. Care to try again? Lmao! This is hilarious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

Not anymore than the cop's actions were appropriate...

They were? Can you show that based on the use of force continuum?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

Even if she didn't, she struck and choked the officer. Choking someone is cause enough for lethal force.

I wouldn't go that far. Depends on the person doing the choking and the type of choke. If she put hands on my throat...I wouldn't consider that deadly force because I have grown men who have a hard time choking me with rear naked chokes and triangles in Jiu Jitsu. But I would be concerned about her doing damage to my vocal cords or trachea. I would certainly put her down and cuff her. Probably would have used a hip toss though because I can do those gently. Or an osoto gari

 

[Maccabee]

I wouldn't go that far. Depends on the person doing the choking and the type of choke. If she put hands on my throat...I wouldn't consider that deadly force because I have grown men who have a hard time choking me with rear naked chokes and triangles in Jiu Jitsu. But I would be concerned about her doing damage to my vocal cords or trachea. I would certainly put her down and cuff her. Probably would have used a hip toss though because I can do those gently. Or an osoto gari

Yeah, but on the street, you have no idea what the person choking you can do. I'm not saying he should've shot her, I'm saying that had he shot her, it's very likely that he would be justified.

 

[blackjack50]

Yeah, but on the street, you have no idea what the person choking you can do. I'm not saying he should've shot her, I'm saying that had he shot her, it's very likely that he would be justified.

I CAN tell you what they are capable of if they are 120 pound drunk female on high heels. They are capable of doing pretty significant cosmetic damage as well as minor trauma to me. Not life threatening though...not without a weapon. To be fair...I am pretty well trained in martial arts. And I know that I'm personally very hard to choke. I would be more worried about the type of damage should do by scratching and biting and all that their ****. She had almost 0 chance of doing any life threatening damage.

A quick takedown was plenty. She landed hard. Gravity is a bitch. Next time...try to handle your alcohol and not assault an officer. No sympathy here, assuming she did what she is accused of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bodi]

Even if she didn't, she struck and choked the officer. Choking someone is cause enough for lethal force.

You think she was "choking" a cop? :roll:

"Choking is a blockage of the upper airway by food or other objects, which prevents a person from breathing effectively. Choking can cause a simple coughing fit, but complete blockage of the airway may lead to death"

She literally was preventing him from breathing effectively?

I dont believe that for a mili-second. Grabbing a person by the throat is not choking a person.
The cop, thank god, was not a frightened trigger happy person.
But by all means.... shoot the female in the face.

 

[Bodi]

Lmao! Now you are just making wild accusations. Every thing I have put in here can be backed up. You won't commit to letting me know if he was justified based on the use of force continuum. That tells me you know your position is weak. Care to try again? Lmao! This is hilarious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok.

1. Back up your assumptions with facts... this should be good.
2. I proved your continuum is not a part of ANY police department.

Assumption + fake evidence = YOU LOST.

They were? Can you show that based on the use of force continuum?

Oh

.

My

.

God

 

[Maccabee]

You think she was "choking" a cop? :roll:

"Choking is a blockage of the upper airway by food or other objects, which prevents a person from breathing effectively. Choking can cause a simple coughing fit, but complete blockage of the airway may lead to death"

She literally was preventing him from breathing effectively?

I dont believe that for a mili-second. Grabbing a person by the throat is not choking a person.
The cop, thank god, was not a frightened trigger happy person.
But by all means.... shoot the female in the face.

Grabbing someone by the throat is however attempting to choke.

 

[Bodi]

Grabbing someone by the throat is however attempting to choke.

So the cop wasn't choked then. It is now an attemp to choke?

What if she was just trying to push? Is that a reasonable assumption?

Yes. It is.

Shoot her in the face anyway? Blow her out of the high heels with lethal force still?

 

[Maccabee]

So the cop wasn't choked then. It is now an attemp to choke?

How woukd the cop know at the time?
[/quote]
What if she was just trying to push? Is that a reasonable assumption?

Yes. It is.
[/quote]

It's also reasonable to think she was trying to choke him.
[/quote]
Shoot her in the face anyway? Blow her out of the high heels with lethal force still?[/QUOTE]

If he reasonably thought his life was in danger, yeah.

 

[blackjack50]

Ok.

1. Back up your assumptions with facts... this should be good.
2. I proved your continuum is not a part of ANY police department.

Assumption + fake evidence = YOU LOST.



Oh

.

My

.

God

https://www.fcgov.com/police/pdf/ll-taser_comm_talk.pdf?1439330513

Here is the use of force doctrine from the arresting department. Prove your ****ing case. Lmao!

You will find that she was actively resisting arrest. His use of force was justified. Slide 21 and on. Care you tell me how their use of force wasn't justified? According to state law he was. Your argument is bust. The only thing you can hope for at this point Is that they lied about what is on the body camera footage they will be releasing. Lmao!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bodi]

How woukd the cop know at the time?

What if she was just trying to push? Is that a reasonable assumption?

Yes. It is.

It's also reasonable to think she was trying to choke him.

Shoot her in the face anyway? Blow her out of the high heels with lethal force still?

If he reasonably thought his life was in danger, yeah.

:lol:.

 

[Bodi]

https://www.fcgov.com/police/pdf/ll-taser_comm_talk.pdf?1439330513

Here is the use of force doctrine from the arresting department. Prove your ****ing case. Lmao!

You will find that she was actively resisting arrest. His use of force was justified. Slide 21 and on. Care you tell me how their use of force wasn't justified? According to state law he was. Your argument is bust. The only thing you can hope for at this point Is that they lied about what is on the body camera footage they will be releasing. Lmao!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No way buddy. You lost that argument. Fact.

Now... if you want to try again that is fine but trying to pass off the **** argument you already made as valid is intellectually dishonest at best...

 

[blackjack50]

No way buddy. You lost that argument. Fact.

Now... if you want to try again that is fine but trying to pass off the **** argument you already made as valid is intellectually dishonest at best...

Lmao! I just gave you the doctrine right from the police department the officer was a part of. You are honestly denying that? Lmfao!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bodi]

Lmao! I just gave you the doctrine right from the police department the officer was a part of. You are honestly denying that? Lmfao!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't let people twist out of a fail like you gave. Your original evidence was bogus and now you are presenting new evidence as if it was there all along. Ill give you this last shot. Man up. Admit defeat. Start anew.

 

[blackjack50]

I don't let people twist out of a fail like you gave. Your original evidence was bogus and now you are presenting new evidence as if it was there all along. Ill give you this last shot. Man up. Admit defeat. Start anew.

Lmao!

Rules? It is not even from a police department. It is a DOC example of what can heppen from Kentucky.

He slammed her body to the ground = body slam.

You can try to be technical if you want. I know it "technically" wasnt but it is irrelevant. You want to get aeay from the fact that she was flung face first into concrete that is fine. End result is face first into the concrete where she is unconscious.

You realize that the DOC is the department of corrections. Law enforcement. And that these are all basically the same. They may differ...but only slightly. And NOW...I've presented you with the actual department and their policy. And you STILL cannot provide me any evidence as to him being wrong.

So your argument is that she was "flung" to the concrete. Lol! He did a classic takedown and she came off her heels. Yea. She landed on her face. But if she had assaulted an officer? Who gives a ****? He was within the law and her choice of shoes was not the best for getting into a grappling match with a cop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bodi]

Lmao!



You realize that the DOC is the department of corrections. Law enforcement. And that these are all basically the same. They may differ...but only slightly. And NOW...I've presented you with the actual department and their policy. And you STILL cannot provide me any evidence as to him being wrong.

So your argument is that she was "flung" to the concrete. Lol! He did a classic takedown and she came off her heels. Yea. She landed on her face. But if she had assaulted an officer? Who gives a ****? He was within the law and her choice of shoes was not the best for getting into a grappling match with a cop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have a serious problem with personal accountability....

 

[blackjack50]

You have a serious problem with personal accountability....

Still waiting for you to point out where I am wrong. I gave you law enforcement standards and now the standards from the department and the state laws they are based on. You STILL cannot win. This is a grade A meltdown. I love it.