Colorado Police Body Slam Woman

[Gaius46]

No. Proper procedure is there for officer and suspect safety. Both legally and physically and emotionally. Period. There is no gray area. Gray areas cause people to die:



You can play pretend policeman behind the computer screen. You can be a soldier. A boxer. Football hero. Doesn't matter. Law enforcement is different than all of those. Even a grappler (me). The consequences of going "off playbook" are real and proven. For everyone. And it is especially dangerous in that Leo's can become too secure like in that video and then they or someone else dies.



Irrelevant. Policies and procedures. My method of takedown would be considerably more violent. Why? Training. And if you don't have grapple training and you don't know how to land? You land on your face.



It doesn't. People who get into altercations get bruises. Incidental.



Shoulda coulda woulda. The fact is that she did come away uninjured. And it was a justified use of force.



I seriously doubt it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seen the video before. What about all the people that don't represent a threat that are injured or killed because of procedure? Or they don't count? How many times has proper procedure caused people to die who should not have died? That argument cuts both ways. The cop wants to go home at the end of the day and that is the only thing that matters?

I referenced it in another thread and I wish I could find the article but a former cop and former combat vet, and current trainer in police use of force pins the blame for incidents like this squarely on cops who are basically too scared to think rationally about what they're doing. He actually advocates for more experienced combat vets taking police jobs specifically because they are trained not to overreact. I have to admit I agree with him.

 

[Gaius46]

Fingers, teeth, knees...head. Need we go on? She didn't get shot. She got put down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please. How much damage could she realistically do?

 

[Gaius46]

I'm just wondering what you want the cop to do. walk away? They already tried reasoning (no doubt, but if evidence otherwise OK), in most cases they have exhausted all options. The then try to restrain them, and if they fight the cop physically.... the cop should tangle with them for a while, some tug of war? What? Again, the cops should never HAVE to use physical violence AT ALL. This was the perps CHOICE. A choice Gaius, where is your understanding that she physically tangled with a cop while the cop was trying to perform their legal duty? (assuming all was proper)?

I don't know what happened before the video so I can't answer as to whether the cop should have just dropped it with her or whether she was interfering to the point where she deserved to be arrested. My point here is just that it's clear in the video that she isn't a threat to him at the point where he drops her. Maybe she hit him before the camera started rolling but if she did he should have dealt with it then and not afterward. Two large men. One small women. They should have been able to handle her a lot easier.

 

[Mach]

Two large men. One small women. They should have been able to handle her a lot easier.

Why would both men get tied up physically with her, and not one, with the other keeping an eye out, hand free, there as backup, etc.? Your advice to both get involved may be terrible advice based on their research, do you know? I don't, but LEO doesn't have to bend over backwards to pamper someone who decides, rationally, to fight them. You're second guessing their conduct based on feelings. I just don't think that's appropriate, especially given that she freely chose to physically resist.

 

[blackjack50]

Seen the video before. What about all the people that don't represent a threat that are injured or killed because of procedure? Or they don't count?

No. They don't. That is a risk you take by being non compliant. Sure. There are a few rare incidents where an accident occurs. Man bites dog. How many times does that happen? Can you put a number on it? Compliance keeps you from injury. Let the lawyers argue.

[QUITE]How many times has proper procedure caused people to die who should not have died? That argument cuts both ways. The cop wants to go home at the end of the day and that is the only thing that matters?[/QUOTE]

Can you please give me an incident of proper procedure causing death or injury of an innocent party? I don't care if the party is guilty. That is a risk that you take in breaking the law (with minor exceptions like choke holds). If you cannot produce these issues as a significant percent of incidence...then it is nothing more than a man bites dog concern.

I referenced it in another thread and I wish I could find the article but a former cop and former combat vet, and current trainer in police use of force pins the blame for incidents like this squarely on cops who are basically too scared to think rationally about what they're doing. He actually advocates for more experienced combat vets taking police jobs specifically because they are trained not to overreact. I have to admit I agree with him.

Of course a combat veteran would advocate for more of his combat brethren to get jobs. They will also advocate for more weapons and argue less over lethal force. I don't think we need more military tactics being taught and condoned in law enforcement. We need more specialization of law enforcement training. A better recognition of what issues face the community and generally a wholistic approach.

And I'm not knocking combat veterans. But they aren't super man or batman. They are simply individuals who have demonstrated that they are trainable, and take orders well. The military is good job experience. Not an indicator of skill in another field that it does not directly translate too.

The problem with law enforcement does not rest squarely on law enforcement. That is ignorance of the problem. We live in an entitled, self centered, drug addicted, and mentally unfit society where people don't believe their should be consequences for their actions.

Do you really think that police are the ONLY ones to blame for those problems? Police having issues is merely a symptom of society dysfunction.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[VanceMack]

So let's try this again. She was not a threat to the officer during the course of the video. She did not hit the officer in the video. We have only the word of the department - which must at this time be taken with a grain of salt - that she hit him. The only intent of mine that you can take from that is that I tend not to believe involved parties without corroboration.

You have no proof she was belligerent other than the fact that the police said was. You choose to believe them on faith. I do not. You further say she was drunk when not even the police say that. I suggest then that your intent is to smear the woman and believe the police regardless of any and all information that may arise to the contrary.

I don't want the cop to be "all sunshine and lollipops" but if your intent in making that statement is to excuse what you may be thinking is an emotional response on his part based on her behavior then I'd suggest that anyone who cannot deal with an unarmed person without getting emotional has no place being a cop.

What world do you live in? Do you think you can identify 'threat' based on a 9 second video clip? Geeezus that embarrassing.

 

[Gaius46]

No. They don't. That is a risk you take by being non compliant. Sure. There are a few rare incidents where an accident occurs. Man bites dog. How many times does that happen? Can you put a number on it? Compliance keeps you from injury. Let the lawyers argue.

How many times has proper procedure caused people to die who should not have died? That argument cuts both ways. The cop wants to go home at the end of the day and that is the only thing that matters?

Can you please give me an incident of proper procedure causing death or injury of an innocent party? I don't care if the party is guilty. That is a risk that you take in breaking the law (with minor exceptions like choke holds). If you cannot produce these issues as a significant percent of incidence...then it is nothing more than a man bites dog concern.




Of course a combat veteran would advocate for more of his combat brethren to get jobs. They will also advocate for more weapons and argue less over lethal force. I don't think we need more military tactics being taught and condoned in law enforcement. We need more specialization of law enforcement training. A better recognition of what issues face the community and generally a wholistic approach.

And I'm not knocking combat veterans. But they aren't super man or batman. They are simply individuals who have demonstrated that they are trainable, and take orders well. The military is good job experience. Not an indicator of skill in another field that it does not directly translate too.

The problem with law enforcement does not rest squarely on law enforcement. That is ignorance of the problem. We live in an entitled, self centered, drug addicted, and mentally unfit society where people don't believe their should be consequences for their actions.

Do you really think that police are the ONLY ones to blame for those problems? Police having issues is merely a symptom of society dysfunction.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Come on you're really going to suggest that innocent people don't get hurt when cops do things completely by the book?

One obvious and recent example is the "Baby Bou Bou" incident in Georgia where police serving a no-knock warrant tossed a flash bang grenade into the house. It landed in a crib and burned the kid. One cop was indicted - for lying to the judge who issued the warrant. She was acquitted. The cops who executed the warrant weren't indicted or faced any administrative punishment that I'm aware of so presumably the use of the grenade was completely within policy. Just as clearly the use of the grenade is meant to disorient people so they don't shoot back at the cops. It's meant to keep the cops safe. Yet is can, and did, and will hurt innocent people. So you are trading the safety of innocents for the safety of officers.

And btw - nothing was found in the house. They guy they were looking for apparently was a relative of the occupants but didn't actually live there.


As to the combat vet cop is point is that a lot of these incidents happen because cops are scared. They have no experience with dealing with stressful situations and overreact. His wanting more combat vets on the job has nothing to do with military weapons - he's actually emphatically against their use. It has everything to do with the idea that combat vets have enough experience to not overreact to every little potential threat that crops up and are far less likely to resort to force as a first resort.

 

[Gaius46]

What world do you live in? Do you think you can identify 'threat' based on a 9 second video clip? Geeezus that embarrassing.

You see a gun? A knife? A big scary looking guy? A ninja chick?

I see a scared kid.

Could she have posed a real threat to him. Sure. It's always possible. Just not at all likely.

 

[Absentglare]

What world do you live in? Do you think you can identify 'threat' based on a 9 second video clip? Geeezus that embarrassing.

Wait what?

You think it takes more than 9 seconds to understand what you're looking at: an unarmed woman probably under 120lbs soaking wet... ???

 

[jaeger19]

End of the video - once she's on the ground - a second officer comes over to help cuff her.

So he wasn't present then when the altercation happened.

 

[Gaius46]

So he wasn't present then when the altercation happened.

Considering that he got there within a second of her hitting the ground I'd say he was there all along.

 

[VanceMack]

You see a gun? A knife? A big scary looking guy? A ninja chick?

I see a scared kid.

Could she have posed a real threat to him. Sure. It's always possible. Just not at all likely.

No...and thats why he didnt shoot her. He detained her and cuffed her. Thats what you do to people that attack you while you are arresting a drunk and belligerent suspect.

 

[Gaius46]

No...and thats why he didnt shoot her. He detained her and cuffed her. Thats what you do to people that attack you while you are arresting a drunk and belligerent suspect.

You know you damage your credibility when you keep stating falsehoods. No one - not even the police - has stated that she was drunk.

And so then you can determine in 9 seconds the level of threat someone represents. And you'd agree that a skinny 22 year old college girl isn't the scariest thing to walk the planet.

 

[VanceMack]

You know you damage your credibility when you keep stating falsehoods. No one - not even the police - has stated that she was drunk.

And so then you can determine in 9 seconds the level of threat someone represents. And you'd agree that a skinny 22 year old college girl isn't the scariest thing to walk the planet.

I know what the news report indicated. I know the news report indicated that the police officer was arresting her boyfriend who was drunk and belligerent and while doing so she attacked the police officer. And I know people like you are foolish enough to believe you can look at a 9 second video clip and think...hah...cops...got him!

 

[nota bene]

I read this earlier today at the Daily Mail:

'All the bones were shattered in my face. I was just so humiliated because people were watching me.

'I can’t go to school without feeling like someone is going to approach me and hurt me, I'm getting death threats online,' she said through tears during a Good Morning America interview.

Body slammed sorority girl speaks out for the first time | Daily Mail Online

All the bones in her face were shattered?!

 

[Bodi]

Well when you have no facts to support your position, you clearly run to personal insults. In the mean time, I am not the one defending the aggressor by pretending she was the victim.

Have a blessed life as I will not be hearing from you again.

Wait. :lol:

You accuse me of sexism and then cowardly turn around and say I am casting insults?

Pure comedy... :lol:

 

[Bodi]

This wasn't a granny in a wheel chair. Because it's a thin girl, you think that means they should take their time and they don't pose a threat when they choose to physically resist police? Really Man? I don't think that cop would try the 300lb man by themselves, they'd call for backup, and maybe use tasers, etc. This is probably about as low on the "physical take-down" scale as it gets... So no. So in this case, what's wrong with a rapid take-down to avoid unnecessary risk? Again, none of us would ever have this issue, we'd comply, and if they were in the wrong (the cop), we'd see if legal action were possible. But fighting a cop? Come on.

You call what she was doing... "fighting"?

:lol:

You live in a really special world.

 

[blackjack50]

Come on you're really going to suggest that innocent people don't get hurt when cops do things completely by the book?

One obvious and recent example is the "Baby Bou Bou" incident in Georgia where police serving a no-knock warrant tossed a flash bang grenade into the house. It landed in a crib and burned the kid. One cop was indicted - for lying to the judge who issued the warrant. She was acquitted. The cops who executed the warrant weren't indicted or faced any administrative punishment that I'm aware of so presumably the use of the grenade was completely within policy. Just as clearly the use of the grenade is meant to disorient people so they don't shoot back at the cops. It's meant to keep the cops safe. Yet is can, and did, and will hurt innocent people. So you are trading the safety of innocents for the safety of officers.

And btw - nothing was found in the house. They guy they were looking for apparently was a relative of the occupants but didn't actually live there.


As to the combat vet cop is point is that a lot of these incidents happen because cops are scared. They have no experience with dealing with stressful situations and overreact. His wanting more combat vets on the job has nothing to do with military weapons - he's actually emphatically against their use. It has everything to do with the idea that combat vets have enough experience to not overreact to every little potential threat that crops up and are far less likely to resort to force as a first resort.

You still aren't giving me numbers here. So it is irrelevant. You also had to escalate your "proper procedure kills innocent people" thing all the way up the use of force level to a no knock warrant on what is likely a violent offender. Nice. What you didn't provide me was a proper procedure when it comes to arrest and handcuffing of a disorderly suspect (non compliant).

As for what kind of damage she could do?

She may not have done much as far as punching, but her non compliant ass could have done plenty. If She had rings on? Hitting in the eyes? Essentially there is plenty. And all you are doing here is making excuses because you...for some unknown reason...think it is somehow acceptable for her to strike an officer and otherwise be a public nuisance.

As for combat vets, irrelevant. Being lax and not remaining cautious is how you end up like the man in the above video. Procedure and caution would have saved his life.

But hey. Why don't you keep condemning officers for doing the right thing. Not like we ALREADY are having a job crisis in law enforcement. I can't wait to hear what excuses you have in 20 years when there are like 5 cops for an entire state (exaggeration).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

You call what she was doing... "fighting"?

:lol:

You live in a really special world.

She struck an officer.

She resisted arrest.

She wasn't fighting. She was losing. Which is good. She deserved it. **** her for being a disorderly sorostitute. Hopefully she learned her lesson.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bodi]

She struck an officer.

She resisted arrest.

She wasn't fighting. She was losing. Which is good. She deserved it. **** her for being a disorderly sorostitute. Hopefully she learned her lesson.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see you can't defend your own argument so you pot shot at others...

Feeble...

 

[blackjack50]

It felt like "all my bones were shattering in my face ... and I was so humiliated and everyone was watching me," Surat told ABC News in an interview that aired on Thursday.

She suffered several bruises and a concussion, but the Fort Collins Police Department alleges she hit an officer multiple times and grabbed a cop by the throat.

"I found out my boyfriend got kicked out of the bar and so I went outside just to see what happened — and then the altercation happened and one thing led to another and it just escalated," she told ABC News.

Colo. woman slammed to ground by police officers asks for apology - NY Daily News

Interesting. And the police intend to release the video after the incident. It seems like the more information on the incident we get...the more we learn that she wasn't a sweet and innocent little college girl...but just a mean and stupid emotional child.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

At no point was there indication she was holding a gun (that we've seen). Let's not make up things to try to prove a point.

I wasn't even saying the cop should get into trouble, I'm not sure why you're trying to argue here or why inventing imaginary scenarios is necessary. He likely could have controlled her in other ways that didn't result in throwing her face-first into the ground. But if she was fighting with the cops, then the use of force is expected. No one is worse for wear, but also I would say that charging her with 3rd degree assault is likely a bit overkill. Drunk and disorderly would perhaps be a bit more appropriate.

It depends on what she did leading up to the incident. According to the news she was really out of control. Not really a surprise. And her boyfriend was getting tossed out of the bar too. That should be an indication. Not for the court...but just to the layman about what was going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

I read this earlier today at the Daily Mail:

'All the bones were shattered in my face. I was just so humiliated because people were watching me.

'I can’t go to school without feeling like someone is going to approach me and hurt me, I'm getting death threats online,' she said through tears during a Good Morning America interview.

Body slammed sorority girl speaks out for the first time | Daily Mail Online

All the bones in her face were shattered?!

No. They weren't. She is being dramatic and playing the sympathy card for the nitwits. She also expects an apology. Even though there is body camera footage the police intend to release. Footage that they were pretty clear on stating: gives a better picture. She was alleged to have struck an officer multiple times, grabbed him by the throat, and shoulder checked some people on the way out. Her boyfriend had gotten tossed out of the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

I see you can't defend your own argument so you pot shot at others...

Feeble...

Which argument? There is body camera footage. It will be released. And she was interfering with an incident in which her boyfriend was involved. After he got kicked out of the club mind you.

She struck an officer.

She resisted detainment after doing so.

She got put down.

End of story. This precious snowflake should probably act more responsibly next time? Would you have been in her situation? Ask yourself: do you honestly believe a reasonable person would have ended up in that situation? Or do you want to keep making excuses on why she doesn't have to follow basic civility rules as well as the laws our society has in place?

Or maybe you think she is special because she is a girl? Thus she deserves special treatment? Right?

Again. **** her. Any rational adult would not have been in this situation. This spoiled child ended up here because she had it coming. No question. And the FULL video is going to prove that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackjack50]

I see you can't defend your own argument so you pot shot at others...

Feeble...

Do you have actual training in hand to hand defensive tactics or martial arts? What would you do if a young woman was slapping at you and grabbing your throat?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk