Police Beating in New Orleans Caught on Tape #2 Constructive Criticism ONLY


PDA






Pietro Beretta
October 10, 2005, 03:58 PM
Originally Posted by NightFall

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1198122

Quote:
Two New Orleans Police Officers Videotaped Punching 64-Year-Old Man; Another Hit APTN Producer

By MARY FOSTER
The Associated Press

NEW ORLEANS - Two New Orleans police officers repeatedly punched a 64-year-old man accused of public intoxication, and another city officer assaulted an Associated Press Television News producer as a cameraman taped the confrontations.

There will be a criminal investigation, and the three officers were to be suspended, arrested and charged with simple battery Sunday, Capt. Marlon Defillo said.

"We have great concern with what we saw this morning," Defillo said after he and about a dozen other high-ranking police department officials watched the APTN footage Sunday. "It's a troubling tape, no doubt about it. ... This department will take immediate action."

The assaults come as the department, long plagued by allegations of brutality and corruption, struggles with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the resignation last month of Police Superintendent Eddie Compass.

The APTN tape shows an officer hitting the man at least four times in the head Saturday night as he stood outside a bar near Bourbon Street. The suspect, Robert Davis, appeared to resist, twisting and flailing as he was dragged to the ground by four officers. Another of the four officers then kneed Davis and punched him twice. Davis was face-down on the sidewalk with blood streaming down his arm and into the gutter.

Meanwhile, a fifth officer ordered APTN producer Rich Matthews and the cameraman to stop recording. When Matthews held up his credentials and explained he was working, the officer grabbed the producer, leaned him backward over a car, jabbed him in the stomach and unleashed a profanity-laced tirade.

"I've been here for six weeks trying to keep ... alive. ... Go home!" shouted the officer, who later identified himself as S.M. Smith.

Police said Davis, 64, of New Orleans, was booked on public intoxication, resisting arrest, battery on a police officer and public intimidation. He was treated at a hospital and released into police custody.

A mug shot of Davis, provided by a jailer, showed him with his right eye swollen shut, an apparent abrasion on the left side of his neck and a cut on his right temple.

"The incidents taped by our cameraman are extremely troubling," said Mike Silverman, AP's managing editor. "We are heartened that the police department is taking them seriously and promising a thorough investigation."

Davis, who is black, was subdued at the intersection of Conti and Bourbon streets. Three of the officers appeared to be white, and the other is light skinned. The officer who hit Matthews is white. Defillo said race was not an issue.

Three of the five officers including Smith are New Orleans officers, and two others appeared to be federal officers. Numerous agencies have sent police to help with patrols in the aftermath of Katrina.

Under normal circumstances, it takes unusually offensive behavior to trigger an arrest on Bourbon Street. But New Orleans police have been working under stressful conditions since the hurricane.

Officers slept in their cars and worked 24-hour shifts after the storm. Three-quarters lost their homes and their families are scattered across the country.

"Our police officers are working under some very trying times," Defillo said. "So it's a difficult time, but it doesn't excuse what our jobs are supposed to be."

Many officers deserted their posts in the days after Katrina, and some were accused of joining in the looting that broke out. At least two committed suicide.

Conditions have improved officers now have beds on a cruise ship but they don't have private rooms and are still working five, 12-hour days.

Compass, the police superintendent, resigned Sept. 27. Despite more than 10 years of reform efforts dating to before he took office, police were dogged by allegations of brutality and corruption.

On Friday, state authorities said they were investigating allegations that New Orleans police broke into a dealership and made off with nearly 200 cars including 41 new Cadillacs as the storm closed in.


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures



The Original Post was locked, because of the Anti-LEO antics. I would like to discuss this, please don't get this locked again... Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Beating in New Orleans Caught on Tape #2 Constructive Criticism ONLY" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Pietro Beretta
October 10, 2005, 04:01 PM
If the man was drunk in public, that is infact breaking the law. If he resisted getting arrested thats again breaking the law.

We dont see the begining of the tape, the camera is turned on half way through the arrest. All we see is an african american man pinned to the wall, 1 second later he his hit in the head by an officer several times, they then get him to the ground to make the arrest.

If hitting the man in the head after he was pinned to the wall was "Necessary force" then so be it, the man was breaking the law. (However I dont think that was necessary from what I can see, they already had him pinned to the wall)

The thing that is 100% illegal, is when one of the officers goes up to a member of the AP and grabs him, and verbally abuses the Assoicated Press guy. The Leo saying "ive been here for 6 weeks trying to keep you guys alive, go home" (or something to that effect)

Carl N. Brown
October 10, 2005, 04:13 PM
I am afraid what we will see is LEO getting defensive
and people with bad experiences with LEO getting
abusive. Seen it too many times to expect anything
constructive. Please prove me wrong.

Pietro Beretta
October 10, 2005, 04:15 PM
Hey Guy I saidConstructive Criticism ONLY

I am afraid what we will see is LEO getting defensive
and people with bad experiences with LEO getting
abusive. Seen it too many times to expect anything
constructive. Please prove me wrong.
Now was that constructive in anyway to this conversation, No.


I thought we could be adults here, with a central point of view on this subject. I know how constructive can you be about this topic, but NO BLATENT LEO BASHING!

Kjervin
October 10, 2005, 04:27 PM
In this case, since there is a video, the officers will be investigated and be held responsible for any wrongdoing (we hope). I'm not sure how much constructively can be said. I would hope it wold be an issue even in the abscence of a video, but I guess you could research to find out if that is the case. For instance, how many cases are followed up where there is no videotape? If there are none we can conclude that either the videographer was lucky, or they don't investigate unless there is proof. If there are, if means that the department takes notice of citizen complaints. I suspect it varies from department to department. In this case, we can only hope that justice done, whatever it turns out to be.

I am not sure, however, that it is reasonable to start a thread where multiple police officers (rightly or wrongly) injure a person and not expect people to respond emotionally. I suspect most people don't like to see police injure the public. In fact, I believe most police officers feel the same way.

Kj

Carl N. Brown
October 10, 2005, 04:27 PM
I was hoping to challenge constructive posts.

TheOtherOne
October 10, 2005, 04:38 PM
Just take a trip over to the forums at officer.com and you can hear from those that actually have valid opinions.

the conduct during the arrest didn't seem to be all that excessive. They were meeting resistance with force, thats what we are trained to do. Obviously, due to the close distance and other officers, OC wasn't an option and it didn't appear that anyone had a Taser present. Good old fashioned display of what it was like before we had all those fancy tools.I saw nothing wrong in that video, except for an unsupporting boss. The message there is, that if you resist being arrested bad things can happen to you. It's pretty simple.

He was obvious resisting arrest and he got punched - big deal. He could have been batoned, and how would have that have looked on video!!!

For the non LEO commenting on this video, welcome to our dynamic world. Arrests are never textbook and the violence needed to take someone into custody never looks pretty.

It's a sad day for those NOPD members when they are apparently arrested before the investigation is completed.You hear the SM Smith guy saying something about the last 6 weeks something something something... These guys are obviously at the end of their patience with the city. The are over worked and over tired. It shouldn't be too long before the usual suspects get in front of the camera to scream police butality!The first 4 punches were thrown when there was just two officers and he still resisted. Later when there was 4+ officers they still couldn't get him into cuffs and couple more complience strikes (punches) were thrown. I agree with other posters, there should not be any rush to judgement on this incident. It is a damn shame that the media wants to make this into an issue because one of their people got told where the bear takes a dump in the woods.I don't mind other officers critiquing or even criticizing incidents like this cause they've been there, but college students, investors and people working in finance should shut the h--- up if they've never tried to handcuff a combative suspect who does not want to go to jail.It seems to me they are saying if you are drunk on the street and don't comply with those in charge, expect to get hit in the head a few times. It's really as simple as that.

Kjervin
October 10, 2005, 04:45 PM
I think the question then becomes are you getting hit in the head to get you under control and place you in custody, or are you getting hit in the head because you made the officer break a sweat (or even threatened them)? the way you answer that question says a lot. I would support the former, but would have serious concerns about the latter. I'm not sure the police should get extra licks in to "teach" you not to resist in future. That's twhat the resisting arrest charge is for, right?

Kj

TheOtherOne
October 10, 2005, 04:49 PM
Just call it a "compliance strike" and you can hit them whenever and however many times you want.

(yes, I'm being sarcastic but it does seem that is what a number of police believe.)

Carl N. Brown
October 10, 2005, 05:04 PM
Safe bet: No one criticising the officers trying to arrest the
resisting drunk EVER has had to try arrest a resisting drunk.
Safer bet: If they did, they would probably botch it too.

I will agree the officer responding to the AP reporter
went overboard, but I have not been under 6 weeks of
of that kind of stress and have no idea what I would do.

Police training ought to include training to ignore the
yelping poodles of the media; officers should not be
distracted by mere nuisances. The media had the right
to videotape what was happening public and should have
been ignored as long as they were not obstructing
the officers.

And don't lose sight of this: if the drunk had complied
and not resisted, we would not have heard of this.

If cops were as perfect as their critics, what a wonderful
world it would be.

Jon Coppenbarger
October 10, 2005, 06:12 PM
I see a big problem for the ( )who hit that guy.
Yellow is the word I use for them and I hope they rot in HELL!
I would bet the guy who got hit might of been locked up longer than the guys who beat him were.
I see no difference in the gang mentality of the brave cops who beat Rodney King and the brave ( )who beat this guy.

I will not compare bad apples to good apples because it means squat.
When anyone breaks someones civil rights like that they deserve everything the goverment can throw at them. The more the goverment turns their heads from punishing thugs and murderers that commit crimes even in front of the camera is a sick goverment.
Maybe with any luck since they also happened to attack a camera crew this one will not be forgotten so quickly.

The first thing they need to do is remove their rights to own a firearm.
I hope that covers the need to talk about guns here.

k_dawg
October 10, 2005, 06:22 PM
Yet another example of where we, the private citizens, can watch the system "in action" and judge accordingly.

I'll first note, the officers currently are not being held to the same standard as any other citizen. So, it definately is off to a poor start.

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 06:38 PM
Cool. 11 posts until the subtle cop bashing started. Excellent job.


Bearing in mind that all a viewer has to go on is a few seconds of edited video; if the officers are found to have used more force than was necessary, then they they should be disciplined accordingly. The officer who grabbed the AP reporter looked to me like he lost his temper and 'crossed a line'. IMHO, he should be disciplined for his actions.

Biker
October 10, 2005, 06:38 PM
I watched the video. One thing that came to mind is, if the cops were doing nothing wrong, why did the mounted cop try to block the camera's view of the encounter?
Number two: I can understand frustration. I may have wanted to punch the old man out too, I wasn't there to see what precipitated the whole mess, but *I* don't get paid *not* to punch old men out and me and my Bros, if we sunk to that level, would be in jail right now for doing so, and rightfully so.
I'm not a cop-basher, but I call 'em as I see 'em.
Biker

Mr_Moore
October 10, 2005, 06:38 PM
From

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1819745,00.html

"Davis, who is black, suffered a swollen left eye and cuts."

I didn't hear anything about permanent damage. I think this indicates that the officers were using some restraint. They could have easily hurt him seriously.

Biker
October 10, 2005, 06:43 PM
We don't know that he wasn't hurt seriously first of all, and secondly, who released that report? That they used "some restraint" is commendable, I guess. :scrutiny:
Biker

50 Freak
October 10, 2005, 06:49 PM
I'll first note, the officers currently are not being held to the same standard as any other citizen. So, it definately is off to a poor start.

Good point.

I don't think the being a LE should entitle you to a "get out of Jail free" pass. I would love to see how this plays out in court. But most likely this 64 year old man will now be one of America's new millionares.

Real losers here are the citizens of NO, who now have to pay to fight any upcoming litigation. And we all know what kind of financial situation they are in. :(

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 06:56 PM
I'll first note, the officers currently are not being held to the same standard as any other citizen. So, it definately is off to a poor start.

Quite right. LEO's are held to a higher standard. If an officer uses too much force, the officer can be charged with 'assault under color of authority', or 'violating a citizen's civil rights'. After this, the officer will be disciplined departmentally. Most likely, he'll be fired. THEN...after this, the civil litigation begins, which will include the deep pockets of whatever agency formerly employed the officer.

If joe citizen stomps on someone's neck, it's just called 'kicking someone's a**'. The citizen *may* go to court, *may* be punished, and *may* be sued.

Byron Quick
October 10, 2005, 06:57 PM
I see a resisting drunk being subdued by officers.

I see one officer who assaulted a media employee. The fact that he is a police officer is of no relevance unless one wishes to argue that a police officer should be held to a higher standard than a private citizen. I do not believe that to be the law at present, however.

I do believe that he should be charged , tried, and-if convicted-sentenced in the same way that a private citizen would be in the same situation. The events experienced by the police officer in the past six weeks should be considered by the jury and the judge in the same manner that such circumstances would be considered for a private citizen.

In any event, the cop who assaulted the producer doesn't need to be a cop. He obviously can't handle the stress and years of such stress could severely damage his physical and psychological health.

phoglund
October 10, 2005, 07:06 PM
It's a bit hard to comment because we don't know the whole story, like what happened before the taping started. I think if you resist the cops you should pretty much expect to get hurt. On the other hand I think if there are 3 - 4 cops and one old man the situation should have been able to be handled without multiple punches (er..."compliance strikes") to the head. Officers are trained in restraint tactics and I assume in techniques to pin even combative suspects without striking them excessively. After all, even though the suspect was attempting to avoid arrest, I don't see anywhere on the tape where he was attempting to strike the officers. In a one on one conflict or where weapons are involved all bets are off because there is no telling what a suspect will do if he wins the confrontation and has the cop at his mercy.

I think it fairly obvious the cop who assaulted the media weenie should be disciplined. Whether we like the media or not they are our eyes and ears on the world, if the authorities are allowed to assault them for keeping us informed we are in big trouble.

Bottom line, if I had to judge these officers solely on the information currently available I would internally discipline the officer who threw the punches and require additional training on how to subdue without striking. The other officers would be offered training as well. The officer who assaulted the media guy would be disciplined internally, receive additional training on the rights of the media, be required to apologize to the man he assaulted, and be required to face battery charges only if the man assaulted wanted to press charges on the incident.

Disclaimer: I am not or have never been an officer of the law. I have never attempted to arrest a combative drunk. I have however fought young, strong, healthy men to compliance. I think I could choose any two of my male training companions and without much trouble subdue most individuals one is likely to run into. I think we should hold professional law enforcement officers to a similar standard.


P.S. Hats off to the NO police that continue to serve under these conditions. To those who abandon their posts or turned to looting, I hope they get what they deserve!

modifiedbrowning
October 10, 2005, 07:16 PM
Anybody have a link to the video, I googled but can't find it.
Thanks.

Pietro Beretta
October 10, 2005, 07:57 PM
I know they have the Video on MSNBC.com

Seriously though, if someone does not want to be arrested, its going to take more then 1 LEO (unless he uses his baton or brute force/tazer/mace) to subdue the perp. Evin a 90lbs crack whore, will put up enough of a fight to require a couple of LEOs to take her down, withought using Tazer/mace/baton.

Honestly I dont think the hitting was required, I believe they had enough men to arrest him withought the hits to the head. However he broke the law, had he not broken the law, then he wouldnt have been in that situation, he may have deserved everything he got, including the punches.... its hard to say withought a full tape, and a 2nd point of view.

In any event, the cop who assaulted the producer doesn't need to be a cop. He obviously can't handle the stress and years of such stress could severely damage his physical and psychological health.
I agree

(Thanks for the good discussion guys)

Biker
October 10, 2005, 08:06 PM
Pietro
You state that if the old man hadn't broken the law, "he wouldn't have been in that situation" intimating that he "may have deserved everything he got, including the punches". It appears that the cops broke the law. Would they deserve to be held and punched? It appears so, according to your logic. Or are they above the law?
Biker

50 Freak
October 10, 2005, 08:07 PM
Quite right. LEO's are held to a higher standard. If an officer uses too much force, the officer can be charged with 'assault under color of authority', or 'violating a citizen's civil rights'. After this, the officer will be disciplined departmentally. Most likely, he'll be fired. THEN...after this, the civil litigation begins, which will include the deep pockets of whatever agency formerly employed the officer.

Really???

Not even going into the "druken 64 year old" (who, if his lawyer is telling the truth, wasn't even drunk and has been "dry" for years now). How do you justify hitting the new reporter. Think if average Joe Blow were to push a reporter into the car and hit him in the ribs. That Joe Blow guy wouldn't be sitting in jail right now on aggrevated assault?

Where's that LE right now?

Amusetec
October 10, 2005, 09:15 PM
Quite right. LEO's are held to a higher standard. If an officer uses too much force, the officer can be charged with 'assault under color of authority', or 'violating a citizen's civil rights'. After this, the officer will be disciplined departmentally. Most likely, he'll be fired. THEN...after this, the civil litigation begins, which will include the deep pockets of whatever agency formerly employed the officer.


Yea Right they are! :what:
I fell threatened and I just put my hand on my gun I go to jail. Cop feels threatned and he shots the guy who has no gun and he is held up as a hero. ok where is the higher standard :banghead:

Grey54956
October 10, 2005, 09:16 PM
I watched that tape a few times. Here's what I didn't see:

1.) 64 year old suspect actively fighting with cops before they throw him to the ground. He looks a little bewildered, but not out of control.

2.) 64 year old suspect thrashing about wildly - rolling about with a pile of cops piling on while he clutches at the side of his head in agony after having it slammed into the wall, maybe, but thrashing about, no.

3.) 64 year old punching cops left and right. Nope not in the tape.

Here's what I did see:

1.) Mounted officer trying to block camera. While this could be on accident, there does seem to be some evidence by how the horse moves that this is on purpose.

2.) A pile of LEOs surrounding and shouting at a bewildered 64 year old, who is not throwing punches, but does seem to be somewhat under control.

3.) Said pile of LEOs shoving 64 year old against brick wall and reportedly punching him in the back of the head. Pretty hard to get hand-cuffs on someone when YOU ARE PUNCHING THEM REPEATEDLY IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD!

4.) Said pile of LEOs throwing 64 year old man to ground and punching him more. He appears to be holding the side of his head in pain. Of course, the LEOs can't get hand-cuffs on him. They can't get his hands behind him to do so because THEY HAVE HIM PINNED ON THE GROUND, ON HIS BACK! HARD TO HANDCUFF SOMEONE BEHIND THE BACK WHEN YOU'VE GOT HIM BACK DOWN TO THE GROUND AND 3 GUYS ARE SITTING ON TOP OF HIM!

5.) A LEO attacking the press because he just got caught with his pants down and he knows his @$$ is grass.

Seriously, if a pile of guys starts beating the hell out of you, are you going to be in a state of mind to calmly obey orders? I don't think so. There is a reason the 64 year old resists arrest - he is getting beaten to a pulp. Survival instinct demands that you cover yourself up and try to prevent as much damage as possible, not roll on your stomach and surrender.

The cops seem completely out of control. And from the comments coming from the police forums, we have much to fear from the thin blue line.

rde
October 10, 2005, 09:23 PM
So the moderator wants a thread that does not include any cop bashing...yet the thread is about...cop bashing. Hmmm...

Biker
October 10, 2005, 09:31 PM
What "cop bashing"? Some fair observations were made. If telling the truth is "cop bashing", I guess that by your definition, the truth shouldn't be told? Instead of whining about Grey54956's observations, why don't you refute them?
Good God...
Biker

beerslurpy
October 10, 2005, 09:37 PM
When good cops circle the wagons around obvious police brutality, what are we supposed to think? There are cops on here that make themselves very inviting targets for "bashing" (or criticism as it is known elsewhere).

That being said, it looks like the police in NOLA are doing the right thing by forcing them to stand trial for what they apparently did. We can all speculate about what the outcome would have been minus camera, but fortunately that didnt happen in this case.

Upon reflection I think the media has done more good than harm in NOLA. It is sort of like keeping the light on in the kitchen so the cockroaches dont run rampant. I loved the looting Wal-Mart videotape (where the guy catches the two women cops) and they seem to be catching a lot of misbehaving people on camera (this, the gun grabbing, etc), which is always good (for ratings and for society as well). Its a shame that bad people no longer seem to worry about an all-seeing, vengeful diety, but nosy reporters will have to do for now.

Amusetec
October 10, 2005, 09:44 PM
beerslurpy-
Why do you think the cop was so pissed at the reporter :D

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 09:56 PM
Not even going into the "druken 64 year old" (who, if his lawyer is telling the truth, wasn't even drunk and has been "dry" for years now). How do you justify hitting the new reporter. Think if average Joe Blow were to push a reporter into the car and hit him in the ribs. That Joe Blow guy wouldn't be sitting in jail right now on aggrevated assault?

Where's that LE right now?

The officers in question are on administrative leave pending the investigation. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. :scrutiny:

Grey54956
October 10, 2005, 09:56 PM
I happen to have a few friends who are cops, and I hope that htey would never behave like the hooligans in the video. But I did have a chance to reflect on all of this today.

I am worried about the militarization of our police forces. If you look in any police oriented magazine, the gear being advertized is modeled after military gear. Is it because it is tactical, or is it because it is tapping into a violence prone, super-cop mentality.

I am worried that the police have begun to see themselves as above the law. Reading the comments from the police forum, it seems that the consensus was "hey, if he didn't follow orders from the guys in charge, he deserved it." This looks terrible on LEOs everywhere. When someone starts yelling at you, you might be confused or disoriented. If panic sets in, you may not be in the state of mind where you can obey orders. Then there is the problem that some orders seem to be arbitrarily given out. Are the police really in charge? Who made them so? Why? Are they always right? Why should they be obeyed without question? So many questions.

Then there's the whole officer safety issue. Officer safety is so much of a concern that it is now perfectly justifiable to shoot just about anybody the second the LEO feels he may be in danger. Rules of engagement go right out the window.

And maybe we should all be concerned. Afterall, should we lose our fight against those who oppose the 2A, then the cops will be coming to our door. When they ask you to scrap your firearms and you say that you don't have any, are they going to punch you in the back of the head four times, shoot your wife because they think she is going for a gun, or maybe burn down your house with gas grenades while serving a no-knock warrant?

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 09:58 PM
Yea Right they are!
I fell threatened and I just put my hand on my gun I go to jail. Cop feels threatned and he shots the guy who has no gun and he is held up as a hero. ok where is the higher standard

Amusetec, you don't know what you are talking about. Post a fact that can be discussed, not baseless conjecture.

rde
October 10, 2005, 09:58 PM
...cops bashing a 64 year old man. Cops bashing media recording cops bashing 64 year old man. I'm gonna have to say their is some cop bashing going on.

odysseus
October 10, 2005, 10:00 PM
I am worried about the militarization of our police forces.

You and a lot of people. This is an aside to this thread, but it has a lot of merit. The lines between civil law enforcement, national guard, and the US armed forces is getting more and more blurred. Culturally I fear we are beginning to be too accepting of one single authority controlling all of this. It may happen for reasons to save, but once constructed and strengthened it can be abused - as history always repeats. It was never meant to be this way, NOR should it ever be this way.

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 10:08 PM
Then there's the whole officer safety issue. Officer safety is so much of a concern that it is now perfectly justifiable to shoot just about anybody the second the LEO feels he may be in danger. Rules of engagement go right out the window.

Are you out of your mind? If someone takes an agressive stance with an officer and threatens him harm, or threatens the harm of a bystander/victim, the officer better damn well do something other than stand there and engage in verbal masturbation with the subject.

Rules of engagement? It's called 'don't get killed'. There are no gentleman's rules when the balloon goes up. That's not to say there aren't any requirements that govern the amount of force that can be used. The police generally are trained to use 'that amount of force necessary to effect an arrest', and not more. Maybe the N.O. officers crossed that line. Maybe they didn't. If they did, they'll be disciplined. Simple as that.

There is no requirement that force be met with equal force. The point is to win, not trade blows. :banghead:

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 10:10 PM
When good cops circle the wagons around obvious police brutality, what are we supposed to think? There are cops on here that make themselves very inviting targets for "bashing" (or criticism as it is known elsewhere).

Like who, for instance?

Joejojoba111
October 10, 2005, 10:23 PM
If you read a book titled:

"War is a force that gives us meaning.

by Hedges, Chris.
Anchor ; PublicAffairs, c2002. "

Your may notice an abundance of similarities between every aspect of how he describes war, and government-police-citizen relations. Every single aspect, it is quite amazing. I wondered if I was mis-interpreting, so I tried several other situations, comparing them to the general points he makes, and they didn't match perfectly. My opinion is that police are moving towards declaring war on the populace.

BTW, did that 'stressed' officer forget to tell the AP journalist that he had a taxpayer-funded vacation to Vegas? Funny that.


Seriously, though, pay attention to what the police say. The actual 'officers on the beat' are giving you unprecedented insight. Don't pass it up. It may be a rare occasion to see the truth told so willingly, without the window-dressing that a skilled P.R. department can flourish.

And remember, there are MANY good men and women in their ranks. MANY! But the institutions have an institutional bias, a pervasive notion which is propogated and internally promulgated through the culture bestowed on their members.

IMO the 'good' police, IE the one's I like, are the ones that resemble humans, in all their forms. Happy, tired, reasonable, irritated, curious, courteous, abrupt, polite - you get the idea. Human, not perfect. The 'bad' police, I'm sorry to admit, seem almost un-human. Not worse than humans, just, apart, different, a foreign life-form. There was a movie with Pacino called 'Devil's Advocate', and a jogger is beaten by two homeless men in the park. As they beat him they seem like monsters as well as men, and that is exactly what I saw in the video clip on the news.

Carlos
October 10, 2005, 10:38 PM
What's funny is the poor man was on Bourbon Street in the party capitol of the country. Didn't these officers have anything better to do?? A 64 year old man was a real threat to those four thugs? He walks slow. They misinterpreted drunkeness and beat him for it.

Officer Smith should be out immediately. I don't care how much stress he was under the last six weeks. Today, in my opinion, he committed an offense that should result in immediate termination, no benefits. He should then be zealously prosecuted for assault.

The Puncher should also be out of a job. Punching a man when he's down is as low as it gets. He should be tried, convicted of First Degree assault and jailed.

M-Rex, you make good points, but you can't defend those scum. The officer on the horse should be disciplined as well as the non-punchers.

And LEO's? - you all know that New Orlean has an infamous police department.

New Orleans is going to have to pay out money it plain doesn't have right now, or in the near future. These so-called officers were plain wrong in the way they handled this. Now, we're all going to pay for it.

These are the facts and consequences as I see em, and please don't pull the "this is cop bashing" thing. Nonsense.

:fire:

Amusetec
October 10, 2005, 10:54 PM
Quote:
Yea Right they are!
I fell threatened and I just put my hand on my gun I go to jail. Cop feels threatned and he shots the guy who has no gun and he is held up as a hero. ok where is the higher standard


Amusetec, you don't know what you are talking about. Post a fact that can be discussed, not baseless conjecture.

M-Rex-Ok I will Go real slow so you can understand :banghead:
1 If I flash my gun I can get arrested for it. FACT
2. there have been a few LEO that have shot unarmed people and have had noting happen to them.
Do you understand now what I am talking about
I doubt it becuse the other post has FACT IN IT. and Is not baseless conjecture lots of cases just here in texas about unarmed shots by LEOs.
Now Tell me what is not fact and what is baseles conjecture. :what: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 11:03 PM
Alrighty...now you are engaging in ad hominim attack.

1. Of course you can, given specific circumstances. But, that's not what you said in your post above. I fell threatened and I just put my hand on my gun I go to jail.

2. Broad, ambiguous generality. Try again.

All you are posting is conjecture. What I understand is that you don't know what you are talking about. You are ignorant of the topic being discussed and you are simply jumping on the 'yeah, what he said' bandwagon.

M-Rex
October 10, 2005, 11:09 PM
Officer Smith should be out immediately. I don't care how much stress he was under the last six weeks. Today, in my opinion, he committed an offense that should result in immediate termination, no benefits. He should then be zealously prosecuted for assault.

The Puncher should also be out of a job. Punching a man when he's down is as low as it gets. He should be tried, convicted of First Degree assault and jailed.

M-Rex, you make good points, but you can't defend those scum. The officer on the horse should be disciplined as well as the non-punchers.

Carlos,

I concur. I wouldn't think of defending an officer who is abusing the power of his/her authority with intent. The officer who accosted the AP reporter should be disciplined to the fullest extent. The other two should have their day in court. If they are found in the wrong, they should be disciplined. However, neither I, nor anyone on this forum has the right to condemn the officers in question based on a few seconds of edited video. I'm not saying they were justified in doing what appears in the video; only that it is ridiculous to play judge, jury, and executioner based on a 15 second 'video soundbite'.

Hawkmoon
October 10, 2005, 11:25 PM
Reports I saw earlier this evening indicate that the victim suffered broken bones in his face. It's really difficult to conceive of any circumstances requiring THAT much force to be used by MULTIPLE officers in order to subdue ONE 64-year old man who was allegedly drunk.

ziadel
October 10, 2005, 11:29 PM
So the moderator wants a thread that does not include any cop bashing...yet the thread is about...cop bashing. Hmmm...



calling a duck a duck is not duck bashing.

;)

MechAg94
October 10, 2005, 11:37 PM
Man, there sure are a lot of people out there who automatically assume the worst about LEO's.

Here is what I saw: (Warning: I did not assume evil intent.)

1. A video of a scene in progress starts with the camera view obscured by a horse. Not sure if the camera guy is lazy or if the horse is intentionally blocking the view. The video starts that way and I can't tell.

2. I see one cop throw several punches at the guy while they are struggling with him against the wall. Can't see it real well, but this certainly doesn't stop the old guy from struggling. I can only see two LEO's at that point. Not sure what happened prior to the punches.

3. That is one big, healthy looking 64 year old. He is certainly not weak and frail and is definitely struggling for all he is worth with the four LEO's once they have him on the ground.

4. When the four LEO's have him on the ground, it looks like they are trying to position him to apply handcuffs, but the frail and weak old man is wrestling with them to prevent that. He is moderately successful. I don't see anyone strike him while on the ground.

5. I see one LEO shove a reporter and get in his face. I didn't see him hit the reporter, just poke at him a little while yelling at him. Looks like he lost his temper and needs some leave to calm down. Probably some anger management or whatever is required for some harrassment of a reporter.

I didn't see anything on that video that would make me want to go lynch these LEO's as some on this thread and others would seem to want to do. I don't really think they did anything wrong in trying to subdue a guy who was actively resisting arrest. I would like to get more details of what happened before the tape started before I would even consider evil intent or bad behavior on the part of the LEO's. As someone previously said, they could have used batons, guns, or other means and hurt the guy a lot worse.

My 2 Cents: If you don't like getting arrested or want to argue, the street is not the place to do it. If you resist arrest, you are just asking for an a$$ whipping whether you think it is right or legal or not.

Pietro Beretta
October 10, 2005, 11:46 PM
This post is almost getting to the point where the orignal post was......


You state that if the old man hadn't broken the law, "he wouldn't have been in that situation" intimating that he "may have deserved everything he got, including the punches". It appears that the cops broke the law. Would they deserve to be held and punched? It appears so, according to your logic. Or are they above the law?
Biker


Going back to my first post...:If the man was drunk in public, that is infact breaking the law. If he resisted getting arrested thats again breaking the law.

We dont see the begining of the tape, the camera is turned on half way through the arrest. All we see is an african american man pinned to the wall, 1 second later he his hit in the head by an officer several times, they then get him to the ground to make the arrest.

If hitting the man in the head after he was pinned to the wall was "Necessary force" then so be it, the man was breaking the law. (However I dont think that was necessary from what I can see, they already had him pinned to the wall)


The thing that is 100% illegal, is when one of the officers goes up to a member of the AP and grabs him, and verbally abuses the Assoicated Press guy. The Leo saying "ive been here for 6 weeks trying to keep you guys alive, go home" (or something to that effect)

F4GIB
October 10, 2005, 11:54 PM
Previously posted: "Why do you think the cop was so pissed at the reporter."

Videotape is taking all the sport out of policework.

ziadel
October 10, 2005, 11:54 PM
This is not so much about the suspect getting beat up, this is about the AP Reporter being assaulted. That is what is totally abhorrent and completely unacceptable and thanks to the tape, not a matter of speculation.

MechAg94
October 11, 2005, 12:02 AM
By assault I assume you mean shoved and yelled at. I didn't see anything more than that. Not something to hang the LEO over.
By the way, was that out of the blue or was the guy getting in too close? I couldn't tell for sure.

Jon Coppenbarger
October 11, 2005, 12:05 AM
Every officer no matter if they were federal agents or uniformed police should be FIRED at least if they did not try to stop a crime like this. Charge every last one of them if they were there if the facts come out to be true.
They are required to stop a crime and just like King they did SQUAT!
They all should be on at least paid leave for not arresting the guy that assulted the AP camera crew.
IF it turns out to be true and they actually filed false charges like being drunk I hope they rot in prison for beating up a 64 year old retired school teacher for asking a question.
Real brave of them is it not.

The only recourse folks have here is to hope to have this thread locked also.
But remember your tactics on threads like this is to circle the wagons untill everyone else gives up and moves on to something else or tag team the one or two that hang on. Just like the tape it is sick.

rmgill
October 11, 2005, 12:14 AM
So, can someone explain something here. The man was drunk in public, in New Orleans. Umm. Isn't that the whole attraction of the place? People stumble around on Burbon street with open containers of alcohol and spend money. Isn't that what is wanted? :confused:

Amusetec
October 11, 2005, 12:27 AM
By assault I assume you mean shoved and yelled at. I didn't see anything more than that. Not something to hang the LEO over.
By the way, was that out of the blue or was the guy getting in too close? I couldn't tell for sure.
If a civilian did that they would be arrested, so why shouldn't a police officer, is he above the law?

No_Brakes23
October 11, 2005, 12:45 AM
I am willing to withhold judgement about the beating of the "drunk", as I was not there, but I HAVE seen how much of a PITA it can be to bring somebody down.

But the abuse of the press, makes it all look very dubious.

I don't wanna LEO bash, but this looks bad at this point.

Regardless of what really happened, the media are gonna try to make it look bad, so knowing that tends to obscure actual wrongdoing on the part of the LEO.

Sure would like to see the whole thing.

Byron Quick
October 11, 2005, 12:47 AM
By assault I assume you mean shoved and yelled at. I didn't see anything more than that. Not something to hang the LEO over.


Please look at the applicable statutes. That WAS assault as defined by statute. And I believe such an act would be within the definition of assault by statute in all of the states of the nation.

No, it's not something to hang the LEO over. If it's a first offense, then he should get no more than probation and a fine. But due to the nature of the offense then his tenure as a LEO-if convicted-should be over. By his own actions he has demonstrated that he does not have the requisites needed for a career in law enforcement. Maybe he needs to apply in some of the rougher bars in town as a bouncer.

If a person wants to enforce the law...that person should be able to obey the law.

He could learn Mandarin and get a job as a policeman in Beijing. He seems to have the proper mindset. I can recognize that he's been through enormous stresses in the past six weeks. But enormous stresses are an inescapable part of being a police officer. Losing control of one's action due to enormous stress is a cluebat that a career in law enforcement in a country that respects the rights of citizens is contraindicated.

That officer is probably a fine man. Involved in his church. Loves his family. Helps little old ladies cross the street. That is immaterial. He's in the wrong line of work. Reality has given him a wake up call. Hopefully his superiors will realize this if he doesn't.

swampsniper
October 11, 2005, 01:19 AM
He might not have been drunk, he says he has arthitis, and walks funny. I keep my forearms scabbed up from catching myself all the time, so I can understand that. The man is a retired school teacher, not some street bum. He may be a very wealthy retired school teacher before long!

c_yeager
October 11, 2005, 01:47 AM
Safe bet: No one criticising the officers trying to arrest the
resisting drunk EVER has had to try arrest a resisting drunk.
Safer bet: If they did, they would probably botch it too.

I have had to deal with more than a few resisting drunks and let me tell you this. I saw an officer punch a suspect in the head while pressed aganst a wall, and at least once while he was already handcuffed. There isnt a technique in the world that calls for such behavior.

Also, that was one of the most piss-poor takedowns i have ever witnessed in my life, and I have coached highschool wrestling. If it wasnt for the uniforms i would have thought that i was watching a bunch of drunks tussling with one-another for all the evident coordination. Did you see the one officer "tackle" the guy by dragging him right on top of himself? Oh, and the old man wasnt resisting on the ground, the arresting officers were all trying to move him in different directions at the same time, with the obvious result of no progress. If you see the tail-end of the film (just saw it on the news) the old man appears to be unconscious at the conclusion (and upon review he might have lost consciousness about halfway through the ground-fighting).

Frankly these guys should stick to picking on old men, if this guy was even REMOTELY capable he would have sent all four of them to the hospital, sans teeth.

There is some indication coming out now that the man in question wasnt even drunk.

More to the point is this: Since when do people get arrested for public intoxication IN THE FRENCH QUARTER?!?!?!?!

Web
October 11, 2005, 02:08 AM
"More to the point is this: Since when do people get arrested for public intoxication IN THE FRENCH QUARTER?!?!?!?!"

Ummm...since a hurricane destroyed the whole city? I don't know, do the events of the past month change anything about how people should be acting IN THE FRENCH QUARTER? At least for now?

No_Brakes23
October 11, 2005, 02:12 AM
Okay, after watching the video, I have to amend my comments.

No LEO friends of mine and no cop I have talked to uses repeated facial strikes to get someone on the ground. The mounted officer appears to be trying to block the camera view of the beatdown.

In the cops favor, the guy IS struggling on the ground.

But the behaviour of the "been here 6 weeks" officer towards the reporter was pure BS. Can't handle the stress? Then quit. That's why it is called "professionalism." No doubt many people would like to tell a nosy reporter where he can stick it, but a professional doesn't do it. Judgement and professionalism are pretty important for an LEO, this guy exhibited a lack of both.

This is looking worse and worse, and this dept doesn't have the best track record to begin with.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 02:24 AM
Not even going into the "druken 64 year old" (who, if his lawyer is telling the truth, wasn't even drunk and has been "dry" for years now). How do you justify hitting the new reporter. Think if average Joe Blow were to push a reporter into the car and hit him in the ribs. That Joe Blow guy wouldn't be sitting in jail right now on aggrevated assault?

Where's that LE right now?


The officers in question are on administrative leave pending the investigation. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.

My point!!!!!!!!! (Ad hominem attack removed by moderator.) If you or I were beating the crap out of that 64 year old man, do you think we'd be have the luxury of going home and waiting till a trial comes on Jan 6????

No way in hell, you and I would be sitting in jail right now for attempted manslaughter, assault and battery, committing race crimes, acts of terrorism, jaywalking and anything else they could throw at us.

(more removed by moderator)

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 02:33 AM
My point!!!!!!!!! (Ad hominem attack removed by moderator.) If you or I were beating the crap out of that 64 year old man, do you think we'd be have the luxury of going home and waiting till a trial comes on Jan 6????

No way in hell, you and I would be sitting in jail right now for attempted manslaughter, assault and battery, committing race crimes, acts of terrorism, jaywalking and anything else they could throw at us.

(More removed by moderator)

You make it sound like being on administrative leave and waiting to be fired, prosecuted, publicly lambasted, and sued is something to look forward too. Don't worry. You'll get your pound of flesh soon enough.

Really, settle down. Your insecurity is showing.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 02:38 AM
You make it sound like being on administrative leave and waiting to be fired, prosecuted, publicly lambasted, and sued is something to look forward too. Don't worry. You'll get your pound of flesh soon enough.

Listen here (edited :rolleyes: ) you probably right that it's going to suck to be those LE's for the next 3 months. It's not going to be fun for them and their families, but it sure beats the hell out of of sitting in jail the next 3 months waiting for trial. And that's what you and I would be doing.

How do you feel now that the old geezer says he wasn't drunk and hasn't touched alcohol in 25 years. Seems his kids and the his lawyer is saying the same thing. I hope the LE's (for their sake) made him take a breathalizer test or something.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 02:42 AM
How do you feel now that the old geezer says he wasn't drunk and hasn't touched alcohol in 25 years. Seems his kids and the his lawyer is saying the same thing.

Shylock? Ok. :confused:

How I 'feel' is irelevent.

And what, pray tell, would you expect the 'old geezer', his family, and his lawyer to say? "Everything was my fault, officer. I'm to blame. Take me to jail"? :rolleyes:

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 02:43 AM
And what, pray tell, would you expect the 'old geezer', his family, and his lawyer to say? "Everything was my fault, officer. I'm to blame. Take me to jail"?

So everyone but the police are all liars now.....

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 02:48 AM
I give up. :rolleyes:

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 02:55 AM
Shylock? Ok.

Shylock....Merchant of Venice...your reference to a "pound of flesh"...

Either way buddy, we can agree to disagree. It's the American way. Good to see a fellow N. Cali person on the boards.

No_Brakes23
October 11, 2005, 03:42 AM
I give up. I am not defending the LEO-hate, but is it really so hard to understand this sort of attitude on a board dedicated to rights that a lot of folks feel the cops are suppressing?

Still, I understand your point. A real shame that it is so hard to have a discussion without some Caps-Lock frenzy of invective being hurled by someone who just got a speeding ticket.

(For the record, I actually do have a lot of discontent with traffic cops, but I am willing to admit that it is because I just got a ticket.) :rolleyes:

Byron Quick
October 11, 2005, 03:46 AM
OK, folks, everyone has done fairly well at avoiding what is considered cop bashing on this thread. Which is NOT criticizing the police.

However, the bounds of civility are becoming frayed. Cluebat: either play nice or go stand in the corner.




"Everything was my fault, officer. I'm to blame. Take me to jail"?

I've done this a time or two. Officer's mouth fell open. Flabbergasted to the point that I didn't even get a warning ticket. And it was a traffic offense that was supposed to be an automatic trip to jail. Reckon they really don't hear it much.

MechAg94
October 11, 2005, 09:04 AM
If the old guy wasn't drunk a simple blood test would show it wouldn't it? He could have demanded all the alcohol tests then pressed charges for harassment if found with no alcohol. He didn't have to fight and wrestle with police, despite his arthritis. There are other ways around that problem.
(I will assume he was fighting. If everyone else can assume the LEO's were evil SOB's, I can assume that.) :)

I don't think the guy who got in the reporters face shouldn't be punished, just that the punishment should be relative to what he did, which wasn't much, IMHO.

My point!!!!!!!!! (Ad hominem attack removed by moderator.) If you or I were beating the crap out of that 64 year old man, do you think we'd be have the luxury of going home and waiting till a trial comes on Jan 6????

No way in hell, you and I would be sitting in jail right now for attempted manslaughter, assault and battery, committing race crimes, acts of terrorism, jaywalking and anything else they could throw at us.
If you had a lawyer available, yes, you would be sitting at home waiting. On the other hand, I don't think you would have any legal purpose for detaining the man in the first place, which they do as LEO's. Not the a good comparrison.

Where did you get manslaughter from? At what point on that video did you get the idea the cops were trying to kill that man? They had much better weapons for that purpose. Batons would have been much better. I think you are letting your emotions get the better of you.

MechAg94
October 11, 2005, 09:07 AM
I have said almost nothing to an officer on a traffic stop before. He kept looking at me like he was expecting me to complaining and mouthing off. Not worth it for an inspection sticker.

justashooter
October 11, 2005, 10:06 AM
i can't say what i want to say here, cause this is the high road.

i could say it on the fal files.

i can only ask, who is the criminal in the video?

Baba Louie
October 11, 2005, 10:06 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051011/ap_on_re_us/new_orleans_taped_beating
(From the story above)
...Two city officers accused in the beating, and a third officer accused of grabbing and shoving an Associated Press Television News producer who helped document the confrontation, pleaded not guilty Monday to battery charges.

Trial was set at a hearing Monday for Jan. 11. Afterward, officers Lance Schilling, Robert Evangelist and S.M. Smith were released on bond. They left without commenting.

Police Superintendent Warren Riley said any misconduct would be dealt with swiftly. He noted the video showed "a portion of that incident."

"The actions that were observed on this video are certainly unacceptable by this department," Riley said.

Two other officials in the video appeared to be federal officers, according to police. Numerous agencies have sent officers to help with patrols in the aftermath of Katrina.

...Davis said he had been walking in the French Quarter and approached a mounted police officer to ask about the curfew in the city when another officer interrupted.

"This other guy interfered and I said he shouldn't," Davis said. "I started to cross the street and bam I got it. ... All I know is this guy attacked me and said, `I will kick your ass,' and they proceeded to do it."
...

Let's wait and see what each side's attorneys have to tell the judge. It'll be interesting to hear what the two Fed LEO's have to offer by way of testimony.

"THE OTHER GUY (Policeman?) INTERFERED AND I SAID HE SHOULDN'T..."

Uh Oh! :eek:
A No Win for everyone involved.

Greymoor
October 11, 2005, 10:25 AM
Usually when a perp is brought to the hospital for treatment a blood test would be done to check his blood alcohol level. If the guy was drunk we should know about it just from his trip to the hospital for those stitches. If the man was drunk it would be very easy to prove.

So what are the results of the test? Or for some reason was this person not taken to the hospital or given the blood tests? If you are not drunk it is pretty hard to explain the arrest let alone the trashing.

If three cops can't restrain a 64-year-old man without having to stomp him they need to work at a different profession.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 12:00 PM
I am not defending the LEO-hate, but is it really so hard to understand this sort of attitude on a board dedicated to rights that a lot of folks feel the cops are suppressing?

No_brakes23, I see your point. I really do. Let me put it to you this way. I signed up for THR because it was recommended to me as THE only good firearms related web board. I signed up thinking I was going to find mature, well adjusted folks who could talk about firearms. I found a few. But, I also found a large percentage of pseudo-militia nuts, anarchist libertarian fruitloops, anti-cop bigots, and largely uninformed posters -- just like every other firearms board. In fact, I think there are numerous users of this board who actively seek out stories like this so they can stand up and scream, "See! The po-po are takin' your rights-es away!" They want to find stories of law enforcement officers making mistakes because is supports their paranoia and delusions. They want something to happen so they can grab up all their firearms, march out into the street, and 'fight the gummint'. "Whoo hoo, Cleetus, ah gets to shoot off mah shoot-em-up gun"

I think they want law enforcement to make contact with them just so they can 'go out in a blaze of glory for freedom'. Their anti-cop hate and bigotry is a warm blanket they wrap themselves in to cover their insecurities.

This thread is the perfect example. There is no way in hell that a thread like this, with posters like this would evolve into anything but a big cop bashing bitch session. I do find it hard to understand where so much vitriolic hate comes from. No one likes to see the light bar behind his/her vehicle. Hell, I don't even like to see it. But, if a police officer or deputy sheriff stops a car on the freeway, why was the officer lighting the car up? The driver was probably speeding. Who sets the speeding limit? A committee made up of people from the community. Who gets the 'constitutionalist diatribe' at the side of the road? The solitary law enforcement officer.

Did those N.O. officers use excessive force? Who the hell knows? For Heaven's sake, all that's out there is a few seconds of video. If they did, they'll be disciplined.

The law enforcement officer on the street does not make the laws. Elected representatives and senators do. LEO's are the ones who have to deal with all the loonballs on the side of the road pissing, moaning, bitching, and complaining that their 'rights' are being taken away.

TheEgg
October 11, 2005, 12:12 PM
A lot of people who are condemning the police action are making assumptions not supported by the evidence (yet).

A lot of people who are supporting the police action are making assumptions not supported by the evidence (yet).

The two critical factors here to me are:

1. Was he drunk? We should surely know -- when he was taken in for treatment, he would as a matter of course had blood drawn -- it can be tested for alchohol level. If he was NOT drunk, then we know a key fact -- the officers are lying their tails off. If he WAS drunk, the old man is lying his tail off.

2. Did he resist at first? We have yet to see any tape of the start of this incident. Does it exist? If he resisted, then we know he is again lying his tail off. If he did not, then we know that the officers are lying their tails off.

So, for me, to have a firm conclusion, we need to answer those two key questions -- was the man drunk, and did he resist arrest, or was he as he said, sucker punced out of the blue?

Now, reading between the lines, recognizing that the two elements above must be resolved to have any kind of definitive conclusion:

My turn to speculate -- It looks to me like a possible case of "contempt of cop." Why do I hypothesis this?

1. The victim/perp seems to be reluctant to relate in detail what he said to one of the officers at the start of the incident -- I take that as a reluctance to admit that he probably made comments to one or more of them about their ancestry/personal habits that he is not proud of now.

2. The reaction of the cop to the newsman, and the cops comments to the newsman.

3. The fact that we do not yet have an official statement from the hospital, DA, or Police Department that the gentleman had a BAL of "x" and was thus drunk, thereby supporting the actions of the police. If they had this, I think it would be announced by now. So maybe he wasn't a drunk.

Derby FALs
October 11, 2005, 12:38 PM
My turn to speculate -- It looks to me like a possible case of "contempt of cop." Why do I hypothesis this?

"Contempt of Cop" is not an arrest able offense. They generally have to lie about something to charge you with. What is really contemptible is the other officers lying to cover the first lie.

spartacus2002
October 11, 2005, 12:48 PM
In the cops favor, the guy IS struggling on the ground.

And if I was getting an unwarranted asswhupping, including rabbit-punches (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_punch) while I'm shoved up against the wall, I'm probably going to struggle against it too. Having a badge doesn't mean that an arrestee has to take an asswhupping.

Gunpacker
October 11, 2005, 12:57 PM
I can't say from the video whether the guy was "resisting" or "resisting with violence." The video seems to start showing several guys with the arrestee against the wall. We don't know, IMO, what transpired prior to that. Now, I agree that if you only look at it from what appears to be the guy only slightly struggling with several guys pretty much in control, the force may have been excessive. The words of the law will have to decide that IMO. If prior violence had occurred, then all questions are moot. Cops are not required to fight on an "even" basis, otherwise they would go home every day looking like Joe Frazier on the morning after "thrilla in Manilla". However, strikes to the head would not be my choice, since that can confuse the subject and make the situation more combative. Hard to reason with a half conscious person. I don't think many of you guys would want to risk your own safety to make sure that you didn't hurt a person that was resisting arrest with violence. Especially on a daily basis.
That said, there is no excuse for excessive violence in arrest. Stress??? Cops don't take into account the stress that most of us are under, and often far more than the work stress of a police officer's job. Police overstate the stress of the job IMO. Danger?? Try working unarmed at a shop and rob. Or delivering pizzas.
As for the guy attacking the cameraman, if you simply touch the police officer with your finger, you can be charged with "battery on a LEO". Felony. Turn about is fair play IMO. Personally, I am fed up with the excuses made for the NOPD. These guys are cops, signed on for the job, supposedly trained for emergency duty. Try talking to guys in Iraq about stress. They usually seem to hold it together in far more trying circumstances for years. It is the attitude and mindset of cops that gets them in trouble usually. Kick the bad ones out, get new ones, and train them to respect the public as much as they expect the public to respect them.

Carl N. Brown
October 11, 2005, 01:00 PM
MRex: "I signed up thinking I was going to find mature, well adjusted
folks who could talk about firearms."

Well, they are here, but not on the Legal and Political forum.

Actually, reading the Whole Thread, I found more constructive
responses than I expected. Sure, there have been some
Blue-Wall-Of-Solidarity and All-Cops-Are-Stormtroopers rants,
but many have been worth thinking about.

Byron Quick:

Quote:
"Everything was my fault, officer. I'm to blame. Take me to jail"?


I've done this a time or two. Officer's mouth fell open. Flabbergasted to the
point that I didn't even get a warning ticket. And it was a traffic offense
that was supposed to be an automatic trip to jail. Reckon they really don't
hear it much.

It does work. (Of course I left out the go-to-jail part).*
I try to treat cops like I would treat a family member** and try to
keep in mind that the officer who pulls me over for a burned out
signal light may have had to secure an accident scene while they
hosed the blood off the road and is not in the mood for snotty
backtalk. I have known two people who I felt should not have had
a badge,*** but most cops are doing a hard job and
deserve the same benefit of a doubt as anyone else, no more
but no less.
__________
*Don't believe in pushing my luck THAT far!
**Uncle and five friends in LE.
***NOT the Uncle and five friends in LE.

ziadel
October 11, 2005, 01:30 PM
update:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051011/ap_on_re_us/new_orleans_taped_beating;_ylt=AkHEthyjVvhHGN7H0Sd_8QGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 01:50 PM
Stress??? Cops don't take into account the stress that most of us are under, and often far more than the work stress of a police officer's job. Police overstate the stress of the job IMO. Danger?? Try working unarmed at a shop and rob. Or delivering pizzas.
As for the guy attacking the cameraman, if you simply touch the police officer with your finger, you can be charged with "battery on a LEO". Felony. Turn about is fair play IMO.

Well, at least you started out alright, I guess. :scrutiny:

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO.

And...if you simply 'touch' anyone, it could be a battery, not just on an officer.

Turn about is fair play? What, are you in kindergarten? High Road. :barf:

Carl N. Brown
October 11, 2005, 01:56 PM
A little more detail than the AP story repeated at Fox:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/11/taped.beatings/index.html

Gunsnrovers
October 11, 2005, 02:02 PM
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO.

give it a rest. There are also plenty of other jobs with very higher risk of death and/or injury that don't pay as well, are also run ineptly, don't have unions protecting their right to work, and remain unappreciated by the public.

Cry me a river if that's going to be the card you want to play.

The Tourist
October 11, 2005, 02:06 PM
We don't need opinions, we need the truth.

Look, everyday 99% of LEO's (many of them my friends and clients) go to work with a positive commitment. They do jobs we do not want.

My wife is a teacher, my SIL is a Red Cross nurse. Along with them, and in conversations with my clients, I believe that there is a certain type of individual who must serve; if they do not, they feel like they are wasting their time.

They want to make a difference, they are not bystanders. Lots of them get hurt.

When the Pentagon got hit on 9/11, the area had more injured than the WTC and they needed blood. My SIL was the one of the first to volunteer, and they snatched her up in a Lear jet to get her to the accident site. The gravity of the condition didn't really settle upon her until she looked out a window and saw that she was being escorted by an F-16.

Scared to death, she worked 15 hour days.

These people do not need to be tarred by the same brush. They should not have to hear that "all LEO's" react in this fashion.

Let's investigate it, find the truth, and publish the answers. If the officers are innocent, then tell the world. If they are rogues, then please separate them from the people who serve.

svtruth
October 11, 2005, 02:08 PM
All I have heard/seen about NOPD has been since Katrina. Given the looting and desertion by NOPD officers and a long history of corruption, what reliance can we place on the assertion that the officers involved in this incident will be dealt with promptly?

bountyhunter
October 11, 2005, 02:13 PM
Here's some constructive criticism:

If you want a good police force, don't hire a bunch of low life thugs and turn them loose with badges.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 02:24 PM
give it a rest. There are also plenty of other jobs with very higher risk of death and/or injury that don't pay as well, are also run ineptly, don't have unions protecting their right to work, and remain unappreciated by the public.

Cry me a river if that's going to be the card you want to play.

Name one.

wingman
October 11, 2005, 02:24 PM
From an old person's perspective I see an break down in society as a group
in terms of common sense, from police to average clerk at WalMart, poor
manners, poor self control, and no I don't have an answer to the problem,
other then turn out the lights and start over, perhaps we could do better
second time around. :confused:

TheOtherOne
October 11, 2005, 02:32 PM
Name one.

The 10 most dangerous jobs
Occupation / Fatalities per 100,000
Timber cutters / 117.8
Fishers / 71.1
Pilots and navigators / 69.8
Structural metal workers / 58.2
Drivers-sales workers / 37.9
Roofers / 37
Electrical power installers / 32.5
Farm occupations / 28
Construction laborers / 27.7
Truck drivers / 25

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; survey of occupations with minimum 30 fatalities and 45,000 workers in 2002
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/extra/P63405.asp
Not that their jobs aren't dangerous, but LEO's don't even make the top 10.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 02:45 PM
:eek: :eek: :eek:

How come my job isn't on there????

Professional Male Stud

Biker
October 11, 2005, 02:47 PM
Not many of us left, eh? :D
Biker

Cosmoline
October 11, 2005, 02:52 PM
OK, I can see that cops sometimes have to get rough with drunks. I've seen it first hand. But what sets my alarm bells off are these aspects of the incident:

--The horseback cop rides in front of the camera to prevent them from filming it

--One cop assaults a producer, again telling me they knew darn well they were going too far.

--The use of FIST PUNCHES TO THE BACK OF THE HEAD instead of proper restraining methods. You don't punch someone to restrain them, you punch someone to fight with them and that's exactly what this looked like to me--a mutual combat.

--The complete absence of any medical assistance once the man was down and bleeding heavily. The cops just walked off, AGAIN revealing that this was a FIGHT not an arrest.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 02:54 PM
You are absolutely correct. But what I was referring to, and countering was this:



Stress??? Cops don't take into account the stress that most of us are under, and often far more than the work stress of a police officer's job. Police overstate the stress of the job IMO. Danger?? Try working unarmed at a shop and rob. Or delivering pizzas.
As for the guy attacking the cameraman, if you simply touch the police officer with your finger, you can be charged with "battery on a LEO". Felony. Turn about is fair play IMO.


Well, at least you started out alright, I guess.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO.

There certainly are job fields that report more statistics in regards to raw deaths. The poster was trying to minimalize any 'stresses' an LEO might experience by throwing up a bunch of smoke. I countered him.

Besides...when was the last time you ever heard someone trying to off themselves via 'suicide by roofer'?

Gunsnrovers
October 11, 2005, 02:58 PM
As of June, there were approximately 870,000 law enforcement personel in the US. There were 153 deaths on duty last year. That comes to just under 18 deaths per 100,000. On average, there are 16,621 injuries per year. This comes from the NLEOMF web page.

As was said, you don't even make the top 10 list.

Nothing discounts the work of LEO's and how hard it is, but if you're going to try selling bad behavior because the job is tough, I ain't buying.

Lots of folks living under stress every day. Some you may never even be aware of.

Biker
October 11, 2005, 02:59 PM
I've seen a few try 'suicide by Biker'. Heh heh...
Biker :evil:

spartacus2002
October 11, 2005, 02:59 PM
M-Rex,
we are well aware of the occupational hazards of being a police officer. None of those hazards justify police officers seeing themselves as a separate class of citizen to whom a LOWERED set of expectations apply. If anything, police should be held to as high a standard as their fellow citizens.

Not to put it too delicately, but look at your sigline; merely by mentioning yourself as a "Sheepdog" you risk setting yourself apart from your fellow citizens. Contrary to the "Sheepdogs'" belief, your fellow non-police-officer citizens are NOT "Sheep."

Cosmoline
October 11, 2005, 03:04 PM
from. No one likes to see the light bar behind his/her vehicle. Hell, I don't even like to see it. But, if a police officer or deputy sheriff stops a car on the freeway, why was the officer lighting the car up? The driver was probably speeding. Who sets the speeding limit? A committee made up of people from the community. Who gets the 'constitutionalist diatribe' at the side of the road? The solitary law enforcement officer.


By my count I've been pulled over about 25 times in my life. The ONLY TIME it was for speeding was ON MY BIKE in Eugene, Oregon--a ticket a took as a genuine trophy :D Every other time, the stops were pretense stops. Somewhere along the line, these cops are getting trained to pull cars over for tail lights, no turn signal light, or whatever. The point has nothing to do with lights, but rather it's an opportunity for them to shine the light in your eyes and look for those "coffee cans" in your car.

I'm tired of it, and over the years my respect and tolerance of LEO's using these tactics has gone down further and further as I see more and more of them behaving like soldiers on patrol. That doesn't mean they're all bad, by no means. But there is an "us vs. them" mentality with many law enforcement agencies. NOLA's cops are among the worst. In one report from CNN, it turns out two different squads have claimed title "Fort Apache" :D They're fighting with each other over the right to claim to be the most under-siege unit.

but back to the topic--
Anchorage and a number of other cities have created a special "drunk squad" of non-cops to come deal with intoxicated folks who aren't hurting anyone but who are a danger to themselves. These guys know how to deal with drunks better than cops and do a good job picking them up. APD will come in to help as needed. I've seen APD officers deal with violent drunks by sitting them down and just talking to them for awhile with the community service people there to help. That's good work. Beating a drunk on the head is at best pointless. If they're really flipping out, they're going to do a pretty good job hurting themselves without any assistance. Best to give them some room and just use a stun gun if needed. Jumping in for a mass bar fight is just a horrible tactical idea, all politics aside.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 03:19 PM
I'm tired of it, and over the years my respect and tolerance of LEO's has gone down further and further as I see more and more of them behaving like soldiers on patrol. That doesn't mean they're all bad, by no means. But there is an "us vs. them" mentality with many law enforcement agencies.

I have been pulled over 4 times in my life. What were you doing to get you pulled over 25?

Do you think the 'us vs. them' attitude is reciprocal? Take a look at the users of this board. Do you think there's a pervasive 'us vs. them' attitude being displayed? Hell, take a look at this thread.

Not to put it too delicately, but look at your sigline; merely by mentioning yourself as a "Sheepdog" you risk setting yourself apart from your fellow citizens.

Absolutely correct. Walker vs. talker, if you prefer. And, as I stated in another post, law enforcement officers (read that in general) are held to a higher standard than that of, say, a roofer. However, unfortunately, this still doesn't prevent the occasional screw up by someone wearing a badge. As you well know, people are people. The interesting thing is, you never hear people get really bent out of shape when a roofer gets in a fight.

Gunsnrovers
October 11, 2005, 03:41 PM
The interesting thing is, you never hear people get really bent out of shape when a roofer gets in a fight.

That's probably because you don't often hear a roofer support the reason he beat the tar out of someone or shot them as being "part of his job".

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 03:46 PM
Um...ok. :rolleyes:

Funny. I've never heard an officer say that either. But I have seen many a roofer who's breakfast consisted of the last half of last night's beer, and a little methamphetamine sprinkled on his cornflakes.

Fine upstanding lads, indeed. But I digress... :neener:

Biker
October 11, 2005, 03:52 PM
Yes, you do digress. I've done roofing work, and never used meth nor did the guys I worked with. Didn't drink before or during work and neither did the guys I worked with. I'm sure that a few do and did, but then again, people from other professions are guilty of the same, including cops, doctors and lawyers, fine upstanding lads, all of them.
Biker

Gunsnrovers
October 11, 2005, 03:54 PM
You've never heard a cop claim that? So abuse under color of authority doesn't exist?

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 03:59 PM
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Cosmoline
October 11, 2005, 04:07 PM
What were you doing to get you pulled over 25?

Got me. I've got some tickets, but all for paperwork infractions. I don't speed and the only serious accident I was in was a fluke of the ice and didn't impact anyone but myself.

Part of it may be my ratty-looking S-10. I suspect something about it makes me look like a meth cook. Usually they stop me, tell me about the light that's out, demand "zee papers" and then shine the light around. Whatever they're looking for, they apparently aren't finding it. I'm really fed up with pretense stops. Esp. since they will NEVER admit that's what they're doing.

Do you think the 'us vs. them' attitude is reciprocal? Take a look at the users of this board. Do you think there's a pervasive 'us vs. them' attitude being displayed? Hell, take a look at this thread.

Certainly, that's part of it. And it's a fair observation. I'm guilty of it myself from time to time.

What makes me most annoyed is the attitude that the police protect us. They do not. I do not expect them to protect me from harm, and indeed they would never be able to unless they're supermen. They are part of the criminal justice system. They are NOT and have never been a "thin blue line" protecting the "sheep" from the "wolves." We're all human men, and we all bear responsibility for protecting ourselves.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 04:09 PM
But I have seen many a roofer who's breakfast consisted of the last half of last night's beer, and a little methamphetamine sprinkled on his cornflakes.

Don't you know that part of the job description for being a roofer is being a "meth head". :D :D

Tell me M-Rex, what do you do if you pull an old geezer over and he has some cans of Folgers Coffee in the back of his car????

So your a police supporter now matter what they do. That's fine if you want to believe they can do no wrong. But please note, that's not the common consensus among us here. How many "bad cop" articles in the paper have you been seeing in the last few months. Even if half of them were true, is a sad statement on the police as a whole.

LE's have a crappy job. No doubt about it. A buddy of mine just got killed pulling over some gang banger two months ago. Being a LE is no excuse to treat the "civilians" as the enemy. Don't make us the enemy. All we ask is stop being blind and clean house.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 04:12 PM
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Yeah, but if there is so many occurances that it becomes a constant then there must be a correlation somewhere.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 04:22 PM
So your a police supporter now matter what they do. That's fine if you want to believe they can do no wrong. But please note, that's not the common consensus among us here. How many "bad cop" articles in the paper have you been seeing in the last few months. Even if half of them were true, is a sad statement on the police as a whole.

If you read any of my posts at all, you would know that is not the case. Judging by the amount of 'jump-on-the-band-wagon-ism', it would seem that 'a' common consensus (not 'the' common concensus) is knee jerk anti-cop bigotry.

'Bad cop' articles in the paper are printed because they gain readers. There's a rather weird fascination in society with watching heroes fall. I believe that people like to see 'bad cop' stories because they know their lives are so miserable, that the only way they can feel good about themselves is to see someone else fall. They justify their own imperfections by pointing fingers at those in authority and screaming, "But what about him?"

"Well, I might be a dope smoking, meth shooting, wife beating, alcoholic, puppy sodomizing, flea infested baby raper....but at least, I'm not that that cop who roughed up an AP reporter."

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 04:34 PM
:( 'Bad cop' articles in the paper are printed because they gain readers. There's a rather weird fascination in society with watching heroes fall. I believe that people like to see 'bad cop' stories because they know their lives are so miserable, that the only way they can feel good about themselves is to see someone else fall. They justify their own imperfections by pointing fingers at those in authority and screaming, "But what about him?"

I disagree. I do think some people like to watch others fall (call it the accident on the freeway syndrome) but not the majority of the public. I sure as heck don't. At one time I wanted to be a cop. Decided the high divorce/suicide rates were not a result I want from a job. Besides I like money, and you know LE's aren't exactly rich. :(

But getting back to my point. I think the majority want to trust and believe in their local LE. But this "us versus them" mentality has driven a stake between the LE community and those they serve. I hate seeing that. Whether it's the result of bad publicity of a minority or the "beat them at all cost" training techniques, the steady militarization of the police or what???. I don't know.

I can just see that most people don't trust LE's and that is very unfortunate because that's not the way it should be.

Quick tangent. Last night, someone called me to donate money to the local Policemen's fund. Typically in the past, without a thought, I'd say send me some written literature (to make sure my money is going to the police and not some unscruptilous telemarketer) and send a check in. I instead said "no" and today am not sure if I did the right thing. Not good.

Peet
October 11, 2005, 04:56 PM
Do you think the 'us vs. them' attitude is reciprocal? No, I don't think so. I know so.

Back in high school (this is about 1968) I was a rebel (not). Long hair, but that was the total extent of any "rebel" behavior. Mind you, this is in a liberal college town.

(edited by moderator) Usual license and registration. Sends me on my way without another word. Not speeding - no lane-change - no X-walk - no nuthin'. No ticket, warning, verbal, no freakin' thing at all said.

Next day, in school the (edited) kid starts tweaking me.

Number 1: (edited) is discussing his stops with the family over dinner.

Number 2: (edited) tells his kid who tells me that he stopped me because my hair was too long.

Given what I know happened, how do I, now, tell at the time if it is a driving w/o a haircut or a legitimate stop? Is this what "driving while colored" stops feel like?

They don't trust "civilians" who "look different" and we can't trust "them."

TheEgg
October 11, 2005, 05:42 PM
A further tid-bit of information: (Note, Bruno is the lawyer for Robert Davis)

Bruno said he would ask for the charges to be dropped. Earlier, he told CNN his client was not asked to submit to a sobriety test.

So, the police did not try to to collect evidence for a charge they were laying against him????????????????

:what:

Amusetec
October 11, 2005, 05:59 PM
It is starting to get old if you say something negative about the police you are suddenly a cop hater. The true supporters and the police can not do anything wrong and if it is well you have to understand there cops and it is ok.
The supportes of the police will attack anyone saying anything negative about the police saying well you are not a cop so you do not know what you are talking about. Well I say you are not me so you do not know what you are talking about. In my life I have had quite a bit of interaction with LE some of it very good and some of it very bad. Most of the people I knew in the Dept. left said it was not worth it and did not like "The young militeristic ones that was comming into the force." there words. I too have been pulled over many times and for no reason and some made up and yes they where Eyewitnesses.
One of the biggest thing about the police is there stand you will beat the rap but not the ride. Or something like it, now if the police know you are not going to be charged or conv. of anything what right do they have to arresst me? and yes they do make things up and lie on the stand.
So before you start to call someone anti cop and say they do not know what they are talking about and are just jumping on the bandwagon maybe you should find out what there experience is and you know it just might be justifiable.
There was a time when the police where highly regarded and thought of as not doing any wrong, people just about idolized them.
People I know who use to thing the best person on the planet was a cop. anytime you have a problem you go to a cop. now these same people would not call the police unless they absolutly had to. you know after you shoot someone its a law :D

I got into this same discussion with a few and I mean few of our finest one day in a restaruant. One of them finaly asked ok then why is it when ever you need help like some one breaking into your house you always call us for help?
With out missing a beat I told him well I have too it is the law I can not just shoot them and throw them in the dumpster now can I?
his jaw just about hit the table a couple laughed and one said it is too bad you can't I would be all for it.
Now If I truly hated the police would I be a member of Law Enforcement Alliaance of America? No I would not. It is just that I have seen the change in law enforcement over the years and do not like it.
Before I meet my wife she went out with a few of them and the stories I heard.

The police like to say that they do not profile well you and I know that is crap .I profile you profile everyone profiles. So police pulling over teen that looks like a gang banger is ok. Police look more like Police state cop than you and me. what am I suppose to think about it.
when the cops where thought of good they had business haircuts sharply dressed and looked professional. now look at alot of them.
case inpoint Houston Police got a new Chief and he said ok from now on I want officers to have proper short haircuts shined shoes shined bags clean pressed uniform. Do you know what happened he got ridiculed from the rank in file to the news to talk radio laughed at him. Police look professional what would that do? well for one they would probably get more respect.
But the reason the chief used it was becuse there was a rash of people immitating the police well we can start by looking very professional becuse most of the BGs looked like thugs in uniform which some of our Police do look like.


All I am real trying to get at is that before you tell some one that disagrees with you that you do not know what you are talking about and talk down to them maybe you should find out more about them and where they are comming from. Polite Debate is the only way to Debate.

Now that I have gotten that off my chest go ahead and attack me for being stupid. You know who you are :rolleyes:
Becuse I am a big boy and can take it and yes I am Ignorant one some things just like you are. But I try to talk with people who can be civil and listen to there point of view but I expect nothing but the same. Becuse alot of times I learn alot just by listening. That is one reason I like reading these boards but I would rather go out and meet people face to face and discuss with them. becuse alot of a conversation involves body lang. How can you use body lang. here

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 06:01 PM
But this "us versus them" mentality has driven a stake between the LE community and those they serve. I hate seeing that. Whether it's the result of bad publicity of a minority or the "beat them at all cost" training techniques, the steady militarization of the police or what???. I don't know.

On this, you and I agree completely. I hate the rift that seems to be forming (or has formed) between citizens and law enforcement officers, and I agree with your examples.

bountyhunter
October 11, 2005, 06:03 PM
(edited by moderator) Usual license and registration. Sends me on my way without another word. Not speeding - no lane-change - no X-walk - no nuthin'. No ticket, warning, verbal, no freakin' thing at all said.

We got pulled over one night..... no charge at all. he looked all through the car, rousted all four of us for ID and general harrassment...... then wrote me a ticket becuse there was a smudge on my driver's license and took off.

I am not making that up.

Downtown sacramento, four young white guys in a 64 Mustang.

I REALLY wanted to ask him how he could see the smudge on my license given that it was in my pocket.... but I thought better of it. :D

wingnutx
October 11, 2005, 06:37 PM
the old guy wasn't drunk a simple blood test would show it wouldn't it? He could have demanded all the alcohol tests then pressed charges for harassment if found with no alcohol.

The burden of proof is on the state, not the accused.

F4GIB
October 11, 2005, 07:30 PM
This is "cop bashing"??? So says M-Rex.
I'll first note, the officers currently are not being held to the same standard as any other citizen. So, it definately is off to a poor start.

Funny thing, I've never been able to get a BBS owner or a moderator to give me a definition of "cop bashing" that isn't totally arbitrary. "Don't bruise their tiny egos" isn't a workable standard for deciding whether to post or not. In fact it's a real good example of why prior restraints chill speech (even the non-free speech on a BBS).

One BBS well known to most of us uses an "abusive" standard. That's no standard at all but just a hook to hang another arbitrary decision on. Then they privately tell the mods to "cut slack" for the LEO's so it's not even evenhanded arbitrariness.

Some incidents call for righteous anger (indignation for the more polite) and for powerful statements of condemnation. The beating of the old man in N.O. (like the attack on the old woman in N.O.) are just such incidents. That isn't bashing, that's a civilized response to uncivilized conduct.

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 07:30 PM
then wrote me a ticket becuse there was a smudge on my driver's license and took off.

My best buddy in HS got pulled over, made to sit on the sidewalk with his friends for half an hour while the police searched his car and was finally given a ticket for having a "dirty plate". More like driving a crappy car through a good neighborhood.

Funny thing. He's a deputy sheriff for Orange county now. Even after all the heartache he received from the LE's when he was younger

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 07:43 PM
This is "cop bashing"??? So says M-Rex.

I'll first note, the officers currently are not being held to the same standard as any other citizen. So, it definately is off to a poor start.

Actually, that's a preconceived bias based on ignorance. ;)

c_yeager
October 11, 2005, 08:11 PM
So, the police did not try to to collect evidence for a charge they were laying against him????????????????

I think you meant to say "the police did not try to collect evidence for a charge that was to be layed against them" ;)

XavierBreath
October 11, 2005, 08:37 PM
Robert Davis was interviewed on our local news channels tonight.

He does not blame the police officers, and states this matter is not racially motivated. He believes the way he was dressed, in a white T-shirt and shorts with grey whiskers on his face made him look like a homeless person. He stated he may have had cigarette smoke on his breath, but no alcohol, and is sure the ER physician will acquit him of any charges that he was drunk from his bloodwork. I have to say that Mr. Davis is a gentleman of the highest order. His response is so unlike that of Rodney King, that he will prevail in this matter.

http://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4215/101005_taped_beating-1.jpghttp://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4215/101005_taped_beating-3.jpg

As far as the stress the police are operating under..........Mr. Davis had recently returned to New Orleans to check on his property that was wiped out. He and his family has been under a great deal of stress as well. Operating under stress does not give law enforcement license to beat citizens. Mr. Davis asked a mounted policeman about the curfew time. Then another policeman smarted off to him, and Mr. Davis asked to be left alone. For that he was beaten to the ground and falsely accused of public drunkeness, and the police had the audacity to try to justify it and suppress and rough up a journalist who filmed their criminal activity. There is something very very wrong here, and it is NOT a black man with whiskers asking a mounted policeman about a curfew!

I usually give the police the benefit of the doubt. In this case, that is very difficult. Beaten New Orleans Man Revisits Scene (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NEW_ORLEANS_TAPED_BEATING?SITE=WWL&TEMPLATE=USHEADS.html&SECTION=HOME)
NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Robert Davis stood at the corner of Bourbon and Conti streets in the French Quarter and stared in disbelief at the brown stain on the sidewalk.

"Is that my blood? It must be," said the 64-year-old retired elementary schoolteacher, who was arrested and repeatedly punched by police over the weekend. "I didn't know I was bleeding that bad."

The confrontation, captured on videotape and broadcast across the country, has put another unwanted spotlight on the beleaguered, exhausted police force in this storm-struck city.

Three officers pleaded not guilty to charges stemming from the incident and the U.S. Justice Department opened a civil rights investigation.

Davis disputed contentions by police that he had been drinking.

"I haven't had a drink in 25 years," Davis said Monday. "I didn't do anything. I was going to get a pack of cigarettes and taking my evening constitutional."

The two city police officers accused in the beating, and a third accused of grabbing and shoving an Associated Press Television News producer who helped capture the encounter on tape, pleaded not guilty to battery charges and were released Monday.

After a hearing, at which trial was set for Jan. 11, officers Lance Schilling, Robert Evangelist and S.M. Smith were released on bond. They left without commenting. They were suspended without pay Sunday.

Davis says even though police accuse him of public intoxication, he hadn't been drinking.

Police Superintendent Warren Riley said any misconduct found in an investigation would be dealt with swiftly. He noted the video showed "a portion of that incident."

"The actions that were observed on this video are certainly unacceptable by this department," Riley said.

Davis is black; the three city police officers seen on the tape are white. But Davis and police officials have said they don't believe race was a factor.

Two other officials in the video appeared to be federal officers, according to police. Numerous agencies have sent officers to help in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and police spokesman Marlon Defillo said it would be up to their commanders to decide if they would face charges.

Davis had stitches under his swollen left eye, a bandage around a finger and complained of aches in his left shoulder and soreness in his back. His lawyer said he suffered fractures to his cheek and eye socket.

The confrontation came as the New Orleans Police Department - long plagued by allegations of brutality and corruption - struggles with the aftermath of Katrina and the resignation last month of Police Superintendent Eddie Compass.

Davis said the confrontation began after he had approached a mounted police officer Saturday to ask about curfews in the city when another officer interrupted.

"This other guy interfered and I said he shouldn't," Davis said. "I started to cross the street and - bam - I got it. ... All I know is this guy attacked me and said, 'I will kick your ass,' and they proceeded to do it."

The APTN tape shows an officer hitting Davis at least four times in the head. Davis appeared to resist, twisting and flailing as he was dragged to the ground by four officers. Davis' lawyer, Joseph Bruno, said his client did not resist police.

Another officer also kneed Davis and punched him twice. Davis was pushed to the sidewalk with blood streaming down his arm and into the gutter. The officers accused of striking Davis were identified as Schilling and Evangelist.

During the arrest, another officer, identified as Smith, ordered an APTN producer and cameraman to stop recording. When producer Rich Matthews held up his credentials, the officer grabbed him, leaned him backward over a car, jabbed him in the stomach and unleashed a profanity-laced tirade.

Davis had returned to New Orleans over the weekend from Atlanta to inspect six properties owned by members of his family, intending to clean them up or figure out how to rebuild them. He's no longer sure he'll return permanently to the city he's called home for 28 years.

"That's up in the air. The chaos that's here - I don't know," he said.

---

Associated Press writer Rachel LaCorte contributed to this report

http://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4201/100905_beat1.jpghttp://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4201/100905_beat2.jpg
http://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4201/100905_beat5.jpghttp://www.nola.com/cgi-bin/prxy/photogalleries/nph-cache.cgi/cache=3000;/nola/images/4201/100905_manbeat.jpg

Here's a link (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/videolineups/index.html?SITE=WWL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=USHEADS.html&videoName=1010dv_davis_nopd) to an excerpt of Mr. Davis' interview.
I have to say, as inflammatory as the statement may be, that this kind of uncalled for attack on a man's physical safety and life is exactly why many of us carry a gun. I wonder..........If these attackers had not been cops, but Cripps, and Mr. Davis had pulled his Glock out and ventilated a couple of skulls, would you have held him at fault? If not, then why are the police any different when they commit the same act?

I understand the NOPD has still not dropped the Public Drunk charges against Mr. Davis.

Some incidents call for righteous anger (indignation for the more polite) and for powerful statements of condemnation. The beating of the old man in N.O. (like the attack on the old woman in N.O.) are just such incidents. That isn't bashing, that's a civilized response to uncivilized conduct. Amen Brother!

50 Freak
October 11, 2005, 09:13 PM
I understand the NOPD has still not dropped the Public Drunk charges against Mr. Davis.

Doesn't matter, Mr. Davis will end up owning half of NO in a year. And the jury will throw it out. Tax payers lose again.

Retired school teacher. Hasn't touched alcohol in 25 years. Picking up cigarettes on this way to church. Jeez.... what a nightmare.

Too bad for NO, he wasn't some crack head pimp on his way to rob the local Qwik-e Mart.

mmike87
October 11, 2005, 09:46 PM
If cops were as perfect as their critics, what a wonderful
world it would be.

OK - but when civillians error or go a little too far, we end up in jail. Either people are responsible for their actions or they are not. Your occupation does not change the rules for you. Laws that require breaking the law to enforce are not worth enforcing.

Police are supposed to be better trained and better equipped to handle difficult situations. Certainly there are better ways to subdue an unarmed old man. Was this guy a threat to anything but one officer's ego?

Armed guy running down the street threatening to shoot people - fine, take him down as hard as necessary. Drunk old guy ... please!

We choose our occupation in this country. If someone can't handle treating citizens, even drunk ones, with some respect, then they need a new occupation.

And this is assuming the guy was even drunk at all - which seems to be in serious doubt now. Personally, if cops assaulted me on the street I'd resist, too - and feel it would be my God-given right to do so.

I will agree the officer responding to the AP reporter
went overboard, but I have not been under 6 weeks of
of that kind of stress and have no idea what I would do.

OK, so the citizens of NO aren't under any stress? If a group of "stressed" citizens beat the snot out of a cop would you be as sympathetic?

mmike87
October 11, 2005, 10:03 PM
So the moderator wants a thread that does not include any cop bashing...yet the thread is about...cop bashing. Hmmm...

This thread is not about cop bashing - it's about "old man bashing." They beat the snot out of a 64 year old man who was unarmed. The response needs to echo the threat.

Can cops shoot jay-walkers just to demand "compliance"?

New Orleans can sleep easy this evening with this violent guy off the street.

mmike87
October 11, 2005, 10:12 PM
My 2 Cents: If you don't like getting arrested or want to argue, the street is not the place to do it. If you resist arrest, you are just asking for an a$$ whipping whether you think it is right or legal or not.

Well, if it's NOT legal then it's not resisting - it's self defense.

mmike87
October 11, 2005, 10:15 PM
By assault I assume you mean shoved and yelled at. I didn't see anything more than that.

OK, I'll walk up to a cop and do just that. I have $10 that says I'd be charged with "assaulting a police officer" (and rightly so).

So, by your logic, a police officer shoving a reporter is different than if it had been the other way around. Therefore, you admit that a different standard of conduct exists for LEO's.

Someone shoves me for no reason, I am shoving back. I don't give a damn who you think you are.

rde
October 11, 2005, 10:18 PM
"M-Rex,
we are well aware of the occupational hazards of being a police officer. None of those hazards justify police officers seeing themselves as a separate class of citizen to whom a LOWERED set of expectations apply. If anything, police should be held to as high a standard as their fellow citizens."

Totally agree.

Apparently I don't know anything about stress according to M-Rex. Even though I am retired military, have been deployed all over the world in less than vacation like circumstances, to include 2 wars, and even recieved the purple heart. But...I guess I just don't know what REAL stress is...PA-lease. Bottom line, I don't have the time of day to listen to that type of excuse and that type of whining.

The attack on the AP journalist is a very key point that clearly demonstrates the concern that many non-police have regarding the police: an armed man physically assaulted the journalist in an attempt to stop the video recording. That armed man is a police officer. That is not an "administrative issue." That is a whole series of felony offenses. Lest many forget code and statutes provide a legal means to defend self up to an including the use of deadly force when attacked. Even when the attackers are LEO's in those cases where LEO's do not have proper legal justification to attack. Read your laws.

griz
October 11, 2005, 10:19 PM
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO.

This is not sarcasm or a joke, just an honest question. If you feel that is what the job is like, why do you do it?

silverlance
October 11, 2005, 10:21 PM
what royal FUP.
they totally picked the wrong guy to whale (wale?) on.

i really respect cops. i really do. i don't want to contribute to "us vs. them".

but given history, katrina, and this recent turn of events... i am not going to be trusting cops so much in the future. like another poster said, i'll treat them like family, but with my wits about me.

mmike87
October 11, 2005, 10:26 PM
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO.

Many of us have never been LEO's - true - but many of us have been in the military and I think many military jobs offer a pretty good amount of stress. Guess what? If I beat the snot out of someone and got caught, I went to see the Man. Period. Bad day, or not.

If have met a lot of LEO's in my day - and many of them were respectful, courteous, and polite. So, it can be done.

I even had a run in with the Carabinari in Naples in 1993. Myself and several others were drunk and lost. Really lost. We were not causing trouble, but were having a good time. The Carabinari guys helped point us in the right direction to get back to the ship. We were foreigners, a bit of a pain in the butt, but the guys kept their cool and helped us out, and later on we appreciated it. These guys could have beat the crap out of us, and didn't. And they would have gotten away with it.

The point is that with power comes responsibility. When you are in a position of power and authority you HAVE to be held to a higher standard of conduct than the average citizen. Otherwise, all that seperates you from the average Joe is the badge and the gun.

XavierBreath
October 11, 2005, 10:32 PM
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Take all of the stress you've ever felt from bills, a nagging spouse, a malfunctioning vehicle, walking a dark street at night, etc.......THEN.......couple it with inept administrators, marginal politicians, a spiteful unappreciative public, thousands of laws, ordinances, and general orders that govern your daily activities, and people who actively want to kill you simply because you wear a uniform, and maybe, just maybe, you will get close to what it is like to be an LEO. Whoop de do. That sounds like a good day on my job.
If you can't handle your job, leave it.

This is the same kind of logic that thugs use when they say "Mama didn't love me so I had to turn to crime." A man is responsible for his actions. Period. Anything less is a disgrace to your profession and your manhood.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 10:37 PM
Apparently I don't know anything about stress according to M-Rex. Even though I am retired military, have been deployed all over the world in less than vacation like circumstances, to include 2 wars, and even recieved the purple heart. But...I guess I just don't know what REAL stress is...PA-lease. Bottom line, I don't have the time of day to listen to that type of excuse and that type of whining.
Many of us have never been LEO's - true - but many of us have been in the military and I think many military jobs offer a pretty good amount of stress. Guess what? If I beat the snot out of someone and got caught, I went to see the Man. Period. Bad day, or not.

First and foremost, thank you for your service. You are most assuredly not the type of person I am talking about. Mea culpa for not making that more clear. Obviously you have a paradigm on the world that most folks do not have.

However, it is interesting. You don't have the 'time of day to listen to that type of excuse and that type of whining' but you had the time to work up a post. Ok. :scrutiny:

Be that as it may, don't you worry, not one little bit. I have no doubt the officer who shoved the hapless AP reporter will be disciplined. He crossed the line and is most definitely deserving the label of JBT. The officers who rolled around with the elderly man will be as well, if the are found guilty of wrongdoing.
The point is that with power comes responsibility. When you are in a position of power and authority you HAVE to be held to a higher standard of conduct than the average citizen. Otherwise, all that seperates you from the average Joe is the badge and the gun.
+1 This is exactly my point.

Biker
October 11, 2005, 10:43 PM
Be damned if that isn't a reasonable response.
Biker

rde
October 11, 2005, 10:45 PM
I have the time of day to work up a post simply because lessons have to be learned and messages have to be sent (not talking about posting on a BBS/Forum). Whining and excuses do nothing in this regard.

Everyone has something to learn from this incident. Police, media, adminstraters, non-police, etc. As noted, I feel the key here (lesson or message) is that an armed man..a police officer...felt that it was within his legal authority to physically assault a journalist in an attempt to get the journalist to stop the recording of the event. Not only is that a whole series of felony actions but is an indication of the mentality of at least those LEO's on the scene. And this is a dangerous mentality or thought process to the rights and freedoms of the average U.S. Citizen.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 10:50 PM
This is not sarcasm or a joke, just an honest question. If you feel that is what the job is like, why do you do it?

There are things that come with the responsibility of pinning on a badge. One has to deal with the bad as well as the good. I personally believe that there are parallels in law enforcement and the armed forces. Certain people gravitate to each pursuit; one primarily being the 'protector', the other being the 'warrior'. A 'calling', if you will.

Occasionally, the wrong sorts of people enter into each profession. Unfortunately, these folks tend to screw up in the most visible way possible and cast a shadow on the rest of the people who perform their duties admirally every day. I don't deny this.

What galls me to no end is the general public's (bear with me for a moment) near-orgasmic reaction whenever a law enforcement officer (or member of the armed forces) goes sideways and oversteps his/her authority (read that as royally screws the pooch). One officer beats up a citizen, then all cops are jack booted thugs. One soldier fraggs his Captain with a grenade, then all soldiers are loose cannons waiting to go off. Thus the divide between citizens and law enforcement grows wider and wider.

I expected more from 'High Road' folks.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 10:58 PM
As noted, I feel the key here (lesson or message) is that an armed man..a police officer...felt that it was within his legal authority to physically assault a journalist in an attempt to get the journalist to stop the recording of the event. Not only is that a whole series of felony actions but is an indication of the mentality of at least those LEO's on the scene. And this is a dangerous mentality or thought process to the rights and freedoms of the average U.S. Citizen.

I agree...to a point. The only one who knows the mind of that officer is that officer. It most certainly was not within his legal authority to do what he did to the AP reporter. I personally believe the officer was a dumbass (please pardon the vernacular) and he deserves whatever discipline he gets. Because of him, all of the honorable LEO's doing their jobs now have a harder time dealing with the public at large. As to the minds of the other officers who were wrestling with the elderly man, who knows? All that has been publicized is a few seconds of video. Note: I am not excusing their actions, if they are found to be excessive.

What I find very disturbing is the powder keg of hostility that flares up every time one of these scenes plays out in the media. It's almost as if people want these incidents to happen so they will be justified in their hatred of authority.

XavierBreath
October 11, 2005, 10:59 PM
What galls me to no end is the general public's (bear with me for a moment) near-orgasmic reaction whenever a law enforcement officer (or member of the armed forces) goes sideways and oversteps his/her authority (read that as royally screws the pooch). One officer beats up a citizen, then all cops are jack booted thugs. One soldier fraggs his Captain with a grenade, then all soldiers are loose cannons waiting to go off. Thus the divide between citizens and law enforcement grows wider and wider.

Goes sideways and oversteps his authority? How about brutally beats a man unconscious for asking a simple question concerning a curfew?

No, all officers are not jack booted thugs, but those who defend and make excuses for these kind of criminal acts have chosen the side they wish to occupy. Here's a clue.......that side is NOT law and order. :banghead:

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 11:05 PM
but given history, katrina, and this recent turn of events... i am not going to be trusting cops so much in the future. like another poster said, i'll treat them like family, but with my wits about me.

Silverlance, I can understand your frustration. I truly do. However, if you are "not going to be trusting cops so much in the future", then you are making a conscious and deliberate decision to do so. Those N.O. officers have no more to do with the officers in your state than a bug fluttering its wings in N.O. causes a storm in Canada.

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 11:06 PM
Goes sideways and oversteps his authority? How about brutally beats a man unconscious for asking a simple question concerning a curfew?

No, all officers are not jack booted thugs, but those who defend and make excuses for these kind of criminal acts have chosen the side they wish to occupy. Here's a clue.......that side is NOT law and order.

Um...ok. :confused:
Why are you looking for a fight? Are we not in agreement?

XavierBreath
October 11, 2005, 11:10 PM
Why are you looking for a fight? So you think I'm looking for a fight because I chose to question your "authority"? Thank you for proving my point sir. :)

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 11:13 PM
Quote:
Why are you looking for a fight?
So you think I'm looking for a fight because I chose to question your "authority"? Thank you for proving my point sir.

Uh...you're welcome? :scrutiny: :confused: :scrutiny: :confused:

Authority? I thought it was just an opinion.

XavierBreath
October 11, 2005, 11:16 PM
Since you think I'm looking for a fight, I hope I don't meet up with you on Bourbon Street while I'm trying to find out the curfew time.
That's my point.

Biker
October 11, 2005, 11:41 PM
Actually, I think that M-Rex is being reasonable and open-minded. I don't 100% agree with him, but I think that his heart is in the right place. Maybe we could give him a break and do a little back and forth?
JMO...
Biker

M-Rex
October 11, 2005, 11:41 PM
Since you think I'm looking for a fight, I hope I don't meet up with you on Bourbon Street while I'm trying to find out the curfew time.
That's my point.

Why, exactly?

rde
October 11, 2005, 11:55 PM
Mind set of the officer is clear by his actions.

Note: I have avoided making serious comments regarding the actions by the LEO's upon/against/with/to the 64 year old man. My comments are regarding an armed LEO assualting an AP reporter recroding the event. I feel that this is the key. It may be possible that there is something we didn't see before the recording started in regards to the 64 year old man. However, a felony attack on journalists recording the event in an attempt to get them to stop recording the event are criminal acts. Plain and simple. Criminal acts. They are not a simple case of "over stepping bounds" and no amount of "administrative" discipline is acceptable. Criminal acts require criminal prosectution..period. This is also a clear indication that these LEO's did not want the event recorded...why? This is a clear indication that these LEO's believe that they do in fact have the legal authority to attack non-police personnel...why? Combine this with the overwhelming support of the LEO's actions including the attack on the AP journalist at the Law Enforcement related forums as being justified. Further combine this with a constant stream of excessive force incidents regularly being recorded and reported all over the U.S. and you do not have an isolated incident. You have a systemic problem. A problem that threatens life..liberty..

griz
October 12, 2005, 12:13 AM
I appreciate the thoughtful reply M-rex. For what it's worth, I think what upsets most folks isn't the officers in a particular incident, it's the automatic defence by some other officers. When a soldier frags an officer, other soldiers don't deflect critisizim by talking about how tough it is to be a soldier.

Thanks again, Griz

M-Rex
October 12, 2005, 12:20 AM
Wait...clarify. You keep saying 'felony'. Is this a felony in Louisiana? When I look up 242 PC here in California, what happend on the video (to the AP reporter) is a misdemeanor. It's only a felony here if there is "serious
bodily injury is inflicted on the person".

Have there been any reports that the AP reporter sustained a serious injury?

M-Rex
October 12, 2005, 12:22 AM
I appreciate the thoughtful reply M-rex. For what it's worth, I think what upsets most folks isn't the officers in a particular incident, it's the automatic defence by some other officers. When a soldier frags an officer, other soldiers don't deflect critisizim by talking about how tough it is to be a soldier.

Yes, I can understand that. Those same officers engaging in the automatic defense, don't know anything more about the incident than anyone else. They saw the same video.

insidious_calm
October 12, 2005, 12:27 AM
M-Rex,

I had a long drawn out response to your posts. I realized, however, that you are one of "them" and you will never change your position becasue of that. My words would have been a waste. Take that for what ever you want, good, bad, or indifferent. I will leave it with my last few paragraphs which you and a whole lot of others should read.

For the appologists on here, perception is reality for those who perceive it. In other words, if the majority of society has come to perceive the police as corrupt JBTs, then the police are in fact corrupt JBTs, whether they are or not in your perception. A lot of people, I believe a majority, have had a change of heart about law enforcement in general. Whether you believe this is fair or justified is not relevant. It remains that it is our reality. This change was brought about by various actions of law enforcement to which we reacted with a negative perception of law enforcement officers to one degree or another. The mere fact that so many people feel this way should be a clue that not all is rosy in your profession. The degree to which this negative perception has grown varies from simple distrust, which is very widespread IMO, to full blown "hate cops wouldn't call 911 to save them if they were all dying". I don't think the latter is widespread and admittedly to go that far there are probably other issues at work as well like mental illness. Like I said though, go ask any number of people the simple question "do you trust cops?" and the answer will most often be "no". We are not "cop haters". We are simply responding to our perception of what we see.

I realize most of what I have written is lost on the apologists. You who are apologists won't like this and will likely respond with the usual barage of attacks. Oh well. FWIW I recognize that law enforcement is both a necessary and difficult function in our society. I really wish things would improve. As I have said on numerous occasions before, the onus is on the police to improve society's pereption of them. We, the general public, will not simply wake up one day and forget what we have seen, heard, and experienced. It's going to take a lot of hard work and positive community relations. You can scream "cop hater" till you are blue in the face and it won't change a thing.

For those who really care about what could be done to improve things, which is probably not many, I'll list my opinions again about what law enforcement can do to fix this rift between "them and us". For starters get ahold of your unions. When someone commits a crime, like assaulting an AP reporter, it is not a labor relation issue. It's a criminal issue. Criminals should not be in law enforcement. Sending the union talking heads out in front of the cameras to defend them makes you all look bad. When you defend the indefensible you yourself become indefensible. Your unions political positions on things like gun control also hurt you badly. We stood united to fight for your 50 state CCW rights, where are your union leaders in our time of need? DO use your unions to stop your being used as political pawns and revenue generators. Do the right thing. I know, it really is harder than it looks. In this instance here several federal LEO's watched a NOPD officer assault a reporter with zero justifcation. An arrest should have been made on the spot. In another thread officers driving recklessly were only stopped after numerous 911 calls. How many patrol cars were passed that simply looked at the spectacle of lights and looked the other way?

The list goes on, but you get the drift. Give us a reason to change our perception and we will. We really want to. Until then things will only get worse. One day it will devolve in to something horrific I'm afraid, and that will truly be a bad day for our country.

I.C.

Greg L
October 12, 2005, 12:43 AM
You've got it Griz. It isn't the assorted actions that would get you or I locked up, it is the "oh well, you just wouldn't understand" responses that appear no matter what the story is. (this isn't directed just at you M-Rex, I do partially understand where you are coming from knowing a couple of LEOs that I talk with off duty every week (in a relaxed situation) as our kids are in Cub Scouts together).

Most people here expect the media to get the story wrong out of the box (fairly justifiably from what I've seen). Yet when the story develops to where the accused might have been in the right to begin with & the journalists actually got it right, the thin blue line circles the wagons & attacks those pointing out the inconsistencies.

Do I believe the citizen in this case? Yes for a couple of reasons. First is the lack of public announcement from the authorities in the area that he was drunk/drug impaired. As was stated by quite a few people here, when someone goes to the hospital under police guard, their blood is tested for alcohol/drugs. If the police were correct that he was drunk/high it would have been trumpeted by every agency involved. The silence is deafening. Second, the one officer trying to place his horse between the event & the camera. Granted an animal could have moved on his own but in light of everything else that was going on it was damning. Which leads up to the third point. There have been many posts here by LEOs singing the praises of dash cameras as they completely demolish claims by those who have done wrong that the cops were the ones in the wrong. For the NO cops to attack a journalist says to me that they KNEW that they were in the wrong & wanted to get rid of the evidence.

Like it or not, the police SHOULD be held to a higher standard as a bad apple in their barrel can ruin lives. It is when the good apples justify/marginalize the bad apples that the "us vs them" really shows up & says to many that the good ones may quite well be tainted too.

M-Rex
October 12, 2005, 12:53 AM
I had a long drawn out response to your posts. I realized, however, that you are one of "them" and you will never change your position becasue of that.

You lost all credibility right about there. Thanks for playing, though. I guess we're all a 'them'.

Jon Coppenbarger
October 12, 2005, 01:00 AM
Greg and Calm I totally agree with everything you have said in the last two post. Your post said things in a calm manner which I can not do when things like this come up as my blood boils when I continually see these things.
Thank you for talking for many of us.
Jon

M-Rex
October 12, 2005, 01:04 AM
Greg,

Yes! I agree. As far as the officers wrestling with the old man, who knows? I do know that at the department I worked at, we were never trained to hit anyone with closed fists. However, on the other side of that coin, we were trained to use various specific strikes to gain compliance. In my opinion, their actions appeared to be beyond what could be considered necessary. However, once again, I have wrestled with enough drunks to realize how difficult it is, also. And, the video was obviously edited to present the most dramatic moment for the media. If they are found to have exceeded their departments level of force requirement, they'll be disciplined. I have no doubt about it.

As far as the officer accosting the AP reporter, I've already stated that I believe he crossed a line that should not have been crossed. Did they all get together ahead of time and plan this out? Who knows? Did he simply lose his temper? Maybe. Am I an 'apologist', or justifying their actions? Certainly not.

But apparently, to some who frequent this board, what one does, all do. How openminded? Broad brush generalizations are just another form of bigotry.

XavierBreath
October 12, 2005, 01:19 AM
Greg, Insidious Calm,
Thank you for articulating what needed to be said.
You said it better than I could, and it is not falling on deaf ears.

Citizens want a police force they can trust. It is not the citizens who have created the divide.

pax
October 12, 2005, 01:21 AM
Since we're down to Us vs. Them, this thread's done.

pax

If you enjoyed reading about "Police Beating in New Orleans Caught on Tape #2 Constructive Criticism ONLY" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!