Football player that was Tasered has charges dismissed

[dragongoddess]

From the Houston Chronicle in todays online edition(chron.com)

A day after charges of resisting arrest were dismissed against him, Houston Texans guard Fred Weary described on Wednesday what it was like to be shocked with a Taser and said he hoped his reputation would not suffer as a result of the incident.

 

[Biker]

So, arrested and Tased but no charges filed. Ya gotta wonder.

Biker

 

[Derby FALs]

 

[hoji]

You seem surprised.
Lesson: Don't look at the police or you might get an attitude adjustment

 

[Derby FALs]

Surprised but pleased.

 

[Spreadfire Arms]

So, arrested and Tased but no charges filed. Ya gotta wonder.

Well, it is Harris County. this DA's office really marches to their own drummer. they publicly state they will prosecute all citizens lawfully carrying a pistol in Texas under the "travelling definition" despite the law that specifically enumerates when a citizen can lawfully carry a pistol in their vehicle. they way they see it, the citizen will have to get an attorney and fight this in court (which they will ultimately will be acquitted of), but will waste his time and money in doing so. not to mention, you'll get arrested, booked, fingerprinted, photographed, spend a few hours in the Houston Jail, and probably have your vehicle towed at your own expense, despite the fact that you have committed no crime.

i've seen plenty of times when a guy on the street was guilty of something, but the DA's office refused to file or plea-bargained it down. yes, for civil culpability it looks bad when the police use force on someone and the DA's office drops the criminal charge, but there may be politics involved.

ill give you an example of another Texas football player a few years ago. Ricky Williams, the golden child of UT Football, was pulled over by a campus police officer for a moving violation. Ricky did not properly sign the ticket. the officer arrested him for not correctly signing the written promise to appear. the next day the officer was fired. was the firing justified? who knows. but i bet he would have at least had the opportunity to defend his actions if it was some regular student. but the fact that it was Ricky Williams resulted in his immediate firing.

 

[wiredwrx]

Not surprising at all. An officer only need PC to make an arrest. The Prosecutor needs evidence to prove his case BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Prosecutors must decide if the cost of a prosecution is worth the effort and expense, and is win-able. Just because the Prosecutor has found that it is either unwin-able or not worth the prosecution, doesn't mean the offendor is innocent, or that the arrest was somehow not proper.

There is a significant difference between the two standards.

Michael

 

[cane]

Wired, what's PS?

 

[Biker]

Wired...

I'm guessing that the event was caught on the cop-cam. Two cops state that he assaulted one cop and they found that it was reasonable to tase the guy.
Why weren't charges filed?

Biker

 

[wiredwrx]

Ooops, changed it to PC.

Biker, nice to know you are "guessing" that it was caught on camera. How you can "guess" that is beyond me. How about I guess that the prosecutor is in the players pocket. How about I guess that the DA in the county is a football fan. How about I guess someone was promised seasons tickets.

Once again, a person believing that the absence of evidence is proof of something. We haven't seen the video, so it MUST indicate the officers did something wrong. They are not prosecuting, so it must mean the player didn't do anything wrong and/or the officers messed up. They must have declined to prosecute because the film shows the officers are wrong.

Once again, given the available evidence, the prosecutor declined to file charges. Could it be that the camera shows the officers messed up, Sure. Could it be that the prosecutor was paid off, Sure.

But, lacking proof to those suppositions, I believe the only thing that can be believed, that there was not enough evidence for a conviction. Plain and simple. No cover ups needed, no nefarious thoughts, that is all. Show me some proof or evidence, more then plain "guessing" and then we can talk about it.

Michael

 

[Biker]

Now...Mike...bag that tone, m'kay? It's not unreasonable to assume that the event was recorded. Why would you think that it wouldn't be given the circumstances?

Biker

 

[Derby FALs]

Hey Mikey!
Your "guess" is as good as ours.
MUHAHAHA!

 

[wiredwrx]

Sorry for the tone, I didn't mean for it to come through. I am just tired of people using the LACK of evidence to be proof of wrong doing, big bad government control, and conspiracy. I deal in proof. The absence of proof is proof of nothing, not proof of the nefarious.

I am NOT guessing what happened. I am giving an alternate reason why the prosecutor failed to prosecute the player. The OP thinks that the failure to prosecute is proof that the officer was wrong in tasering the player, and the police are wrong. IT IS NOT.

I choose to not immediately assume the BAD in every situation. If there is proof of bad, then it is bad. If there is no proof, then I assume the "good", or at least, I don't ASSUME either way.

 

[razorburn]

Innocent until proven guilty, you're saying. But only in regard to the LEO? Aren't you assuming that wrongdoing was done on behalf of the football player, resulting in proper arrest? But you want proof that the LEO was guilty of false arrest to the player before you'll accept that was wrongdoing on his behalf ? Quite an interesting way of thinking. My head is spinning.

 

[wiredwrx]

Wrong, innocent until proven guilty for all. I never said that the Player was guilty. I said that based on what was being dicussed, that I felt the officer was justified in tasering the player. I never said he was guilty of anything, JUST that I felt the tasering was justified based on what was stated in the article. TO be tasered, HE NEED NOT BE GUILTY, only that the officer has justification for her actions.

I said that in order to make an arrest, there must be PC. PC DOES NOT equal guilt, but it does equal a "proper arrest"

I am not saying anyone is guilty or innocent, just that the failure to prosecute is not indicative, in the absence of additional evidence, that the officers did wrong. The absence of viewing the tape is not indicative of the officers guilt and the players innocence, or the opposite.

Michael

 

[Derby FALs]

If you say so, I guess.

Guess:
a. To predict (a result or an event) without sufficient information.
b. To assume, presume, or assert (a fact) without sufficient information.

 

[sam59]

Football Stars at College

From my perspective: I have first hand knowledge of athlete’s at a major Arizona University that have blatantly assaulted Police Officers and were not prosecuted. The simple fact was their status as an athlete overode their momentary lack of judgement.

This town would not survive without the college, so it was in the best interest of the college/DA's Office etc.. to not pursue chargs.

I am not sure if that is the case here but that was my experience.

 

[springmom]

Actually, a judge dismissed the charges. The police were not happy and said they disagreed, although they accepted the judge's ruling. This had nothing to do with the police making this decision at all. Whether there was a cop cam or not, the judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence and dismissed the charges.

Springmom

 

[Art Eatman]

Springmom's summary pretty much ends a Low Road thread...

Art