isnt 19 officers an overreaction?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

ProactiveReactionary

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
95
Location
Louisville, KY
i have to ask this. first they only have him unrestrained with a single officer, he gets a hold of her gun and kills three people. a couple days later, they have him surrounded by 19 guards and the look on his face said to me "if i move they'll kill me, i know it". he didnt so much as twitch.

so my question is, why overreact? is 19 guards going to more effective than say 10? if they had simply had 2-3 guards to escort him while he was handcuffed and shackled (making it all the harder for him to fight guards or get their guns) he might not have killed 3 people and courthouses across the country wouldnt be running aorund like raped apes. in my city they're questioning whether the officers should even have guns...this in light of the fact someone has been able to bring a weapon into a courtroom. clearly a taser or pepper spray is going to defeat a knife or a gun, right? after a couple people are dead or seiously injured maybe. we've all seen cops and seen how ineffective pepper spray can be.

maybe if they had used the "buddy system" with the officers escorting criminals to begin with none of this would have happened. but rather than admit that they're looking for excuses and scapegoats. doesnt anyone in the government have the backbone to simply say "look we screwed up, we're sorry"??? of course not, that would open them up to three lawsuits, which would be fine by me, they should pay the price for having only one guard with him. they're looking to avoid being punished for their actions while holding others accountable. something about that turns my stomach.
 
no no no, i mean someone being fired for assigning only one guard (or whoever told them to assign only one guard). im talking about the city being sued.

they have paid anything yet, the four victims have paid and dearly for something that was completely preventable. their families should be compensated and heavily for it.

normally i'm not a lawsuit happy kind of person but i think this deserves an exception to the rule. they should be sued for this for every last dime. unfortunately its only going to come out of the wallets of the tax payers but the city should have to pay and those who let this happen should be outright fired and barred from having a law enforcement job ever again.
 
Yes, I think so but isn't that (over-compensation) the norm these days?

Besides, they probably all wanted to be on TV and their supervisor was afraid one of or more of them would have filed an official compliant if he dared show "favoritism" by picking out the best guards for the job! :rolleyes: :D
 
What I keep asking myself is, why don't they cuff people behind the back? I doubt very highly that the guy would have been able to do anything had he been cuffed behind the back instead of in front.
 
Won't the civil attorneys have fun with this lawsuit, blind adherence to the cult of PC and poor tactics are going to bite the taxpayers of Atlanta in the ash, and the lawyers keep making money.
 
defense attorneys argue that a handcuffed inmate denotes they are guilty and want their clients unfettered so as to give them a "fair trial". while putting everyone's safety at risk at the same time. violent criminals need to be restrained, it has nothing to do with a conveyence of guilt, it has everything to do with keeping a courtroom safe. at the least the person should be shackled and those shackles chained to the floor, that way if he tries anything he wont be getting very far and people can get away from him easily. but transporting they need to be handcuffed, no questions asked. jurors cant see an inmate being transported so i really doubt its going to prejudice them in any way.


as many videos we've seen of people being attacked in courtrooms, we would think that someone by now would get a clue and say hey, why dont we restrain them?

the courthouse here has a courtroom for newly arrested suspects to be arraigned and there is a nice strong bullet proof glass barrier to keep suspects well away from judges and lawyers, why dont defense attorneys argue that the barrier implies their guilt? defense attorneys, while i understand they have a job, really disturb me as to how far they'll argue for their client while putting others at risk. when you put my life at risk because you dont want hancuffs on your client becuase they're a violent offender and you dont want the handcuffs to prejudice the jury, you and i are going to have a problem.

non violent offenders can be treated differently but still with caution and still two two or three guards while transporting them and near them at all times.
 
Was this the first time in court for this guy? Or had he been before a judge before this?
 
My understanding is that some Law Enforcement Agencies use the "shock belt" with wonderful result. You just belt the sucker on the perp, (suspected perp, excuse me), walk 3 steps behind him, (er, or her, sorry), and if he does anything other than precisely what you tell him, her to, you just zap him/her. I would add cuffs to the mix, and I think you would have a reasonably safe situation.

It's not as politically correct as to have ONE 51 year old overweight Grandmother do the escorting, and it won't make the ACLU happy, but if it had been in effect at the time 4 people would be alive, a couple more would not be physically harmed and the Sheriff wouldn't be looking like the dope he/she is....

Under the stupid rules in effect when this situation happened probably 90% of the deputies would still have been overwhelmed and nothing would be different.

The only good that might have possibly have come out of this comedy of errors was the lady who turned him in will get (at least) $10,000. They'll probably try and screw her out of the other $50,000 reward that was offered.

I wouldn't have spent the night in the house with that murderer for WAYYYY over $10,000. She deserves all the reward!

This whole snafu was SOOOOO unnecessary.. :cuss:
 
Last edited:
Two guards with orders to stop by any and all means possible would have been entirely sufficient.

Somewhere, there's a deceptively dainty-looking 4' 11" female U.S. Marine who could easily have settled that particular criminal's problem in about a second and a half.
 
Was this the first time in court for this guy? Or had he been before a judge before this?
Click to expand...
He's got a long rap sheet, and most of it's violent, including weapons violations. They caught him with two home-made shanks in his shoes a couple of days previously, and Judge Barnes had requested extra security. It obviously didn't happen.

So now Fulton county scrambles to look like they're "on top" of things, and that this was only a fluke incident. Sheriff Freeman's even promised to appoint a "task force" to look into the whole situation.

I feel so much safer now.

Atlanta is split into two counties, Fulton and Dekalb. Numerous Sheriffs in both counties have been charged with corruption, and I hope Freeman loses his job over this.
 
Depends on the competance of the officer, their training and whatever policies they have for the situation. With 19 officers present ??????????


Sam
 
normally i'm not a lawsuit happy kind of person but i think this deserves an exception to the rule. they should be sued for this for every last dime. unfortunately its only going to come out of the wallets of the tax payers but the city should have to pay and those who let this happen should be outright fired and barred from having a law enforcement job ever again.
Click to expand...

Suing the people of atlanta, or the city will do nothing....except make the people pay, they need to fire the person responsible
 
I'm thinking the 19 deputies makes him feel more powerful...in his head he's probably thinking "I'm so bad, they need all these cops to guard me".
 
Somewhere, there's a deceptively dainty-looking 4' 11" female U.S. Marine who could easily have settled that particular criminal's problem in about a second and a half
Click to expand...

I knew her about 9 years ago. She was a 21 year old, 110 pound red headed diesel mechanic on Camp Pendleton from Provo, Utah that liked to shoot. (Age and weight are all guesses.) She may have been 5'5", however.

The next year she was at Quantico, #1 at Camp Perry, and promoted by order of the commandant way, way above what her time in would warrant.
 
A couple of points regarding my understanding of what happened....

  • He was released from his handcuffs to allow him to change out of his orange jail clothing and into civvies.
  • The video, if the cameras were pointed in the right direction, was not monitored.
  • Extra deputies, shock-belts, or anything else additional will cost the taxpayers. City budgets are strained everywhere. We all had better be prepared for local tax increases to fund more security in our jails and courthouses.
  • Given the violent nature of his charges, and the fact that he'd been caught with shanks, he should have had an extra deputy. But go back to my point about budgets.
  • It's only my guess, but as relatives of government employees, I'm thinking the heirs of those killed will not be allowed to sue the city agencies involved.
 
I say tripple the fine on all vilent crime and use the money on shock belts and wages. The extra goes to bullets and practice of proper shot placement.

Kill the SOB

Tony :cuss:
 
Proper procedure would've been to allow him to change into his courtroom clothes while still in his jail cell. Then, he should've been led, while cuffed and shackled, to the courtroom, where he would've been shackled to his chair.

Especially after he had just been found with weapons on his person.

With his arms free, the jury could have been admitted to the room, and none would have been the wiser.

P.S... Those shock belts really do work, too!
 
Extra deputies, shock-belts, or anything else additional will cost the taxpayers. City budgets are strained everywhere. We all had better be prepared for local tax increases to fund more security in our jails and courthouses.
Click to expand...
My guess is Atlanta is like just about every other city in this country. We are spending too much money on the wrong things. We have all kinds of money for statiums (I know its wrong), light rail, airports, urban planners, diversity seminars, corporate incentives, and I could go in until I puke. But for some mysterious reason we don't have sufficient money to implement justice.

So in the Atlanta situation we have a PC Nazi putting people into dangerous situations. And the goober refuses to believe that perhaps it wasn't the best idea to put a 51 year old, tiny grand mother with an athletic, dangerous, violent perp. Atlanta's tragedy was caused by PC and spending money where it ain't needed. The decisions that lead to the deaths were made by a few people. They need to be root out and treated to a tar and feather bath. :mad:
 
I knew her about 9 years ago. She was a 21 year old, 110 pound red headed diesel mechanic on Camp Pendleton from Provo, Utah that liked to shoot. (Age and weight are all guesses.) She may have been 5'5", however.
The next year she was at Quantico, #1 at Camp Perry, and promoted by order of the commandant way, way above what her time in would warrant.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the confirmation, eh?

What's lacking is rarely, if ever, the human resources, but the management to apply them as needed.
 
I think 18 of the deputies could have stayed at the house if they had the perp "belted" with a shock belt.

It makes no sense to me that a 51 year old deputy of either sex, large or small, would be allowed to escort this huge felon, unshackled, alone.

This is mismanagement of the worst sort. Whoever is making these politically correct decisions should be held responsible. I hope the tax payers of Atlanta will not allow this to be swept under the rug.

As for "shock belts" being costly, that's true. But in the long run it's probably cheaper than having to use mutiple escorts in these type situations. Shock belts don't care how big, or how bad you are.... They'll drop ya to your knees in a heartbeat. I think even with shock belts there should be 2 escorts.

All this crap about the "jury" being affected by the sight of the perp in "handcuffs or shakles" is pure political correctness too. If you are sitting on a jury involving the crimes of alleged rape and sodomy, or any felony resulting in physical harm to someone I think seeing the "alleged" perp secured in the courtroom would be comforting. If the jury finds him innocent, THEN take the cuffs off.

I guess I'm just too old to understand the logic of "political correctness" anyway. It all seems "political IN-correctness to me.

I think bad guys know that "shock belt's" have no conscience, and if the person holding the trigger has the "will" to properly apply the juice when needed then the bad guy IS GOING TO FEEL PAIN, BIGTIME. I don't think there are very many humans that can withstand a shock of electricity of the strength available with the shock belt...

Of course now the problem would be having a Sheriff smart enough to allow his deputies to actually apply shock to the perp. This Sheriff is apparently so stupid he wouldn't let his deputies use it if they had it. Go figure?

Just my old fart opinion. :banghead:
 
"that would open them up to three lawsuits, which would be fine by me, they should pay the price for having only one guard with him"

When you say "they", you know that means you and me, right? The government doesn't have any money--they spend ours.

But yeah, 19 guards is overkill and it was a "demonstration" or show of force to quell media stories. In other words, propaganda.

Oh yeah, what's not be guarded since that guy has 19 deputies on him?
 
All this crap about the "jury" being affected by the sight of the perp in "handcuffs or shakles" is pure political correctness too.
Click to expand...

It also seems to be the opinion of many judges that it is inherently prejudicial for a defendant to be shackled in front of the jury. I guess we could go back to the days when the defendant sat in a little cage...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top