mjMIff
Member
Fast LT1 said:If he just told him to shut up, then the officer needs to get his ass chewed! If i did that i would be suspended without pay and would be in deep shit!
cpd1212 said:I'm curious, what happened in this incident before mr cell phone "I could watch this all day" started recording?
Did the officer ask the intoxicated individual a series of questions that resulted in a determination that he needed to be arrested? Maybe he made a determination that the individual needed to be taken to the ground in order to be taken into custody. Maybe this determination was made due to combatative language, aggressive movements prior to the video starting? Can't see the officer's feet or the offender once he is taken down. Maybe he is holding onto the officers feet? Can't tell, can we? Maybe he tried to bite the officer while he's down there.
People would be complaining if the officer was down on top of him with a knee in his back trying to gain custody. People would complain if he tazered him. For a copper, this a a no win situation in the armchair court of public opinion. New Years Eve too? I'm sure there was just TONS of backup available to call for. Not really, everyone is probably tied up with drunks like this.
That is not a beat down, a beating, or whatever you want to call it. He uses three force options to get the guy into custody. Physical, mechanical, and chemical. He's in custody, and it is game over. Maybe he should have rolled around on the ground with the guy, got cut up, tore his uniform, and maybe have to fight for his sidearm in the process.
That's my opinion from someone who has been there, done that, lost the criminal case, won the civil case, and is still working. I'd be happy to have this guy with me on a call where "hands on" is called for.
rwo978 said:Don't know all the circumstances of the call or what was said, therefore EVERYTHING at this point is speculation. It looks bad, but we don't know all the details. Therefore, I have no opinion.
I think to the Felony warrant we served last night for 'Felon in possession and discharge of a firearm'. Put myself in this situation with the same warrant and if the dudes being all squirrley, evasive, and digging, the force might well be reasonable. But, without audio and details, everything at this point in time is moot.
crescentstar69 said:It is the "video age". I taught all my trainees to always assume they were being filmed, even if it was 4 AM on a country road. Everyone wants to be the next dickhead made famous by putting something juicy on You Tube.
ST. LOUIS (AP) — St. Louis police are investigating after a YouTube video surfaced showing a city officer using his nightstick to beat a man.
Police said in a statement Tuesday that while the circumstances are not yet known, the video is disturbing. Police say they have not yet identified the officer, but he will be placed on administrative duty once identified, until the investigation is complete.
The video was shot early on New Year's Day, at a convenience store, through the window of a car that was not involved.
The convenience store owner, Joel Platke, says the officer was off-duty working security at the store when the young man came in and caused a disturbance. He says what the video doesn't show is the young man grabbing at the officer's ankles. Platke says he believes the officer did nothing wrong.
mjMIff said:
The convenience store owner, Joel Platke, says the officer was off-duty working security at the store when the young man came in and caused a disturbance. He says what the video doesn't show is the young man grabbing at the officer's ankles. Platke says he believes the officer did nothing wrong.
Can't see the officer's feet or the offender once he is taken down. Maybe he is holding onto the officers feet?
cpd1212 said:Can't see the officer's feet or the offender once he is taken down. Maybe he is holding onto the officers feet?
mjMIff said:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5949051/Police-helmet-cams-go-up-in-smoke.html
Hope it never comes to that, but geez, may need to one day. I am planning on putting a cam in my POV!
I really like having a dash cam in my cruiser, while its not perfect and can't show everything that I see, at least it is an unedited copy of video that catches the majority of what happens.mjMIff said:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5949051/Police-helmet-cams-go-up-in-smoke.html
Hope it never comes to that, but geez, may need to one day. I am planning on putting a cam in my POV!
How do you figure?Station 3 said:i mean damn he is in deep shit now.
Also, you go to your spray first when you are alone, dealing with a subject who is under the influence of something (possibly pcp???) and you don't know if/when you'll have backup? Are you concerned that you might get contaminated and can't see or breath to stay in the fight?Station 3 said:I go for my spray first its just better
mcpd2025 said:Well, the reason I posed my questions is that you are crucifying this officer for using force without knowing the reason he used it. You would use your gun if the situation called for it, but not your baton?
I guess my 9 years on the job hasn't taught me the appropriate way to use OC to ensure that I am not contaminated. Its been my experience that spray can be affected by wind (when in a struggle, it can be difficult to judge wind speed and direction), foam can be thrown back at an officer, if the guy gets up and tries to tackle or hit me it can spread the OC. Besides the fact that my experience has shown me that higly intoxicated or impaired people aren't are affected by OC spray. But those are my experiences...
I have no problem if you want to use spray instead of a baton, thats your call that you can make based upon what you see at the scene. I guess I got bent out of shape because you are throwing this officer under the bus without knowing any details at all.
And I feel that as a brother officer, we have to extend the benefit of the doubt rather than curb stomp him in public. If you prefer OC, thats your call. I just take major exception to the comment that "damn he is in deep shit now" or "damn why BEAT him so many times when he is on the floor". That implies that you think that he was wrong in his use of force. I would argue that NONE of us can sit here and say for fact that the force was justified or unjustified based upon what we saw in that video. There are many questions, but I consider the totality of the circumstances here. The officer is not swinging blindly and does not appear to be out of control. The multiple people standing there in arms reach did not react as if the officer was out of line. You can't hear the officer, but he swings and it appears as though he either tries to pull his foot away or issue verbal commands, then swings again. That is TEXTBOOK use of force for the baton.Station 3 said:I have many questions to this video -- did he have a gun?-- did he have some other weapon we did not see?--- was he fighting back from the floor but we just could not see it? Many many questions that i dont have the answer to but i guess thats how many videos are these days people just dont get the right angle.
mcpd2025 said:And I feel that as a brother officer, we have to extend the benefit of the doubt rather than curb stomp him in public. If you prefer OC, thats your call. I just take major exception to the comment that "damn he is in deep shit now" or "damn why BEAT him so many times when he is on the floor". That implies that you think that he was wrong in his use of force. I would argue that NONE of us can sit here and say for fact that the force was justified or unjustified based upon what we saw in that video. There are many questions, but I consider the totality of the circumstances here. The officer is not swinging blindly and does not appear to be out of control. The multiple people standing there in arms reach did not react as if the officer was out of line. You can't hear the officer, but he swings and it appears as though he either tries to pull his foot away or issue verbal commands, then swings again. That is TEXTBOOK use of force for the baton.
Not sure if you watch UFC or any of the MMA fights, but there are a lot of these types of fighters that actually PREFER to fight on the ground. Just because the suspect was on the ground does NOT mean that the fight is over or that the officer is at the advantage.
Not trying to be rude or disrespectful at all, but what exactly is a Texas peace officer? Is it a full time law enforcment officer, volunteer, part time? From a full time law enforcement officer, I would expect a little more brotherhood and understanding of what this job encompasses and the minutia of using force and counter acting a struggle. If information comes out that this was unjustified, the suspect was trying to surrender, etc... I won't have any problem with criticizing him. If information comes out that it wasn't as clean as I hope it was, I'll quietly stop commenting about it. However, until something like that occurs, I feel as though we should support the officer and hope that everything works out.
OC and batons work on the exact same principle. You take away the ability to fight or the will to fight. There is no reason (that I can think of) to believe that OC would have been more effective in this situation. The officer achieves the desired effect with his baton - the subject releases his grasp. If I break your fingers and forearm with a baton I bet I could free myself. Either you'll be in so much pain and don't want it to continue that you'll release (will to fight) or you won't physically be able to grasp (ability to fight).emtspruitt said:I am not a LEO, but I do understand that if you are threatened that you must stop that threat. It seems to me that the baton strikes do not force the subject to let go of the officers feet but the OC does. Threat ended and subject was cuffed. Seems to me, with the limited information that is given he did what he thought was needed to protect himself.
Yea, everyone and every situation is different. There are some people that aren't affected by OC spray. If you are under the influence or have some type of serious head injuries, OC might not affect you. The big downfall to OC is the potential to be self contaminated. I know how OC affects me, and I have no desire to be contaminated by it. If I can't breath or see, I am no good in a fight and at an even greater risk to be injured or lose my gun. That is why I prefer punches, kicks or baton/maglite strikes... no potential for contamination. I can, however, lose the fight, get my ass kicked and then killed...emtspruitt said:I am not a LEO, but I do understand that if you are threatened that you must stop that threat. It seems to me that the baton strikes do not force the subject to let go of the officers feet but the OC does. Threat ended and subject was cuffed. Seems to me, with the limited information that is given he did what he thought was needed to protect himself.