The 12th Commandment Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I have more objection to the decision than the methods, she resisted, ergo more force is needed. using force tends to be brutal.....I'm sure his jurisdiction wishes he had made better choices So you're saying you think he didn't have the power to detain her and made a bad decision thinking he did. I kinda think he did have that power. Gotta keep order and it was starting to get a little disordered. As to the method, I'm smaller than that cop and if my niece were to get uppity, who's the same size as the girl, and I absolutely had to, I would 'detain' her with a whole lot less force. Or my sister would righteously kick my ass. Cops should think of all 100lb 14 year old girls in bikinis as their niece, it would save a lot trouble all the way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Cops should think of all 100lb 14 year old girls in bikinis as their niece, it would save a lot trouble all the way around. Or their own daughters. I'm sure he wouldn't want his little girl being tosses around by a grown man while wearing a bikini. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 answer my question and I'll answer yours Cops the power to do just about anything, that power is meant to be checked by reviewing their judgment after the fact. Citizens do not have the right to forcefully resist just about any officer action (outside of the extreme). A cop could detain that girl on nothing more than his instincts telling him she was up to something and she, nor anyone else, has the right to use any force to intervene. Does that answer your question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 So you're saying you think he didn't have the power to detain her and made a bad decision thinking he did. I kinda think he did have that power. Gotta keep order and it was starting to get a little disordered. he had the power and legal justification, I think his choice was a relatively needless escalation of the tensions though. Does that answer your question? yes and yes would have been simpler , and I agree review /accountability controls it if applied. to answer yours: no she was not walking away and had remained in that area for quite some time jawing and walking. Or their own daughters. I'm sure he wouldn't want his little girl being tosses around by a grown man while wearing a bikini. I teach mine respect for authority....but I think she could take him, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 One thing I noticed in the McKinnney video is how absolutely irate the officer is. He is out of control and let his anger get the best of him. He's running around like a madman yelling at everyone, while the other officers keep calm and separate the crowd. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 (edited) Cops the power to do just about anything, that power is meant to be checked by reviewing their judgment after the fact. Citizens do not have the right to forcefully resist just about any officer action (outside of the extreme). A cop could detain that girl on nothing more than his instincts telling him she was up to something and she, nor anyone else, has the right to use any force to intervene. Does that answer your question? He cannot legally detain her based on a "hunch" or his "instincts". In order to lawfully detain someone a police officer has to have "specific and articulable facts" that show the person in question has or is committing a crime. I don't see her committing a crime there. It is NOT a crime to stand around and watch what police officers are doing, as long as you're not right up in their face and actively interfering with them. It also isn't illegal to say mean things to cops either. That's just straight up first amendment there. If he can't handle some kid jawing at him without letting his emotions and frustrations get the better of him and then getting violent then he doesn't belong in that uniform. Notice that he gave absolutely no reason for detaining her. Fact of the matter is he was unhinged and emotional and pissed off and he lashed out at a bunch of kids...going so far as to throw a 14 year old girl in a bathing suit to the ground and then put his whole weight on her back for 5 minutes. There really is no excuse for his actions. I hope her parents file a lawsuit, I hope they win, and I hope every single penny of the settlement comes out of his paychecks. Edited June 9, 2015 by mistertim 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Umm, I do think she was walking away when he pursued her and dragged her to the ground. She was walking away and talking about she was going to tell her mother about how he was speaking to her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Umm, I do think she was walking away when he pursued her and dragged her to the ground. She was walking away and talking about she was going to tell her mother about how he was speaking to her.Well that's what she gets for being a tattle-tale. Snitches get stitches! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Umm, I do think she was walking away when he pursued her and dragged her to the ground. She was walking away and talking about she was going to tell her mother about how he was speaking to her. People with no legs move faster than that.,odd ya can hear her if she left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 People with no legs move faster than that.,odd ya can hear her if she left. Again, it doesnt matter. That is a public area, the police have no authority to say you cant be there, she didnt have to leave. Now with a cop like that it would have been wiser to leave as he was obviously not in control, but doesnt mean he had a right to do that to her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Again, it doesnt matter. That is a public area, the police have no authority to say you cant be there, she didnt have to leave. keep repeating it , it will still be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 TWA, i myself am not arguing that the kids should not have obeyed his orders, they should have. But as alphabet skins (abdc) said, his ego was out of control, and the situation should NOT have gotten to the point where he was putting his hands on a little girl. Watching the video again, the girl who was tackled and roughed up was a good 15 feet from him. He rushed her, went after her, to grab her and put her down. It should never had escalated to that point of tackling those kids, but his ego/anger led to that. He just as easily could've ignored the smart-ass remarks (heavens to betsy a 13 year old gets an attitude), and just yelled at everybody to go home until they dispursed. Thank god for camera phones, cuz this dickhead could've said anything he wanted to explain the 13 year old girls bruises, but the camera tells the truth. Just like that guy,shot in the back by a cop in SC, and the recorder Whindleton the fence caught the cop placing something near his dead body. I'm not an angry black man, but I am terrified of police. It shouldn't be that way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 keep repeating it , it will still be wrong Im open to being shown via the law how I am wrong. Im not stuck on one viewpoint, Im just going off of what I see written in the law. If I am overlooking a law or reading it wrong I want to know what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Im open to being shown via the law how I am wrong. Im not stuck on one viewpoint, Im just going off of what I see written in the law. If I am overlooking a law or reading it wrong I want to know what it is. http://wp.upagainstthelaw.org/interactions-with-law-enforcement/ Order to Disperse: A police officer can order a “disorderly” group to leave an area, even in a place where they have a right or permit to be, if those officers reasonably expect the group’s presence will result in substantial harm or serious inconvenience, or annoyance or alarm. If you hear an officer give an order to disperse, you may (and likely will) be arrested if you do not obey.https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/2600/2686.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 http://wp.upagainstthelaw.org/interactions-with-law-enforcement/ Order to Disperse: A police officer can order a “disorderly” group to leave an area, even in a place where they have a right or permit to be, if those officers reasonably expect the group’s presence will result in substantial harm or serious inconvenience, or annoyance or alarm. If you hear an officer give an order to disperse, you may (and likely will) be arrested if you do not obey.https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/2600/2686.html Great, thank you for correcting me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 These two cops in my home town got fired for this just recently. They're being indicted too. http://www.abqjournal.com/590247/news/nm-attorneys-to-prosecute-las-cruces-police-officers-for-alleged-brutality.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It takes two cops to beat a handcuffed man. They're so brave. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 That's absurd KAO. The man was handcuffed, and the one cop pointed right at the camera...saying they are right there basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 (edited) That's absurd KAO. The man was handcuffed, and the one cop pointed right at the camera...saying they are right there basically. There hasn't been any support at all for these guys with the public. But there also hasn't been any outcry of racial motives. I'll be curious to hear their explanation come the trial. Edited June 9, 2015 by KAOSkins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 There hasn't been any support at all for these guys with the public. But there also hasn't been any outcry of racial motives. I'll be curious to hear their explanation come the trial. That does rather surprise me. The lack of people trying to justify the officers actions. A sign that things are getting a little better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Looks as if they are all Caucasian ...one officer looks perhaps Hispanic. I wish it had sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Jeeze, that was tough to watch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Looks as if they are all Caucasian ...one officer looks perhaps Hispanic. I wish it had sound. Both cops are mexican, as are a large portion of our cops, and the victim is white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 When you give a guy a badge . . . http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 http://wp.upagainstthelaw.org/interactions-with-law-enforcement/ Order to Disperse: A police officer can order a “disorderly” group to leave an area, even in a place where they have a right or permit to be, if those officers reasonably expect the group’s presence will result in substantial harm or serious inconvenience, or annoyance or alarm. If you hear an officer give an order to disperse, you may (and likely will) be arrested if you do not obey.https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/2600/2686.html Ehh. While Order to Disperse is a valid law, does this really pass muster in terms of the necessity for such an order? The key word there is "reasonably". Did the officer have a good reason to believe that a group of teenagers in bathing suits was a physical threat to himself or the public (though I do love that they threw "annoyance" in there as a catch all...pretty stupid)? This isn't some mob or riot; its a group of kids at a pool party and there was a fight. The other officers clearly didn't think it was necessary as they were just standing around talking to people calmly. I think the only reason he was yelling at people to get out of there is he was pissed and frustrated and he let his emotions go (as evidenced by him standing around and cursing at kids...top notch professionalism there) and wanted to lash out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now