We need to give the cops a formal legal citation for Disrespectin Ma Thority so they don’t have to resort to alternative charges.
At 1:30 in the video I posted. (It’s the reporter relaying the officer’s words).
Yup, nice contempt of cop charge. Sounds good.
As was very clearly explained to you in the other thread, tazers are meant to be used when there is a threat of violence, not some cop’s ego out of control. This was 100% the Birmingham’s police’s failure to try one ounce of de-escalation. They did nothing but issue bullshit commands, and when they weren’t complied with on the spot, they escalated the situation.
Let’s check back in a month from now when the charges are dropped and Ben Crump is suing the department.
And I at no time defended the use of the tazer. I’m merely trying to counter the knee-jerk false summaries and descriptions. The tazer was not used to make him stop conducting as has been misleadingly implied several times, and it was not used on him as he “just stood there” either, as has been said several times. It was used to gain compliance after 90 seconds of him actively resisting arrest. You get to argue if that’s reasonable/justifiable/horrific or whatever, but you don’t get to make up different facts.
I would not be surprised if the charges were dropped, but he’s unlikely to succeed in any lawsuit, Qualified Immunity being what it is.
No, it wasn’t used to make him stop conducting. I agree with you. He had already done that. Any reasonable officer would have said, ok, clear out and go home. He would have filed a complaint with the department, which would have been ignored and the whole thing would have been forgotten about. Instead, the tazer was used to dominate and hurt him for his failure to immediately comply with their authority.
Not sure I agree, except that this just shows that the officers acted like children and will very likely be allowed to get away with it.
That’s not even an infraction!
The reporter says, “I’m going to have them send you all a bill tomorrow” where ‘them’ is apparently the school. I’m not sure where they got that from since I don’t see it in the released bodycam footage.
You left out, “for the overtime.” Taken as a whole, I take that to mean: you have to stop playing right now, because if you don’t we’re going to charge for overtime, and I’m going to have the school bill you for it.
I don’t know. Obviously if the news station made it up, it changes the tone of what caused this whole altercation.
I doubt the news folks made it up, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if they got it from an eyewitness and the third-hand report got garbled. It’s also possible there’s another video I haven’t seen, or it’s in the video and I missed it.
I would be very, very happy to hear that the quote was wrong, and that the officers had a compelling reason to escalate the situation so completely. I mean, if there was a tornado headed for the stadium, then this would all make sense.
Surely everyone agrees it is important to get tough with child pornographers?
Where by “resisted”, you mean “he didn’t get on the ground and kneel on his own neck”.
No, by “resisted” I mean he held his arms in front of his body, moved his hands away from the handcuffs, and pulled away from the police restraining him, and yelled “No man, get off of me”.
…that doesn’t demand a tasing.
Perhaps not. But that is a different argument from “he was tazed for not stopping the band performance”.
…“perhaps not” kinda implies that “perhaps so” is actually an option.
Do you think he deserved the tasing?
I understand “resisting arrest” is a crime, even if the arrest is unlawful. OTOH, I can completely understand why a black person would resist, because they are in genuine fear for their life. There are many racist cops out there who fantasize about murdering someone of color.
Yeah, those would be the two options. I don’t take a side in that argument, but nobody else is either because everybody keeps arguing about whether he would have been tazed for “continuing a band performance” (it was over at the time) or for “just standing there” (he was actively resisting arrest).
My position is that the argument should be about the facts, not a fantasy alternate reality where the police walked up and tazed a guy who was just directing a band.
Assuming this is true (and it does happen all the time) if the cops are escallating the situation they can pretty much force it to happen. If the underlying reason for restraining him were bogus (and they appear to be bogus) then the cops should be held accountable for criminal activity. They have power and authority, but misuse of that power should be monitoried and controlled.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
…don’t be disingenuous.
It isn’t about “the facts.” There was nothing in that video that deserved a tasing and you know it.
And that’s all that matters here. Not some pointless nitpicking over what you consider the “correct narrative” to be.
In some people’s minds he deserved a tazing long before any of this happened. As one of the members here who is part of the constabulary believes, a prophylactic use of beatings keeps people in line. Teaches them who’s boss y’know. Makes future interactions much safer for the boys in blue.