I think there is more to the issue. I think many police officers really do view all defense attorneys and time- and resource-pressed prosecutors as disrespectful of their efforts. I think they believe the punishment they inflict is the only punishment many criminals will ever face.
I think cops should be legally prohibited from watching Fox.
I’ll respond to my second question first: When I wrote that I had just come in from working in the yard, so I had a 4" folding knife in my pocket for pruning and cutting twine. My point is that ANYBODY could have a weapon on them, for a variety of reasons.
As for my first question, you couldn’t know if he had a weapon. But you can be damned sure that if he had one he wouldn’t hesitate to hurt someone if he could get a chance, based on his willful disregard for human life. Try this: lay face-first and put your arms out. Now, as quick as you can, roll to one side and pretend like you pull out a weapon from your waistband. How long does that take? a quarter second? half second? Either way, it’s quick. If you’re a cop and you wait to react to a weapon, you’ll get hurt.
The cop should’ve acted differently, but that suspect deserves no sympathy.
I use to think that the cop bashers were just mad because they were doing something wrong and got caught.
I had an insident last year that opened my eyes. I am going to keep it short. It was a story of one cop helping a friend at my cost, In all there were maybe 8 cops involved. Not one could tell the truth to me. they lied when it would have been easier to tell the truth. And far as IA being the rat squad wrong they are the white wash squad.
I have coached and acted as a ref with a number of cops. They did not think they needed to read the rule book, they knew it all. One I kept going to the director to try and get him removed. He made up his own calls and caused many teams to lose a game.
I do not trust the cops in San Jose. I could print line after line why.
Cops are above the law.
Absolutely. I got pulled over once and the police guy said, “The video tape in the cruiser is recording, is that OK with you?”
FUCK YEAH!!! I know I’M going to be polite and courteous and the camera guarantees that the same will be reciprocated. I’d be thrilled to be able to avoid an unwinnable cop said/defendant said arguement in court.
And a kick to the face prevents this how?
Um, that’s not quite what you meant, is it? After all, a kick in the face will most probably prevent a number of things. :smack:
The point is that there are other methods of accomplishing the same goal without smashing the toe of your shoe into the other person’s incisors.
And Duggy Fizzle, no one is being sympathetic to the suspect, except to the extent that his rights as a person just got violated by the officer. If the officers in the video did their job correctly, and were somewhat rough in the process, no one would really complain. So it’s a little disingenuous to assert that you think what the officer did was wrong, then say that the suspect deserved bad treatment anyway.
This completely fits with this thread… Let’s review the main detail:
An INNOCENT CITIZEN’s skull is crushed by the police due to excessive force. He will most likely die.
Does it matter what he did? Did he deserve to have his skull crushed even if he did rob the store in question? Did he deserve to have his skull crushed without a trial if he had killed someone else? Would you deserve to have your skull crushed by the police?
What is your definition of “Resonable Use of Force”?
I’d never heard that before, but I think it’s an excellent standard.
The guy was pointed out by a “witness” as being a suspect in a beating and stabbing of another individual. Right there is reasonable suspicion to stop him and talk to him. When he started running, he certainly made himself look even more guilty. Tackling a suspect in a stabbing is completely within the realm of reasonable force in order to stop him. No where in the article did it say the suspect’s head hit the wall due to a deliberate act by the officer. When one tackles another, anything can happen. Unfortunately, in this instance, an innocent guy chose to run and he got hurt. He should have just stayed, answered some questions, and then he would’ve been let go when they realized the witness was mistaken.
I have, although not in a police context.
In martial arts, specifically old-style judo/traditional Japanese jujitsu, this kind of thing is called kasumi, which IIRC translates to “haze” or “fog”. It isn’t always a strike, but it is something to do to distract your opponent from what you are up to. The sequence is kasumi, then you create or attack an opening in his defense (kuzushi), then you enter the opening (tsukuri), then you execute the technique (kake).
Don’t know the Japanese for this, but the expression is “the fist opens the way”. There were a collection of techniques used mostly prior to WWII in Japan as taiho-jitsu, or arresting techniques, that I believe used this concept. This is largely discontinued in modern Japan, mostly because the techniques did not spend much energy worrying about the well-being of the person being arrested. It is possible that this is the concept in play here.
Whether or not it is justified is a different question. But yes, the concept does exist.
Regards,
Shodan
What’s your point in all of this? You’re went back and forth a bit with Nobody and it seemed in doing so you were defending the cop’s actions. The first statement above seems to defend what the police officer did, because apparently you’re under the impression that a police officer should have reacted to the suspect face down on the on the ground with his hands up as if he was an immediate threat. This is not how police officers are trained! They ARE trained to not use the type of force as they would if they were certain their or someone elses lives are in danger. But then you say the cop should have acted differently, but the suspect deserves no sympathy. If you think the cop should have behaved differently, what it is that you’re arguing about? And no one said the suspect deserves sympathy; none of this is about sympathy. It’s about a police officer kicking someone in the face without a good reason to do so.
Why do the cops do this when there is a news helicopter hovering overhead?
Adrenaline and stupidity.
Just to add more facts to this thread, the CCT video from the second incident in Seattle has been released. The guy is still in a coma.
Wow, he really went hard into that wall. That hurts just to watch…hopefully he’ll somehow recover. Not sure why he ran to begin with but that’s a pretty brutal end to the chase.
Can you elaborate on what you’re referring to? Some of us aren’t old enough to know what you’re talking about.
He’s talking about the rock group The Police
Bolding mine
But as your own OP pointed out, it has gotten more worse since the Bush Admin set thier precedent.
Thinking about it, yeah, Bush was in office when I fist started noticing all these stories, but correlation does not imply causation. Also, I believe that there were a lot of officers like this before, but they’re just getting reported on more often.
I agree with one of the previous posters; I have heard of distracting blows in martial arts. I was in Jhoon Rhee style Tae Kwon Do, and in addition to learning the martial arts moves for each belt level, we had certain prearranged self defense situations we had to be able to resolve. We called these “softening techniques”. For instance, in a situation in which the victim is grabbed from behind in a bear hug, it was advised you come down on the instep as hard as humanly possible, possibly breaking the metatarsal, or at least causing enough pain and surprise to make someone’s grip loosen. You could follow this up with elbowing in the solar plexus, sending an elbow back to hit the jaw, or use it as an opportunity to turn around and start throwing punches from there. Or, if the aggressor dropped his grip entirely, you could run like hell (the recommended option).