The GQ answer to this:
Because they can. And 99%+ they get away with it.
He was drunk but didn’t do anything stupid. See the arrest report linked above.
This is what I don’t understand. When police officers beat people or commit perjury, why aren’t they arrested?
I don’t understand that, either.
They do if they’re not on duty when they commit the offense(s).
This cop is going up on charges. The day prior, the motorist was issued a bunch of tickets, including resisting arrest, driving under the influence, etc. Then the next day, those were dropped and the officer was charged with felonies including aggravated battery. Dash-cam video from his own squad car helped spur that.
Hopefully students beaten in this incident will get some justice.
Wow. Check out the pic. Looks like if he didn’t have his fists in his pocket, he’d be beating on the channel 5 reporter’s face.
Why should that matter? If you beat someone or commit perjury, you should be arrested.
ETA: I know that there are reasons that a cop might need to strike someone. But if I were suspected of beating someone without just cause, I would be arrested and put on trial to determine if I had just cause. This cop(s) is widely suspected of beating someone without just cause. Why no criminal proceedings?
This NYC cop is being brought to trial next week. His defense is the guy was aiming for him.
Video of Cop Assaulting Cyclist at Critical Mass Ride - Gothamist (at about :23; there’s a slo mo section after that clearly shows him trying to avoid the cop)
WTF? In the regular-speed version it looks like the cop may not have seen the guy coming or accidentally crashed into him, but in the slo-mo it looks like he was actually timing the lunge to nail him right as he cycled by.
I wonder if it was a case of mistaken identity.
What I don’t understand is in what police training course do they tell you to keep whaling on someone who not only isn’t even actively resisting but appears to have already gone completely motionless if not unconscious. 
Any cops here care to comment? Not trying to bait you understand, just genuinely puzzled.
How so? I’m not sure if you’re familiar with Critical Mass bike rides; they take place periodically to, in this case, encourage New York City to make streets and roads more biker friendly and safe. New York City cops are notorious for hating them and coming down hard on the participants. Some will say the riders shouldn’t bike en masse because they block traffic, etc. Be tht as it may, there is no excuse for police brutality and there definitely was no "mistaken identity going on here.
Because you don’t need to beat people in the course and scope of your employment. Cops do. Therefore, when they beat somebody up while on duty it is assumed that they are doing so for valid reasons until shown otherwise.
That’s what they have investigations for.
Beat first, ask questions later.
I’m not saying it’s a sensible policy. I’m just saying that’s how the system works.
That one looks like just an accident to me. The cyclist was trying to go left of the cop. I think the cop had decided to cross in front of the bike, and they both kept trying to do what they were doing.
Are we watching the same video (though I’ve seen it about 10 times, I went back to make sure I had posted the one I meant to and re-reviewed it)?
The cop takes two preparatory steps (like someone about to take off running) to propel him at the bike/rider and pushes out with his arms forcefully. If it had just been a defensive move based your scenario there would have been at least a hitching back of the legs and a less propulsive shove with the arms than just trying to stop the bike from hitting him. Also, he follows the trajectory of the biker (who never changes his slow speed), after havng faced in the direction of the all the bikers for a few seconds. Having followed the trajectory, why would have then have thought that he could cross in front of that particular biker at that particular moment?
Sometimes cops will deliberately do bad things; this is one of them.
Oh, I didn’t know that. I completely agree there is no excuse for police brutality. It just seemed like such a bizarre totally unprovoked act of aggression that the only thing that made sense if if he thought he recognized a dangerous criminal or something, realized as soon as the guy went down that he had just attacked an innocent man, and then pulled a story out of his ass to cover for his own stupidity.
It’s just baffling to me that anyone would just do something like that.
What a silly question.
There isn’t anything in police training that tells them to do that and you know it. It’s the fact that these cops exist in an environment of entitlement. They really do feel like they’re the boss dogs and we’re just the teeming millions. What’s wrong with beating a punk?
John… their is no cause for it. Theirs what we go by called a use of force continuum. Basically the short version is like Sean Connery in the “Untouchables” if they bring a knife you bring a gun… well even if someone curses me repeatedly there’s technically no cause for arrest… because MY peace cannot be disturbed. Now if you’re cursing me loudly in a public space then THAT would qualify for a disorderly conduct arrest.
As for that… look you’re suppose to use force necessary to effect the arrest. At 6’4 245 i rarely have to resort to a great deal of force luckily…