Author Topic: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again  (Read 4635 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bobboau

  • Just a MODern kinda guy
    Just MODerately cool
    And MODest too
  • 213
More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/17/us/officer-dashcam-video-excessive-force-lawsuit/

wasn't that interested until the one cop was like "hey we're on film, wait a sec while I turn off this camera before you start beating the guy."
Bobboau, bringing you products that work... in theory
learn to use PCS
creator of the ProXimus Procedural Texture and Effect Generator
My latest build of PCS2, get it while it's hot!
PCS 2.0.3


DEUTERONOMY 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, [as] of woollen and linen together

  

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Looks like this one was handled right, though. He got handed off to IA just for disabling the camera, and will likely not escape disciplinary action. I think you should expect to be at the very least clobbered if you try fooling about with a gun while being detained, but I also think that a policeman should not be doing anything he wouldn't be comfortable with being shown publicly (while on duty, of course). The cameras are for the very reason of enforcing that.

 

Offline Bobboau

  • Just a MODern kinda guy
    Just MODerately cool
    And MODest too
  • 213
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
she
Bobboau, bringing you products that work... in theory
learn to use PCS
creator of the ProXimus Procedural Texture and Effect Generator
My latest build of PCS2, get it while it's hot!
PCS 2.0.3


DEUTERONOMY 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, [as] of woollen and linen together

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
He got handed off to IA just for disabling the camera, and will likely not escape disciplinary action.

Your faith in this system is admirable, but probably not justified.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Well, at least they did something. Even if "disciplinary action" means "a chewing out", it's better than some other PDs did. At least part of this system is working properly.

 

Offline Mars

  • I have no originality
  • 211
  • Attempting unreasonable levels of reasonable
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
It will get thrown out by the grand jury, most likely.

 

Offline Bobboau

  • Just a MODern kinda guy
    Just MODerately cool
    And MODest too
  • 213
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
I doubt it will make it that far, this doesn't fit the standard narrative.
Bobboau, bringing you products that work... in theory
learn to use PCS
creator of the ProXimus Procedural Texture and Effect Generator
My latest build of PCS2, get it while it's hot!
PCS 2.0.3


DEUTERONOMY 22:11
Thou shalt not wear a garment of diverse sorts, [as] of woollen and linen together

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
* jr2 waits for MP-Ryan to comment.

 

Offline Klaustrophobia

  • 210
  • the REAL Nuke of HLP
    • North Carolina Tigers
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
what's that supposed to mean?


On topic:
Turning off camera - BAD.  But I understand why they wanted to do it with the rising tide of "**** the police" sentiment.  Justified or not, they don't want video of ANY violence out there for people/the media to jump all over and stir **** up with.  Doesn't make it right, and they're kindof idiots for not realizing that cat was out of the bag already and then SAYING they were turning it off to not capture was was about to happen, I'm just saying it's not proof that these cops are complete ****bags and wanted to beat a guy and get away with it. 

Excessive force - initial impression is no.  He was armed and they knew it (according to the report).  I saw one kick amongst the general dog pile.  It's not like they beat the **** out of him once he was down.
I like to stare at the sun.

 

Offline jr2

  • The Mail Man
  • 212
  • It's prounounced jayartoo 0x6A7232
    • Steam
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
what's that supposed to mean?

He's usually good at telling it like it is IMHO objectively.

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
The whole thing is disgusting. Person pulled over for no reason.

On the person who got pulled over part, perhaps he did not know that you have to tell the police you have a fire arm in the vehicle. In unnecessary suspects defense, perhaps he did. We don't know this, and i want to see what was on the other dash cam.

The whole thing was unjustified.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Ask and yes shall receive.

The stop I think is perfectly legal, as that looks like an improper U-turn, but I don't know Missouri's traffic law, so it may not be. What follows hinges on this being a legal stop, which I believe it to be.

For one, I will never take an edited video at face value. No action in a use of force incident stands alone; the context of the whole encounter is required.

The removal from the vehicle was legal and executed correctly. The kneeling on him to get control to apply cuffs is fine. The officer sprinting in to deliver a kick is highly suspect, but there's editing in there so I don't trust that something isn't missing.

The guy is clearly actively resistant if not assaultive, which means police can use substantial force to gain control. He appears to be turtling with arms underneath - an intensely dangerous position as he has not been searched and can have weapons on the front of his person which can be accessed.  You want control of those arms immediately.  However, I've taken the training and pulling out a turtled arm can be high impossible, even with 2+ people.  Given the urgency, if he is actively resisting as he appears to be and will not present his arms, the Taser is perfectly justifiable to force his muscles to give.

I don't feel sorry for this guy. The police had clear legal authority to stop, and articulated reasons for an arrest.  He failed to comply with and physically resisted lawful orders, resulting in the police using force to make the arrest.  While pieces of the force used are dubious looking, with the video editing I won't begin to suggest any were legally-speaking excessive.

However, under no circumstances should an officer EVER stop or hinder the recording of a police interaction. EVER.


Oh, and unless there is a specific statute in place for firearms owners in some states, you are never required to tell police items present in your vehicle. Border patrol/inspectors yes, police, no. Not that it's not a bad idea sometimes, though.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
The whole thing is disgusting. Person pulled over for no reason.
How exactly is pulling someone over for no reason wrong? That sort of thing is common around here. They pull you over, check you with a gizmo that tests your breath alcohol level (drunk driving being a common problem around here), check your papers and let you go. Now, they'd likely haul you off to jail if they found something highly illegal (like drugs or other contraband, or an open bottle of alcohol), and having a gun in there would get you strange looks at best (you should be allright if it's legal, but guns are uncommon here), but that's exactly what those patrols are for. Frankly, one of the few things traffic cops are good for in Poland. 

Also, it seems that this car's description matched one of a suspect involved in a shooting somewhere nearby. I'd say, a perfectly valid reason to pull someone over. I agree with MP-Ryan, this action looks legitimate. The guy was an idiot for resisting the police. If that officer did not turn off the dashcam, this would not be newsworthy at all (and even if the guy did sue anyway, it'd likely be easier to defend the use of force if that didn't happen).

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Dragon, police in countries with unreasonable search/seizure prohibited by their constitutions do not allow police to randomly pull people over for no reason whatsoever.  That said, US courts set the bar for traffic stops very low.

There must be some reasonable purpose behind the stop. It appears to me there was, but if not then everything that followed was essentially illegal.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Klaustrophobia

  • 210
  • the REAL Nuke of HLP
    • North Carolina Tigers
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Even if they weren't justified in pulling him over/ordering him out of the car, the time to take a stand against illegal police actions isn't while you are armed. 
I like to stare at the sun.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
Dragon, police in countries with unreasonable search/seizure prohibited by their constitutions do not allow police to randomly pull people over for no reason whatsoever.  That said, US courts set the bar for traffic stops very low.

There must be some reasonable purpose behind the stop. It appears to me there was, but if not then everything that followed was essentially illegal.
Ah, so it's in the US constitution. Another US/Europe dichotomy, it seems. In Shengen area, at least, you can get pulled over not only by police, but also by customs officers looking for contraband (though the latter mostly seem to stick to trucks).

Besides, the article linked to in OP clearly stated that they stopped the guy based on description of a car that fled from a shooting. Seems like reasonable enough of a purpose for me. If they could reasonably suspect that it was the car they were looking for, they were right to stop him.

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
How exactly is pulling someone over for no reason wrong? That sort of thing is common around here. They pull you over, check you with a gizmo that tests your breath alcohol level (drunk driving being a common problem around here), check your papers and let you go. Now, they'd likely haul you off to jail if they found something highly illegal (like drugs or other contraband, or an open bottle of alcohol), and having a gun in there would get you strange looks at best (you should be allright if it's legal, but guns are uncommon here), but that's exactly what those patrols are for. Frankly, one of the few things traffic cops are good for in Poland. 

Also, it seems that this car's description matched one of a suspect involved in a shooting somewhere nearby. I'd say, a perfectly valid reason to pull someone over. I agree with MP-Ryan, this action looks legitimate. The guy was an idiot for resisting the police. If that officer did not turn off the dashcam, this would not be newsworthy at all (and even if the guy did sue anyway, it'd likely be easier to defend the use of force if that didn't happen).
Yes we come from different countries, and thank you for pointing that out.

My opinion quite heavily rests around abuse of power since i am overly suspicious of everything around me. I see getting pulled over for no reason as a wrong reason for doing so. If i am doing nothing wrong, then i feel really disturbed if cops find me interesting when they possess no probable cause. There is a such thing as getting ****ed over for no reason at all. I really don't just roll over and accept cops bothering me for no reason as a happy positive part of life thank you. You either have probable cause or not, and it's still not probable cause if you make up a reason on the spot after having pulled someone over. Don't bother people unless you have a probable cause.

As for the video, i really wish (like the rest of you) it wasn't edited, and had better video quality. It's hard to tell what happened exactly aside from a cop turning off the camera and letting the others know before she does it. That u-turn part is what i'm interested in, however, hard to see with low video quality. And i suppose more of the details weren't released because cop bashing is what the media is hyping right now. But, an edited video followed up by more details. I can't trust it. It's just a big question mark of what should actually be trusted about the guy who was pulled over and the officers themselves.

I don't hate cops. I hate abuse of power and authority.

Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
My opinion quite heavily rests around abuse of power since i am overly suspicious of everything around me. I see getting pulled over for no reason as a wrong reason for doing so. If i am doing nothing wrong, then i feel really disturbed if cops find me interesting when they possess no probable cause. There is a such thing as getting ****ed over for no reason at all. I really don't just roll over and accept cops bothering me for no reason as a happy positive part of life thank you. You either have probable cause or not, and it's still not probable cause if you make up a reason on the spot after having pulled someone over. Don't bother people unless you have a probable cause.
The problem is, some things just can't get checked without stopping a car and inspecting it (and the driver). If you don't do that at random, then it might be too late by the time you've got a probable cause. Two examples: alcohol levels and roadworthiness.

A drunk that isn't in a completely hopeless state can usually drive straight. However, what he can't do is react to a rapidly changing situation on the road, or make snap decisions (which, as any driver can attest, are the thing separating a close call from a deadly crash). Also, this same impairment also makes them, in many cases, incapable of judging their own level of drunkness (and thus avoiding getting into cars). In most cases, you literally don't know someone is drunk until they make a mistake, which can (and often does) have lethal results. Now, you might not see that as a big issue, but in Poland (and in Russia as well), this alone is enough to justify random checks. It's not perfect (drunk drivers still drive and kill people, it's a very common comment in accident reports), but it works, both by catching them and presenting enough of a chance of getting caught to make people reconsider getting into a car after drinking alcohol (Poland has no tolerance here, anything above 0 gets you in trouble, so it should be easy enough of a decision). Related to this is driving without a license, which seem to primarily happen because someone lost theirs for drunk driving (yes, some of them do drive drunk and without license. Local news don't even report those unless they hurt someone, are famous or did something really dumb when stopped).

The second issue is that of cars driving when they really shouldn't. Police also check the car's papers, including the date of the last technical checkup. If you're way past the expiration date, you and your jalopy get hauled off. Poland isn't lousy with post-Soviet junk anymore, but the used car market (including imported used cars) is enormous. Add to it a peculiar tax policy that makes LPG much cheaper than gasoline, and you've got a country full of foreign jalopies running on a fuel they were never designed for. Not only that, they usually don't look the part, the differences are under the hood. If you have it regularly serviced, it sort of works, though you're better off having a backup car handy. If you don't, you never know when something will break, only that it will. If the checkup rule was not enforced like it is, some people would try to be "smart" and save money on them (since the procedure is somewhat costly). Inevitably, this would mean them driving an unroadworthy car, thus being a danger to everyone near it (themselves included). I'm not saying some people don't bribe the mechanic (they do), or that the jalopy won't completely go from "all clear" to "scrap it!" in between them, but for most, it does ensure that an expert is periodically inspecting the car.

There is certainly nothing morally reprehensible about random checks. Those things I mentioned apply to the US (or even a civilized country west of our border) in a much lesser degree, but somehow, I do get a general feeling that US roads are much less safe than European ones. As far as I'm concerned, it's a minor annoyance when it happens to you, but it doesn't happen that often and if everything's in order, they let you go with no hassle. The whole thing doesn't take longer than a drive thru run and is one of the few times our police doesn't try to screw you over. Pull over, blow on the gizmo, show papers, on your way. A small price to pay for a definite reduction in likelihood of being crashed into by a drunk.

Also, no random customs inspections (a separate thing from police, they check your cargo for alcohol content, not your breath. :) Though if you really smelled of vodka, they'd probably find a way to arrange you a meeting with police) would turn the entire Shengen area into even more of a smuggler's paradise than it already is. I don't suppose they're any serious hindrance to skilled smugglers, but they can't be completely worthless, either.

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
It was designed to be successful in your country and is actually a benefit. Over here it possibly needs to be integrated. But, right now with the way it is in america, it currently leads up to a lot of targeting and hassling the innocent for no reason. Highway interdiction is the extreme example. Making up bull**** reasons for wanting to search my car after finding out my insurance and registration are current, the car isn't stolen, wasn't speeding or driving erraticly, and i'm not drunk or high is the minor example.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Dragon

  • Citation needed
  • 212
  • The sky is the limit.
Re: More cop ****tyness, St.Louis again
I wonder why there's such an extreme difference. It's not only my country, IIRC most of the Europe works like this (I just quoted the usual reasons from mine). Around here, Police will not always check all those things at the same time, though breath and license are always mandatory. I certainly didn't seen them search a car on top of that without a very good reason (it's usually the driver who's the problem, not anything being transported). Customs officers might, but I've only seen them stop trucks and buses. And even then, on my father's run in with them, they just gave the truck's cargo hold a glance, asked him if he's transporting anything he'd like to pay the toll for and sent him on his way. On the other hand, when you want our Police (this is likely less true further west) to actually do anything worthwhile off the road, you pretty much have to have a murder or high-value theft on your hand for them to take interest. Otherwise, complaining to them is generally a waste of time. TBH, they're sort of useless, though to their credit usually helpful if the situation is bad enough for them to get off their bums. Even worse is the "city watch" (regional force, supposedly similar to police, but with less power), which is pretty much a glorified meter maid association, mostly existing to ticket people who don't pay parking fees (good luck getting them to actually tow an obstruction on the road, especially in a non-paid zone...).

On the other hand, what I've seen of the US non-road police seems better. They're certainly a lot more respected and seem actually effective in what they do, and going to the police with a problem is a often valid solution that won't get you brushed off most of the time. They take people seriously, are taken seriously and are very definitely of use. On the other hand, it looks like not everyone on the force is suitable for police work, and abuses of power do happen, especially recently (or maybe they're just being talked about recently). The search thing might be just because it's something "exceptional" in the US (our police do it all the time, so the checkup simply needs to be faster), but there might be more to it.