But he then has to justify that to a court whose members might well see it differently, especially if the punching continued well after the crotch-grabbing had ceased. But it may well have been that those five jurors who weren't voting to convict felt just the way you've described. Having seen the tape, though, it does not appear that the kid's hands are in a position to be grabbing anyone's crotch during at least one of the times he's being hit. To me, at that point, it becomes retribution rather than trying to control the situation or stop the kid's behavior (assuming any of that happened. It is not clear from the tape that anyone's crotch was grabbed). Yes, because no one has ever been wrongully arrested, either. I mean, it isn't Dallas, so I guess it's possible that no one has been illegally arrested out there. But I know for a fact people get arrested all the time in Dallas for things that aren't against the law. I wouldn't say that justifies the use of excessive force.
Exactly. The officers knew that the suspect was highly dangerous and in need of physical restraint. The handcuffs indicate that. However, RM95, your two posts in this thread seem to indicate that you are not familiar with the video tape. The crotch grabbing allegedly occured when the suspect was handcuffed and being bent over the side of the car. So therefore your comment above is not reflective of the situation. The rational thought process went out the window after the handcuffs were applied, and while the crotch grab was taking place.
Watching part of the tape again, I see that unless that kid is plastic man, he could not have been grabbing the officer's crotch when he was lifted up and slammed onto the trunk of the police car. And even the officer doesn't claim that the slam onto the trunk was in response to any crotch-grabbing. That alone could've been seen as excessive by many. It is possible he was doing so when the officer punched him in the face, but he could not have continued doing so during the time that the officer wrapped his hands around the kid's neck. The officer was simply not in a position where that could've happened.
This is precisely the same story I tried to make in the case where the little girl got run over and the guy was let off. All people on this board know about this case is what they read from the linked story. There is NO WAY you people can make a better decision on who was at fault here than the jury could, who sat through loads of evidence. Nobody here knows anything about what happened before the handcuffs were put on, nor what was going on while the handcuffs were on. What if the officer was being grabbed in the crotch like T_J said, or had his foot stomped or he was kicked. There's a number of insubordinate activities that one can do while handcuffed. Can we think through things, first, people? I think a lot of people are LOOKING for reasons to get mad at the police. This is just reprehensible. The police risk their lives day in and day out for meager wages to protect and serve the public. By the way - has there been a REVEREND sighting on this matter yet?
Hey, some of us are just agreeing with a majority of the jurors on the case. Oh, and the department who fired him. (And as for all those other things that could happen while handcuffed, the officer never claimed anything other than crotch-grabbing happened. And even he says that happened after he picked the boy up and slammed him against the trunk of the car.)
"How about groin-grabbingly transcendent?" I don't look for reasons to get mad at police, I just get upset with bad cops. I don't see how punching a suspect in the face is the correct next step after you've hand cuffed and slammed him down on the car. Where's AB, he used to be a cop, I'll bet that crotch snatching was brought up and addressed at some point and I'm pretty sure a fist to the face wasn't part of procedure.
I'm pretty sure that AB will back me up on this. I ripped it out of an officer's manual when he wasn't looking. Apparently, if you tea bag an officer (which you can easily do while handcuffed, provided you are standing on the squad car or provided he has fallen down), you will just never be heard from again. They just shoot you and bury you.
RR, what he is trying to say is that it is okay for a white cop to beat the crap out of a black man. As long as the cop is white, everything goes.
LOL! Before I even clicked on this thread I just imagined all of the stupid things that TJ would be running at the mouth about... justice served and case closed nonsense. It is pretty useless to bother. It's pretty despicable that cops keep getting off on these things though. The officer in Baytown who killed a Hispanic man on the streets last year I believe had now a third complaint filed against him recently for excessive force. This time by a 50 something year old 5'2" Hispanic woman who this cop used a tazer gun on because she had a brick in her hand and was banging it on someone's door to get them to answer. I don't know how many times these types of rogue cops need to use completely excessive force before someone throws their asses in prison. It's really disgusting. Particularly in Texas with all these conservative judges who pick the Grand Juries, it's just a joke.
I won't I just wanted to see is explaination the sad sick part of it is. . . . unlike you . . . .I BELEIVE HE BELEIVES THIS BS I don't think he is doing it just to piss us off [Not unlike the fun loving internet guy that wants to go into Black/gay/minority chatrooms and scream obscenities and perversions just to get a rise out of the darkies. . . . while they sit safely behind a computer screen but WOULD never say anything to any one in any of those groups in person . . . .] The sad thing is. . . . Far too many folx beleive this drivel as well. i.e. At least 5 out of 7 The measure of justice should never be IF I WAS IN THAT SITUATION I WOULD HAVE . . . . The Measure of a Cop should not be how much Terror you can enforce on a neighborhood . . . . The Measure of Justice should never be MIGHT MAKES Right If that is ya thought process. . . WELCOME TO THUNDERDOME TWO MAN ENTER .. . . . ONE MAN LEAVE I doubt many cops would enter. . . much less leave Don't get me wrong. . . I've met good cops I've met some power abusing sh*theads too. For every sh*thead I meet. . . I think I meet about 3 ok ones and maybe 1 good cop 1 out 5 may sound good . . . . but 20% of the force being a sh*thead is not acceptable . . . . .esp when they concentrated in various areas. .. . . No my friend. . . I won't get into it with TJ he has proven his philosophy on life time and again nothing will change it. . . .He will sit on his nice cushy life and look down on the rest of the world. Funny thing .. if a guy hits me in a club . . . and I beat him to a pulp . . .I get Aggrevated Assualt even if he threw the 1st punch . . . . Cops live by a different set of laws and rules We expect the every day man to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK but cops have a license to BEAT YOU DOWN? I thought Cops were suppose to be trained to be better than that Rocket River
I really feel sorry for you if you believe what you wrote. You live your life sulking in your own self pity and looking for excuses to claim that people are holding you down. I can't believe you would form an opinion on all police by what you READ in a newspaper story in this case. How many cops are there in Houston? 5,000? probably more? You make your judgment on all of them by what you READ about ONE cop in LA. Please. I fully believe that you are not capable of mature thought.
Did this poetry make sense to anyone? Thunderdome? 20% of policemen are "sh*theads"? Gay chatrooms and screaming obscenities? How can anyone think this is a rational argument? This is just silly. What makes sense to me is that if a group of people consistently poses a threat to police officers and the community, then that group of police officers must be perpetually on guard against their attacks. Want to stop the problem? Stop committing crimes. Abide by the law. Seems pretty simple to me. Most other groups don't have a large scale problem with it.
