@HTM is arguing three different issues. Should rude people be held accountable? What should happen if you don't comply with lawful orders? He does not believe what he saw was excessive force. On 1st point, the answer is no from a lawful standpoint. If you are rude, that's it, you are rude, but if there is no physical or verbal abuse that would be a criminal violation, then yeah, it sucks to deal with that person but just be professional and move on and limit your encounter. In this particular case, Tyreek was rude throughout the initial encounter, but a cop needs to swallow their ego and just deal with it. He got the ID and registration, go write the man his ticket and get him out of there. Being rude is not a lawful reason to detain somebody, so check your feelings. On the second point, if a lawful order is not followed, then the officer does have options to choose from as to how to proceed. Once again, if he is rude, that doesn't give you grounds to escalate the situation and in fact, you just need to remain professional and calm assuming the individual poses no immediate threat. One of the options may be arresting the individual and in Florida not following a lawful command does appear to be a misdemeanor and an arrestable offense, so if it made you that angry, go ahead and move forward with that option and let the individual know they are under arrest. In this arrest, let's remember that Tyreek did roll down his window initially, handed his paperwork over so he was complying up to that point, even if he was rude. Now putting the window back up after the officer made a lawful command to put it back down, well that's a grey area in Florida law since the officer already had what he needed to issue said citation. It is typical that the officer goes back to his vehicle to write the citation in situation like this one. I been stopped a few times in the past and that's my typical encounter. Does that give Tyreek the right to put up his window, well Florida law doesn't state it very well, but since the officer made a lawful command, then it is in his right to evaluate the situation and if he wants to make an arrest for lack of compliance, then go ahead and do it. Let the courts figure it out the rest. Now let's move on to the third point. In this case, the way Tyreek was taken out of the car by force and then put down to the ground in handcuffs, including the officer putting his hand around his neck and also then pinning him down with a knee, that's unnecessary. Once again, evaluate the situation, why was this necessary? Was Tyreek not being compliant? Well we wouldn't know since the officer only gave him seconds to comply and from the looks of it when the door was opened, he was unbuckling. So I don't believe reasonable time was provided to allow Tyreek to comply and instead the officer was just angry that Tyreek was rude (WHICH IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW). If the situation didn't go down in this manner, I'm pretty damn sure we wouldn't have a long thread about this. I don't think you are being reasonable @HTM and I really encourage you to evaluate the situation based on the visual evidence. Get the whole rudeness **** out of your system. Also forget about whether he complied or not. Just think of it from a pure perspective of putting someone under arrest, is it necessary to go down in the manner in went down if the individual was not posing a threat to the officers and if the individual initially complied with a few orders, despite his rudeness. I would hope you arrive at the answer that it was excessive, because it was. It was totally unnecessary for the situation to escalate how it did.
Agree 100%. I've had European colleagues tell me they don't want to stay in America long term because they feel cops carry that military thug feeling that can end your day and life on a whim. I took that opinion to heart but it's hard not to give police a wide berth when firearms are legal in the US. Euro streets aren't like the toughest parts in ou cities and guns can give a war mentality for anyone who puts on a badge. They're on the frontlines of public safety. How they act and behave is a byproduct of our society. That doesn't justify Hill's treatment. It's a bigger problem with no easy answers.
American cops are very similar in their demeanor to drill instructors in the Marine Corps the moment someone doesn't bend to the knee and suck their dick. Similar haircut also. they got that veins popping out of the neck, face turned red shouting orders aura as soon as a civilian doesn't think they are a god. Then you see Britisht cops with some drunk bloke being a bit difficult and they are like "eh chap, why you making this hard?" In a slightly annoyed but calm voice. Ra just a different culture entirely with US police.
0:49 Cop: Hey keep your window down 0:50 Hill puts his window slightly down Hill: don't tell me what to do 0:52 Cop: keep your window down or I'll get you out of the car 0:53 Cop: as a matter of fact get out of the car 1:01 Cop opens door 1:04 Cops forcefully yanks Hill out of his car 1:09 Cops force Hill on the pavement face down and cuffs him
The second time when he was forcibly brought down to ground was excessive force. The officer commanded him to sit on the ground is I think is the issue. Hill was not a flight risk. Or even a safety risk heck they didn’t even search his person till well over 30 seconds. If he was a safety risk they wouldn’t have waited almost a minute to search his person. Tyreek stated he just had surgery On his knee so he said hold on. At that point officers knew who he was. That command and take down wasn’t necessary and beyond the purpose of the stop itself. It was a power trip. That is my point. Which you could argue infringed on his rights
Also at no point was Tyreke Hill interfering with the duty of the officer in the sense of what he pulled over Tyreke Hill in he first place... To issue a traffic citation. Nothing Hill did was interfering with that. He handed the relevant information the officer needed to write up the citation. The cop doesn't need windows down when he's writing the citation. Obviously Hill was going to roll the window back down after the citation would be written because I'm sure Hill would want his driver's license back.
Also rolling up the window as the cop was about to walk away was not disobeying the cop. You could argue that Tyreek waited a bit too long to roll down the window the second time sure. The reason for hill to roll up the window in the first place was not to be defiant it was to prevent possible pictures taken by on lookers. Well that didn’t turn out well for him in the long since this is a huge national story. Also the cops pulled him out of the car 8 second after the command even though as you see in the video Tyreek was in the process of doing and even stated that to the officers.
I been meaning to ask, is this what you and others are speculating, or is this something Tyreek has said himself? It doesn't change my thoughts on things, just wondering where this is coming from.
Tyreek said it himself in one of the interviews after. I forgot which one. I think the cnn interview but can’t remember I heard him say it though
Yes he does, especially when they're tinted. How does he know you're not gonna pull out a gun n shoot him. He needs to be sure he's safe. When you're not complying it starts raising questions about his safety and everything else, which automatically puts him in a defense mode. I mean its not that hard to see it from that perspective as well. Its not like he's buddy-buddy with Tyreek, he pulled over a random individual as far as he's concerned.
If a cop feels scared over a dude they pulled over for speeding handing relevant information like us drivers license right away and saying in a frustrated tone "get it over with quickly" so the cop and hurry up go back to his squad car and do the thing he pulled over Hill for in the first place, then he shouldn't a cop. Any human with basic social interaction skills can figure out that Hill's actions weren't from being a potential violent threat to the officer but rather a wealthy egoistic person who believes he shouldn't waste time with the cop. At no point was the cop performing actions based on safety. He did those actions based on his ego hurting. If you think Hill was a potential threat when he voluntarily immediately without hesitation gave his drivers license to start the process of writing the speeding ticket then you have very bad social awareness.
If he felt threatened then he would have pulled out his firearm. If they felt threatened they would have searched him asap not wait almost a minute to search his person.
Its not about being scared, its about being extra cautious, which is totally understandable, because he doesn't know who he's pulling over or what that somebody might do. Its your responsibility as a civilian to ensure him that you will not do any harm nor present a threat to him at all times. If you fail to do that, of course he's gonna make sure you will not be a threat at all (faced down handcuffed). I mean you can go in circles all you want, the bottom line is that and if you can't (more like you don't want to), see it like that, it is what it is.
There was no "extra caution ". The desire for the officer to take Hill out of the car was not based in any way as a security measure. It was a pleasure to express authority. That's all. Do you even read comments you reply to? I ask because multiple times I told you he literally handed the officer his driver's license to start the process of writing a speeding ticket. That means the officer has the maans to know who he is. That's how an office figures out who someone is. Most passive aggressive encounters of civilians is them refusing to give ID to the officer to figure out who someone is. Hill was not refusing to deny the officer information of who he is. He gave the cop the information required to walk back to his patrol car and write down the citation. A window being rolled up has no conflict with the cop going back to the squad car with Hill's information and write the ticket. Hill would want his driver's license back and then would roll down the window to get it back. It's that simple. Now I need to do a turning test on you because you are giving me bot/troll vibes because you don't address anything people type. You just repeat the same talking point. I want you to address something specifically i said here. Address he fact that he gave the cop his information. Address how that conflicts with your narrative that the cop didn't know who the person was.
He told the police officer not to bang on his window like that (with attitude), "don't tell me what to do", and failed to keep his tinted window down after he was told to do so. Of course all that combined is gonna put a police officer in a defensive mode, because it speaks volume about your character as a person. You won't see it like that because to you the LEO is in the wrong. So we're just gonna run in circles anyway.
Hill was not being smart and the Cop was being an *******. I think cops that show a propensity of escalating situations need to be fired. I don't think he should get charged with anything, but I do think cops should be fired more often for being crappy at their jobs. Police unions should not be able to able to negotiate how police officers can be investigated for committing crimes or violating the constitution.
