Pixiq

Ok,
I have now watched this with everyone in the house, it is the consensus that she did not in fact strike the officer upon him grabbing her, you can clearly see him swing his right hand towards her right side, since he had her right arm she instinctively reacted and brought up her right leg in a defensive position, her foot does not go out until she is pushed down at which point it goes out for balance.

If she was within the safety zone she should be asked to move back to a specific distance or location, otherwise the police need to start setting up a barrier for their safety zone so that non psychics will know its location.
Then if we breach the safety zone it is done so knowingly and at that point they have the ability to arrest a person if they feel they need to.

The second he grabbed her wrist without provocation he lost qualified immunity as a police officer and any action taken after that is as a citizen and should be subject to the same rules as any citizen of the United States. Her fighting back was simple reaction to a perceived threat by the officer, cop or not you put your hands on me without provocation and I will feel threatened. I may be more in control and not immediately react, but she was a young child (maturity wise) it seems and reacted on instinct.

I hate to say it but I think because she is a person of color is why the officers acted as they did and the camera was just an excuse.

The only good cop is a .......

Wait....there is no such thing as a good cop. "Good cop" is an oxymoron.

Well I pretty much agree with the chief on this one. The officers were completely justified in arresting her. It's obvious to me that she kicked the officer and resisted. However I don't think the elbow strike was justified. I think the officer went to far with that. I think the two of them probably could have muscled her into cuffs. However if she began striking during this, the officers would have been justified in escalating the force.

The person who thinks it is racially motivated needs to put that overused card back in the deck.

Sorry Johnny i am going to have to call BS on your apologetics this instance.

You're telling me that if i am walking down the street holding a camera, and i happen upon a scene where officers are arresting someone, and one of them runs over and grabs my arm, that i just need to comply with an unspoken rule that only cops know about? I'm not allowed to defend myself?

This is an INSANE request. I get that officers should be safe and whatever, but an officer of the law is not allowed to assault and batter someone for crossing their imaginary line without SAYING ANYTHING.

I'm trying really hard not to make any judgements of your character, here, but this doesn't look good coming out of anyone's mouth/fingers.

Too many wrongs for anyone to be right.
As we are all commenting on the video I guess we should all look at the video. Too bad that there's no sound as you could hear any instructions, if any, that were issued by the police.
When you watch the video after the chief comments that his officers used excessive force you'll see the dashcam footage.
The young lady walked right up to the cop car. The officer did grab her hand and she reacted by pullin her hand w/the phone away ... reflex. She lifts he knee to keep space ... reflex. As the officer keeps coming she swings/punches at him with the hand that contains the soda can ... assault?
Pullin away and creating space are between you and someone else ar a lil different from throwing a punch or swingin.
LEO's are like regular people in some regards. The majority of them are decent or good folks ... then there are a number ... "unprofessional" is probably a kind way to describe them. A citizen who behaves in a similar fashion would be called triflin, a dumb@ss or an a##hole.
In the video it looks like there are 2 officers there. Maybe 1 of them should have been paying attention and advised the young lady and the other people in the video to keep there distance [ in the video there is another young lady who walks over but stops short ], ask JL what he would do if there were a group of people around and he was trying to arrest/question someone. Maybe they did. No audio to give a hint one way or the other.
If the young lady doesn't walk up to the car, if she stays where she was, does this happen? If the officer talks to her and gives her achance to step back, before touching her, does this happen? If she doesn't pull back, does it happen? What if anything does officer #2 say, or does he just grab her?
I live in D.C., and there are a number of different LEA's in the city. Only time I ever get close to them is when they are talkin to me. Otherwise I keep my distance. I've watched a few encounters over the years, and I watch from a distance. If/when it involves someone I know and I got something to say or a question to ask, I wait, make sure that I am seen and say excuse me. I don't do anything that can make a bad or stressful situation worse.
If I had a camera or a phone to take pics or video, I can do that from 15 to 20 feet away. Not less than 10
feet, as BAD THINGS CAN HAPPEN.

Just a reminder that those who are discussing this with Johnny Law. Johnny Law believes that there's "absolutely nothing wrong" with the way this person was arrested.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15772710?source=email

So, according to Johnny Law, there's "absolutely nothing wrong" with giving a concussion to a suspect who isn't resisting arrest. Take that into consideration when deciding whether or not it serves any constructive purpose in discussing the use of force in law enforcement with him. Personally, I equate it with discussing geology with a young earth creationist.

Who knows, maybe JL will at least be able to admit that the thugs in the video above shouldn't have lied in their reports.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17700839?source=rss

CARLOS, just wanted to give you a shout out as I think your site is great.
It's one of the things I check whenever I use my computer.
Keep up the good work!

I find JL’s arguments pretty disturbing; that he may be legally correct is even more disturbing. Apparently:

A) Officers have the authority to arbitrarily define the appropriate distance from which one can observe and/or film them.

B) Officers are not required to issue verbal warnings before physically pushing/shoving/grabbing you to remove you to an arbitrarily defined appropriate distance.

A and B together mean that any officer can push/shove/grab you at any time with no warning.
Additionally, apparently, resisting in any way is also a crime. The only thing he’s apparently willing to concede is that the cops can’t proceed to elbows and other strikes unless you offer at least some resistance.

As far as LEO's go, I was under the impression that to some degree they have a bit of leeway in choosing how they deal with any number of situations.
Some are polite, professional and informative when dealing with the public. Others aer crude, rude and treat the public as though they are an irritant. I honestly believe that the latter are the minority. Their behavior at times is so bad, that it makes you wonder a number of things. You also wonder why the"good cops" don't police the bad ones.
Kind of like everyday people.
Something I see when I read this site is that LEO's should be held accountable for their behavior as they perform what is arguably a very tough job.
If they do their job correctly, they don't have a lot to worry about. When they are ignorant of the laws that they are to enforce, then it becomes a problem. When they are unprofessional in that same situation, it makes it worse.
This blog usually contains lots of images/video of LEO's and security officers doing things in a illegal, immoral or at the least unproffesional matter.
But some of the conduct of the everyday citizens is not legal, confrontational and plain stupid at times.
Would you have done what the young lady did in this video?
Would you have stood and watched your mom, sister, wife or daughter do it, w/o being the voice reason? And then complained about how she was treated?
I figure if the public is in conrol of themselves when dealing with LEO's, it will be a lil easier to hold em accountable.
If they had compliance from those they deal with on a consistent basis and then acted up, it would establish a pattern and probably aid in improving the behavior of LEO's.
My question for JL would be how often his peers in his department "police" themselves.
One bad aaple ruins the bunch.

john law is right from a procedural point of view. however, police policies and priocedures ARE NOT LAW. this means they are not as defense in any court.
an unlawful arrest, and unlawfully obtained warrants, mean the arrest or warrant do not exist. this means the officer could be charged with (age depending) child abuse, kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment, witness intimidation, and if the phone was seized up to grand theft, armed robbery and evidence tampering ( if the phone data was erased). this does not happen, though the law is supposed to apply to all equally (includibng law enforcement officers) because of the power of police unions and the political influence of the law enforcement community.