Pixiq

1 year ago

There seems to be an endless supply of cops giving cops a bad name. How often does this happen with no video record, I wonder? Then if the person smashed up complains, the cops form a fat blue line and say, "We never touched him!" Thank goodness for video cameras!

1 year ago

If there was no video, it didn't happen.

1 year ago

In that poor man's position, I'd have hospitalized that deputy. I know for a fact that it's simply not in me to meekly submit to a beating.

Handcuffs are not so effective that an abusive bad cop positioning himself like that deputy did would be safe just because his victim was handcuffed.

1 year ago

Then clearly you are a valid threat and the officer is just defending himself against the possiblity. Attacking a cop around here has a minimum 25 year sentence, I don't know what it is in SC.

1 year ago

If self-defense against an unprovoked violent assault validates and justifies the initial assault, then there is no such thing as self-defense at all.

This is true on the police end as well: If use of force in self-defense justifies an unprovoked assault, then everyone is fully justified to assault a police officer, because they have a reasonable expectation the officer will fight back.

1 year ago

If self-defense against an unprovoked violent assault validates and justifies the initial assault, then there is no such thing as self-defense at all.

Michael Kerney

1 year ago

I... Think you're being sarcastic... Right?

(Referring to Happy Tinfoil Cat there, not Bergman. Nesting may not make that clear, sorry.)

1 year ago

Yes, sarcasm and a bit of realism. Sad but true. They can kick our asses and if no camera is around, we're screwed. I've been to court where it was my word against a cop's and got slam dunked.

1 year ago

When it's a cop's word against a civilian, the cop is given extra credit in court, and nine times out of ten his word is believed. There might have been a time when such an assumption was justified, but today it seems clear that cops lie at LEAST as often as anybody else. What would it take, I wonder, to erase that invalid assumption? Doing so would go partway to restoring justice in America.

Michael Kerney

1 year ago

HTC - OK, yeah, I was hoping so. Sometimes hard to tell in text-only.

One thing that really needs to change is the ridiculous deference to officers on their word alone. I think I can live better with the occasional minor criminal getting away because there was no more evidence than an officer's word than with the institutionalized "officer's word as near-unassailable evidence" that we have now.

(And no, I'm not worried about major criminals getting away. Serious crimes should be proven beyond a reasonable doubt with actual evidence, anyway.)

Yeah, it might make it harder to be a good guy in some cases. But being the good guy isn't always the easy thing.

1 year ago

You would certainly be morally justified in downing the cop, and you might land him in the hospital, but the goons would also pound you senseless, even if they had to call for six more fat slugs to overpower you. And you'd be charged with felonies (assuming they stopped before killing you). Would it be worth it? If your answer is yes, I admire you, but probably wouldn't follow in your footsteps.

1 year ago

I'm told I have a paladin complex. I tend to view it as being normal, while most people are too tolerant of evil.

I used to be a law enforcement explorer; As I imagine has happened many times in that program, the topic of discussion got around one night to whether or not a cop should take a bullet to defend a total stranger, and whether each explorer would do so if they became a cop.

My answer was an unequivocal "yes"...though I did point out that the cop would probably be wearing body armor.

The fact that I didn't pursue a career as an officer doesn't actually change my instinctive response to danger. Like cops, I tend to run towards problems, not away. There are worse ways to die, after all, than opposing an act of evil.

1 year ago

I fear you may be giving cops (most of them, anyway) too much credit when you say "Like cops, I tend to run towards problems, not away." In the Columbine massacre, did they not hang around outside the school, too frightened to act, while the slaughter unfolded? Ditto the Virginia Tech massacre.

1 year ago

They weren't too frightened to act in Columbine. They followed their training in a crisis. Active shooters were very rare and the conventional training was focused on hostage takers, not mass murder. The SOP was to form a tight perimeter around the school, call SWAT, and have the negotiators enroute to discuss surrender. Regular patrol cops were not trained in clearing a building room by room and it was beat into their heads to call SWAT.

Columbine caused a complete change to tactics in law enforcement training. Now officers are trained on active-shooters and taught that one or two officers must be prepared to immediately enter a building to neutralize a shooter. If you hear shots, you go in.

In reference to Virginia Tech, the bad guy chained the doors from the inside. Officers simply were unable to get in. Officers were eventually able to force entry (after about 6 minutes) and immediately attempted to engage the gunman but he killed himself when he realized the police were coming. If they had not charged in when they did, the slaughter would have been much worse.

The response to Columbine was unacceptable but it was not because of the individual police being cowards. It was simply because of outdated planning. Simply do a google search for "police active shooting" and you will see how police now respond to these things.

Do you have the stones to charge into a place where there is a gunman capping off rounds?

1 year ago

Yes, I do, when children are being killed and maimed. I was watching on TV from CA, furious that the cops did not engage. Then even far more furious that the cops followed a clearing procedure that forced the teacher slowly bleed to death. Some common sense is needed. Columbine appeared to be massive cowardice followed by massive stupidity. I'm absolutely positive I would take the risk to intervene in a similar situation. I'm not a brave man at all, but I can't think of anything more worthy risking dying for.

1 year ago

Hindsight is 20/20 sir. At the time of the incident, it was assumed that the police were dealing with a hostage situation. It's common knowledge that charging into a hostage situation is a good way to get the hostages killed. The officers onscene didn't comprehend that there was a mass killing going on inside and all their training has always been to contain and call SWAT.

In a chaotic situation, you are going to fall back on your training and procedures. You didn't know what was going on inside that school at the time it was happening. Of course now that you have the luxury of the school videos, the casualty reports, and the crime scene report, it's easy to say the police should have gone in.

In hindsight, all the officers present that day wish they had gone in sooner but they didn't know at the time. Hell, most are parents and would have gladly charged in IF THEY HAD KNOWN THE WHOLE SITUATION! They didn't and they followed their training.

As I have said, the training and doctrine has changed and law enforcement has adapted. If you had been a cop there as it was going down, you would have done the same damn thing and you know it. Try to forget you are looking at it after the fact and try to imagine being there as it went down. Would you like to be the one responsible for charging into a hostage situation and getting those kids killed? Of course not, so as a result, you would sit there and wait for SWAT.

1 year ago

This isn't hindsight; I watched it unfold and was horrified by the lack of intervention, AS IT HAPPENED. The parents actually were demanding to be let in with their own guns because they cops would not go in. Sounds like it was known NOT to be a hostage situation by everybody else on the scene but the cops. TV stations had the kids on the telephone telling them what was happening. Watch the original footage. Additionally, watch the interviews of the students who were keeping the teacher alive. The EMTs were not allowed in until the building was cleared several hours later. The students helping the teacher begged to stay with him and keep him from bleeding to death, since the cops weren't interested in getting him the help he needed.

I think I have a much better idea of what I would have done than you do.

1 year ago

Wow so you had complete knowledge of what was going on as it was happening? You mean that by watching News Channel 8 in San Diego, you feel you had enough information, in real time, to make a determination that it was not a hostage situation and that doing a frontal assault on armed gunmen in a school would have been a better solution than trying to contain the scene and getting SWAT and negotiators?

Seriously dude, these critical incidents are insanely chaotic as they are unfolding. Officers on the scene didn't know how many gunmen they had, what these guys wanted, or where they were at in the school. They didn't know these nuts were going to pull off a mass murder.

How long did it take you to figure out what was really going on? It's easy to make that snap decision when you know that it's all theory in your living room. It's a little bit different when you are on the scene trying to figure things out as they unfold.

Do you really think that every cop on scene was just too chicken to go in there? It's beat into our head that we can't take independent action during a hostage crisis/barricaded subject. That is still the doctrine for events that aren't active shootings in progress.

Things are different now due to training changing. The first officers onscene would form a contact team and go in immediately. Other officers would show up and start forming up rescue teams and other search teams.

My point here is that the officers were not cowards for not going in. Society and police training just was not prepared for that kind of violence at the time. However to call the officers cowards is just ridiculous and shows a failure to consider the whole situation. It's just as ridiculous to say that you would go charging in and try to save the day when you didn't have a clear understanding of things either and didn't have any extra insight as to what was going on.

1 year ago

That is why there are well-trained people who are supposed to follow procedures contingent on the exigent situation at hand. Setting up a large perimeter did not fit this situation, and now procedures have been updated. I get it.

I'd like to point out that I did not call the cops cowards but said it LOOKED like massive cowardice.

I've been speaking from memory of that day. This stuff gives me nightmares and I have avoided dwelling on it. I just read the facts today and it looks like I've been wrong in many aspects.

Initial reports were that the cop stationed at the school fled when shooting started, to set up a one-man perimeter. It turns out he did actually arrive on scene and shoot at them, which is pretty much the opposite. The rest of the murders were committed in the next 17 minutes while he was outside. (This is where the new procedures make a difference.)

From the live reporting it seemed like they were still slaughtering kids long after that but the rest of the shooting and explosions were ineffective.

SWAT entered an hour after the shooting stopped.

The teacher got to bleed out for nearly four hours. I'm happy procedures have changed to prevent this from happening again.

Also, Wikipedia says the new procedures have saved dozens of lives since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre#Police_tactics

From what I read of the new procedure, it is exactly what I had said I would do. You can't always wait for the situation to sort itself out before acting.

Shawn Wright

1 year ago

HTC, I agree with Johnny. Charging headlong into a hostile situation with an unknown number of assailants with unknown numbers and types of weapons is normally a recipe for disaster.

Hazza

1 year ago

I happen to agree with HTC, hysterical teenagers ringing their mummy and media outlets are THE most reliable source of information you could wish for at ANY time, especially highly volatile life and death situations.

Surely anyone can see that?

1 year ago

Standard Operating Procedure - Nobody there batted an eye

Phil

1 year ago

What's truly amazing here is that the video didn't drop into a black hole. It would be interesting to know how this all came to light.

I think a lot of these beatings happen for the same reason people climb mountains. "Because we can." It looks like video is starting to change that reason.

Roger

1 year ago

It is good that they were fired and the one charged, but how about the others who only watched? They did nothing and did not report, they failed in there duty and should also be fired. Any cop who holds to the "blue line" should be fired.

Phil

1 year ago

I did a search on this. One article I read said there would be some consequences for the officers who saw this and failed to take action to stop the beating.

1 year ago

Roger,

I agree. They had an obligation to report this. There was a failure on many levels.

Michael Kerney

1 year ago

I only wonder who the deputy angered, that lead to the video coming to light.

Tom Joad

1 year ago

It is unbelievable that the other cops did not intervene and stop the beating. Couldn't they have said "Hey Oddie, let me hand this one from here..." or "Hey dude, chill out you don't want to have to explain this one to the chief." etc. So much for upholding the rule of law and serving the citizens. IMHO, those cops that looked the other way are almost as guilty as the one doing the beating.

Saint Ola

1 year ago

I am waiting for Johnny Law. Before he is going to post, we will all hear: Blalalalala ........................... Cops can do no wrong.

Hazza

1 year ago

Your tiny little mind might think that but he has proven on multiple occasions that it NOT what he believes.

Sure he is bent towards the cops but most of us here are bent towards the photographer.

I am sure Carlos gets stuff, that we never see, showing the photographer is clearly in the wrong.

1 year ago

I'm sorry to disappoint you Saint Ola but nothing could be further from the truth. I can't see any justification for that behavior. The officer who beat that man needs to go to prison and the other officer needs to lose his job for not stopping it.

Beating a handcuffed prisoner with a baton? Maybe if the guy was kicking at the officer and the officer was trying to subdue him. However this prisoner wasn't resisting. The officer clearly lost his temper and went off the reservation.

I found it disgusting.

1 year ago

Assuming you do truly believe in justice and holding LEOs accountable you surely meant that both officers present need to go to jail (along with any other officers who knew about it but didn't report it). Also that they need to be automatically sentenced to the maximum time allowable under the law.

Bill Cooper

1 year ago

Emeth, had you actually taken the time to read the thread before looking for an opportunity to pounce you'd have seen that just a few posts above this one he agreed in no uncertain terms that the cops who stood by and let this happen without stopping and/or reporting it had an obligation to do, failed in their duties, and should be fired.

It's often astonishing how people see only what they want to see.

1 year ago

I read through the whole thread before posting and I saw that Roger said they should be fired and Johnny Law agreed. That is nowhere near being enough imo. I don't think a cop who holds to the "blue wall" should just be fired. I think they should face severe jail time.

However on reflection I do see that my tone towards Johnny Law was way off base.

Johnny Law I apologize for my hostile tone in my original comment, you didn't deserve the hostility and rudeness I displayed. All I can say is that I am an emotional person and a little frayed from unrelated matters at the moment but that is still no excuse for being so uncivil. I would remove it but the system isn't letting me edit it.

1 year ago

No offense taken Emeth. I've heard a lot worse in these forums.

I still have to disagree with you on sending the other officers to jail. We don't send people to jail for failing to stop crimes that they witness. If a civilian observed a man beating a woman and they didn't take steps to stop it, that witness doesn't get charged for his failure to act. In fact, nothing at all happens to the witness.

You may argue that it is different because these officers have an obligation to uphold the law. I agree and that is why they should lose their badges forever. However it is still not a criminal offense to not stop the beating. Is it shameful that they simply stood by? Yes it is a horrible thing but there is still no criminal act as far as I know.

However if they lie during any part of the criminal investigation, they should be charged with perjury. If they assisted the beating in anyway, they should be charged. But we can't just charge someone who was standing nearby.

1 year ago

---No offense taken Emeth. I've heard a lot worse in these forums.---

Thank you you are very gracious.

---You may argue that it is different because these officers have an obligation to uphold the law.---

I would.

I know that standing by while a criminal offense is being committed isn't a crime. However in the case of a police officer witnessing a violent assault like that and refusing to do anything I think it should be, especially if the one committing the assault is a fellow officer.

Police are supposed to be there to protect people and uphold the law. They are granted authority that regular citizens must respect and acknowledge but with that must come a higher standard that police must be held to.

That is my opinion anyway. The opinion of one man who knows most officers are trying to do right but (despite never having had trouble with the law) is finding it harder to have faith in our law enforcers.

1 year ago

They are held to a higher standard if you consider the fact that they will probably (and should) lose their jobs due to failure to act. I doubt anyone else would be at risk for that. And also consider that the officer doing the beating isn't just going to be charged with assault. He can expect to be hit with several other charges ranging from official misconduct to federal civil rights violations.

If there is a law enacted making it a crime for an officer not to intervene, I wouldn't be upset about it. I would like for that law to be very specific about what it would require and for what kinds of offenses.

Bill Cooper

1 year ago

"You may argue that it is different because these officers have an obligation to uphold the law."

I do think the witnessing officers had a moral obligation to stop the beating from taking place. I can't speak to whether or not they had a legal obligation - I'm just not qualified to say so - but if they didn't, I think I'd want them to.

Police officers are human beings, something far too many knee-jerk haters seem to forget, but they're also human beings given a very serious responsibility and great power over others. With that should come, in my opinion, a degree of being held to higher standards. By virtue of their inaction, the witnessing officers should to some extent be considered accomplices in the beating.

1 year ago

does the crime misprison of a felony strike a note?

Bill Cooper

1 year ago

Emeth, a tip of the cap and my apologies to you. It's clear you deserved a more measured response than the initial one I gave you.

1 year ago

No apologies are necessary. Actually I owe you some thanks. Your words made me reexamine my own and realize I was letting my emotions take my brain for a ride.

IceTrey

1 year ago

Thank god the cop was black so we don't have to talk about how he was a racist. We just can talk about how he was an a**hole.

Tijuana Joe

1 year ago

That's the "Trouble" with "Tribbles."

Saint Ola

1 year ago

Bad cops are popping up nation wide like mushroom after a rain. The more video cameras, the more bad cops appear; therefore no wonder why cops really hate cameras and photographers.

Photography is a crime to cops!!!

Elliott

1 year ago

I think a couple things are evident..

While a regular citizen is not expected to either intercede or report a crime, cops ARE. When witnessing another cop as the assailant and neither acting or reporting should be a crime if it isn't. It is inescusable when the officer is on duty.

I'll make another point, if the union goes to bat for these guys then when their contract comes up it needs to be modified. I have no doubt that a statement in the media like "the previous contract prevented us from X, that kind of restriction is unacceptable and will not exist in the new contract." Far too many times we have seen cases where a mediator has forced a PD to take a cop back after BS like this.

I have one additional point. It has long been argued that there are "a few bad apples". In the absence of video in the past, any even marginally plausible story from the cop was believed. The widespread use of video is showing that there are more than "a few bad apples". And I just don't believe that the volume of bad cops is some new phenomenon that happened to grow as video became more widespread.

I keep coming back to this.. When cops act illegally and unprofessionally THEY are causing the erosion of trust and respect of cops.

I generally do not speak with cops when I am not legally obligated to, but when I deal with a professional and respectful officer he is very like to get the same back, even if it is me saying, that I'm sorry I don't speak with officers. If I get one who cops me an attitude or doesn't treat me with respect, I can and will be his worst stop of the year, all while following all LEGAL commands and asserting my rights and never raising my voice.