Human rights and the police (misconduct)

  • Thread starter rootX
  • Start date
  • #1
378
2

Main Question or Discussion Point

Mr Rodriguez, a gang member, was detained for violating his parole and pending investigation into other charges.

But human rights group the American Civil Liberties Union called for the immediate suspension of the police officer who kicked him, and urged the Los Angeles County District Attorney to conduct a full and swift investigation.

Its southern California executive director, Ramona Ripson, said: "This video is truly chilling in the clarity with which it captures an egregious example of police abuse."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8049633.stm


Don't human rights have something better to criticize.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616
I can't get the video to play beyond the ad, but the article states,

A California police officer has been caught on camera apparently aiming a sharp kick at the head or neck of a suspect who has already surrendered.
Damn that Constitution, giving thugs the presumption of innocence!
 
  • #3
LowlyPion
Homework Helper
3,090
4
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8049633.stm

Don't human rights have something better to criticize.
You aren't offering to defend the officer for his actions I trust. I'd say that's a pretty clear cut case of abuse. In a prone surrender position and a gratuitous kick? What is to distinguish police from criminals if there is universal disregard for the Law?

The video has been aired on several cable news networks today.
 
  • #4
378
2
The video has been aired on several cable news networks today.
That's what I was against.

Those guys don't see this crazy guy breaking the law, racing in the wrong lane, and endangering everyone but they see the officer kicking.

Edit: I should mention "on parole" here so a guy on parole becomes a danger to the public. Human rights simply ignore that. I don't know why they are so blind towards that.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
655
3
Heres the full video:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
2,985
13
hAHAHAH he got rocked in the face. That officer is an idiot because now they guy is going to walk away from his crime. That cop should be fired.
 
  • #7
JasonRox
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,314
3
The cop who punched him should also be fired.

Both should have records on their name now. After winning the case, I would mail them a letter saying... "Good luck getting a good job with a record under your name. :) "

Seriously, that's full on abuse. The guy surrendered.
 
  • #8
135
0
This just happened the other day. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009213641_arrest13m.html [Broken] This man was not who they were looking for.

And I'm sure you remember the King County, washington deputy who viciously attacked the 15 year old girl in the holding room on camera.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
655
3
The question is: are police abuses on the rise, or was it always like this and we only see it now because everyone has video cameras?
 
  • #10
The question is: are police abuses on the rise, or was it always like this and we only see it now because everyone has video cameras?
I would say that it has likely been much worse and now it is only the idiots who think they can still get away with it that continue.
I saw a story on the news the other day about a small town that had a tendency to pull over out of towners who were mostly either black or hispanic. They would arrest them for some minor offense and take them to the jail where they would confiscate all of their money and valuables then tell them that if they want to avoid being thrown in jail they need to sign a confession and release (or some such). They would sign it and be on their way. Apparently this is partially legal in that state (Texas I think), by law officers can confiscate any money and valuables on a person that are believed to be involved in the crime for which they were arrested. In most of these cases though they were pulled over for minor traffic violations where the money was not in fact involved in the crime. The police are also to return the money and valuables if the person is not actually convicted of anything and in all of these cases the DA never filed any official case against the victims. The town apparently made hundreds of tousands of dollars doing this before there were too many complaints for it to go unnoticed.

As a security guard I have found that blacks and hispanics tend to be rather cooperative. They seem to have a worry that they will get in trouble and want to avoid it. Even as they may complain or do their best to make me aware that they do not like me telling them what to do they still comply. Hispanic immigrants who speak little english tend to be the most apologetic. White people on the other hand are the ones that can be the biggest pains in the ***. As long as minorities feel that they have no recourse but to endure what ever they are put through by authority figures there will be quite a bit of abuse that goes unseen and unreported.
 
  • #11
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,916
17
The question is: are police abuses on the rise, or was it always like this and we only see it now because everyone has video cameras?
These variables are not exclusive, and there's another important one you overlooked: how widely incidents get publicized.
 
  • #12
378
2
The cop who punched him should also be fired.

Both should have records on their name now. After winning the case, I would mail them a letter saying... "Good luck getting a good job with a record under your name. :) "

Seriously, that's full on abuse. The guy surrendered.
You are asking for too much. The incident can also be reworded as:

A guy on parole (see 1) intentionally endangers the public and police. Police officers risked their and other people lives trailing the guy in the wrong lane or going faster than the speed limits. Fortunately, police was able to capture him without harming anyone else or themselves but they misconduct near the end.

So, I think they should only be disciplined - idea of firing them is insane. Their work excluding the misconduct is rewardable.

1) "violating his parole and pending investigation into other charges"
I think I would look into the whole story like if he should have been in the jail.
 
  • #13
LowlyPion
Homework Helper
3,090
4
That's what I was against.

Those guys don't see this crazy guy breaking the law, racing in the wrong lane, and endangering everyone but they see the officer kicking.

Edit: I should mention "on parole" here so a guy on parole becomes a danger to the public. Human rights simply ignore that. I don't know why they are so blind towards that.
It's difficult to have sympathy for the perp. But regardless of what he may have done, the officer acted gratuitously when the perp was already cooperating and following instruction to prostrate himself. I appreciate the frustration the officer unfortunately thought to act out on, but still ... the officer must bear some fault.

Sure there was a chase, and others were endangered because of the perp's sociopathy in violating the law and seeking to avoid apprehension, crashing his car, but the bottom line is he had adopted a defenseless non-flight position, that offered greatly diminished threat to the officer, and the officer acted badly. I think the public has a right to expect better.
So, I think they [he] should only be disciplined - ...
I agree. And maybe the system will see to it that the perp remains in tighter control this time around and not given license to be out and about sowing further chaos.
 
  • #14
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
12
What you need is a law making it illegal to take photos of the police/army/security services then all these problems go away.

Since the UK introduced such a law no Brazilians have been shot on the tube and only one guy has been clubbed to death (unfortunately an American visitor videoed that so it's probably his fault)
 
Last edited:
  • #15
2,985
13
You are asking for too much. The incident can also be reworded as:

A guy on parole (see 1) intentionally endangers the public and police. Police officers risked their and other people lives trailing the guy in the wrong lane or going faster than the speed limits. Fortunately, police was able to capture him without harming anyone else or themselves but they misconduct near the end.

So, I think they should only be disciplined - idea of firing them is insane. Their work excluding the misconduct is rewardable.

1) "violating his parole and pending investigation into other charges"
I think I would look into the whole story like if he should have been in the jail.
rooX..........................a police office kicked a guy in the head while he was laying on the ground. Stop making up a load of BS to excuse it.

Pause and say this out loud where ever you are reading this: "A POLICE OFFICER KICKED A SUSPECT IN THE HEAD WHILE HE WAS LAYING ON THE GROUND". Then say it again one more time for good measure so it sinks in.
 
  • #16
JasonRox
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,314
3
You are asking for too much. The incident can also be reworded as:

A guy on parole (see 1) intentionally endangers the public and police. Police officers risked their and other people lives trailing the guy in the wrong lane or going faster than the speed limits. Fortunately, police was able to capture him without harming anyone else or themselves but they misconduct near the end.

So, I think they should only be disciplined - idea of firing them is insane. Their work excluding the misconduct is rewardable.

1) "violating his parole and pending investigation into other charges"
I think I would look into the whole story like if he should have been in the jail.
When you're a police officer, you're suppose to know how to handle yourself. This police officer does not know how.

A serious punishment should be made in my opinion.

I'm a believer of harsh punishment on government officials who start power tripping, like the police officers did.
 
  • #17
492
0
Wow. Those police officers should be put in jail for assault. I don't want people like that to continue posing a danger to society.

There is absolutely no excuse for that. Frustration, incompetence, etc. I can't just go kick people in the face if they bother me. Police should be held to a higher standard.
 
  • #18
russ_watters
Mentor
19,299
5,327
The question is: are police abuses on the rise, or was it always like this and we only see it now because everyone has video cameras?
There is an option 3: the prevalence of video cameras has caused these incidents to decrease even while we see more of it because of that prevalence.
 
  • #19
459
7
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8049633.stm


Don't human rights have something better to criticize.
Don't police have procedures they are supposed to follow to serve and protect the community? I get the whole adrenaline rush, catch the bad guy thing, but I only like to see the taking matters into your own hands type of personal justice in westerns and action hero movies. Authority figures just look like thugs when they try to do it. I don't think kicking that guy in the head does anything to serve or protect the community, and incidents like that can have great potential for harm to the community.

After listening to that announcer babble on for 6 minutes about not knowing which direction he was going I wished someone would kick me in the head too.
 
  • #20
Last night on the radio I heard a man being interviewed who stated that he believed the officers action was a common police procedure. Supposedly when multiple officers move in close to a target and they believe he may have a weapon they will strike the target to distract and disorient him decreasing the likelihood that the target will successfully lash out at one of the officers with a weapon as they grab and restrain him. I've not actually watched the video but I have heard the man supposedly had one or more of his hands concealed beneath himself when the officer who kicked him first ran up.

Whether or not this is really common procedure I have no idea and the radio show host pointed out that (as far as he is aware) when an officer initially approaches a target by himself it is common procedure to keep their distance until fellow officers arrive.
 
  • #21
492
0
If that's common procedure, we have a lot of uniform-wearing criminals who need to do the time.
 
  • #22
149
0
No doubt the officer was wrong and should be reprimanded....maybe someone should follow the "gentleman" around for a few days with a camera...see how he behaves when he isn't in custody.
 
  • #23
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
12
No doubt the officer was wrong and should be reprimanded....maybe someone should follow the "gentleman" around for a few days with a camera...see how he behaves when he isn't in custody.
The point isn't really that the criminals aren't naughty - it's that the police officers shouldn't be.

Suppose if firemen occasionally fire bombed a house to relax on the way home, as long as they put out more fires than they start that should be ok?

Or a doctor/serial killer? Ok so Harold Shipman killed a couple 100 of his patients, but think how many lives doctors save. So we shouldn't really judge him harshly.
 
  • #24
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,916
17
If that's common procedure, we have a lot of uniform-wearing criminals who need to do the time.
If. We have no reason to suppose such a thing.
 
  • #25
492
0
"Last night on the radio I heard a man being interviewed who stated that he believed the officers action was a common police procedure."

He seems to think he's heard of people claiming it is.
 

Related Threads for: Human rights and the police (misconduct)

Replies
3
Views
887
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Top