Human rights and the police (misconduct)

[Hurkyl]

I would have beat the crap out of that guy. I would have jumped onto his head instead.

That police officer took it easy on him.

It's too bad we have to wait until you actually do assault someone before any action can be taken.

 

[JasonRox]

It's too bad we have to wait until you actually do assault someone before any action can be taken.

Too serious.

Read other posts.

 

[WhoWee]

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.

"Naughty"?

I think everyone should go and rent the movie Demolition Man with Sylvester Stallone/Sandra Bullock/Wesley Snipes about the genteel police force in the future.
http://www.aveofthestars.com/movies/movies-d/1437-demolition-man-sylvester-stallone-wesley-snipes-sandra-bullock-movie.html

Like it or not, there are violent people in this world...and someone needs to defend the weakest members of our herd from the predators.

Maybe we should apply the rules of Physics to this discussion?

I do not condone the officer's behavior...he was wrong. However, he kicked him only once...in the face/neck...which happens to be a clear sign/message of disrespect on the street...call it "communication". The second officer was also wrong if he was hitting the man in his sides while applying handcuffs. On a positive note, the dog didn't bite the guy.

There's an ongoing discussion in Warren, Ohio regarding the behavior of teenagers when the police drive by...and the mandated police response in the name of tolerance. Basically, people standing on the corner...mostly teenagers...may shout obscenities and make disrespectful gestures of every conceivable variety in the direction of the police...and the police aren't allowed to respond in any way. Somehow I don't think this makes the streets safer.

If the guy in the video had driven his car into a crowd of people, would the police have been wrong for chasing him?

Back to a Physics discussion.

Think of society as an object that desires to remain at rest...rest equals peace and harmony and equality. Unfortunately, the criminals exert various forces onto society...the police need to counter those forces. What happens to society when the force of the criminals exceeds the force used to counter?

 

[AUMathTutor]

Police should not be able to break the law. That's how dictatorships are made.

This goes beyond the law. The police have a duty to protect and to serve the public. How does kicking a prostrate, surrendering suspect protect or serve the community? Do children need to see this sort of behavior on TV? And where does it end? Why doesn't the cop just shoot the guy in the back of the head, execution style. One less criminal, right?

Oh wait, aggravated assault is alright but murder in the 2nd is not. If you cannot control your actions, you're a danger to yourself and to others. I think it's clear this cop fits the bill. He needs to be off the streets and behind bars. The fact that he's wearing a badge only makes him more dangerous.

 

[LowlyPion]

I do not condone the officer's behavior...he was wrong. However, he kicked him only once...in the face/neck...which happens to be a clear sign/message of disrespect on the street...call it "communication".

Of course you are condoning it. You offer excuses for it. There is no excuse. It was totally gratuitous. The officer acted out his own personal frustrations and crossed a line, and acted badly, outside the law.

If you believe in a world with consequences and personal responsibility, then you can't choose to stop at the shore of selective application of the laws. The officer should be punished. Personally I think he might consider himself lucky if the perp doesn't file an assault charge against him. If the police Department fails to discipline him, that sends a terrible message to the community about the rule of law. No one is above it.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

Watch the video then. The perp was prostrated, in a spread eagle position, face down, not moving. The officer approached him with a drawn gun, and kicked him sharply in the head. There was a clear Δmv delivered by the blow.

I'm sure the officer was angry about having to chase him down. And likely all the paperwork he had ahead of him, because of this guy's criminal behavior. OK so it was a bad day at work. But still and despite all that, the action was uncalled for. If he needed back-up before approaching him to secure his hands, then he should have waited. I don't think there is any conclusion than that the kick was totally gratuitous.

Here's a story on it...

An El Monte police officer was legally justified in kicking a car chase suspect in the head as he was lying on the ground at the end of a televised high-speed pursuit because it was a "distraction blow," a police union attorney said Friday.

Dieter Dammier, attorney for the El Monte Police Officers Assn., said the officer acted within his training and department policy when he delivered the kick.
cont...

Just to be clear I was not supporting or excusing the actions of the officer only relaying what I had heard. They are probably talking about it in the news around here more than in other areas and I thought you might be interested in further developments.

I believe both the law enforcement trainer I heard in the interview and the attorney in this article are misrepresenting the supposed training to try to cover for the officer. I'm sure there are prescribed situations in which the action, or some similar action, is called for by their training but I seriously doubt this was one of them.

 

[AUMathTutor]

The police officer is a scumbag, the attorney who said it was justified is a scumbag, and scumbags see the judge on Monday morning.

 

[LowlyPion]

Just to be clear I was not supporting or excusing the actions of the officer only relaying what I had heard. They are probably talking about it in the news around here more than in other areas and I thought you might be interested in further developments.

I believe both the law enforcement trainer I heard in the interview and the attorney in this article are misrepresenting the supposed training to try to cover for the officer. I'm sure there are prescribed situations in which the action, or some similar action, is called for by their training but I seriously doubt this was one of them.

Please, I didn't mean to suggest that you were. Merely that I think not seeing the video really makes it more challenging to characterize what happened. Like art, it's in the eye of the beholder, and I can't imagine that having seen it, that anyone can believe that it would not be a malfeasance on the part of the officer.

I must say for others to cite that it's acceptable within the bounds of the training manual, really suggests that either the training manual needs modification, or else the idea of applying common sense to carrying out procedures was poorly taught in their training.

 

[JasonRox]

Instead of kicking him in the head, he could have used the stick instead. Might as well use it for something.

 

[WhoWee]

The police have a difficult job. Sometimes "nice" doesn't work.

In this case the officer should not have kicked the fleeing suspect...but he did...1 time. One kick should not end his career and definitely should not land him in jail.

There are a lot of anti-police opinions posted in this thread. I have to ask...have any of you ever been a victim of a criminal attack? Have any of you ever been faced with a crazed crack or meth head? Have you ever been in a situation where you wondered if someone might have a gun? Have you ever chased someone on foot after a high speed automobile chase?

If you answered no...then don't be so fast to judge. Consider walking around the meanest inner city streets you can find tonight (for a few hours)...then post your opinion tomorrow.

Please note before you take that walk...if you show weakness on the street...you might get hurt...if you become surrounded and scream HELP...remember to remind the officer that shows up to be nice to your alleged attackers.

 

[Cyrus]

The police have a difficult job. Sometimes "nice" doesn't work.

In this case the officer should not have kicked the fleeing suspect...but he did...1 time. One kick should not end his career and definitely should not land him in jail.

There are a lot of anti-police opinions posted in this thread. I have to ask...have any of you ever been a victim of a criminal attack? Have any of you ever been faced with a crazed crack or meth head? Have you ever been in a situation where you wondered if someone might have a gun? Have you ever chased someone on foot after a high speed automobile chase?

If you answered no...then don't be so fast to judge. Consider walking around the meanest inner city streets you can find tonight (for a few hours)...then post your opinion tomorrow.

Please note before you take that walk...if you show weakness on the street...you might get hurt...if you become surrounded and scream HELP...remember to remind the officer that shows up to be nice to your alleged attackers.

Sorry, but what does this have to do with anything?

A police officer kicked a guy in the head who was laying on the ground with his hands over his head. That's unacceptable. Period. The end. No Excuses. I don't care if he works the beat all day long at 4 am.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

The police have a difficult job. Sometimes "nice" doesn't work.

Nope, nice does not always work on those guys lying on the ground. Personally I prefer this manuever...

Looks a lot better on camera too.

And my neighbourhood is a bit scary but its more of a seeing crackheads preforming "services" behind dumspters kinda scary. Does that count?

 

[WhoWee]

Sorry, but what does this have to do with anything?

A police officer kicked a guy in the head who was laying on the ground with his hands over his head. That's unacceptable. Period. The end. No Excuses. I don't care if he works the beat all day long at 4 am.

Again, you did not chase the guy all over town at high speeds, then chase him on foot into a backyard...nor was your life in danger JUST IN CASE he might have had a gun...did you happen to notice how he kicked him and moved to a more defensible position?

He shouldn't have kicked him...but it might have just been good survival instincts. Also note he only kicked him once...after he gauged the response.

A criminal on the run, risking the lives of hundreds of others on the street, doesn't exactly prove himself to be npn-violent or not drug crazed.

 

[NeoDevin]

If he was concerned about potential threat, he should have waited (gun drawn) for another officer before moving in. He made a poor decision, and will now have to suffer the consequences. I imagine during the investigation/hearing they will also try to establish the motivations behind the kick, probably also considering his record and past performance.

 

[Cyrus]

Again, you did not chase the guy all over town at high speeds, then chase him on foot into a backyard...nor was your life in danger JUST IN CASE he might have had a gun...did you happen to notice how he kicked him and moved to a more defensible position?

He shouldn't have kicked him...but it might have just been good survival instincts. Also note he only kicked him once...after he gauged the response.

A criminal on the run, risking the lives of hundreds of others on the street, doesn't exactly prove himself to be npn-violent or not drug crazed.

No, I didn't see him kick him because the guy was reaching for a gun, and neither did you. He kicked the guy who was submitting.

Reverse roles. If the police officer was on the ground and the criminal had kicked the cop in the head, the criminal would have been in jail no questions asked. Why do you think the police officer is above the law? This is a double standard.

 

[rootX]

Reverse roles. If the police officer was on the ground and the criminal had kicked the cop in the head, the criminal would have been in jail no questions asked.

Not necessarily.

If police officer was running red lights at above speed limit also driving in the wrong lane and this criminal (not police officer) stops him and kicks once or twice, you wouldn't put the criminal in jail. I don't even think there would be any action. As for the human rights, they would have naming the criminal as hero.

Police should be more responsible - agree.

 

[Moonbear]

In this case the officer should not have kicked the fleeing suspect...but he did...1 time. One kick should not end his career and definitely should not land him in jail.

The suspect was NOT fleeing at the time of the kick, and that is the important distinction. He had already ceased fleeing or resisting arrest and had submitted himself to police by then. This was not force used to subdue someone who was still fleeing, it was force used just to take out the cop's frustrations. That very definitely should end his career and put him in jail. It is a cop's job to remain rational when everyone around them isn't, and when they can't do that, they are no better than the other criminals they are abusing.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Quoting TheStatutoryApe's article:

Dieter Dammier, attorney for the El Monte Police Officers Assn., said the officer acted within his training and department policy when he delivered the kick.

I find this to be most disturbing. Suppose for a moment that it's true. What forum does Rodriguez have if the officer was within department policy but the policy itself is wrong?

It's one thing to have a single 'bad apple' -- it's always going to happen. But if that's sanctioned policy...

 

[WhoWee]

Quoting TheStatutoryApe's article:


I find this to be most disturbing. Suppose for a moment that it's true. What forum does Rodriguez have if the officer was within department policy but the policy itself is wrong?

It's one thing to have a single 'bad apple' -- it's always going to happen. But if that's sanctioned policy...

Again, the officer didn't know if the fleeing criminal had a gun or not. It seems logical that if after a VERY long chase the suspect suddenly changes tactics and you are the first to arrive...a verification move might be in order. It appeared the criminal had given up, but it could have been a mis-direction tactic to distract and injure the officer.

The kick served to verify the intent of the suspect...the evasive move following the kick took the officer out of harms way until the second officer arrived.

 

[LowlyPion]

Again, you did not chase the guy all over town at high speeds, then chase him on foot into a backyard...nor was your life in danger JUST IN CASE he might have had a gun...did you happen to notice how he kicked him and moved to a more defensible position?

He shouldn't have kicked him...but it might have just been good survival instincts. Also note he only kicked him once...after he gauged the response.

A criminal on the run, risking the lives of hundreds of others on the street, doesn't exactly prove himself to be npn-violent or not drug crazed.

Then maybe he should have just popped a couple of caps into him to gauge his response just as easily?

Cleaving to the position that the officer may have had a hard day, and so can act lawlessly as he pleases, is not exactly witnessing for personal responsibility and consequences for your actions - the framework of civilized behavior - the standard to which you would presumably hold the perpetrator who received this romantic vision of yours of "street justice" instantly meted out.

 

[Cyrus]

Again, the officer didn't know if the fleeing criminal had a gun or not. It seems logical that if after a VERY long chase the suspect suddenly changes tactics and you are the first to arrive...a verification move might be in order. It appeared the criminal had given up, but it could have been a mis-direction tactic to distract and injure the officer.

The kick served to verify the intent of the suspect...the evasive move following the kick took the officer out of harms way until the second officer arrived.

You are doing an awful lot of assumptions and rationalizations on the police officers conduct here - why?

Ok, let's say he did have a gun. Was he reaching for it? No. Do you see him going for a gun? No. Stop making up stories about what the guy 'could have been thinking in his head'.

 

[Gokul43201]

Again, the officer didn't know if the fleeing criminal had a gun or not. It seems logical that if after a VERY long chase the suspect suddenly changes tactics and you are the first to arrive...a verification move might be in order. It appeared the criminal had given up, but it could have been a mis-direction tactic to distract and injure the officer.

The kick served to verify the intent of the suspect...the evasive move following the kick took the officer out of harms way until the second officer arrived.

From what I've read on some other forums frequented by folks in LE, it did no such thing. If anything, it only risked making things worse.

Apparently, distraction blows are taught to LEOs for use in very specific cases. When an officer fails to apprehend/cuff/hold down a perp due to evasive action by the perp, the officer is trained to deliver a distraction blow before reattempting to restrain the perp.

The distraction blow defense is just that: a distraction blow.

Here's an opinion from a pretty conservative LAPD officer who is a regular contributor to Pajamas Media (which itself is pretty conservative, as blogs go):

Like any good attorney, Mr. Dammier is just doing his job, but that one is a stretch. Mr. Rodriguez was no doubt “distracted” by the kick, but even if such a kick were allowed under department policy (which I doubt), it certainly was not the proper tactic to employ at that time. The officer instead should have placed himself behind some kind of cover and waited for help to arrive before attempting to approach the suspect.

But as any cop can tell you, adrenalin is powerful stuff. My guess is that the officer in question, after a long and very stressful pursuit, ran into that yard not knowing that the suspect had given up, instead fully expecting a violent confrontation with him. When he turned the corner and saw the suspect lying on the grass, he was in effect like a bullet that had already been fired. He failed in that moment to re-program himself for the nonviolent conclusion that was unexpectedly but appropriately called for. In so failing, he endangered himself and his fellow officers by risking an altercation that might have resulted in a shooting, and he made them all look bad in the process.

(emphasis mine)

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/what-happens-when-a-police-officer-kicks-a-gang-member/

 

[AUMathTutor]

I can't believe people would defend the cop.

The *suspect* should walk and be paid a hefty settlement by the LAPD. The police officer should lose his job and go to jail on felony assault. The attorney should have his license revoked and be put in the loony bin.

 

[Cyrus]

I can't believe people would defend the cop.

The *suspect* should walk and be paid a hefty settlement by the LAPD. The police officer should lose his job and go to jail on felony assault. The attorney should have his license revoked and be put in the loony bin.

Wrong. The cop and his suspect should be in jail. The suspect should not walk.

 

[rootX]

But as any cop can tell you, adrenalin is powerful stuff. My guess is that the officer in question, after a long and very stressful pursuit, ran into that yard not knowing that the suspect had given up, instead fully expecting a violent confrontation with him. When he turned the corner and saw the suspect lying on the grass, he was in effect like a bullet that had already been fired. He failed in that moment to re-program himself for the nonviolent conclusion that was unexpectedly but appropriately called for. In so failing, he endangered himself and his fellow officers by risking an altercation that might have resulted in a shooting, and he made them all look bad in the process.

Can training be enough intensive to enable cops to act under control in these like situations?

They are humans not some robocops! So, I am expecting them to have limits. A normal person wouldn't even been able to purse the criminal - confrontation is another thing.

 

[turbo]

Let's look at possible outcomes. If the kick had dislocated the suspect's neck and left him a quadrapelegic, the suspect would be "living" the rest of his life paralyzed and requiring very expensive care (taxpayers, rejoice!). The cop should be discharged immediately and be subject to charge and prosecution by the DA.

None of this mitigates what the suspect might have done before his arrest. The offenses are separate and should remain so.

 

[turbo]

A normal person wouldn't even been able to purse the criminal - confrontation is another thing.

One of my best friends was the chief of the Maine warden service. His son hollered down from upstairs that he had just heard a shot (out-of-season, and after dark and they lived in an area frequented by deer poachers). Parker jumped out of his chair, and in his underwear and T-shirt raced after the truck passing by. A passenger in the truck took a couple of shots at him during the chase, during which he called for backup. The driver ditched the truck and the occupants bailed out and ran into the woods. Parker chased them into the woods. A trooper showed up on the scene and blipped his siren, so Parker ran back to the road. The trooper had some training clothes in the trunk, so Parker grabbed a set of sweats and some sweat-socks (still no shoes) and the trooper's back-up sidearm. They headed into the woods and apprehended one of the perps pretty quickly, and got the other one not too long after. My friend got shot at, chased the a$$holes through the woods in his underwear (with sweats, later), and managed to apprehend the poachers without kicking them in the face or any other childish crap.

Want to make an argument about adrenaline, pursuit, and confrontation? It won't wash. Real adult law-enforcement personnel put their lives at risk AND they follow the law, so that they don't contaminate their cases and put the convictions at risk.

 

[WhoWee]

Then maybe he should have just popped a couple of caps into him to gauge his response just as easily?

Cleaving to the position that the officer may have had a hard day, and so can act lawlessly as he pleases, is not exactly witnessing for personal responsibility and consequences for your actions - the framework of civilized behavior - the standard to which you would presumably hold the perpetrator who received this romantic vision of yours of "street justice" instantly meted out.

LP...Did the officer really act in a "lawless" manner? Did he really engage in "street justice"? Was the gang member a shrinking violet...what was his gang initiation?

You presume to know what my romantic idea of street justice is, although I'm not sure I even have one...but here goes. The cop chases the guy into the yard, because nobody was injured in the chase...he beats the guy bloody...takes his ID and let's him go...says he'll be watching him. Is that romantic enough...does it fit the cliche?

How about this, maybe the police should just go on strike nationwide for better working conditions, better technology and a lot more help. They need a bailout. In the mean time, they should just let everyone do as they please...until something REALLY bad happens...prioitize crime. Afterall, (especially CA) we can't afford to lock anyone else up anyway.

Cyrus...you live in the Washington D.C. area...have you ever driven around the S.E. on a hot summer night...it's a war zone. Can you imagine what the police endure in the course of a single day? I don't think they're even allowed to respond to a crime unless there are at least 2 cars (with 2 officers each). LA is worse...given the problems with Mexican gangs.

I didn't start out defending the cop...he was wrong. But I'm tired of hearing about police "misconduct". We have very mean streets. The job of Police officer has to be the worst job in the big cities of America...and it's getting worse.

 

[Gokul43201]

We have very mean streets. The job of Police officer has to be the worst job in the big cities of America...and it's getting worse

...thanks in part, to cases like this, where cops overreach their legal bounds.

 

[russ_watters]

Wrong. The cop and his suspect should be in jail. The suspect should not walk.

... and the defense attorney is just doing his job.