Human rights and the police (misconduct)

[rootX]

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.

 

[lisab]

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!

 

[LowlyPion]

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.

 

[rootX]

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.

 

[maze]

Heres the full video:

 

[Cyrus]

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.

 

[JasonRox]

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.

 

[mbisCool]

This just happened the other day. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009213641_arrest13m.html 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.

 

[maze]

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?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

 

[Hurkyl]

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.

 

[rootX]

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.

 

[LowlyPion]

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.

 

[mgb_phys]

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)

 

[Cyrus]

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.

 

[JasonRox]

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.

 

[AUMathTutor]

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.

 

[russ_watters]

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.

 

[Huckleberry]

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.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

 

[AUMathTutor]

If that's common procedure, we have a lot of uniform-wearing criminals who need to do the time.

 

[WhoWee]

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.

 

[mgb_phys]

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.

 

[Hurkyl]

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.

 

[AUMathTutor]

"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.

 

[rootX]

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.

...

The point isn't really that the criminals aren't naughty - it's that the police officers shouldn't be.
...
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.

There's a difference between making a mistake and intentionally doing harm.

While I agree that the officer should be punished but I only disagree with how harsh the punishment should be. Also, No one is blaming the existing law system that allow criminals like him go free and create problems for the public and the police (I wanted to know if it was known that this guy would create more problems once he gets out of the jail). The things happened before the guy surrendered are completely ignored as if taking for granted that police can handle any mess perfectly. If the guy had killed police officers along with others (as he intended to), then human rights wouldn't have any problem.

Expecting the police to provide perfect protection to the community and at the same time not making any mistakes is too idealistic. Their job is already hard enough in catching criminals and dealing with the complex laws that have many loopholes.

 

[LowlyPion]

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.

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.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Expecting the police to provide perfect protection to the community and at the same time not making any mistakes is too idealistic. Their job is already hard enough in catching criminals and dealing with the complex laws that have many loopholes.

Kicking someone in the head is abuse, not a mistake. Being a cop doesn't exempt one from the law. While I completely agree that they have a tough job, if they can't handle it, then they should be doing something else.

Perfect protection? Please, don't make me laugh. I grew up in LA. It was also common knowledge that the police abuse their power every day. Check out the Ron Settles case, for example. Had he not been a football star, we probably never would have heard about it on the news. It would have just been more of the local lore.

 

[mgb_phys]

.Expecting the police to provide perfect protection to the community and at the same time not making any mistakes is too idealistic. Their job is already hard enough in catching criminals and dealing with the complex laws that have many loopholes.

The job doesn't get any easier when you alienate the people you are policing.

When you have to police the streets in a western democratic country like this - you know you need to reform your police.

 

[JasonRox]

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.

 

[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.