US 'cell assault' video released

  • Thread starter cristo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Video
In summary, this video shows a sheriff's deputy assaulting a 15-year-old girl by throwing her onto the ground and punching her in the head. This is inexcusable and the deputy should be punished.
  • #1
cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
8,146
74
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7917295.stm

US prosecutors have released video footage of a sheriff's deputy striking a 15-year-old girl and throwing her onto a cell floor.

The video is evidence in the case against Washington state Deputy Paul Schene, accused of using excessive force against the girl in November.

The incident began after the girl was arrested in a car theft inquiry.

Footage shows the deputy lunge at the girl after she kicks one of her shoes towards him at SeaTac City Hall. ...

This video is just amazing. Police officers are supposed to be showing an example to the rest of society, and not abusing their power. This guy should be locked up!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I don't think that is torture (other most common thing which should discouraged IMO). He just acted out of anger because the girl seems to have acted like a real a******. I bet she been swearing a lot before they brought her to the cell.
Now, I don't think policemen are given anger management training or they need it.
 
  • #3
rootX said:
I don't think that is torture (other most common thing which should discouraged IMO).

Of course it's not torture, but it is assault.

He just acted out of anger because the girl seems to have acted like a real a******.
I bet she been swearing a lot before they brought her to the cell.

Anger? That is a lot more than anger. Regardless, if a police officer cannot control his anger, then he shouldn't be in the job. Anyway, how do you know she'd been acting like a 'real a******'? All I see is a teenager kick her shoes off at him: how do you know she wasn't told to given him her shoes? Does any of this alleged 'attitude' condone him kicking her in the stomach, punching her in the face, smashing her against the wall, then throwing her to the ground by her hair, before pinning her arms behind her back and punching her in the head twice?
 
  • #4
If they are lace up shoes she would have probably been asked to remove them in case she attempted to comit suicide with the laces. Its standard practise (at least in the UK). The officers reaction to the way she nonchalantly kicked her shoes off towards him was outrageous. Even if she was swearing and being abusive then there is still no excuse for that reaction toward a 15 year old girl.
 
  • #5
That is insane. I don't care if she "assaulted" the officer earlier as his lawyers claim, what he did is inexcusible.

In the US "Sheriffs" are elected. They aren't police officers. I don't know how much training they get, and it would certainly vary from town to town.
 
  • #6
What's the deal? With Firefox 3, when I play the clip I get a Price Line ad.
 
  • #7
This video is just amazing. Police officers are supposed to be showing an example to the rest of society, and not abusing their power.

You mean this video surprised you? From my point of view, ignorant and abusive policeman are by far the most common kind. I always thought that the goal with hiring police officers from the same pool of low lifes who commit these crude crimes was to legitimize their behavior in a certain domain, so that the total number of criminals would appear to be lower.
 
  • #8
confinement said:
You mean this video surprised you? From my point of view, ignorant and abusive policeman are by far the most common kind. I always thought that the goal with hiring police officers from the same pool of low lifes who commit these crude crimes was to legitimize their behavior in a certain domain, so that the total number of criminals would appear to be lower.
We will not tolerate this kind of posting of unsubstantiated personal opinion that is insulting to a group of people.
 
  • #9
cristo said:
Does any of this alleged 'attitude' condone him kicking her in the stomach, punching her in the face, smashing her against the wall, then throwing her to the ground by her hair, before pinning her arms behind her back and punching her in the head twice?


It would have completely inexcusable if officer intentionally assaulted her (then no one else but him is to blame).

But here, did he knew what he was doing? Or, did he have good training? If he never learned in his training how to deal with his anger/temper, then some of the blame goes to the body that provides the training. So, punishing/blaming him alone would not solve this problem in the future.


1. I don't know the whole story and that news looks bit biased to me.
2. Personally, I was under impression that police act bit more aggressive. Kicking or hitting twice might be common in those places.
 
  • #10
cristo said:
This video is just amazing
It certainly is - the tapes are normally faulty when it comes to this sort of thing.
It's like how CCTV cameras are never available when there is a demonstatration.

This guy should be locked up!
Anybody stupid enough to do this in view of a camera should probably have his night stick confiscated before he does himself an injury - and probably needs professional care.
 
  • #11
What could the trainee have done to protect the girl? He seemed concerned, but did his trainer's authority take over?

Would the video have received as much acclaim if the girl were black? No kidding.
 
  • #12
rootX said:
It would have completely inexcusable if officer intentionally assaulted her (then no one else but him is to blame).

But here, did he knew what he was doing?

Did he know what he was doing? If not, then he's clearly not mentally capable of being a police officer.

1. I don't know the whole story and that news looks bit biased to me.

You can't make a CCTV video biased (unless you edit it, which this one doesn't appear to be).

2. Personally, I was under impression that police act bit more aggressive. Kicking or hitting twice might be common in those places.
To restrain a dangerous criminal on the streets maybe, but a 15 year old girl who is already in a police cell and is 3 foot away from the police officer that she's half the size of is not, in my opinion, dangerous.
 
  • #13
Saw this and was disgusted.

In his own report from the incident, Schene wrote that the shoe hit him in the right shin, "causing injury and pain." He wrote that he "placed" her into handcuffs and that she needed medical attention for a "panic attack."

Placed??! :mad:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/401779_schene28.html
 
  • #14
cristo said:
To restrain a dangerous criminal on the streets maybe, but a 15 year old girl who is already in a police cell and is 3 foot away from the police officer that she's half the size of is not, in my opinion, dangerous.
Unless she had a stapler - then 4 of them could have reasonably feared for their lives.
(you might need to be in Vancouver to get this)
 
  • #15
mgb_phys said:
(you might need to be in Vancouver to get this)

(I think you do!)
 
  • #17
Please help me guess what on Earth could ever justify what the police officer is doing on this video. Even perpetrators of crime against humanity are not supposed to be treated in this manner. I just can not come to terms with
"As we argued to the judge, it will inflame public opinion and will severely impact the deputy's right to a fair trial."
because I don't understand how seeing the video can change anything to the facts shown by the video. It does not matter what this girl has done before. Such a policeman must be removed from duty and go the other side of the bars, where he belongs.
 
  • #18
Forgive me if I am wrong, but does he help her stand up by pulling her hair instead of her arm?
 
  • #19
cristo said:
Did he know what he was doing? If not, then he's clearly not mentally capable of being a police officer.
You can't make a CCTV video biased (unless you edit it, which this one doesn't appear to be). To restrain a dangerous criminal on the streets maybe, but a 15 year old girl who is already in a police cell and is 3 foot away from the police officer that she's half the size of is not, in my opinion, dangerous.

Yes agree that here:
1) The girl did not posses any harm
2) The officer's response was not required
So, that is definitely professional misconduct.

But, I think it is biased in terms that
1) It seems to put 100% of blame on the officer which is simple not true.

It just make their profession complicated. They get lots of negative opinions from the media even when things are out of control and they can't do more than screwing up something.

He should be punished by law and they should see how to prevent this in future. But, I don't like these things getting public scrutiny (there should be a limit to what level of public scrutiny is appropriate..).
 
Last edited:
  • #20
But, I think it is biased in terms that
1) It seems to put 100% of blame on the officer which is simple not true.

Why is not true, in this instance? The police officer had no justification for his behaviour, irrespective of the behavior of the girl (who was a minor, and did not pose any physical threat). I think this officer deserves 100% of the blame.

(there should be a limit to what level of public scrutiny is appropriate..).

Why is that? I think that it's important to give public scrutiny to such incidents, especially when we consider the powers and responsibilities which is expected of the police. I've seen a worrying number of such incidents of late, and public exposure could raise awareness of certain problems in the system, and might lead to measures to correct it.
 
  • #21
cristo said:
You can't make a CCTV video biased (unless you edit it, which this one doesn't appear to be).
Of course you can! Even if the editing is just cutting off what happened before - what happened before matters a lot.

Police are not robots, they are human. They get frustrated and they lash out. Knowing what happened before would help a lot to understand what happened.

Please note - I'm not defending him, I'm just saying we don't know. The tape might show the girl being completely calm, making the attack totally unprovoked. But it also might show hours of a crazy hissy-fit, the kind that would make any parent smack their kid.

These types of things don't get me upset like they get other people. Humanity contains a certain fraction of bad apples and given a large enough sample, things like this are inevitable. But one thing that threads like this show is just how rare such events (police brutality in particular) really are. Things like this make the news while most of the thousands of brutal deaths and dismemberments that happen every year barely make the news and certainly don't provoke comment here. It's a disproportionate human emotional response that I don't subscribe to.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
russ_watters said:
the kind that would make any parent smack their kid.
No. I'm unsure whether I need to justify this, but I simply want to state that I deeply disagree with the idea that a kid can do anything that could justify their parent hitting, even in principle. It does include hitting back, yes.
russ_watters said:
It's a disproportionate human emotional response that I don't subscribe to.
What was she guilty of, again ?
 
  • #23
russ_watters said:
the kind that would make any parent smack their kid.

Any parent who hit their kid in the way this police officer did deserves to be locked it. It wasn't just a rap on the knuckles, or a slap on the back of the legs!

But one thing that threads like this show is just how rare such events (police brutality in particular) really are. Things like this make the news while most of the thousands of brutal deaths and dismemberments that happen every year barely make the news and certainly don't provoke comment here.

It shows how rare video evidence of the events are, yes.

It's a disproportionate human emotional response that I don't subscribe to.

Well, so long as most of the kids in the world are fine and don't get treated like this, we can just turn a blind eye to the statistical anomalies? :uhh: You could make this argument about anything. It basically boils down to the view of "the chances of this affecting my life are so slim I won't bother expending any emotion on it." Fair enough.. each to their own!
 
  • #24
humanino said:
No. I'm unsure whether I need to justify this, but I simply want to state that I deeply disagree with the idea that a kid can do anything that could justify their parent hitting, even in principle.
I didn't say it was right, I just said it happens.
 
  • #25
cristo said:
Well, so long as most of the kids in the world are fine and don't get treated like this, we can just turn a blind eye to the statistical anomalies? :uhh:
Essentially yes. Our emotional reactions and calls for actions are much better placed on problems that affect more people. Every 12 minutes, someone dies in a car accident in the US. It makes much more sense to focus effort and emotion on that issue than feeling sorry for a trouble-making girl who got treated a little rough.
You could make this argument about anything. It basically boils down to the view of "the chances of this affecting my life are so slim I won't bother expending any emotion on it." Fair enough.. each to their own!
It has nothing to do with whether it will affect my life or not - how much I care is based on how many lives it affects.

Police brutality affects about 300 people a year in the US ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-12-17-copmisconduct_n.htm ). Car accidents kill about 42,000 ( http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/stats.html ). One is a big problem, the other is not.

This is more a study in how people respond emotionally to seeing such things. This case got a sympathetic response because the victim was young and female. Such treatment of an older man would not provoke this reaction.
 
  • #26
russ_watters said:
the kind that would make any parent smack their kid.
Any parent?? Not this one. I have never and would never lay a hand on my kids.


russ_watters said:
Essentially yes. Our emotional reactions and calls for actions are much better placed on problems that affect more people. Every 12 minutes, someone dies in a car accident in the US. It makes much more sense to focus effort and emotion on that issue than feeling sorry for a trouble-making girl who got treated a little rough.
Using the logic of just numbers terrorism is no more than a minor irritant hardly worth reporting and yet as I remember your reaction to 9/11 was somewhat stronger than that.

I suspect such apparent callousness to how this girl was treated stems more from a blind subservience to figures of authority than any truly rational thinking. Were you smacked a lot when you were young by any chance?
 
  • #27
russ_watters said:
Essentially yes. Our emotional reactions and calls for actions are much better placed on problems that affect more people. Every 12 minutes, someone dies in a car accident in the US. It makes much more sense to focus effort and emotion on that issue than feeling sorry for a trouble-making girl who got treated a little rough.

Well, I think that's a crazy comparision. Car accidents are usually a random phenomenon, and not a result of a deliberate act by a trusted member of society. IMO, it's like saying that we shouldn't worry about incidents of terrorism when compared to accidental falls, because the number of individuals dying due to falls is much more.

I think such incidents of police brutality may be further minimized by better screening and criminal prosecution of the abusive cops, which is why I think public scrutiny and response to such incidents are important.

russ_watters said:
who got treated a little rough.

If you think that's a "little rough", I can't imagine what you think would qualify as a criminal assault.

russ_watters said:
Such treatment of an older man would not provoke this reaction.

I would tend to disagree with that. This is a graphic video of allegedly similar treatment of an older woman (although, off-camera) and I think it is quite terrible, and it did provoke a similar reaction. And another incident with a white male bicyclist provoked a similar response which led to the cop being fired.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
russ_watters said:
Essentially yes. Our emotional reactions and calls for actions are much better placed on problems that affect more people. Every 12 minutes, someone dies in a car accident in the US. It makes much more sense to focus effort and emotion on that issue than feeling sorry for a trouble-making girl who got treated a little rough.

You clearly didn't watch the video if you class this as treating someone "a little rough[ly]"!

The police are supposed to uphold the law. If this was just some man hitting a girl, then whilst I wouldn't have condoned it, it wouldn't have as much of an impact. But this isn't just some guy on the street, it's way more important than that: it's a police officer assaulting a girl, in a police station.

This case got a sympathetic response because the victim was young and female.

The case got a sympathetic response because the victim is a child. Children are supposed to be protected by society, not assaulted by the very characters put in place as role models of society.
 
  • #30
rootX said:
1) It seems to put 100% of blame on the officer which is simple not true.

It just make their profession complicated. They get lots of negative opinions from the media even when things are out of control and they can't do more than screwing up something.

because policemen should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen when it comes to being in control of one's emotions. I don't care *what* that girl could have possibly been saying or what attitude she was giving; his reaction is 100% his fault.

If you can't handle a moody 15 year old girl, you should not be given authorities and responsibilities that are above those of the average citizen; you should not be a cop.

And, judging by his reaction, they are not even at the level of the average citizen. his reaction would have been excessive even if she had moved to kick or punch him; she posed no real threat and he is clearly capable of easily overpowering her. such an outburst of violence would be inappropriate under any circumstance short of her having been holding a weapon.
 
  • #31
moe darklight said:
If you can't handle a moody 15 year old girl, you should not be given authorities and responsibilities that are above those of the average citizen; you should not be a cop.
.

Yes, exactly. He shouldn't have his policeman position. Putting all the blame on him and taking away his position wouldn't solve this problem (if you consider this as a serious problem) and neither it would be fair.
I do believe that they need to have greater control over themselves but they aren't perfectionists. They make mistakes!
If you set their standards too high, you wouldn't get enough policemen.
 
  • #32
siddharth said:
Why is not true, in this instance? The police officer had no justification for his behaviour, irrespective of the behavior of the girl (who was a minor, and did not pose any physical threat). I think this officer deserves 100% of the blame.
See above post.

Why is that? I think that it's important to give public scrutiny to such incidents, especially when we consider the powers and responsibilities which is expected of the police. I've seen a worrying number of such incidents of late, and public exposure could raise awareness of certain problems in the system, and might lead to measures to correct it.

They can't get fair trails for professional misconduct if the case gets more than required public scrutiny/media focus. It's better to have a good regulation body that considers the case rather than subjecting it to public opinions.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Imprisonment and psychological rehabilitation. It matters not how much someone acts like an ******* or swears, force is never the answer unless it is for self defense.

That being said, I'm not surprised at this at all. Almost all that is required to become a police officer is that the applicant doesn't have a history of mental illness or a criminal background, and that they be relatively healthy and in shape. Besides that, the screening process isn't very rigorous.
 
  • #34
Scuzzle said:
Imprisonment and psychological rehabilitation. It matters not how much someone acts like an ******* or swears, force is never the answer unless it is for self defense.

That being said, I'm not surprised at this at all. Almost all that is required to become a police officer is that the applicant doesn't have a history of mental illness or a criminal background, and that they be relatively healthy and in shape. Besides that, the screening process isn't very rigorous.

Please. My town is right next to http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_56314.html" . This is 12 years ago, but it is still interesting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
Chi Meson said:
Please. My town is right next to http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_56314.html" . This is 12 years ago, but it is still interesting.

What a stupid attitude. Any intelligent person would know how to get the target score :rofl:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

News 100 Abu Ghraib pictures/videos to be released
    • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
News Woman raped while Husband chained to wall
    • General Discussion
Replies
14
Views
20K
News Downing Street - New memos released
    • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
The Truth about 911 gutting the disinformation, LETS GET IT ON
    • General Discussion
4
Replies
109
Views
54K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top