Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTAE)   Police see cheerleader walking home with friends eating ice cream after 10 PM, so they protect and serve the hell out of her   (wtae.com) divider line 795
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

25168 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2014 at 12:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



795 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-17 03:13:35 PM  

redmid17: MycroftHolmes: redmid17: MycroftHolmes: jshine: Looks like she had good reason to run from the cops - they're dangerous thugs with no self control and probably will not be held accountable for their actions.

If a suspect is unarmed and not fighting back and you put her in the hospital, you should be tried for assault - badge or no.

But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate.  So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong.

They didn't need to tackle her in the first place. They were responding to her responding to their escalation of the situation.

She is admittedly out after curfew.  When they attempt to detain her, she admittedly turns and walks from them.  When the officers pursue, she, by witness accounts, runs.  I am not sure where you see the officers escalating inappropriately.

If you know another way of stopping someone who is running away from you without using force, please let me know.

Not escalating the situation in the first place? I'd bet ten bucks I could "subdue" that 17 year old girl without tackling her, punching her, or putting her in an arm lock.


I bet you $1,000 that you could not subdue one who decided they were just going to ignore you and then run from yhou without using force.  Your naive notion that if you just grab her arm she would go limp and nopt start kicking or hitting back is disproven by her actions in this case.  The idea that you could passively restrain a 17 year old who did not want to be restrained without using force is all manners of stupid.
 
2014-07-17 03:13:44 PM  

jst3p: Perpetuous Procrastination: jst3p: Double down on showing everyone what a moran you are, interesting strategy.

They were in the act of placing her in a custodial situation, she was, I am sure, read her rights once she was  in a custodial situation

.

I've highlighted the relevant legal definition for when Miranda must be advised. Clue train to retardville: it's not when you're placed under arrest, it's ONLY when you're to be subjected to interrogative questioning (that is, when you're questioned for things that pertain to your innocence or guilt - ie non-basic information such as name, address, etc.). It's still prudent for police to give you your rights as soon as reasonably possible, but they are not REQUIRED to do so immediately on arrest. Take your derp somewhere else.

I was responding to his idiotic claim:

Also, if she was just tackled without being recited her Miranda rights at the same time, then they were just assaulting her.

I know that it isn't required until before questioning, but it is pretty standard practice to do it as soon as they are arrested. My not a cop or lawyer brain tells me it is to make sure they are covered if the person in custody just decides to start talking.


My bad - I read your response as their response, hence the confusion on why you flip-flopping on the subject. I haven't had lunch yet, my brain is moving into energy conservation mode. Sorry!
 
2014-07-17 03:15:26 PM  

Perpetuous Procrastination: Sorry!


It's all good, too much misinformation going around in this thread. Easy to get confused.
 
2014-07-17 03:16:21 PM  

CeroX: moeburn: I don't think it's racism. I don't think these people actually believe that black people are an inferior race. I think they're just a bunch of contrarians.

but had this been a blonde white girl, there would be serious cop outrage, but because "ghetto" sounding name and dark skin is involved, meh fark it, she got what she deserved...


I didn't think she was black, I thought she was a stripper.
 
2014-07-17 03:16:24 PM  

MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.


Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.
 
2014-07-17 03:16:50 PM  

Perpetuous Procrastination: Quote anything that says an arrest is invalid if Miranda isn't issued upon arrest. Please note I am not looking for anything that includes the terms "questioning," "interrogation," or the like. Simply "If you're placed under arrest, you must immediately be issued Miranda or it's null and void."

I'd say I'll wait, but since that doesn't exist, anywhere, I won't.

/stop telling people to know their rights when you clearly don't.


Uh, I think you have some confusion.  I'm the one laughing at the other poster for suggesting that Miranda is necessary before an arrest takes place.
 
2014-07-17 03:17:47 PM  

jst3p: My not a cop or lawyer brain tells me it is to make sure they are covered if the person in custody just decides to start talking.


Bingo.
 
2014-07-17 03:17:50 PM  

Por que tan serioso: Secret Master of All Flatulence: Por que tan serioso: Atwater v. City of Lago Vista says you can be arrested for anything. More bad legal advice corrected on Fark. Its almost a full time job.

Some people think that watching Law & Order reruns qualifies them to practice law.

/Used to enjoy that show
//Until I found myself screaming "Batson!  BATSON!!!" at the Goddamnednoisybox.

We call it a Wheeler motion in SD.


Got to advise a judge on a possible Batson situation a couple of days ago.
Fun!
 
2014-07-17 03:17:58 PM  

Headso: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.

Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.


He wasn't chasing her until she decided the conversation was over while the cop hadn't come to that conclusion. He might be an asshole, but he is right (legally).
 
2014-07-17 03:17:58 PM  

MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action....


Indeed -- and that's not what you were discussing in the post I replied to:

"But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate.  So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong."

It seems that there was no effort made to arrest her until after they began beating her.

Given your condescending tone and moving goal-posts, I'm going to just ignore any further replies.  This is obviously not a productive conversation.
 
2014-07-17 03:18:12 PM  

MycroftHolmes: But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate. So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong.


Here's the right way to take down a resisting perp:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrs7QNV0v6Q

No real harm, no wrong doing...


Here's basically what they did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7fY_uZ8bec


fark those assholes
 
2014-07-17 03:18:44 PM  

Click Click D'oh: Perpetuous Procrastination: Quote anything that says an arrest is invalid if Miranda isn't issued upon arrest. Please note I am not looking for anything that includes the terms "questioning," "interrogation," or the like. Simply "If you're placed under arrest, you must immediately be issued Miranda or it's null and void."

I'd say I'll wait, but since that doesn't exist, anywhere, I won't.

/stop telling people to know their rights when you clearly don't.

Uh, I think you have some confusion.  I'm the one laughing at the other poster for suggesting that Miranda is necessary before an arrest takes place.


He is sorry for getting mixed up. He hasn't had lunch yet.
 
2014-07-17 03:19:37 PM  

jst3p: Headso: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.

Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.

He wasn't chasing her until she decided the conversation was over while the cop hadn't come to that conclusion. He might be an asshole, but he is right (legally).


legally he is right when he arrests some kid smoking a joint too but I ain't gonna slob the guy's knob for that either.
 
2014-07-17 03:20:27 PM  

Headso: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.

Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.


Yes, but that does not appear to be the case here.  Here it looks like the police came upon them and attempted to detain them.  She ignored these actions and started to walk away.  When they pursured her, she ran.  She was subsequently tackled and restrained.  When you are tackled and restrained, it is pretty unavoidable that they are going to physically restrain you using arms and legs, and that it likely will not be comfortable.

Characterizing these actions as psycho is unsubstantiated by the description of the events.  Unless you make the assumption that all LEO are psycho, which would be a ridiculously silly assumption to make.
 
2014-07-17 03:21:08 PM  

Headso: jst3p: Headso: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.

Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.

He wasn't chasing her until she decided the conversation was over while the cop hadn't come to that conclusion. He might be an asshole, but he is right (legally).

legally he is right when he arrests some kid smoking a joint too but I ain't gonna slob the guy's knob for that either.


By the same token I am not going to ignore a lawful order from a cop. I am not slobbing his knob, I have called him an asshole several times.
 
2014-07-17 03:23:11 PM  
The invention of the loogie-gun will make threads like these moot.
 
2014-07-17 03:23:16 PM  

i.r.id10t: Was at a 2nd grade "come see the snowflakes" thing at my kids school and the parents behind us had a pair of preschoolers wtih them... named Ranger and Charger.


Please find out if their middle names were Hemi.
 
2014-07-17 03:24:20 PM  

MycroftHolmes: redmid17: MycroftHolmes: redmid17: MycroftHolmes: jshine: Looks like she had good reason to run from the cops - they're dangerous thugs with no self control and probably will not be held accountable for their actions.

If a suspect is unarmed and not fighting back and you put her in the hospital, you should be tried for assault - badge or no.

But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate.  So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong.

They didn't need to tackle her in the first place. They were responding to her responding to their escalation of the situation.

She is admittedly out after curfew.  When they attempt to detain her, she admittedly turns and walks from them.  When the officers pursue, she, by witness accounts, runs.  I am not sure where you see the officers escalating inappropriately.

If you know another way of stopping someone who is running away from you without using force, please let me know.

Not escalating the situation in the first place? I'd bet ten bucks I could "subdue" that 17 year old girl without tackling her, punching her, or putting her in an arm lock.

I bet you $1,000 that you could not subdue one who decided they were just going to ignore you and then run from yhou without using force.  Your naive notion that if you just grab her arm she would go limp and nopt start kicking or hitting back is disproven by her actions in this case.  The idea that you could passively restrain a 17 year old who did not want to be restrained without using force is all manners of stupid.


I never said I wouldn't use force. I feel like reading is paramount to having an informed debate. I said I wouldn't tackle her, punch her, or use arm locks. Beside that, the cops were the ones who made her run in the first place.

Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?
 
2014-07-17 03:24:44 PM  

Headso: jst3p: Headso: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action.

Running from a psycho chasing you seems pretty instinctive.

He wasn't chasing her until she decided the conversation was over while the cop hadn't come to that conclusion. He might be an asshole, but he is right (legally).

legally he is right when he arrests some kid smoking a joint too but I ain't gonna slob the guy's knob for that either.


If you want to argue against curfews, that is a different argument, and I might agree with you in some circumstances.  But in an area with enough crime that the city decided to pass a curfew, a cop stopping a group of kids to get ID and ask a few questions is really not an unreasonable action.
 
2014-07-17 03:24:50 PM  

Misconduc: Nope didn't get tazed, beaten - he asked if he could get the gun first until he figures out the situation; I said no problem - he took my luger and placed it in his car and shut the door


You carry a Luger around with you?  Those are worth a LOT of money.  You may want to carry something else because if you ever have to shoot someone there's a real possibility of it vanishing into some corrupt jerks private collection....

/back to being amused by those who think that you won't eat some pavement if you make the police chase you
//it may not be right but it will be happening & the police will get away with it
///don't put yourself in the position where they have a legal reason to whomp on you, many of them will do so enthusiastically
 
2014-07-17 03:26:06 PM  

redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?


Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.
 
2014-07-17 03:26:53 PM  

Click Click D'oh: tlars699: DUE PROCESS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_C on stitution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

Jeebus, are we really that far gone?!

Where in any of those links does it say that there is no arrest without a reading of the Miranda Rights first?

Exact quotes please.

I'll wait.


Fair enough. It says Miranda Rights must be read when in custody, and being questioned. My previous understanding was or, which was wrong.

However:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_arrest
A police officer, or a person authorized by a jurisdiction's police powers act, may arrest anyone whom the officer has reasonable or probable cause to believe has commiteed any criminal offence.
 However, in the case of a misdemanor, offence, or non-criminal offence (such as a municipalby-law offence) the officer may arrest the suspect only long enough toidentify the suspect and give the suspect a summons to appear in court, unless there is reason to believe they will not appear in answer to the summons

If they knew who she was, and had taken her name down, there would be no reason to further restrain her.
 
2014-07-17 03:27:17 PM  

MycroftHolmes: Characterizing these actions as psycho is unsubstantiated by the description of the events.  Unless you make the assumption that all LEO are psycho, which would be a ridiculously silly assumption to make.


some grown man aggressively running at a teenager girl and then tackling her and beating her are the actions of a psycho so I am going by just this guy's actions. that said there's enough stories of the police beating up children, deaf people, blind people, old people, people in wheelchairs, people in diabetic shock, people with mental disabilities that the odds are good enough the one you are dealing with might be one of those countless police officers and if someone panics and runs from that IMO I can't blame them.
 
2014-07-17 03:28:14 PM  

Misconduc: I said no problem - he took my luger


You conceal carry a P08?  I like the cut of your jib...

/HSc fan here
 
Ant
2014-07-17 03:28:25 PM  

Maud Dib: Jaden Smith First of His Name: It must be awful having to spell out your attractive and successful first name for everything. Or imagine being a teacher for an inner-city school: "Yunique, can you answer this question? No, not the Yunique with two E's. No, not you either, one that ends with a K."

Wow, I see the Fark Racist Brigade has shown up.


They're not racists, they just spout racist shiat at every opportunity... or something...
 
2014-07-17 03:29:29 PM  

Waldo Pepper: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: MycroftHolmes: jshine: Looks like she had good reason to run from the cops - they're dangerous thugs with no self control and probably will not be held accountable for their actions.

If a suspect is unarmed and not fighting back and you put her in the hospital, you should be tried for assault - badge or no.

But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate.  So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong.

They didn't need to tackle her in the first place. They were responding to her responding to their escalation of the situation.

Again, she escalated the situation.

Yes she was an idiot for walking away, and the police got as heavy handed as they could. That's not something the police should be doing. If they can't or won't adequately judge a threat to themselves or the community, they shouldn't be trusted with a badge and a gun.

where is there any proof the cops got heavy handed. I'm not saying they didn't but I see no proof. being tackled on the street could easily cause the injuries to the knees, elbows and sore neck and punch ever thrown. 

bumping her head on the street and having a sore neck might get her admit to the hospital for an overnight observation especially in this situation the hospital won't take a chance.


The doctors wouldn't let the police take her to a detention facility because she was too badly injured. "Bumping your head" is not reason for an overnight admission

.

jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?
 
2014-07-17 03:29:33 PM  

redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?


That happens hundreds of times per day.  We're only hearing about this one because it's a young, relatively cute, cheerleader.
 
2014-07-17 03:29:47 PM  

SewerSquirrels: Egoy3k: SewerSquirrels: Egoy3k: It's almost as if African Americans have no trust for the police.  I wonder why that might be.


With all the videos on the net, one would think you would eventually see one of somebody not sassing, not running from, & not fighting with the cops where they still get their arse kicked by them.

Only a complete psychopath would consider 'sassing' justification for a police beating.

And I'd reckon there are a fair number of (at least) sociopaths on the force. Why give them an excuse? At any rate it's not the sassing that will earn you a beating from a cop; it's a cocktail of those three things. Sassing will only escalate a finger wag to a citation. How is being belligerent to a cop noble? It certainly won't improve your situation even if you are in the right.


Well yeah, it's a pretty stupid thing to do but it doesn't mean that a beating is justified either. keep in mind that i'm speaking in generalities here and I'm not exactly comfortable calling what this girl got a beating.  She doesn't look like she was beaten to me.  Detained with excessive force? Maybe.
 
2014-07-17 03:29:49 PM  

tlars699: If they knew who she was, and had taken her name down, there would be no reason to further restrain her.


It's pretty obvious that she didn't identify herself before running...
 
2014-07-17 03:30:16 PM  

Recoil Therapy: /back to being amused by those who think that you won't eat some pavement if you make the police chase you


My father, who has done some pretty serious time, tells a story that may or may not be true, but I believe it.

He was 19 and running from cops. When they finally caught him they were pretty rough with him. He said, "You wouldn't be such a bad ass without that gun and badge." So the cop put down his belt and badge and they uncuffed him. Cop says "Let's box". He was getting beat, but he managed to get one good punch in. That's when they other 5 cops pounced on him and kicked his ass.
 
2014-07-17 03:31:12 PM  

MycroftHolmes: Here it looks like the police came upon them and attempted to detain them. She ignored these actions and started to walk away. When they pursured her, she ran. She was subsequently tackled and restrained.


They were in the car, they weren't detaining anyone from the car. They attempted to make contact with her, that's when dropped her possessions and started to run, then stopped, tried to go back and grab her stuff, when they tackled her. Had it stopped there and they actually restrained her (100 lbs is not difficult to do), then no harm no fowl...

What you are either missing the point on or being a disingenuous ass about is that once they tackled her, they grabbed her by the hair and kicked and stomped her...

I just posted 2 video examples, one the right way when someone runs, and one the wrong way...

Pulling the hair and kicking a mudhole in a 100lb girl is NOT OK

If you think it is, you are either a bully cop, or a racist douche, because NO ONE with an ounce of conscience would think that pummeling a 17 yo girl is the "right thing to do"...
 
2014-07-17 03:31:20 PM  
Let's see. A curfew is blatantly illegal to begin with as was the use of force. She should calm down, keep her mouth shut for now, and go find the best lawyer she can so she can squeeze every drop from this one.
 
2014-07-17 03:32:01 PM  

tlars699: Click Click D'oh: tlars699: DUE PROCESS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_C on stitution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

Jeebus, are we really that far gone?!

Where in any of those links does it say that there is no arrest without a reading of the Miranda Rights first?

Exact quotes please.

I'll wait.

Fair enough. It says Miranda Rights must be read when in custody, and being questioned. My previous understanding was or, which was wrong.

However:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_arrest
A police officer, or a person authorized by a jurisdiction's police powers act, may arrest anyone whom the officer has reasonable or probable cause to believe has commiteed any criminal offence.
 However, in the case of a misdemanor, offence, or non-criminal offence (such as a municipalby-law offence) the officer may arrest the suspect only long enough toidentify the suspect and give the suspect a summons to appear in court, unless there is reason to believe they will not appear in answer to the summons

If they knew who she was, and had taken her name down, there would be no reason to further restrain her.


You just don't stop with the stupid, do you? Disobeying his lawful order to "get back here" is resisting arrest, a criminal offense.

Once again, you are completely wrong.
 
2014-07-17 03:33:09 PM  

Click Click D'oh: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

That happens hundreds of times per day.  We're only hearing about this one because it's a young, relatively cute, cheerleader.


Cops escalate the situation from non-violence to violence and stomp someone hundreds of times every day? It would appear that law enforcement is more out of hand than people thought, and that's a hell of a scary thing to imagine.
 
2014-07-17 03:33:39 PM  

redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?


Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.
 
Ant
2014-07-17 03:33:41 PM  

wyltoknow: We all know the cops shoulda just shrugged it off and let them go...and if turned out later that those kids were breaking curfew and running away from cops because they were commiting crimes then, meh, surely those cops would not be haraunged for not doing their jobs.


Yeah, it's obvious those kids had just pulled off a massive ice cream cone heist.
 
2014-07-17 03:33:56 PM  

jshine: MycroftHolmes: I missed the part where ignoring and running from the cop was considered an instinctive defensive action....

Indeed -- and that's not what you were discussing in the post I replied to:

"But if a suspect is resisting arrest, using force to control the suspect is appropriate.  So, go back and read the article and realize why you are wrong."

It seems that there was no effort made to arrest her until after they began beating her.

Given your condescending tone and moving goal-posts, I'm going to just ignore any further replies.  This is obviously not a productive conversation.


Got it.  So you are basically saying that there is no such thing as resisting arrest, as anything that happens after the police lay hands on you is an instinctive response.  My point was that if that is the case, then the decision to run is tantamount to resisting arrest, since it will require the police to physically restrain you, and your stance is that this will always result in resisting arrest.

So basically the argument went like this
-Force was escalated because she was resisting arrest
+She was resisting arrest because force was being used
-Force was used because she ran
+We aren't talking about her running, we are talking about force being used.
...and the cycle begins again
 
2014-07-17 03:34:33 PM  

tlars699: If they knew who she was, and had taken her name down, there would be no reason to further restrain her.


Wrong again.
1) By the time the officers finally got ID out of here she had already committed other offenses other than the curfew violation.  The curfew violation would likely have been a cite and release, but the resisting arrest is a trip to jail offense

2) Cite and release is contingent entirely upon the officers belief that the cited person will appear in court of their own will.  Even police officer in most jurisdictions can take a person to jail on a misdemeanor if they believe the person won't appear to answer the citation.  Since she's already demonstrated a will to flee and resist arrest, an officer could easily make that argument.
 
2014-07-17 03:34:50 PM  

jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?

Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.


What imminent threat was this 17 year old girl presenting to them? I'm not talking conceptually. I'm talking about this specific incident.
 
2014-07-17 03:36:04 PM  

redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?

Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.

What imminent threat was this 17 year old girl presenting to them? I'm not talking conceptually. I'm talking about this specific incident.


In the moment, the cop has no idea what threat she could present. She could be carrying a weapon.
 
2014-07-17 03:36:14 PM  
When your step 1 was "run from the cops while being busted for curfew", you get what you deserve.

And I don't even like cops.
 
2014-07-17 03:36:32 PM  

Headso: MycroftHolmes: Characterizing these actions as psycho is unsubstantiated by the description of the events.  Unless you make the assumption that all LEO are psycho, which would be a ridiculously silly assumption to make.

some grown man aggressively running at a teenager girl and then tackling her and beating her are the actions of a psycho so I am going by just this guy's actions. that said there's enough stories of the police beating up children, deaf people, blind people, old people, people in wheelchairs, people in diabetic shock, people with mental disabilities that the odds are good enough the one you are dealing with might be one of those countless police officers and if someone panics and runs from that IMO I can't blame them.


Wow, so she knew he was a psycho and ran from them because they knew what he was about to do if she ran?  amazing.

I would be willing to bet large amounts of money that 99% or more of daily interactions with police do not result in a beating.
 
2014-07-17 03:36:53 PM  

CeroX: MycroftHolmes: Here it looks like the police came upon them and attempted to detain them. She ignored these actions and started to walk away. When they pursured her, she ran. She was subsequently tackled and restrained.

They were in the car, they weren't detaining anyone from the car. They attempted to make contact with her, that's when dropped her possessions and started to run, then stopped, tried to go back and grab her stuff, when they tackled her. Had it stopped there and they actually restrained her (100 lbs is not difficult to do), then no harm no fowl...

What you are either missing the point on or being a disingenuous ass about is that once they tackled her, they grabbed her by the hair and kicked and stomped her...

I just posted 2 video examples, one the right way when someone runs, and one the wrong way...

Pulling the hair and kicking a mudhole in a 100lb girl is NOT OK

If you think it is, you are either a bully cop, or a racist douche, because NO ONE with an ounce of conscience would think that pummeling a 17 yo girl is the "right thing to do"...


Just curious, how do you know the police pulled her hair and stomped her?

And I can personally tell you that drugged up 100 pounders are (most of the time) much harder to control then much bigger guys. I am not saying that is the case in this situation but I am just saying.
 
2014-07-17 03:38:19 PM  

Secret Master of All Flatulence: tlars699: If they knew who she was, and had taken her name down, there would be no reason to further restrain her.

It's pretty obvious that she didn't identify herself before running...


Did you read the article at all- the police were talking with the whole group.
The group told the police officers that a bag/phone was left behind where they came from- one girl had started walking away to go get the stuff. She looked back to see police officers jumping out of their car, sprinting towards her, and she subsequently started to run, was tackled and then beaten.

She didn't just start running, she was walking first, and if the police officers had just asked her to stop without leaping out of their vehicle, or jeebus, driving up to her with the lights on, she probably would have stopped and given explanation.

Why did she want the phone? Maybe to Call Home and Let her Parents know she was going to be late, because Cops?

GEE.
 
2014-07-17 03:38:56 PM  

redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?


Nope.   Of course, the arrestee here wasn't "unlawfully, but peacefully".She knew or should have known that she wasn't free to leave.  She ran.  They chased.  She was stopped, and resisted with force.  She got beat on until she was cuffed.  End of story.  Now, if she was laying still on the ground with her arms cuffed behind her back, and a bunch of Officers then decided to put the boot in, THAT would be unreasonable.
 
2014-07-17 03:39:06 PM  

redmid17: Cops escalate the situation from non-violence to violence and stomp someone hundreds of times every day?


If that's the way you wish to read my response, I can't stop that. It's clearly not what I meant.  What I was commenting on was the big bold part you wrote:

"THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE "

Yes, hundreds of times per day officers take into custody suspects who are in some way injured during their altercations with police and those suspects end up going to seek medical care instead of straight to jail.

I still fail to see anything special about this incident.  Without a detailed accounting of her injuries I don't see anything that isn't inline with a forcible take down and handcuffing.
 
2014-07-17 03:39:18 PM  

jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?

Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.

What imminent threat was this 17 year old girl presenting to them? I'm not talking conceptually. I'm talking about this specific incident.

In the moment, the cop has no idea what threat she could present. She could be carrying a weapon.


She could be about to spontaneously combust. If you have no reason to suspect that, there's no reason to use that much force. They were stopped for violating curfew with ice cream in their hands. Once again, how is that a remotely reasonable assumption?
 
2014-07-17 03:39:54 PM  

tlars699: She didn't just start running, she was walking first, and if the police officers had just asked her to stop without leaping out of their vehicle, or jeebus, driving up to her with the lights on, she probably would have stopped and given explanation.


That is her version. How much you want to bet in the report he states that in a loud clear voice he instructed her to stop and she ignored his command?
 
2014-07-17 03:40:15 PM  

jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?

Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.

What imminent threat was this 17 year old girl presenting to them? I'm not talking conceptually. I'm talking about this specific incident.

In the moment, the cop has no idea what threat she could present. She could be carrying a weapon.


Could have a warrant out as well.  Cops have a pretty farking tough job to do.  Lots of internet tough-guy Monday-morning QB's that like to dissect their every move in an adrenaline-and-stress filled situation.  Best advice for dealing with cops: don't.  Best advice if you have no choice?  Be polite and follow directions.
 
2014-07-17 03:41:16 PM  

redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: jst3p: redmid17: Does anyone seriously think this: "THE OFFICERS HANDCUFFED HER DAUGHTER, AND PLANNED TO PUT HER IN A DETENTION CENTER, UNTIL DOCTORS TOLD THEM HER INJURIES WERE TOO SEVERE." is an acceptable outcome for unlawfully, but peacefully, ignoring a police command to stop?

Not only is it acceptable, it is entirely predictable.


I'd give you predictable, but not acceptable. How is that even remotely acceptable?

Cops are assholes but they have a rough job. Once someone has shown they aren't going to cooperate they need to get things under control quickly for their own safety. Sometimes people are going to get hurt.

What imminent threat was this 17 year old girl presenting to them? I'm not talking conceptually. I'm talking about this specific incident.

In the moment, the cop has no idea what threat she could present. She could be carrying a weapon.

She could be about to spontaneously combust. If you have no reason to suspect that, there's no reason to use that much force. They were stopped for violating curfew with ice cream in their hands. Once again, how is that a remotely reasonable assumption?


I don't fault cops for operating under that assumption 100% of the time when someone is not cooperative. They only have to be wrong once to end up dead.
 
Displayed 50 of 795 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report