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 804
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

25106 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2014 at 12:37 PM (10 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-17 03:57:23 PM
Just curious... if the cops in question are such violent, racist, infants with god-complexes and guns ... why wasn't the rest of her group beaten and arrested, too?  Could it be that they complied?  They didn't mouth off, they didn't leave the scene, they didn't fight back?

Everyone saying "She didn't deserve to get beaten over a curfew violation" is, at best, being disingenuous and at worst, knowingly trolling and making the discussion worse.  She did NOT get beaten for breaking curfew.  She did NOT get beaten for walking away.  She got beaten for resisting arrest.  The immediate cause of her bruises and scuffs was the resisting.

As stated in my first paragraph, if curfew was the reason for beating kids, then her entire group (or at least the other young woman that was with them (if you believe the cops were just out to beat people who are smaller than them) would be beaten as well.  But no, those kids made the best decision when presented with the "We're breaking curfew and the cops caught us."  They shut their mouths, listened to the police (who didn't even need to get out of their car at that point) and followed instructions.  She started the chain of events that lead to her ending up in the hospital and managed to escalate the situation with every poor decision she made after contact.  If she stops from the beginning, she gets off with nothing, like her friends.  She stops when walking away, the cops get upset, but she doesn't get tackled (scrapes on elbows, hands, and knees).  She doesn't resist after being tackled, she doesn't get throat and rib damage (choke holds and knees/kicks to the ribs to take the wind out of the subject and force compliance).  Again, at EVERY stage, SHE is the active decision maker that escalates the interaction to the next level.

It's unfortunate that she got scuffed up, it really is, but she has no one to blame but herself and her poor decision making skills.
 
2014-07-17 03:58:26 PM

SubBass49: redmid17: More cops get killed by car accidents than get shot.

Probably because they're extra careful...you know, to avoid getting shot.  Kind of what we're talking about here, right?  Try to pay attention.


2013 was the safest year for cops since the 1950s. Assaults and murders have gone way down, especially over the last 20 years. They don't need to avoid being shot. People aren't out to kill cops like it's going out of style.

An aggressive adversarial stance on every single interaction they have with the populace is pants on head retarded.
 
2014-07-17 03:58:29 PM

redmid17: Click Click D'oh: redmid17: They are just usually hammered drunk, attacked someone, or gave the cops a legitimate reason to use lots of force.

Or, they landed wrong on pavement being tackled at the end of a pursuit and no other force was used at all.  Because pavement hurts,  Since we don't know the actual extent of this persons injuries, it seems a bit premature to assume excessive force was used.

Other than the witness talking about hair pulling, kicking and punching...


Those are all consistent with someone being restrained while resisting.  Those are also reported by witnesses with a very vested interest in making themselves seem the victims and police the bad guys.
 
2014-07-17 03:58:30 PM

redmid17: Click Click D'oh: redmid17: They are just usually hammered drunk, attacked someone, or gave the cops a legitimate reason to use lots of force.

Or, they landed wrong on pavement being tackled at the end of a pursuit and no other force was used at all.  Because pavement hurts,  Since we don't know the actual extent of this persons injuries, it seems a bit premature to assume excessive force was used.

Other than the witness talking about hair pulling, kicking and punching...


The injuries listed as justification for hospitalization are consistent with a hard tackle and applying weight to someone to force compliance.  I see nothing that would be indicative of punching, hair pulling, and kicking.  Not saying it didn't happen...maybe she has all sorts of huge punch & kick bruises under that blanket.
 
2014-07-17 03:59:10 PM

SubBass49: jshine: SubBass49: jshine: SubBass49: Lots of internet tough-guy Monday-morning QB's that like to dissect their every move in an adrenaline-and-stress filled situation.

How many steroids would you have to take such that stopping a 17 year-old cheerleader for a curfew violation creates an "adrenaline and stress filled situation" in your mind?

Funny...I seem to remember that it was a GROUP that was stopped.  Oh, and last time I checked, even weak little girls could use weapons.  A cop has to be on guard 100% all the time.  It's why they often have one hand on their holster as they approach your car during a traffic stop...even if you're a 98 pound weakling, or god-forbid, a GIRL.


...so, your conception of being a cop is that every moment is an "adrenaline and stress filled situation" then -- since, presumably someone could shoot at you anywhere, at any time, for any reason?

Technically I suppose that's not wrong, but someone who is living in constant fear is probably too highly-strung to being a police officer.  Sooner or later they will snap and beat the living shiat out of a random person for no reason (or worse).

I know a cop personally.  While I find him to be a bit of a scumbag, we've talked about the adrenaline rush and the time that it takes for the adrenaline to leave your system.  Also talked about the long-term health effects of such elevated adrenaline levels.  You have to be 100% "on" every minute while you wear your uniform.  You don't know the person in front of you from anyone else under the sun, and it only takes a split second for them to attack you...in many cases they're dealing with mental health or drug issues (or a lovely combo of the two).  They could be wanted fugitives with warrants out.  They could also be a 4.0 honor roll valedictorian.  As a cop, you don't know either way, so in order to come home at the end of the night without a tag on your toe, you assume the worst.

Surprised someone with seemingly reasonable levels of intelligenc ...



Yes, I understand it, but I also understand that I don't want someone being handed a gun and a badge and then spending every moment of his/her shift suffering from paranoia and walking through my neighborhood.  It's a dangerous combination that will eventually lead to tragedy.  Sometimes the paranoia will be justified, and in those cases it might help you survive an unexpected encounter -- but eventually you're going to get it wrong and injure or kill an innocent person.  ...and, frankly, those are the people whose lives we should value the most.  Police signed up for a dangerous job and have to accept some of the risk that goes with that decision.  Most people who are just living their lives made no such calculation and shouldn't be expected to bear the consequences.
 
2014-07-17 03:59:28 PM

tlars699: jst3p: 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?

I would say that it is possible, but "ignored" or "failed to hear"? If she reacted to his say so by running, that would be acknowledgement of his order, and resisting arrest.
If she failed to hear him and one dude caught up to her, and said, "Hey, we still need to do our report, so you can't go yet," wouldn't be nearly so scary to her, and may have ended up without her being in the hospital.


I am sure she will claim she didn't hear him. Who do you think the judge is going to believe when the cops says "In my estimation it would have been impossible that she couldn't have heard me."

I admire your conviction, you have been shown to be wrong so many times in this thread, but you keep chugging along. "I-derp-I-can-I-derp-I-can-I-derp-I-can!"
 
2014-07-17 04:00:12 PM
s17.postimg.org
 
2014-07-17 04:00:19 PM
cops put a 17 year old, 100lb girl, in the hospital for a curfew violation and that's ok?

pathetic on the cops and only shows poor training if this is the way they have to apprehend someone with such a size disadvantage.

all of you in support of these LEOs are awful human beings
 
2014-07-17 04:00:21 PM

SubBass49: jshine: SubBass49: jshine: SubBass49: Lots of internet tough-guy Monday-morning QB's that like to dissect their every move in an adrenaline-and-stress filled situation.

How many steroids would you have to take such that stopping a 17 year-old cheerleader for a curfew violation creates an "adrenaline and stress filled situation" in your mind?

Funny...I seem to remember that it was a GROUP that was stopped.  Oh, and last time I checked, even weak little girls could use weapons.  A cop has to be on guard 100% all the time.  It's why they often have one hand on their holster as they approach your car during a traffic stop...even if you're a 98 pound weakling, or god-forbid, a GIRL.


...so, your conception of being a cop is that every moment is an "adrenaline and stress filled situation" then -- since, presumably someone could shoot at you anywhere, at any time, for any reason?

Technically I suppose that's not wrong, but someone who is living in constant fear is probably too highly-strung to being a police officer.  Sooner or later they will snap and beat the living shiat out of a random person for no reason (or worse).

I know a cop personally.  While I find him to be a bit of a scumbag, we've talked about the adrenaline rush and the time that it takes for the adrenaline to leave your system.  Also talked about the long-term health effects of such elevated adrenaline levels.  You have to be 100% "on" every minute while you wear your uniform.  You don't know the person in front of you from anyone else under the sun, and it only takes a split second for them to attack you...in many cases they're dealing with mental health or drug issues (or a lovely combo of the two).  They could be wanted fugitives with warrants out.  They could also be a 4.0 honor roll valedictorian.  As a cop, you don't know either way, so in order to come home at the end of the night without a tag on your toe, you assume the worst.

Surprised someone with seemingly reasonable levels of intelligenc ...


This!!!!
 
2014-07-17 04:00:32 PM

redmid17: SubBass49: redmid17: More cops get killed by car accidents than get shot.

Probably because they're extra careful...you know, to avoid getting shot.  Kind of what we're talking about here, right?  Try to pay attention.

2013 was the safest year for cops since the 1950s. Assaults and murders have gone way down, especially over the last 20 years. They don't need to avoid being shot. People aren't out to kill cops like it's going out of style.

An aggressive adversarial stance on every single interaction they have with the populace is pants on head retarded.


Surely it has nothing to do with analyzing what went wrong in violent confrontations and learning from them.  Surely their safety has nothing to do with being trained to be on guard 100% of the time.  You realize you're helping prove my point, right?
 
2014-07-17 04:00:55 PM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: redmid17:  More cops get killed by car accidents cars than get shot.

FTFY.

You do understand that a car is generally about three thousand pounds worth of guided missile, right?

/Has heard of far more cases of people trying to run down cops with a car than attempting to shoot at them.


I do. I've had a driver's license for a few years now. Last year the ratio of motorcycle/car accident ratio to cops being run over was 3:1.
 
2014-07-17 04:00:56 PM

tlars699: The officers had been talking with the whole group. How would htey not have been collecting names by that point?


Presumably because her ID was in the bag that she was trying to go get?  Maybe because they didn't have ID on them?  Maybe because central was slow running their IDs.  Maybe because like many other teenagers they didn't have state issued IDs, hence why they were walking home from the ice cream place and not driving.

Is this a game?  Do I get more points for listing lots and lots of reasons why ID checks may not be completed quickly?

tlars699: Your #2 point is entirely contingent that she didn't provide the necessary information which is not clear based on article.


No, point #2 is entirely contingent upon the officer on the scene and doesn't require any basis in reality other than his stated belief.

tlars699: She may have given her name and address, and was forced to wait around, found out she was missing a bag and her phone, and said to the police, "Well, I've done my thing, I'm going to go get my stuff at the shop before Raymone locks it up for the night." and started walking off.


You do realize that would be illegal right?

tlars699: Also, even if they hadn't gotten her info, I would say that the police's escalation was far in excess of what was warranted to solve the situation. One guy can stay by the group and file reports, and the other can use the car to track her down at walking speed.


Lol.

Seriously?
 
2014-07-17 04:02:12 PM

Headso: MycroftHolmes: Headso: MycroftHolmes: 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.

No, I am suggesting she believed he might be a psycho because of the constant stories of police brutality sunk in to her subconscious and then when he beat her to the point of being hospitalized her belief was proven correct.

Got it.  She was justified in running from police because of the sensationalist nature of press, and this invalidates the need to restrain her when she was running.

Actually, no, I don't get it.  I think your argument is just boiling down to 'Cops bad'.

Based on the fact that she was personally beaten by the police I don't think she'd call stories of police brutality "sensationalism". You're the only one saying she was justified in running, I am just saying it is understandable to run from someone you associate with beating defenseless people.  Where we disagree is you believe it is fine to beat up a teenage girl in this scenario and I don't.


She was beaten because she ran and then resisted arrest.  These are both by her own description of events.  Until I see a video showing the excessive force of the 'beating' I will withhold judgement.  Where we disagree is whether or not the force used to restrain a running and resisting suspect will functionally resemble a beating.

And I doubt your logic that she was terrified of the cops.  If that was the case, she wouldn't have ignored them in the first place when they attempted to detain her, or she would have run from the outset.  Your argument just doesn't really make much sense.
 
2014-07-17 04:03:54 PM
The Homer Tax:  Where was the "forcibly resists arrest" part in the account?

Christ, can't you read?  Again, FTFA:

"admits she and her friends were out after the city's 10 p.m. curfew, and she both ran from officers and resisted them after being tackled"
 
2014-07-17 04:04:01 PM

SubBass49: redmid17: SubBass49: redmid17: More cops get killed by car accidents than get shot.

Probably because they're extra careful...you know, to avoid getting shot.  Kind of what we're talking about here, right?  Try to pay attention.

2013 was the safest year for cops since the 1950s. Assaults and murders have gone way down, especially over the last 20 years. They don't need to avoid being shot. People aren't out to kill cops like it's going out of style.

An aggressive adversarial stance on every single interaction they have with the populace is pants on head retarded.

Surely it has nothing to do with analyzing what went wrong in violent confrontations and learning from them.  Surely their safety has nothing to do with being trained to be on guard 100% of the time.  You realize you're helping prove my point, right?


No you're arguing in a circle and completely ignoring that the same kind of crime that is falling for cops is falling for society in general.

MycroftHolmes: redmid17: Click Click D'oh: redmid17: They are just usually hammered drunk, attacked someone, or gave the cops a legitimate reason to use lots of force.

Or, they landed wrong on pavement being tackled at the end of a pursuit and no other force was used at all.  Because pavement hurts,  Since we don't know the actual extent of this persons injuries, it seems a bit premature to assume excessive force was used.

Other than the witness talking about hair pulling, kicking and punching...

Those are all consistent with someone being restrained while resisting. Those are also reported by witnesses with a very vested interest in making themselves seem the victims and police the bad guys.


And completely unnecessary in this scenario.
 
2014-07-17 04:04:07 PM

kosherkow: cops put a 17 year old, 100lb girl, in the hospital for a curfew violation and that's ok?

pathetic on the cops and only shows poor training if this is the way they have to apprehend someone with such a size disadvantage.

all of you in support of these LEOs are awful human beings


The use of force was not related to the curfew violation at all.  Do you honestly not get that?
 
2014-07-17 04:04:45 PM

kosherkow: all of you in support of these LEOs are awful human beings


the funny thing is half these people will be incredulous as to why we have the highest incarceration rates in the world and a militarized police force..."whatta ya mean my constant apologizing and support of all things authoritarian has created policies that perpetuate these issues???!!! I thought I was just being tough on crime like a real merkin!"
 
2014-07-17 04:04:49 PM

MycroftHolmes: tlars699: 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.

I am not sure what you were reading.  This is the paragraph in the article that comes closest to your version of events

Wright said she and her friends were walking home from the Soft Serve and Dee-Lites ice cream shop on Miller Avenue when they were stopped by officers for being out after curfew. When they tried to go back to pick up a bag and a phone they left behind, they claim the officers tried to detain them.
Wright said she continued walking away from the officers, who then allegedly used force to stop her.

By her own description, she was going back to get her stuff when the officers tried to stop her, not the other way around.  If she ignored their attempts to stop her, they chased her down.  So basically, she is out after curfew, they roll up on them and start asking questions.  She ignores and keeps walking away. They exit the key and she starts to run.  They tackle her, and she is injured.  Are there any parts of the above that you disagree with factually?


These do not mean the same thing.

"they" could be the majority of the group, but excluded her.
She may not have intentionally ignored them.
She looks back while walking to see cops chasing her down, and using force to stop her.
If they  had just one officer get out of the car and start jogging to catch up with her, to tell her to stop, maybe she wouldn't have panicked and actually stopped.
 
2014-07-17 04:05:25 PM

redmid17: And completely unnecessary in this scenario.


Oh shiat...you were there???  Why didn't you get video so we could put this all to rest?
 
2014-07-17 04:05:44 PM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: redmid17:  More cops get killed by car accidents cars than get shot.

FTFY.

You do understand that a car is generally about three thousand pounds worth of guided missile, right?

/Has heard of far more cases of people trying to run down cops with a car than attempting to shoot at them.


To be fair, that is because anytime someone drives away from them they claim "he attempted to hit me with his vehicle."

When I was a dumb kid me and a buddy went out to take some stuff from his ex-girlfriends car. Some neighbors spotted us and we took off. They called the cops and the cops found my car (which stuck out like a sore thumb in that neighborhood) hid and waited. After a few hours we figured we were in the clear and went to my car. My plan to draw as little attention as possible was jump in, start the car, and take off as quickly as possible. By the time I got to step three the cops were running at me from the bushes, I thought it was the neighbors. That was until two cop cars pulled around both corners ahead of me blocking me in.

Cop pulls me out of the car and he is PISSED! "WHEN I SAY 'STOP POLICE!' YOU FARKING STOP!!!!"

Even though he was never in front of my car I was arrested for, among other things, attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon (my car). Those charges were dropped, and I am not saying people don't try and take out cops with a car, but I am skeptical that it happens as often as is reported.

/managed to not catch a beating by being polite and complaint.
 
2014-07-17 04:06:44 PM

SubBass49: Oh shiat...you were there??? Why didn't you get video so we could put this all to rest?


I'm still trying to figure out why the cops were even stopping the kids. It's not like it was 1AM.
 
2014-07-17 04:06:48 PM

redmid17: And completely unnecessary in this scenario.


I guess I am silly that I will give benefit of the doubt to the people who were trained in restraint and were at the scene.  We will really never know what was or wasn't necesary in this situation since we weren't there.  But the description of events, girl walks away cops attempt to detain her verbally, cops exit car and chase after her, she runs....I am not seeing that many different ways to play this out where tackling her is not a reasonable, maybe even unavoidable, option.
 
2014-07-17 04:07:45 PM

WhyteRaven74: SubBass49: Oh shiat...you were there??? Why didn't you get video so we could put this all to rest?

I'm still trying to figure out why the cops were even stopping the kids. It's not like it was 1AM.


It was after curfew.  Their job is to enforce the law, so they did.  They see a group of kids out after curfew, they stop them, one runs and gets tackled.
 
2014-07-17 04:08:52 PM

redmid17: I don't know how many times I need to repeat this, they didn't have to tackle her. They did.


That's a judgement you can't honestly make.

redmid17: Other than the witness talking about hair pulling, kicking and punching...


Actions that could easily be confused for officers trying to grab her arms.
 
2014-07-17 04:09:14 PM

jst3p: I have had several encounters with cops in my life. Since I have been respectful and compliant they have never had to chase me. Since they have never had to chase me I have never been tackled by them and have never been accused of resisting arrest.

Cops are scum but running from them gives them the opportunity to put you in a position where their claim that you were resisting will be taken as gospel truth.


You are correct that running or resisting gives them an excuse. BUT THEY SHOULDN'T BE FARKING LOOKING FOR AN EXCUSE TO ABUSE CITIZENS.
 
2014-07-17 04:09:20 PM
Good, maybe she will keep her stupid ass named self home before curfew and not run from the police.
 
2014-07-17 04:10:12 PM

MycroftHolmes: And I doubt your logic that she was terrified of the cops.  If that was the case, she wouldn't have ignored them in the first place when they attempted to detain her, or she would have run from the outset.  Your argument just doesn't really make much sense.


Just to be clear here, you're saying people act in a rational way when they are panicked in order to suggest that my argument doesn't make much sense.
 
2014-07-17 04:10:43 PM

tlars699: These do not mean the same thing.

"they" could be the majority of the group, but excluded her.
She may not have intentionally ignored them.
She looks back while walking to see cops chasing her down, and using force to stop her.
If they had just one officer get out of the car and start jogging to catch up with her, to tell her to stop, maybe she wouldn't have panicked and actually stopped.


This is a stretch.  You are saying that she knew something was going on, but did not hear the officers interacting with the group, and with her not thinking she had done anything wrong, her Weeners was to run when a cop got out and started chasing her?  This seems a bit of a stretch
 
2014-07-17 04:11:20 PM
Pretty sure "eyewitness accounts" in that neighborhood are worthless in terms of reliability.
 
2014-07-17 04:11:50 PM
Merceedez Wright admits she and her friends were out a few minutes after the city's 10 p.m. curfew, and that she both ran from officers and resisted them after being tackled, but she doesn't believe she deserves the injuries she suffered.


dumbass tag, anyone?
 
2014-07-17 04:11:53 PM

Headso: MycroftHolmes: And I doubt your logic that she was terrified of the cops.  If that was the case, she wouldn't have ignored them in the first place when they attempted to detain her, or she would have run from the outset.  Your argument just doesn't really make much sense.

Just to be clear here, you're saying people act in a rational way when they are panicked in order to suggest that my argument doesn't make much sense.


If she was panicked, why was she walking, not running, away from the police?
 
2014-07-17 04:12:52 PM

jst3p: tlars699: jst3p: 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?

I would say that it is possible, but "ignored" or "failed to hear"? If she reacted to his say so by running, that would be acknowledgement of his order, and resisting arrest.
If she failed to hear him and one dude caught up to her, and said, "Hey, we still need to do our report, so you can't go yet," wouldn't be nearly so scary to her, and may have ended up without her being in the hospital.

I am sure she will claim she didn't hear him. Who do you think the judge is going to believe when the cops says "In my estimation it would have been impossible that she couldn't have heard me."

I admire your conviction, you have been shown to be wrong so many times in this thread, but you keep chugging along. "I-derp-I-can-I-derp-I-can-I-derp-I-can!"


Unlike you, I have been able to admit I was wrong when I could be shown to be so.

You, however, still think that it's okay for trained professionals to beat up a minor just because they were out past 10 p.m..
 
2014-07-17 04:13:23 PM

SubBass49: It was after curfew. Their job is to enforce the law, so they did. They see a group of kids out after curfew, they stop them, one runs and gets tackled.


Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

Bit'O'Gristle: Good, maybe she will keep her stupid ass named self home before curfew and not run from the police.


Perhaps we should be asking what sort of idiots make a curfew ordinance at 10PM, especially one that applies to 17 year olds.
 
2014-07-17 04:13:50 PM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: The Homer Tax:  Where was the "forcibly resists arrest" part in the account?

Christ, can't you read?  Again, FTFA:

"admits she and her friends were out after the city's 10 p.m. curfew, and she both ran from officers and resisted them after being tackled"


My mistake. Calm the fark down.
 
2014-07-17 04:14:49 PM

MycroftHolmes: Headso: MycroftHolmes: And I doubt your logic that she was terrified of the cops.  If that was the case, she wouldn't have ignored them in the first place when they attempted to detain her, or she would have run from the outset.  Your argument just doesn't really make much sense.

Just to be clear here, you're saying people act in a rational way when they are panicked in order to suggest that my argument doesn't make much sense.

If she was panicked, why was she walking, not running, away from the police?


maybe she was trying to get away from them without being beaten for running
 
2014-07-17 04:15:31 PM

WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.


It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...
 
2014-07-17 04:15:34 PM

MycroftHolmes: redmid17: And completely unnecessary in this scenario.

I guess I am silly that I will give benefit of the doubt to the people who were trained in restraint and were at the scene.  We will really never know what was or wasn't necesary in this situation since we weren't there.  But the description of events, girl walks away cops attempt to detain her verbally, cops exit car and chase after her, she runs....I am not seeing that many different ways to play this out where tackling her is not a reasonable, maybe even unavoidable, option.


Well instead of sprint they could walk quickly. It's not as if she was running.

Really it's Occam's razor. When witnesses say there was kicking, punching, and hair pulling from multiple police officers on a 100 lb girl, and doctor's wouldn't let her leave the hospital due to injuries, I'm gonna have to lean with an overuse of force being the likeliest occurrence. I'd find it easier to believe them if Pittsburgh PD didn't have a recent history of police brutality lawsuits.
 
2014-07-17 04:16:42 PM

tlars699: You, however, still think that it's okay for trained professionals to beat up a minor just because they were out past 10 p.m..


Wrong again? I am shocked!

She wasn't "beat up" because she was out past 10 p.m.

She suffered injury because, by her own admission, she first walked, then ran away from cops and again  by her own admission resisted them as they tried to put her in handcuffs.

tlars699: I have been able to admit I was wrong when I could be shown to be so.


Actually I have yet to see you admit to being wrong. What has been happening this entire thread is as follows:

You post something that is completely wrong.

Several people show you how you are wrong.

You ignore it and go on to a brand new wrong argument.

Repeat!
 
2014-07-17 04:17:27 PM

pedrop357: Cops can still selectively enforce the way they do with everything else. SFPD apparently stopped enforcing their curfew years ago to focus on actual crime.


No, absolutely not. The fact that you would even suggest this is ridiculous. You know why? Because some cop, either for good reasons or bad, may one day choose to enforce some law that "oh, everyone knows that's ok because it's not enforced". If the law is wrong, it should not be on the books. No exceptions.

The cops will never be able to enforce every law perfectly but there should never, ever be a law on the books that should not generally be 100% enforced.
 
2014-07-17 04:19:00 PM

SubBass49: WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...


She didn't start running until they got out of the car... I was unaware that telling a bunch of kids to "go home" requires more than rolling down a window and yelling "Get home already. It's past curfew."
 
2014-07-17 04:20:20 PM

tlars699: You, however, still think that it's okay for trained professionals to beat up a minor just because they were out past 10 p.m..


Dude, you can have a different opinion on the matter, even if its not substantiated in law or the actual circumstances. But stop with the disingenuous (actually pretty close to outright lie) that she was "beat up for being out past curfew." That's a gross oversimplification of the situation and you know it. It serves no purpose in the discussion and it really only works to confirm that many of the cop-haters around here don't actually give a flying fark about facts, just emotional, knee-jerk rhetoric.
 
2014-07-17 04:20:33 PM

redmid17: SubBass49: WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...

She didn't start running until they got out of the car... I was unaware that telling a bunch of kids to "go home" requires more than rolling down a window and yelling "Get home already. It's past curfew."


OK...now you're just being stupid.
 
2014-07-17 04:21:49 PM

MycroftHolmes: tlars699: These do not mean the same thing.

"they" could be the majority of the group, but excluded her.
She may not have intentionally ignored them.
She looks back while walking to see cops chasing her down, and using force to stop her.
If they had just one officer get out of the car and start jogging to catch up with her, to tell her to stop, maybe she wouldn't have panicked and actually stopped.

This is a stretch.  You are saying that she knew something was going on, but did not hear the officers interacting with the group, and with her not thinking she had done anything wrong, her Weeners was to run when a cop got out and started chasing her?  This seems a bit of a stretch


Not everything happens instantaneously.
1. Group gets stopped.
2. Group gets questioned.
3. Merceedes: "Crap! I left my crap at the shop"
4. Group tells police: "We have to go back- Merceedes forgot her stuff lol." Merceedes starts walking towards shop.
5. Police say to group, "Tell your friend to get back here, we're not through." Friend calls out "Merceedes!"
6. Merceedes turns around, sees officers rushing to get out of vehicles, panics, starts running.

All the information from the article is accounted for in this scenario, and still shows excessive force.
 
2014-07-17 04:22:41 PM

redmid17: It's not as if she was running.


According to the article she was.

redmid17: When witnesses say there was kicking, punching, and hair pulling from multiple police officers on a 100 lb girl, and doctor's wouldn't let her leave the hospital due to injuries, I'm gonna have to lean with an overuse of force being the likeliest occurrence.


Really?

How about this.  The girl who had to be pursed by the officers and tackled had clearly moved some distance from the group.  Hence, the pursuit part.  Since this happened at 2200, I'm going to suggest the lighting might not have been the best.   At night and at a distance, people seeing arms and legs flailing around are more likely to give a statement based on their impression of what happened instead of an accurate accounting of events.

Also, have you considered the likely injuries that would be sustained by a 100 pound person falling on pavement at a run and then having a police officer fall on them, which is a likely scenario give a pursuit termination.

Occams Razor in this case would seem to say that without a more detailed accounting of injuries, or at least some more obvious injuries consistent with a beating, it didn't occur.
 
2014-07-17 04:22:55 PM

redmid17: MycroftHolmes: redmid17: And completely unnecessary in this scenario.

I guess I am silly that I will give benefit of the doubt to the people who were trained in restraint and were at the scene.  We will really never know what was or wasn't necesary in this situation since we weren't there.  But the description of events, girl walks away cops attempt to detain her verbally, cops exit car and chase after her, she runs....I am not seeing that many different ways to play this out where tackling her is not a reasonable, maybe even unavoidable, option.

Well instead of sprint they could walk quickly. It's not as if she was running.

Really it's Occam's razor. When witnesses say there was kicking, punching, and hair pulling from multiple police officers on a 100 lb girl, and doctor's wouldn't let her leave the hospital due to injuries, I'm gonna have to lean with an overuse of force being the likeliest occurrence. I'd find it easier to believe them if Pittsburgh PD didn't have a recent history of police brutality lawsuits.


If you see two or three officers trying to restrain a resisting person, what do you think it will look like?  They are trained to use leverage, the weight, their arms, and legs to control and subdue a resisting suspect.  This would easily look like kicking, punching, and hairpulling.

And just getting tackled onto pavement could easily be enough to give enough injuries to admit someone to a hospital.  We don't know if it was precautionary or if she was being treated.

Got it, the whole thing was because the officer ran after a suspect who was walking away rather than walk quickly. 

When I look at any post mortem (whether it was an incident at work, something in my personal life, or a news story), I don't ask, what is hypthetically the best thing that could have been done knowing all the facts that we know now, but I ask, was the action taken reasonable given the circumstances.  Are you honestly telling me that a police officer running after a suspect who is ignoring his commands to stop is not reasonable?  If you say no, I fear that the rules of engagement that you expect police officers to operate under will make their job darn near impossible.
 
2014-07-17 04:23:25 PM

SubBass49: redmid17: SubBass49: WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...

She didn't start running until they got out of the car... I was unaware that telling a bunch of kids to "go home" requires more than rolling down a window and yelling "Get home already. It's past curfew."

OK...now you're just being stupid.


Says the guy defending cops, who belong to a PD notorious for excessive force, who put a girl in the hospital for walking down the street with ice cream and ignoring their command.
 
2014-07-17 04:23:55 PM

redmid17: SubBass49: WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...

She didn't start running until they got out of the car... I was unaware that telling a bunch of kids to "go home" requires more than rolling down a window and yelling "Get home already. It's past curfew."


I like how you continue to act as though there's a legal difference between "walking away from police who are actively attempting to detain you" and "running away after they start chasing you because of the former."

Newsflash, Sparky: both are ignoring a lawful police order and are probable cause for arrest. Please, continue to skip over the important initial escalation (the girl actively disobeying police who were, based on what this story is telling us, merely attempting to contact and shuffle them on their way) and right to the part where you can spin it against the cops and not the moron who ignored their lawful orders.

/HODOR
 
2014-07-17 04:24:02 PM

redmid17: SubBass49: redmid17: SubBass49: WhyteRaven74: Or the cops could've looked at the time and decided it wasn't worth the trouble and gone on their way. The way most cops do. I've never actually met a cop who thought curfew violations were worth the trouble. At most they just tell kids to go home and leave it at that.

It's likely they would have told them to go home, but then she took off running.  She didn't give them the opportunity to be cool.  BTW...take a quick peek at the street they were on, and tell me if you'd want packs of kids roaming there after 10pm...looks pretty sketchy to me...

She didn't start running until they got out of the car... I was unaware that telling a bunch of kids to "go home" requires more than rolling down a window and yelling "Get home already. It's past curfew."

OK...now you're just being stupid.

Says the guy defending cops, who belong to a PD notorious for excessive force, who put a girl in the hospital for walking down the street with ice cream and ignoring their command.


And then the extra-stupid arrived.
 
2014-07-17 04:24:13 PM

It's Me Bender: Do we know yet what race the police officers were?


www.morrisonmeat.com
 
2014-07-17 04:24:35 PM

jst3p: 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.


Nope. Never admitted I was wrong. Ever. Never had you quote me saying I was wrong either.
 
Displayed 50 of 804 comments

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report