Police confuse speech impediment for "disrespect" - Tasered teen

[Jinx_Dragon]

Looking at the second article, it doesn't seem as much a crystal clear case of Police brutality as it does looking at the first.

If the police report is to be believed then the kid was kicking and hitting the officers whilst his parent and the family friend attempted to stop the officers from arresting him. If that happened then yes, they both committed offences.

It still violates the rules and regulations to use a taser in such cases where the person is violently resisting arrest unless they are doing so with a lethal weapon and there is a reasonable fear of life. This police officer could not have justifiably feared for the life of the officers conducting the arrest simply because a young adult male was throwing a fist around. If he does, then he has highlighted he is not suitable for the police force as he is a danger to others and himself with such a mentality.

The correct use of force in this case would of been submission holds.

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/security/security-5.gif

 

[rwege]

The sad but real truth is after my encounters with police, I would certainly think twice about helping one. With anything.

 

[crudus]

I still believe their response was grossly excessive.

Considering that the other article posted said the kid started to attack the police officers, a neighbor, and the mother were getting involved, their response was correct.

It still violates the rules and regulations to use a taser in such cases where the person is violently resisting arrest unless they are doing so with a lethal weapon and there is a reasonable fear of life.

You don't need to fear for your life to use a taser. It isn't lethal force. The boy started assaulting officers while the mother and neighbor were nearby.

 

[Navvan]

This article [http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/family-sues-city-over-sons-arrest-1198555.html] also includes events as described in the police report.

Based on what little info we have, it is definitely not a clear-cut case. I do however question the need to pursue a teenager for a mere bicycle traffic infraction.

It could of been any number of things. If he recognized this individual then he could of felt obligated to give a warning due to the danger of bicycling the wrong direction for safety concerns.

If he didn't recognize him then someone fleeing upon approach is highly suspension activity and there is a good chance the suspect is involved in other illegal affairs.

Police can be arrogant and abuse their power. But the idea that the majority of officers are high on power and just out to exert their authority over people is just ridiculous. Most of the time they are just doing their job as best they can and they just make mistakes like any of us and it just so happens to have a more significant impact due to the nature of the job. Then people hear a story about a truly bad cop and make unfair generalizations.

After reading both sides the situation actually makes sense.

On the part of the officer he witnessed a bicycling violation, the suspect ran which raises suspicion of the officer, officer pursues individual, individual puts up violent resistance officer proceeds with force to subdue individual.

On the part of the minor, sees police officer and becomes spooked and runs home, finds door locked and thus cornered, freaks from approaching police officer. Feels threatened and attacks.

 

[NormalityImpaired]

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/06/29/37770.htm and http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/family-sues-city-over-sons-arrest-1198555.html
any thought you would like to share about this

We've heard the parent's story, and it holds water. Now look at it from the cop's perspective: -snip-

Well said, though i snipped the majority to save space. Even though the cop was told about the young mans mental state, it was still his duty to inform and cite the guy for doing wrong, even for such a minor infraction. As for being incompetent, the guy knew to get back on the sidewalk after he saw the police, so he knew what he was supposed to be doing (maybe he forgot, but remembered after seeing the police, it could happen).

Maybe, just maybe, he has been taught by his militant mother that if he gets in trouble with the police that he will be removed from his mom and they will never see each other again. So when he gets confronted by the cops at home, he goes ape-shit. If he is mentally handicapped, this theory is not as far fetched as it seems. The mother and friends involvement seems to be why backup was called in, well that and the fact that the guy was not a small kid.

Both sides of the story are in the wrong. However, I would side with the Cops on this one. I am happy that this was not the frail-handicapped-child-beaten-down-by-power-mad-cops story that i was led to believe.

 

[Togs]

Shock shock horror police are just thugs with badges, hope the doucebag gets punished ot the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

My country's police are a fucking joke. Power mad little piggies who use their gun and taser and any justification to make up for their inability to read at a fourth grade level or please a woman.

This.

Why are pigs allowed to be cops? They're a fucking disgrace to law enforcement. Hell I've seen honest cops RESIGN from their units because they were sick and tired of putting up with their corrupt chiefs.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

You don't need to fear for your life to use a taser. It isn't lethal force. The boy started assaulting officers while the mother and neighbor were nearby.

People die from taser all the time, it also causes lasting physical damage and can lead to a lot of health issues. Less then lethal is different to non-lethal, never confuse the two. Tasers are less then lethal and should only be used when the other option is high lethal weapons. Many countries are making the move to have them outlawed for the police department, as they are being abused too often.

Lets put that point to the side right now and focus on the use of these weapons. Tasers do falls under the category of a physical weapon for obvious reasons. By regulation, physical weapons can only be used if there is a serious risk of grievous bodily harm to the officers or innocent bystanders. Unarmed, though violent, resisting of arrest does NOT constitute grounds for use of a weapon. It does allow you to use physical means to detain a person but a weapon, any weapon, is still off the list.

The sad part is, you're still trying to defend the practice of using a weapon on offenders outside of the regulations. It is this behavior that shields the police from scrutiny in all cases where a weapon is used. It boils the situation down to 'another criminal god whooped? good!' and that alone gives the police justification to continue to abuse these weapons. Even in cases where the victim might be a criminal, it does not excuse the 'blame the victim' mentality I keep seeing surrounding these cases.

The lack of training, coupled with a less then lethal option, is leading to situations where these tools are being used to torture people. All in the name of 'forcing compliance' which we should be concerned with. Even without the taser in the situation the use of force should always be investigated and should always be grounds of concern. The use of force to make someone comply is a dangerous line to cross and should only be done when no other option is available in situations where there is serious risk to someones life.

Caption: cestacin and, seems cestacin is lethal too.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

This.

Why are pigs allowed to be cops? They're a fucking disgrace to law enforcement. Hell I've seen honest cops RESIGN from their units because they were sick and tired of putting up with their corrupt chiefs.

Sadly true....

 

[Kair]

And this is why I plan to leave America. All the bullshit we cause because we don't give a damn who we give power to. "Ok, so you can shoot a gun, pass a physical course, and recite some Policeman Code. You're hired!" I know that's not how it EXACTLY goes, but that's the gist of it. Yes, they do background checks, and all that jazz. But it's not the veil people put up so they look good. It's the person. Which is why life today sucks because everyone lies about who they are. Politicians, police officers, athletes, all of them (and countless people on the internet) lie in some way about who they are.

Woah... I need something to drink. Sorry bout the rant. I'm just a bit tired and (if you guys can relate) emotions get a bit more radical when you're tired.

It might not be exactly that hard to become a police officer either. During the cocaine wave in the 80s you could be hired by not being on drugs during the interview. I doubt it is hard even today.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

It might not be exactly that hard to become a police officer either. During the cocaine wave in the 80s you could be hired by not being on drugs during the interview. I doubt it is hard even today.

The police force has a willingness to hire people the military rejects... what does that say?
Hell, anyone else remember the case where people where refused entrance for being too intelligent?

No not genus level intelligent, either, just ten or so points above average will get you bared from being a police office. Think that one over for a few minutes and realizes just what sort of people it leaves taking these jobs. The fact this was upheld by a court of law, that found it was not discrimination as all people need to score below a certain intelligence level,* makes it a very shocking and dark future for the police force.

*Proving the same non-intellectual categorization is required of judges...

 

[Treaos Serrare]

It might not be exactly that hard to become a police officer either. During the cocaine wave in the 80s you could be hired by not being on drugs during the interview. I doubt it is hard even today.

The police force has a willingness to hire people the military rejects... what does that say?
Hell, anyone else remember the case where people where refused entrance for being too intelligent?

No not genus level intelligent, either, just ten or so points above average will get you bared from being a police office. Think that one over for a few minutes and realizes just what sort of people it leaves taking these jobs. The fact this was upheld by a court of law, that found it was not discrimination as all people need to score below a certain intelligence level,* makes it a very shocking and dark future for the police force.

*Proving the same non-intellectual categorization is required of judges...

are you fucking Kidding me? jesus why the hell is this kind of shit legal? honestly this is the kind of thing that makes it so easy to hate police, you know aside from the brutality and utter incompetence

 

[Kair]

It might not be exactly that hard to become a police officer either. During the cocaine wave in the 80s you could be hired by not being on drugs during the interview. I doubt it is hard even today.

The police force has a willingness to hire people the military rejects... what does that say?
Hell, anyone else remember the case where people where refused entrance for being too intelligent?

No not genus level intelligent, either, just ten or so points above average will get you bared from being a police office. Think that one over for a few minutes and realizes just what sort of people it leaves taking these jobs. The fact this was upheld by a court of law, that found it was not discrimination as all people need to score below a certain intelligence level,* makes it a very shocking and dark future for the police force.

*Proving the same non-intellectual categorization is required of judges...

are you fucking Kidding me? jesus why the hell is this kind of shit legal? honestly this is the kind of thing that makes it so easy to hate police, you know aside from the brutality and utter incompetence

It requires a corrupt enforcement entity to enforce corrupt laws.

That is why they do not accept intelligent individuals, as intelligent individuals will give leniency to those who with good reason disrespect the law.

Intelligent law officers would have given leniency to members of the underground railroad when the law painted them as thieves [footnote]Freeing slaves was considering stealing the property of the slave owner[/footnote]. Today some police officers refuse to enforce the ban on THC. They have to keep this a secret because the police force will not accept free-willed entities in their force.

 

[William MacKay]

wait, what did the kid even do? it said that the cop tried to talk to him, then he rode home, then he got brutally attacked. theres no reason for the cop to be talking to him, and not wanting to/being ABLE to talk to someone isnt grounds for an arrest.
and the second article says 'unintelligible language'. so, does that mean that if the only language you can speak isnt english you get tasered? way to be racist...

 

[Doctor Glocktor]

Somebody gets horribly beaten and then tasered by a cop.

How is this surprising anymore?

 

[Zaik]

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/06/29/37770.htm and http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/family-sues-city-over-sons-arrest-1198555.html
any thought you would like to share about this

Now, yes, the kid was mentally handicapped. How did the cop know that? Yeah, he was technically a kid. Again, not to appearances, so how would the cop know? Yeah, he ran home to his mom, but the cop doesn't have a damned birth certificate. The cop was acting on the information he had available.

Sure, the mom says she tried to "explain." While fighting the officer. Have you ever been in a fight? Ever try to have a conversation, in which someone gives you information to remember, while you're fighting them? Ridiculous.

So, yes, the cop was mistaken. But not maliciously. He didn't wake up in the morning and say, "Well, time to go beat up a crippled kid. Ooh, and a bicycler."

And the mother and friend did escalate the situation, to the point that the cop had to use a baton to get things under control. Again, not maliciously. She didn't wake up in the morning and say, "Well, time to go resist arrest. Ooh, and endanger my son."

The cop was working with understandably incomplete information. The mom just wasn't thinking straight, and she acted out of maternal panic. Neither of them was doing it intentionally.

This part works out if you omit the claim by the mother that the officer knew the boy well enough to recognize him and was made aware before of his issues. As to whether that is true or not, who knows?

My biggest issue overall with the story is the boy's mother let him roam around alone. That's what sticks out to me, if one of my more combative clients was allowed to be alone in public for three seconds there'd be a kid in the hospital or a woman being molested. Most likely both. And yes, it's happened before.

 

[Iconsting]

Tazing, pepper spraying, and beating someone for disrespect? Good to know the police aren't abusing their power.

 

[RamirezDoEverything]

That's all that can be said, some asshole with a gun feels powerful enough to beat down citizens for no just reason.

 

[JochemDude]

Why is it so hard for these american cops (you see these coming up like every week) to keep their dicks, oops sorry guns in their pants. Do your fucking job is all I have to say about it.