Pepper spray! A kung Fu kick to the head, followed by a Hulk Hogan style leg drop...
If she didn't resist arrest it wouldn't of happened.
A green for the cop!
Printable View
Pepper spray! A kung Fu kick to the head, followed by a Hulk Hogan style leg drop...
If she didn't resist arrest it wouldn't of happened.
A green for the cop!
You're joking, right??? If you or I were to resist arrest, just what type of treatment do you think we would receive??? Kid-gloves and warm blanky???Quote:
Originally Posted by madjbs
The situation appeared incendiary, with a group of people lambasting and interfering with the officer while he was trying enforce the law... The group are lucky that backup didn't arrive and the whole lot of them thrown in the gaol...
He shouldn't have punched her. They are trained in restraint techniques and I don't believe punching teenage girls in the face is one of them. Not so difficult to understand.
Yeah, get a dig in at the latinos as well!Quote:
I will take it a step further, This whole incident was stagged by the NCCAA. The current acting Police chief is Latino, however the outside candidate is black. The mayor is currently deciding to chose between the two, This is a smear campaign.
Man, you really have some race issues, don't you?
:rofl:
here's a tip maudib....if you actually took the time to read what madjbs posted, you wouldn't be coming across as so hysterical.Quote:
Originally Posted by MuadibYou're joking, right??? If you or I were to resist arrest, just what type of treatment do you think we would receive??? Kid-gloves and warm blanky???Quote:
Originally Posted by madjbs
cops don't normally punch people in the face. they are trained to use other restraint techniques.
no one posted anything about 'kid gloves and warm blanky'...except you.
btw, what's up with the three question marks? or hold on...what's up with the three question marks???
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
Nice there , it looks like.
With all those niggers about. :bananaman:
Ah, my little stalker has piped into the convo... Hi Ray, Muaaahhhh...
You have obviously never pissed off a policeman in the US...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muadib
Ray would have gotten his ass beat by that Nigga girl , I would pay to see that.
Seattle police guild defends officer's teen punch - Yahoo! News
Seattle police guild defends officer's teen punch
SEATTLE – The president of the Seattle Police Officers Guild says an officer was justified in punching a young woman who shoved him in a dispute over jaywalking.
Rich O'Neil told KCPQ-TV that punching her in the face was an appropriate use of force as the officer struggled with two women and a crowd formed. O'Neil says it's wrong to call the punch police brutality or racist.
Cell phone video shows Officer Ian P. Walsh trying to control two women Monday and punching a 17-year-old in the face.
Acting deputy police chief Nick Metz has said the women bear much of the responsibility for resisting arrest.
Seattle Urban League CEO James Kelly says the punch was an overreaction that brought to mind a video taken April 17 of two Seattle officers kicking a Hispanic suspect.
Police are conducting an internal investigation.
I have no problem with what the cop did, she was resisting, he was arresting, end of!
In the UK the Police are hamstrung by laws preventing them from harming suspects while pursuing an arrest. Freaking Crazy UK politically correct laws.
As usual you haven't kept up with the news, he has since retracted his statement condoning the officer's actions.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown
Forgot his Taser?
^^^ In the UK officers need to comply with Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967 relating to 'reasonable force' in order to effect an arrest.
I saw nothng to condemn the officer, indeed he used considerable restraint in order to handcuff the female offender who was clearly resisting. The other larger girl who was attempting to prevent the officer in performing his duty was swiftly subdued by the officer. She was commiting an offence by physically assaulting the officer. He defended himself quite correctly and if in the UK i don't believe his actions would warrant investigation.
What i do find a wee bit strange is that some posters have felt a need to mention that the offenders were black and that the officer was white. It s quite irrelevent what colour the perpetrators of crime are. It certainly wasn't mentioned in the headline and when one begins to bring the colour or race into the equation in a situation such as this they are providing evidence that they themselves are prejudiced.
When you make a statement like this links please.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteKnightAs usual you haven't kept up with the news, he has since retracted his statement condoning the officer's actions.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown
I have been wondering about the year of this law that you've quoted, 1967.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Lick
It was not always the case that the British police would arrest a person as gently as they do now, indeed 30 years ago the police could be firm bordering on brutal in some instances when arresting a person.
So what has changed if not the law, has it been amended or are there now more recent laws that they must adhere to?
I'm going to have to side with the cop on this one.
The first girl was resisting arrest so a level of force was needed to restrain her.
The second seems to be a passer by who, after repeated attempts by the boyfriend to stop her, attacked the cop.
She could hardly be considered 'half his size' as one poster said. She is just a few inches shorter than the cop and looks powerful as women go.
The punch was over the top really but I can understand why he did it.
I would go with 'serious slap on the wrist, retraining and written warning' for the cop and leave it at that. Rodney King this is not.
Sadly politics will mean it will go further.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SdigitI have been wondering about the year of this law that you've quoted, 1967.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Lick
It was not always the case that the British police would arrest a person as gently as they do now, indeed 30 years ago the police could be firm bordering on brutal in some instances when arresting a person.
So what has changed if not the law, has it been amended or are there now more recent laws that they must adhere to?
You're pretty much spot on Sdigit.
Before The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) was introduced in 1984 i would agree that alleged perpetators of cime were treated more harsher than they are today. Interviews now need to be recorded, videoed and in my view this has lead to a more professional attitude from officers. Prior to PACE, officers would often force a confession from suspects. Judges Rules legislation being too open to interpretation. Corruption within forces was almost out of control. I believe Sir Robert Marks, Metropolitan Police Commisioner in the 70's, was instumental in rooting out those officers who were less than honest and with PACE came a new breed of officer.
Under PACE, a custody officer is appointed to look after the welfare and process of prisoners at Police stations. Prisoners are entitled to food/drink at certain intervals and are checked regularly whilst in their cells, all of which is recorded. The custody officer also need to be aware of how and why the arrest was effected. e.g. if a prisioner is brought to the station with marks on his face/hands etc:, how did he/she suffer them? The custody officer may decline to accept the prisoner if he feels that excessive force was used or that the arrest may not have been carried out to the letter of the law.
To be fair Section 3 of the CLA of 1967 has stood the test of time and applies to any person. Not only in effecting an arrest but also where someones life is at risk so it covers quite an area. It doesn't define what reasonable force is and should not be confused with 'minimum force'. e.g. if someone was attacking you or another with a knife and you believed that yours or anothers life was in immediate danger or you or that person may suffer a serious injury and the only way of stopping that person was to use a lethal weapon then the force used may be deemed as reasonable. If the attacker was not in an immediate position to cause serious harm/death than the use of a firearm or other lethal weapon may be deemed unreasonable.
The US officer in the video found himself in a difficult position with the 2 females, he needed to get things under control quickly or he may have been subjected to violence himself. He achieved his goal and although the larger lady may have suffered a bloody mouth as a result, she was in the process of assaulting the officer and thus committing a crime of violence herself. He was entitled to defend himself. Was it reasonable or excesssive? One would need to refer to US legislation and in most cases these things are decided in court or at a disciplinary hearing, that is if one has a complainant of course. :)
If it means anything (it probably won't...) three different US cops chimed in on a thread re: this topic on another board I frequent- they all commented how how much restraint this particular police officer showed in a situation where he was alone and in front of a hostile crowd battling to get control over a perpetrator (once it became physical the original issue that set off the confrontation in the first place no longer mattered)- none of them think he was out-of-line smacking her in the face and that he was more than justified in his actions.
It's easy to make a judgment from watching a couple of minutes of video from an event that was already in progress before the camera started- it's something else entirely to be out there in the street dealing with it.
You're an idiot. Are you talking about the civilised world or comparing the US to Uganda or Sudan?Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
Ah, yes . . . it's all a conspiracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
To shut her up? Is that what you do to your children?Quote:
Originally Posted by gingsa
I'd have to agree with Panda here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda
:rofl: bsnub is an alcoholic foul-mouthQuote:
Originally Posted by WhiteKnight
That's the issue. Restraint. It isn't pretty seeing a grown man punch a girl, irrespective of race. I'd not like to be in the cop's shoes, surrounded by a crowd, screaming females grabbing him . . . what if someone had a knife in that situation?Quote:
Originally Posted by FailSafe
I abhor police violence, and the punch was over the top, but he definitely had to do something to get the situation under control . . .
I see your point...Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
It's not a 'grown man' punching a 'girl'- it's a police officer giving a lawful order to comply and being met with resistance and possible injury from a hostile crowd- it can't be whittled down to anything less than that- he didn't have a taser, but if he did that situation would have ended pretty damned fast- he needed to do something, and his basic self-defense skills were not the greatest- a punch was the best option he had.
A policeman can't back off or show weakness in front of a crowd when he's lawfully perfoming his duty- that guy (or at least his fellow officers) will be working on that same street tomorrow, and they can't be run off by an angry mob.
I agree, but it does boil down to: Big Man punching 'small' woman. Added to which the big man was wearing a uniform. Again, he had to do something.Quote:
Originally Posted by FailSafe
Possibly not, it may have inflamed the situation and be seen as using excesive force by the bystanders and may have been occasion for some guys to get involvedQuote:
Originally Posted by FailSafe
Well, prudence is the best way to go about it, really. Showing force for the sake of it is seldom a good solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by FailSafe
I hope the cop doesn't get into trouble, however . . . geez, I'd hate to be in his shoes in that situation
Small? I hope you are joking, she was his height and weight.Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
Now if you are talking about him being big as a police officer....then she should have stood back, instead of assaulting hm.
Suppose it does but predictably in cases like this, interpretation is: Big white cop punches small defenseless black woman in face. Followed by moral outrage from many in the black community and support from many who believe blacks deserve a good wupping just because they are black.Quote:
Originally Posted by panama hat
Ignore the skin colors of the cop and the woman and what I see is a lone cop facing a woman violently resisting arrest. Woman persists as cop tries to restrain her and cop eventually punches her.
Easy for "Monday morning quarterbacks" to offer options to how the cop should have handled it but , cop did the best he could given the situation.
part 2....the women who was punched wasn't the original woman being arrested, she was the one interferring
Heavier! Those thighs could feed Bangladesh for a weekQuote:
Originally Posted by sccrhound
Quote:
Originally Posted by sccrhound
NO disagreement with either of your posts. He was in a shitty situation, no-win for himQuote:
Originally Posted by Norton