Plan B Forum

There is no other word for it. Only a full-bore, Kool-Aid-swilling cops-can-do-no-wrong badge bunny could even ATTEMPT to justify this assault and kidnapping.

When is it time to start dropping the hammer on bad cops?

Pah, got off lightly, they should have shot him.

Agreed: both cops should have been bleeding out in the gutter.

The takedown looks violent. I would like to have seen what happened in the 10 seconds before the video started.

Nothing...the thugs weren't there. (Video starts with them rolling up and getting out of the car.)

If that video showed up in my prosecution office, I'd dismiss any citations against the kid and call the officers in, with their supervisor, to discuss use of force guidelines.

On another note, I understand why bicycle cops in Tampa might wear shorts, but patrol cops in a vehicle with AC?

Jarlaxle wrote:Nothing...the thugs weren't there. (Video starts with them rolling up and getting out of the car.)

(a) I would have liked to see what if any interaction there was between the cop and the kid further down the block (as in if they yelled at him out the window to stop/get off the roadway and he didn't comply.

(b) the camera was not trained on the cop and the kid when they first made contact after the cop got out of the car (as in did the cop go to put his hands on the kid and did the kid resist in any way)

I'm not saying I like what I saw, and you know that there is no pro-police bias in me, but I am not seeing the entire interaction here, and I'm not going to assume they just picked some kid at random to grab and smash into the ground for no reason at all. It might not have been a good enough reason, but there was something happening that we did not see.

Scooter wrote:

Jarlaxle wrote:Nothing...the thugs weren't there. (Video starts with them rolling up and getting out of the car.)

(a) I would have liked to see what if any interaction there was between the cop and the kid further down the block (as in if they yelled at him out the window to stop/get off the roadway and he didn't comply.

(b) the camera was not trained on the cop and the kid when they first made contact after the cop got out of the car (as in did the cop go to put his hands on the kid and did the kid resist in any way)

I'm not saying I like what I saw, and you know that there is no pro-police bias in me, but I am not seeing the entire interaction here, and I'm not going to assume they just picked some kid at random to grab and smash into the ground for no reason at all. It might not have been a good enough reason, but there was something happening that we did not see.

Ditto, Scooter.  That's why I don't like videos that come from a person that is apparently on one side or the other and may have their own agenda or personal axe to grind — or, in this case, what seems like a bystander who comes onto the scene at the half-way point.  Now, if this was something from a "neutral", constantly-on dashcam or security camera on a nearby building that shows the lead-up or the interaction between the cops and the skateboarder, I would give that a great deal more gravitas than I would something like this.

I also don't like the number of cuts and skips in what we do see.  I'll take what I can get — anything is better than nothing — but if this is going to become a piece of evidence it should have been running constantly, without gaps or interruptions like on Nixon's White House tapes.  It seemed to me that the person making the video was more interested in showing up the cops ("You're gonna be on YouTube") than securing an unbiased evidential video.

-"BB"-

More reason that all cops should be required to wear body cameras, every second of every shift.

For sure, and none of this "oh it didn't function for those 30 seconds" bullshit. Any gap in the footage and you're fired, no hearing, no appeal.

Jarlaxle wrote:More reason that all cops should be required to wear body cameras, every second of every shift.

Scooter wrote:For sure, and none of this "oh it didn't function for those 30 seconds" bullshit. Any gap in the footage and you're fired, no hearing, no appeal.

The bodycam is a good idea that has been suggested before, and some places do have such a thing; but your suggestion, Scooter, is a little harsh.  Anything electrical or mechanical can and does break down or have interruptions — not to mention that it could be broken, damaged, or removed by the suspect in a scuffle like the one we saw on the video in question, and anyone with half a brain would understand that and have some sort of protocol set up to follow when (not if) that does occur.  For example, the patrol car must also be equipped with a dashcam which is running every second of every shift, and if the body-mounted device doesn't work the other device should provide some idea of what went on during the missing period.

Now, who's going to pay for all these digital cameras so that every cop on every shift in a city the size of Tampa — population 350K, with a police force of approximately 950 officers — has one?  And remember, this is just one single medium-sized city in one single state; care to guess how many you'd need to provide one to every cop on every police force in the country from NYC down to someplace like Rabbit Hash, KY?

Hey!!  Maybe we can make EVERYBODY wear a bodycam 24/7 — cops, crooks, cyclists, clergymen, construction workers; anybody, man, woman, or child — so that no matter what happens, when or to whom, someone has it in a recording.

-"BB"-

Poor lil angel. I am sure he did nothing wrong.
Love how the smug look morphed to panic as the reality of the situation starts to dawn on him.

BoSoxGal wrote:"...
On another note, I understand why bicycle cops in Tampa might wear shorts, but patrol cops in a vehicle with AC?

Because you never know when you're going to have to leap out of your bat-mobile and onto your bat-cycle and pedal off in a low-to-mid-speed chase of malodorous, malcontent, maundering, malefactors.


yrs,
rubato

Bicycle Bill wrote: "...

Hey!!  Maybe we can make EVERYBODY wear a bodycam 24/7 — cops, crooks, cyclists, clergymen, construction workers; anybody, man, woman, or child — so that no matter what happens, when or to whom, someone has it in a recording.

-"BB"-

That would clear everything right up, without the Zapruder film we would never know what happened in Dallas, am I right?


yrs,
rubato

Scooter wrote:For sure, and none of this "oh it didn't function for those 30 seconds" bullshit. Any gap in the footage and you're fired, no hearing, no appeal.

No: deactivating or obscuring it in any way, shape, or form should be a Federal felony carrying mandatory prison time.

Any gap in the footage and you're fired, no hearing, no appeal.

You're going to have to renegotiate a whole lot of police union collective bargaining agreements to pull that one off...

I could give a crap. If there was one thing for which I would expend the huge political capital involved in invoking our Constitution's notwithstanding clause, it would be to abolish the police unions and rip up every collective agreement with them.

Public employees should not be permitted to unionize.

No: deactivating or obscuring it in any way, shape, or form should be a Federal felony carrying mandatory prison time.

could President Ford pardon you?