Surveillance video doesn't answer victim's family's questions [More]Hey, he shouldn't have run.
They should have beat his ass harder.
They should have shot him.
Oh wait, wrong video.
See how he stopped and raised his hands to surrender?
No matter. I've seen updates where the department spokes"Only One" says everything was within justified procedure. So it must be OK.
Meaning it could never happen to you or me, right?
6 comments:
Running when the police shout and chase seems like a SURVIVAL instinct to me.
What IS it with transit cops lately? I guess since they're Tier Two of the Department of Homeland Security, every suspect is a terrorist until proven not a terrorist.
That Sgt. Urguhart is straight from Central Casting. There's one like him in every citizens-take-back-their-town movie.
"...every suspect is a terrorist until proven not a a terroist."
And if you die in the process, so much the better.
"No laws were broken" here folks - nothing to see, move on.
Gee, I wonder if a non-only one can shove someone's head into a wall without breaking any walls?
I have to agree with defender - if an armed gangster starts chasing someone, it seems like running away might be a good thing to do. We can see her what happens when and if you slow down or stop.
But at least the perp is getting a paid vacation from this.
This is not as egregious as most of these incidents we see. I can see why the cops may have thought they had a bad guy running. The shove he put on the victim was rather enthusiastic and didn't look necessary, but it also is standard procedure to take a suspect off his feet in order to control him and cuff him. This did happen in a chase and the cop was probably full tilt with very little time to realize the guy was giving up. The guy probably ran until he realized it was cops chasing him and knowing he wasn't doing anything wrong was relieved to find it was the cops. And the cop very well could have thought if he had the time to think at all between the suspect running and stopping that the man had stopped to fight.
This truly does look like an unintended result to me. There was no abuse of the victim at all after he was down, so I don't think this was a case of "street justice".
However, the city should still be liable as it was the actions of one of their agents that harmed an innocent man, unintended or not.
But in this case, I just cannot see the type of over the top behavior we are accustomed to seeing from cops.
I guess it is a good thing I have my own "procedures" that I live by. Anything I do to any criminal cops is "following procedures" and "justified", obviously. That means I won't punish myself, just like the JBTs. The only problem is that the JBTs will not honor my "procedures". I think it is high time we return the favor. Don't expect the mob to punish the mobsters. Since they have shown they are unwilling to do so, that is OUR job now.
Well, when the "ones" are in full CYA mode do they ever accuse themselves? Hmmm? Never! It's always "legal, standard procedure etc." Why? Because GOD doesn't have to admit he's wrong. It's your job to believe every bit o vomit that spews from their mouths all the while you're paying for it! Remember that nobody conveniently knows what exactly happened. Riiiiiigggghhhhhttt.
Post a Comment