Politics

[Brent in Az]

I subscribe to this civil rights lawyers channel.
All types of scenarios of cops getting out of line,.
He sues the shit out of many departments.

 

[BJH65]

No need for the ride along. I'm perfectly aware of how people are.

Really more for a better understanding of how officers operate during a shift and the tactics employed. I don’t believe the OPD officer intended to inflict any injuries on the suspect. I recall one event back when I was working, an Hispanic gang member fired a sawed off shotgun into a rival gang members home then took off on foot.

Our helicopter was able to locate the suspect and vector me to him. A foot chase ensued. I did not see the suspect holding the shotgun but still assumed he was armed. I was able to overtake the suspect and stiff arm him forward, pushing him to the ground. Unfortunately, he did not block the fall with his hands and his face impacted the concrete sidewalk.

While handcuffing him I noticed a large pool of blood seeping outwards from the sidewalk from his face. I tentatively turned him over and his face kind of looked like a mashed up pizza with broken teeth floating in the blood. I honestly felt bad. I certainly didn’t intend for that to happen. The forced used was reasonable however.

 

[CJW]

you don't treat people differently because of the way they look...

You're getting on your high horse acting like myself or anyone else is saying that an officer can't or isn't legally allowed to arrest a law breaker. No f'ing way! We're just saying that instead of flinging this guy around and smashing his head into the pavement, tell him he's under arrest, grab his wrist, twist it behind his back if he resists and put on the damn cuffs. Slamming him as a first course of action earned the cop whatever is coming his way just like slapping the cops arm earned an arrest and even some manhandling if necessary.

Most here are very well aware of people's nature and most probably know a cop of two who has been in an extremely dangerous situation, hurt or even killed in the line of duty.

Everyone's actions matter and as a cop, so does the the publics perception of you whether you like it or not.

 

[mdwest]

I subscribe to this civil rights lawyers channel.
All types of scenarios of cops getting out of line,.
He sues the shit out of many departments.

the key there is SUES...

civil liabilty.. not criminal..

 

[Brent in Az]

the key there is SUES...

civil liabilty.. not criminal..

He also exposes them for what they've done, and has gotten many terminated. Many have tried to get his channel taken down, to no avail.
I applaud him

 

[mdwest]

You're getting on your high horse acting like myself or anyone else is saying that an officer can't or isn't legally allowed to arrest a law breaker. No f'ing way! We're just saying that instead of flinging this guy around and smashing his head into the pavement, tell him he's under arrest, grab his wrist, twist it behind his back if he resists and put on the damn cuffs. Slamming him as a first course of action earned the cop whatever is coming his way just like slapping the cops arm earned an arrest and even some manhandling if necessary.

Most here are very well aware of people's nature and most probably know a cop of two who has been in an extremely dangerous situation, hurt or even killed in the line of duty.

Everyone's actions matter and as a cop, so does the the publics perception of you whether you like it or not.

I hear what youre saying..

its easy to Monday morning quarterback... its easy to offer a litany of "what if" scenarios..

there is a reason the supreme court heard the Graham v Conner case.. because it is indeed easy for everyone else that wasn't there, wasn't personally involved, etc.. to have an opinion, a perspective, etc..

the supreme court says the only perspective that matters is the officers.. (criminally)...

the problem is its never as "easy" as people think.. if we're going to "what if" this.. what if the officer grabs Vu's wrist and twists it, and breaks Vu's wrist (he's a frail old man).. "what if" when trying to grab a wrist (a proper wrist lock is NOT easy to apply unless you already have some measure of upper body control) Vu pivots and tries to run, gets into traffic, and gets hit by a car?..

while those scenarios may sound ridiculous.. they are just a couple of possibilities.. (there are hundreds of things that can go wrong in any scenario).. and those very scenarios have happened countless times in other cases..

the officer did at the time what he thought he needed to do.. he had a split second to make a decision.. the USSC says the courts can only consider things from his vantage point and perspective at the time of the incident.. and the law says his intent matters..

public opinion certainly matters.. public opinion is what gets mayors elected, chiefs of police appointed, budgets approved, etc.. in addition to influencing future interaction between police and citizens..

public opinion should have no place in the execution of the law however.... or whether or not the officer committed a "crime".. the law is the only thing that matters there (or should)

 

[BJH65]

You're getting on your high horse acting like myself or anyone else is saying that an officer can't or isn't legally allowed to arrest a law breaker. No f'ing way! We're just saying that instead of flinging this guy around and smashing his head into the pavement, tell him he's under arrest, grab his wrist, twist it behind his back if he resists and put on the damn cuffs. Slamming him as a first course of action earned the cop whatever is coming his way just like slapping the cops arm earned an arrest and even some manhandling if necessary.

Most here are very well aware of people's nature and most probably know a cop of two who has been in an extremely dangerous situation, hurt or even killed in the line of duty.

Everyone's actions matter and as a cop, so does the the publics perception of you whether you like it or not.

While I’m sympathetic to your thoughts on this situation, regarding arrest control it’s best that you refrain from commenting on specific arrest control techniques unless you have training and experience. It’s extremely difficult and often impossible to handcuff a resisting suspect without assistance. Yes the suspect looks frail enough but you would be surprised, if someone doesn’t want to be cuffed it’s very difficult and if only one cuff is latched it then becomes a weapon being flung around.

I’m not sure what your line of work is, but let me tell you everything you need to know about your job. I certainly don’t mean to offend any AH members, but unless they worked in law enforcement, most don’t have a clue regarding the job. Legitimate use of force is often shocking and unacceptable to civilians that have no law enforcement background, no law enforcement experience and training. You often hear comments, “Why didn’t they shoot him in the leg?” Regarding a lethal force situation.

Certainly you and everybody else are entitled to your opinions. Knowing a cop who has experienced lethal force situations, unspeakable tragedies and line of duty deaths is completely different than actually experiencing these situations yourself, I assure you it would give you a different perspective.

 

[BJH65]

He also exposes them for what they've done, and has gotten many terminated. Many have tried to get his channel taken down, to no avail.
I applaud him

It’s a very lucrative business. ADA shakedown lawsuits and suing law enforcement organizations, especially prisons and custodial facilities is quite lucrative for them. Many of these attorneys are vermin.

I’m not opposed to videoing custodial institutions, police body cams, police vehicle cams for everything. Full transparency. I believe it does more help than harm for law enforcement and corrections. Funny that the ACLU wants to put limits on this, wouldn’t want to depict the entire story, just what makes the officers look bad.

 

[CJW]

I hear what youre saying..

its easy to Monday morning quarterback... its easy to offer a litany of "what if" scenarios..

there is a reason the supreme court heard the Graham v Conner case.. because it is indeed easy for everyone else that wasn't there, wasn't personally involved, etc.. to have an opinion, a perspective, etc..

the supreme court says the only perspective that matters is the officers.. (criminally)...

the problem is its never as "easy" as people think.. if we're going to "what if" this.. what if the officer grabs Vu's wrist and twists it, and breaks Vu's wrist (he's a frail old man).. "what if" when trying to grab a wrist (a proper wrist lock is NOT easy to apply unless you already have some measure of upper body control) Vu pivots and tries to run, gets into traffic, and gets hit by a car?..

You're not wrong and I don't think I'm wrong. My point is that a broken wrist, which I knew someone would bring up and ver valid point, is far better than Vu's current physical situation and the cop's current situation. Getting loose and running into traffic seems very unlikely given the cop vs Vu's physical capabilities. Frankly I've seen things like that play out before. Usually the suspect only gets so much sympathy in that scenario. Just seems like this cop went from zero to ten.

while those scenarios may sound ridiculous.. they are just a couple of possibilities.. (there are hundreds of things that can go wrong in any scenario).. and those very scenarios have happened countless times in other cases.

the officer did at the time what he thought he needed to do.. he had a split second to make a decision..

This is the problem. We just here that he did what he needed to do and only had a split second to react. It just doesn't seem realistic or logical to most people.

the USSC says the courts can only consider things from his vantage point and perspective at the time of the incident.. and the law says his intent matters..

public opinion certainly matters.. public opinion is what gets mayors elected, chiefs of police appointed, budgets approved, etc.. in addition to influencing future interaction between police and citizens..

public opinion should have no place in the execution of the law however.... or whether or not the officer committed a "crime".. the law is the only thing that matters there (or should)

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I can't imagine what it would be like to be a LEO in this day and age. Especially in what appear to be routine traffic stops, vis-a-vis the video of the officers that were killed that @mdwest posted. So I'm very reluctant to give an opinion with no experience whatsoever as to the right/wrong of the officers actions in the OK incident.

Having said that, I see a couple of things I'd comment about.

First, I have at least two incidents in my lifetime where I guess I got out of a ticket I deserved. The first time was when I was pulled over by an officer who was driving one of those D.A.R.E. cars you may have seen. D.A.R.E. standing for Drug Abuse Resistance Education. My wife and I were on our way to dinner and a Santana concert, first time we'd had a date night in quite awhile. My parents were with us on their annual winter escape from my brother's house in New York. I had actually passed the cop and was completely oblivious. Fact is I wasn't going that fast, but the people next to the cop kept looking at me and back at him. He told me this after I'd stopped. I kind of chuckled, not in a disrespectful way but just at my own dumb luck. So I said to the officer, "So you had pull me over mostly for P.R. reasons. He affirmed that. I then said, "Well officer, I can't and won't argue with you, truth is I've no idea how fast I was going. So if you have to give me a ticket, I understand you're just doing your job." As it turned out he was going home from having given a lecture at some school and forgot his ticket book at the school. He explained that and didn't really want to write me one anyway, and said to just slow down and enjoy the evening.

The second incident in the middle of nowhere in Arizona when I was hastily driving my father-in-law's truck back to Dallas. He and my MIL were visiting when my FIL died unexpectedly. I was doing probably 75 in a 60mph zone. I explained to the officer the situation but again in a respectful way. I knew I was speeding and he had me dead to rights, but given the situation and I think also how I handled it, he let me go with no ticket.

I think if this elderly man in OK had handled the situation a bit different, he most certainly would not have been taken to the ground, maybe he even gets out of the ticket.

Having said that, the optics of this looks horrible. I would not be surprised if in a civil court, the police department ends up making a big payout to the man. Right or wrong, that's just the nature of how things are at least in the USA.

Again I'm not going to say whether the officer was in compliance with protocols and the law, that's for someone else to decide and apparently has been.

But when a 70 year old man gets flung to the ground and requires being hospitalized for injuries caused by the incident and it's over an illegal U-turn, that is just not going to play well in civil court for either the officer or the department.

 

[mdwest]

Completely agree with all of that Phil.

My guess is Vu thought by being defiant the officer would relent, not wanting to deal with him, and let him go…

I’ve never understood that, but I’ve seen it hundreds of times personally… it never ends that way…

Had Vu behaved differently I am 100% certain things would have gone down differently… he would have gotten his ticket, and frankly there’s a pretty good chance that had he contested it in court like the offer suggested, he’d have gotten out of it.. and that would be the end of the story..

I’m going to go back to there are things here we don’t know… like why Vu and the passenger are out of the car.. that is NOT typical for a u-turn traffic stop… and not something many officers are going to allow to go unchecked unless the officer specifically ordered Vu out of the car… which would mean there’s something else going on here (could be a number of things… but none of them positive)..

What it suggests to me is Vu very likely was already intentionally refusing to follow lawful orders (like “stay in the car sir”… or “get back in the car sir”…)… and continued to escalate the situation despite the offers attempt to simply give him a ticket and send him on his way…

No one should read me wrong… I’m not advocating cracking the vertebrae in a 70 year old man’s back for refusing to sign a traffic ticket or for touching a cop..

What I’ve been saying is Vu was clearly wrong on many levels on many things… the officer responded to Vu’s actions the way his department trained him to (empty hand control tactics) and the way OK law allows… there was from what the AGs investigation revealed no intent for Vu to be harmed the way he was… it simply happened.. which means there is no criminal liability…

The optics are terrible.. that’s a given..

But the optics are not the same thing as the law…

Had Vu been a 30 year old white male, this conversation would have never taken place…

But the law doesn’t discriminate… what applies to 30 year old white guys also applies to 70 year old Asian guys.. and 20 year old black females.. and 50 year old native Americans..

Justice, by its design is supposed to be blind..

 

[wesheltonj]

. . . But the law doesn’t discriminate… what applies to 30 year old white guys also applies to 70 year old Asian guys.. and 20 year old black females.. and 50 year old native Americans..

Justice, by its design is supposed to be blind..

But juries do.

 

[mdwest]

But juries do.

Civil trial juries absolutely do..

Completely concur

It appears the AH jury does as well lol

 

[CJW]

While I’m sympathetic to your thoughts on this situation, regarding arrest control it’s best that you refrain from commenting on specific arrest control techniques unless you have training and experience. It’s extremely difficult and often impossible to handcuff a resisting suspect without assistance. Yes the suspect looks frail enough but you would be surprised, if someone doesn’t want to be cuffed it’s very difficult and if only one cuff is latched it then becomes a weapon being flung around.

I'm a tax paying American citizen who might possibly be subjected to the ridiculous actions of garbage cops. I'll comment if I see fit. Especially in this case where it must have taken years of training to learn this technique. That's sarcasm.

PO's are no different than anything else in life. They can be in the wrong too even if some of them take offense.

At best this guy belongs behind a desk. Definitely not in public and should be fired.

I’m not sure what your line of work is, but let me tell you everything you need to know about your job. I certainly don’t mean to offend any AH members, but unless they worked in law enforcement, most don’t have a clue regarding the job. Legitimate use of force is often shocking and unacceptable to civilians that have no law enforcement background, no law enforcement experience and training. You often hear comments, “Why didn’t they shoot him in the leg?” Regarding a lethal force situation.

Certainly you and everybody else are entitled to your opinions. Knowing a cop who has experienced lethal force situations, unspeakable tragedies and line of duty deaths is completely different than actually experiencing these situations yourself, I assure you it would give you a different perspective.

With all due respect, some of us aren't simpletons and we're fully aware of how the world works and we don't need to be PO's or do ride along's to have a clue about the job.

BTW the gang member earned what he got that day. That's what happens when you are dangerous and force someone to stop you on the run. He didn't necessarily deserve it but that's how the situation played out due to his stupidity. Maybe his jacked up teeth served as a positive reminder later in life.

 

[mdwest]

You and the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma… a former USAF officer, graduate of Georgetowns law school (a top rated school), with 30 years of experience prosecuting criminals as an Asst AG before becoming that states top law enforcement official, clearly disagree on this officer… you also disagree with the FOP President that has more than 20 years of law enforcement experience in Oklahoma… and you also disagree with the OCPD Chief that is keeping him employed who has 32 years on the job in the same city..

I suppose your opinion is more valuable and more accurate than theirs combined…

If you look at trends in American law enforcement.. this sort of unity in command when it comes to officers actions in question isn’t common….

Look at what happened in Minneapolis… Ferguson, and other locations… the agencies and police administration turn on their officers as often as not

There is a reason they are standing behind him

 

[CJW]

Completely agree with all of that Phil.

My guess is Vu thought by being defiant the officer would relent, not wanting to deal with him, and let him go…

I’ve never understood that, but I’ve seen it hundreds of times personally… it never ends that way…

Had Vu behaved differently I am 100% certain things would have gone down differently… he would have gotten his ticket, and frankly there’s a pretty good chance that had he contested it in court like the offer suggested, he’d have gotten out of it.. and that would be the end of the story..

I’m going to go back to there are things here we don’t know… like why Vu and the passenger are out of the car.. that is NOT typical for a u-turn traffic stop… and not something many officers are going to allow to go unchecked unless the officer specifically ordered Vu out of the car… which would mean there’s something else going on here (could be a number of things… but none of them positive)..

What it suggests to me is Vu very likely was already intentionally refusing to follow lawful orders (like “stay in the car sir”… or “get back in the car sir”…)… and continued to escalate the situation despite the offers attempt to simply give him a ticket and send him on his way…

No one should read me wrong… I’m not advocating cracking the vertebrae in a 70 year old man’s back for refusing to sign a traffic ticket or for touching a cop..

What I’ve been saying is Vu was clearly wrong on many levels on many things… the officer responded to Vu’s actions the way his department trained him to (empty hand control tactics) and the way OK law allows… there was from what the AGs investigation revealed no intent for Vu to be harmed the way he was… it simply happened.. which means there is no criminal liability…

The optics are terrible.. that’s a given..

But the optics are not the same thing as the law…

Had Vu been a 30 year old white male, this conversation would have never taken place…

That's disingenuous at best.

Let's keep at least one parameter the same. Say it was a 70 year old white man.

But the law doesn’t discriminate… what applies to 30 year old white guys also applies to 70 year old Asian guys.. and 20 year old black females.. and 50 year old native Americans..

Justice, by its design is supposed to be blind..

 

[mdwest]

That not disingenuous… you’re missing the point…

The point is the law doesn’t care about your age.. sex.. skin color.. religion… or anything else…

You’re upset because the man is old..

The law could care less about his age..

Nor does the departments policy

Or its training programs…

 

[CJW]

You and the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma… a former USAF officer, graduate of Georgetowns law school (a top rated school), with 30 years of experience prosecuting criminals as an Asst AG before becoming that states top law enforcement official, clearly disagree on this officer… you also disagree with the FOP President that has more than 20 years of law enforcement experience in Oklahoma… and you also disagree with the OCPD Chief that is keeping him employed who has 32 years on the job in the same city..

I suppose your opinion is more valuable and more accurate than theirs combined…

If you look at trends in American law enforcement.. this sort of unity in command when it comes to officers actions in question isn’t common….

Look at what happened in Minneapolis… Ferguson, and other locations… the agencies and police administration turn on their officers as often as not

There is a reason they are standing behind him

I indeed do disagree with them. I see a cop in no danger get pissed off at being told to shut up and slammed a man to the ground in response.

Maybe it will eventually come out that the man threatened him and was somehow an immediate and imminent threat but there hasn't been a word uttered in that direction.

 

[wesheltonj]

I subscribe to this civil rights lawyers channel.
All types of scenarios of cops getting out of line,.
He sues the shit out of many departments.

Perfect example of you can beat the charge, but you can't beat the ride.

 

[CJW]

That not disingenuous… you’re missing the point…

The point is the law doesn’t care about your age.. sex.. skin color.. religion… or anything else…

You’re upset because the man is old..

The law could care less about his age..

Nor does the departments policy

Or its training programs…

You said that if it was a 30 yr old white guy that nobody would have cared. It's untrue and a cop out which is also why you brought race into it.

Here's a simple question that might bring our views into clearer light.

Do you think this guy showed good enough judgement and emotional control to keep his job?