Cop Sucker Punches Woman at Philadelphia Puerto Rican Day Parade

[#juan]

As near as I could tell, the woman got a split lip. I'm sure that a lawyer could find spinal injuries, concussion,
and probably a few others. The cop's looping right hook could have been an attempt to throw an arm around
to try and stop her but it will depend to some extent, on what the media do with it. The cop could be hung out
to dry. There were a lot of policemen standing around who could have helped but didn't.

 

[captain morgan]

I don't know what the law is surrounding police and silly string. Frankly, I don't really care. The end result of this altercation is what it is.

It's called assault.. You can probably add to that resisting arrest and a raft of other public disturbance style charges.

Gender has nothing to do with the fact that she broke a variety of laws

It sounds like they made a deal anyway... all her lawyer is asking for is a public apology.. she must have dropped her potential lawsuit in return for her charges disappearing.

Too bad she dropped the suit, maybe that might have motivated the cops to press the full range of charges against her. If convicted, she'd have a nasty little albatross around her neck to remind her of her temporary loss of reason

 

[B00Mer]

[youtube]5m2p-1JJPdA[/youtube]

Lately there have been a slew of videos coming out showing law enforcement officials using excessive force, and I don't use the word excessive lightly. In response, a new trend is starting to spread. In three states, it is now illegal to film an on duty police officer, even if the encounter involves you, and may be necessary to your defense....

 

[Ron in Regina]

[youtube]5m2p-1JJPdA[/youtube]

Lately there have been a slew of videos coming out showing law enforcement officials using excessive force, and I don't use the word excessive lightly. In response, a new trend is starting to spread. In three states, it is now illegal to film an on duty police officer, even if the encounter involves you, and may be necessary to your defense....

Not that shyte is scary, & how can it possible be justified?

 

[CDNBear]

... how can it possible be justified?

By people carefully editing video and using it to smear police officers unjustly.

 

[Ron in Regina]

By people carefully editing video and using it to smear police officers unjustly.

So you agree with this? Or are you just taking the position of devil's advocate?

 

[CDNBear]

So you agree with this? Or are you just taking the position of devil's advocate?

I agree and disagree.

I can fully appreciate why, but find it disturbing none the less.

 

[Ron in Regina]

That enters the next phase then, of the 'unedited' video being available
to the defense & prosecution (& media, if even part of it is released),
making the law irrelevant hopefully.

That also opens the door to police dash-cams, and public surveillance in
general from ATM's to traffic camera's in the event that they might catch
an officer in uniform in public preforming his/her duty.

This law, currently in these three unnamed stated, just has that inherently
'wrong' feel to me on a visceral level before I even try to rationalize the pro's
and con's for both sides of a debate on this.

 

[CDNBear]

That enters the next phase then, of the 'unedited' video being available
to the defense & prosecution (& media, if even part of it is released),
making the law irrelevant hopefully.

That also opens the door to police dash-cams, and public surveillance in
general from ATM's to traffic camera's in the event that they might catch
an officer in uniform in public preforming his/her duty.

This law, currently in these three unnamed stated, just has that inherently
'wrong' feel to me on a visceral level before I even try to rationalize the pro's
and con's for both sides of a debate on this.

As we see with the video in the OP. The officer was tried, convicted and sentenced before the mere thought of an investigation could take place.

Trial by media wins, always. Even in the long run, if you're able to vindicate yourself by trial or investigation, the damage is done.

 

[Ron in Regina]

....and the flip side of that coin. Without video, in the case of abuse, your word
equals nothing (& often less than nothing) without proof in conflict to what an
officer decides to put in a report, if a report is even made. It's ugly all the way
around.

 

[CDNBear]

It's ugly all the way around.

Yes it is.

 

[Goober]

You know, this cop may be a great guy. This may be his first mistake in 19 years. Unfortunately the event is indicative of how most police react today and it is wrong.

Do you have stats to back up a clearly off the wall post. Aside from not having any use for Police Officers?
You filling in for Cliffy?

 

[PoliticalNick]

I think I said it was a poor choice of action.

None the less, it's still assault. If we wanted to get technical actually, is assault by administering a noxious substance, in Canadian law.

Your attitude surrounding this event is a big part of the problem we have with cops assaulting the citizenry and getting away with it. Stop trying to justify his actions. Unless he was being physically assaulted by someone punching him his reaction was over the top and he deserves to be fired. These are just normal people like you and me who happen to wear a uniform at work. That uniform really gives them as much authority as a janitor's jumpsuit. I might have more sympathy if they upheld their first oath to be peace officers and serve the crown & the citizens. Most instead choose (or are trained) to ignore the primary oath and honor the second oath to the corporation of Canada making them glorified collection agents with a gun. I understand you might not recognize the difference but it is a big one. So until the cops themselves start recognizing what their true role in society is and acting accordingly I have no use for them and when they f*ck-up like this they should get nailed to the wall!

 

[captain morgan]

As we see with the video in the OP. The officer was tried, convicted and sentenced before the mere thought of an investigation could take place.

Trial by media wins, always. Even in the long run, if you're able to vindicate yourself by trial or investigation, the damage is done.

The court of public opinion does not operate based on the notion of innocent until proven guilty, mind you, it does seem to reward the mass demonstrations and illegal antics of protesters. Case in point, the G-8 summits have been nothing short of a week of anarchy in any of the cities where they have been held, yet there is more sympathy for the wrong-doers than there is for the poor cops & security that get to deal with the rampant crime, vandalism and theft

Your attitude surrounding this event is a big part of the problem we have with cops assaulting the citizenry and getting away with it.

This cop was provoked, and for the record, he didn't get away with anything. Many people think that he's getting fired for doing his job in (attempting) to detain a person that broke a variety of laws.

Stop trying to justify his actions.

Ironically, by not recognizing that this woman violated any laws; you are justifying her illegal actions.

Unless he was being physically assaulted by someone punching him his reaction was over the top and he deserves to be fired.

Assault isn't limited to punching. She could have spit at him and assaulted him equally as much as punching

So until the cops themselves start recognizing what their true role in society is and acting accordingly I have no use for them and when they f*ck-up like this they should get nailed to the wall!

You might think differently if you or a neighbour were the victim of a mugging or home invasion

 

[Goober]

Your attitude surrounding this event is a big part of the problem we have with cops assaulting the citizenry and getting away with it. Stop trying to justify his actions. Unless he was being physically assaulted by someone punching him his reaction was over the top and he deserves to be fired. These are just normal people like you and me who happen to wear a uniform at work. That uniform really gives them as much authority as a janitor's jumpsuit. I might have more sympathy if they upheld their first oath to be peace officers and serve the crown & the citizens. Most instead choose (or are trained) to ignore the primary oath and honor the second oath to the corporation of Canada making them glorified collection agents with a gun. I understand you might not recognize the difference but it is a big one. So until the cops themselves start recognizing what their true role in society is and acting accordingly I have no use for them and when they f*ck-up like this they should get nailed to the wall!

A Juror with a proven bias against the person they are to find innocent or guilty- should they be removed from the Jury? Yes or no is sufficent.

 

[PoliticalNick]

It's called assault.. You can probably add to that resisting arrest and a raft of other public disturbance style charges.

Gender has nothing to do with the fact that she broke a variety of laws



Too bad she dropped the suit, maybe that might have motivated the cops to press the full range of charges against her. If convicted, she'd have a nasty little albatross around her neck to remind her of her temporary loss of reason

Unlikely for them to press charges at all. The video speaks for itself. You guys can say she assaulted a cop til you are blue in the face but the facts remain the same. The police, as usual, were infringing upon peoples rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech. This precludes them from any protection they may have in the uniform as at the time they were breaking the law. Also, any jury is going to look at the situation with half a dozen or so police within feet and this large man using unneccessary force upon a small female and they will find in her favor (unless they move the trial to Simi Valley).

I know some of you seem to think that we who disagree with the govt and how society is operating have no right to protest but we do! We also have the right to escalate into whatever is required to maintain our rights to protest and be heard. If that means a full-scale armed revolt because the govt is oppressing the citizenry then so be it...it is allowed and expected and in the US is demanded by the second ammendment. So quit your whining about people who fight for your freedoms and rights and recognize a simple assault when you see it instead of just defending some moron in a uniform.

 

[CDNBear]

Your attitude surrounding this event is a big part of the problem we have with cops assaulting the citizenry and getting away with it.

You aren't capable of understanding my attitude towards this. You aren't smart enough.

Stop trying to justify his actions.

You quoted me saying it was a poor choice. Hence my previous observation.

Unless he was being physically assaulted by someone punching him his reaction was over the top and he deserves to be fired.

Nope. And if you ever were an Officer, you'd know that.

These are just normal people like you and me who happen to wear a uniform at work.

If you actually believed that, you'd be willing to give this officer the benefit of the doubt.

That uniform really gives them as much authority as a janitor's jumpsuit.

LOL, you really are an idiot.

So until the cops themselves start recognizing what their true role in society is and acting accordingly I have no use for them and when they f*ck-up like this they should get nailed to the wall!

No doubt. It comes as no surprise that due process is something you don't support.

 

[Ron in Regina]

You might think differently if you or a neighbour were the victim of a mugging or home invasion

...or an officer was under the impression that you (or your wife, or your daughter, etc...)
commited an act which you didn't, and assulted you (or your wife, or your child)...this
can go both ways, and some of us have been on the wrong side of the coin in the 'court
of the not so public opinion' where you just pray that video comes forward to vidicate
things, and it doesn't. That's a different story for another time though.

 

[PoliticalNick]

By people carefully editing video and using it to smear police officers unjustly.

Or by the people that control the cops or the cops themselves not wanting to be caught breaking the law. We know it happens, to deny that police can break the law is stupidity. We, as citizens, should be demanding that all cops are filmed all the time to ensure they are doing their job properly and not overstepping the boundaries.

 

[CDNBear]

The police, as usual, were infringing upon peoples rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

LMAO.

No they had detained someone for public drunkenness I believe, and the "protesters" began attacking them, lol.

We also have the right to escalate into whatever is required to maintain our rights to protest and be heard.

No you don't.

If that means a full-scale armed revolt because the govt is oppressing the citizenry then so be it...it is allowed and expected and in the US is demanded by the second ammendment. So quit your whining about people who fight for your freedoms and rights and recognize a simple assault when you see it instead of just defending some moron in a uniform.

You really are an idiot, lol.

Or by the people that control the cops or the cops themselves not wanting to be caught breaking the law.

LOL...

We know it happens, to deny that police can break the law is stupidity.

That's probably why I've never said it. Although it surprises me you haven't.

We, as citizens, should be demanding that all cops are filmed all the time to ensure they are doing their job properly and not overstepping the boundaries.

So long as the video has a manageable chain of evidence.