Cop Sucker Punches Woman at Philadelphia Puerto Rican Day Parade

[PoliticalNick]

I disagree.

So you are saying it is ok for criminals to be cops?? I don't get it?

Hmmm,

Let us think for a minute....

Someone comes up to you in the street and sprays silly string on you, You in turn punch them in the face splitting their lip and knocking them to the ground. I am thinking you will spend a lot of money on a good lawyer to get off from the assault charges laid against you for the unmitigated response.

So why should it be different for a cop?

 

[captain morgan]

And if they acted according to their oath as "Peace Officers" they could accomplish that without promoting conflict with a different group of citizens.

You still haven't addressed that the protestors may have been violating the rights of others.

Seeing how you've got your panties in a bunch over 'rights' - why are you evading the issue that the protestors trampled the rights of others?

Yep, you have the right to be a moron and approve the governmental oppression of any group who disagrees with them.

Thanks for the tip and it's especially good to see that you exercise that right at (apparently) your every waking moment

So sorry but you are still under the mistaken impression that a cop has a right to order me to move from a sidewalk or a park or wherever when I have committed no crimes. You are sadly mistaken. In fact I don't even legally have to provide my name or even speak to a cop unless he arrests me lawfully. Learn what your rights really are surrounding police and you will see in most situations the cops break the law, commit assault, and always give unlawful orders which need not be followed.

I'll take that under advisement, but thanks all the same Matlock

 

[gerryh]

So sorry but you are still under the mistaken impression that a cop has a right to order me to move from a sidewalk or a park or wherever when I have committed no crimes. You are sadly mistaken. In fact I don't even legally have to provide my name or even speak to a cop unless he arrests me lawfully. Learn what your rights really are surrounding police and you will see in most situations the cops break the law, commit assault, and always give unlawful orders which need not be followed.

Yup, you have that bang on. Case in point. When I was 19 years old, Langley BC had a curfew for those under 16. I was in front of one of the local pizza joints at about 1:30 in the a.m. waiting for my brother to get off work when a cop came screaming onto the side walk with his cruiser and slammed his brakes on. He jumped out and demanded to know why I was there. He wanted to know where I lived, I told him over that way. He wanted ID, told him I didn't have any. He informed me that there was a curfew, I informed him I was 18 and it didn't apply to me. He told me he wanted me off the streets, I told him I didn't have to be and I was doing nothing wrong. He informed me I had half an hour to be out of the downtown core and if he saw me again he would arrest me. I informed him that I could stand right there all night if I so wished and HE had no right to tell me to go home or any thing else. He got pissy, jumped back in his car and screamed away. A half hour later I waived to the prick as he drove by and glared at me.

 

[DaSleeper]

Question for anyone: You are having a possible heart attack on a sidewalk, an ambulance is called, and the ambulance attendants are purposely prevented by a crowd of onlookers from doing their job to try and save your life....

What should these onlookers be charged with?....should the police just say please and pretty please???? in performing their duty to clear the crowd???

 

[CDNBear]

I don't get it?

That's painfully obvious to everyone.

Let us think for a minute....

We've been waiting for you to do just that.

Someone comes up to you in the street and sprays silly string on you, You in turn punch them in the face splitting their lip and knocking them to the ground. I am thinking you will spend a lot of money on a good lawyer to get off from the assault charges laid against you for the unmitigated response.

BS.

It's assault, if to stop them from continuing that assault, you are forced to hit or subdue them in some way, you are legally allowed to do so.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Question for anyone: You are having a possible heart attack on a sidewalk, an ambulance is called, and the ambulance attendants are purposely prevented by a crowd of onlookers from doing their job to try and save your life....

What should these onlookers be charged with?....should the police just say please and pretty please???? in performing their duty to clear the crowd???

Obviously your argument hinges on the "purposeful" denial of medical care to you. This, of course could be an offense under a variety of different charges from public mischief to attempted murder and even murder if you succumb to the heart attack.

I wouldn't think police would be needed to clear a crowd in a medical emergency though. Even the hard-core anti-government types I know would not interfere with medical treatment when it is required.

That's painfully obvious to everyone.

We've been waiting for you to do just that.

BS.

It's assault, if to stop them from continuing that assault, you are forced to hit or subdue them in some way, you are legally allowed to do so.

You might be that much of a pussy to call silly string an assault but most of us aren't.

What if I subdue them with my .44 because they won't stop....that is allowed right?

 

[Goober]

Obviously your argument hinges on the "purposeful" denial of medical care to you. This, of course could be an offense under a variety of different charges from public mischief to attempted murder and even murder if you succumb to the heart attack.

I wouldn't think police would be needed to clear a crowd in a medical emergency though. Even the hard-core anti-government types I know would not interfere with medical treatment when it is required.



You might be that much of a pussy to call silly string an assault but most of us aren't.

What if I subdue them with my .44 because they won't stop....that is allowed right?

Attemtped Murder or Murder charges would not stand past the day they went to trial.

 

[CDNBear]

You might be that much of a pussy to call silly string an assault but most of us aren't.

If you were ever an officer of the law, which has become quite clear you weren't, you would know the law.

What if I subdue them with my .44 because they won't stop....that is allowed right?

Only because you're an idiot, and a liar, lol.

Obviously your argument hinges on the "purposeful" denial of medical care to you. This, of course could be an offense under a variety of different charges from public mischief to attempted murder and even murder if you succumb to the heart attack.

What about purposely attacking officers while they perform their duty?

I wouldn't think police would be needed to clear a crowd in a medical emergency though.

How do they do that using your logic?

 

[DaSleeper]

Obviously your argument hinges on the "purposeful" denial of medical care to you. This, of course could be an offense under a variety of different charges from public mischief to attempted murder and even murder if you succumb to the heart attack.

I wouldn't think police would be needed to clear a crowd in a medical emergency though. Even the hard-core anti-government types I know would not interfere with medical treatment when it is required.



You might be that much of a pussy to call silly string an assault but most of us aren't.

What if I subdue them with my .44 because they won't stop....that is allowed right?

More convoluted deflection....which is why I...........

[

 

[PoliticalNick]

If you were ever an officer of the law, which has become quite clear you weren't, you would know the law.

I do know it, that is why I mock your response. I know that I cannot use excessive or extreme force in any situation that does not require it. I know I can only respond with a 'similar' level of aggression. That means I don't get to punch your lights out because you threw water at me. I might want to but I cannot lawfully do it.

What about purposely attacking officers while they perform their duty?

Depends on which duty. If they are acting as peace officers they would not likely get attacked. When they act as armed agents of the corporation of Canada they are succeptable to anything as they do not work for the citizenry at that point.

You do know the difference between a Peace Officer and a Police Officer don't you?

 

[CDNBear]

More convoluted deflection....which is why I...........

Meh, they help waste time.

I'm off to do a tat, ttfn.

I do know it, that is why I mock your response.

You mock it because you're an idiot and a liar, who doesn't know the law, or how it's applied.

I know that I cannot use excessive or extreme force in any situation that does not require it. I know I can only respond with a 'similar' level of aggression. That means I don't get to punch your lights out because you threw water at me. I might want to but I cannot lawfully do it.

That's not why she was hit. She was hit because the officer thought she was the assailant, and she was attempting to get away.

Another reason I fully believe you are lying about ever being an MP.

Depends on which duty. If they are acting as peace officers they would not likely get attacked. When they act as armed agents of the corporation of Canada they are succeptable to anything as they do not work for the citizenry at that point.

Your nuttery has been previously noted.

You do know the difference between a Peace Officer and a Police Officer don't you?

Police officers are peace officers.

In Canada any public sector employee whose primary duties are the enforcement of law, is a peace officer.

The implication you just made only strengthens my observation.

I'd love top stay and watch you dig your own hole deeper and deeper, but I really must get this tat started, ttfn.

 

[Ron in Regina]

IF the cop approached me and wanted to question me regarding the 'act' - I wouldn't run off and give them all the more reason to take a more aggressive tactic.

With respect Ron, the jails are filled with the 'innocent'.

How could society possibly operate a police/security force if they were prohibited from investigating illegal acts?

Let say the Officer starts with an aggressive act, no questioning involved. You
don't run, but simply go with the motions and go to the ground in cooperation
while waiting for an explanation. A couple of pot-shots to you and some
expletives directed at you with some threats, but no explanation.
What then? No questions and no investigation. Just an assault.
I've been there, & I didn't resist anything 'till I'd had enough.

At that point, I just stood up, and shrugged a couple of times until the officer
slid off my back, and told them to get the **** off my lawn. It took them twenty
minutes or so of much swearing and threats on their part, and my lawyers wife
arriving (my lawyer was out'a town and they thought she was my lawyer) to get
them to leave. It was totally surreal and I know it totally sounds like fiction, but it
was real & I was sooooo hoping one of the neighbours was videotaping this, but
no such luck. Without video it's my word against theirs, which means my word
is worthless. Been there, experienced that, and didn't even get the T-shirt.

If I didn't (literally) stand up for myself, and my lawyers wife didn't arrive when
she did, I would have been one of those 'innocents' in jail that you refer to. It
happens, & I'm no bleeding heart liberal by anyone's yard stick, but not
everyone behind bars belongs there or initiated the act that put them there,
with all due respect. Anyway, sorry for the sidetrack.

 

[SLM]

I can recall seeing a former police officer on the news one night, many years back, discussing this very thing, the trend of the public videoing the police. He was very much for it, for both the possibility to be able to exonerate officers against claims of police brutality as well as the fact that if the police are mindful of being watched, it's added incentive to conduct themselves accordingly. I wish I could remember his name, I'd like to see if I could come up with a video clip, unfortunately I cannot.

The danger in these videos is that it provides the viewing public with an impression that all officers of the law conduct themselves in the same manner, they do not. The vast majority of them act appropriately, but the more these videos are out there, the less the public has trust and faith in the police, the more the police close ranks and the thin blue line becomes a little thicker. It's a vicious cycle.

Having said that however, if the conduct of an officer is definitively excessive, and I don't mean as 'we' determine it to be in some YouTube video, but as a conclusion reached after an impartial investigation, that officer needs to be removed from duty. Whether it's a permanent removal or not may well depend upon the situation but it is necessary. I understand that the police are human and humans make mistakes but each and every time they are not sufficiently penalized for their actions (and I do think they owe a much higher standard of care than the general public too), that trust that we need to have in our police officers is eroded that little bit more. In the end, it helps one person (the office in question)when there is no penalty or consequence but it is detrimental to every other office as well as the general public.

 

[PoliticalNick]

That thin blue line is probably the biggest issue here. If the culture in the police forces was to out the bad apples instead of hiding and protecting them I believe the public trust would be a lot greater. I also think that an independent board of inquiry should be in place everywhere as the police won't police themselves. The idea of letting cops investigate cops is ludicrous. A civilian board is the best bet.

I also cannot reiterate enough that any police officer found guilty of any criminal offense should be fired immediately. Not only does it bring into question the force he/she works for but every case they ever touch or come close to would have to be tossed out because a first year law student would have no problem discrediting the individual and painting a picture of corruption and misdeeds.

I know it sounds harsh to destroy a career over 1 mistake but that is the standard required from the police. If they are not above reproach they cannot do their job.

That's not why she was hit. She was hit because the officer thought she was the assailant, and she was attempting to get away.

Considering the weapon of choice was water and possibly silly string his reaction is still excessive and he should be treated accordingly. I don't care if he loses 19 years of pension and winds up divorced & homeless, might make the next cop think before he throws a punch at a citizen.

Police officers are peace officers.

So you don't know the difference....as I thought.

In Canada any public sector employee whose primary duties are the enforcement of law, is a peace officer.

Sorry, you are incorrect and have been eliminated from the competition. Better luck in the next life.

 

[DaSleeper]

That thin blue line is probably the biggest issue here. If the culture in the police forces was to out the bad apples instead of hiding and protecting them I believe the public trust would be a lot greater. I also think that an independent board of inquiry should be in place everywhere as the police won't police themselves. The idea of letting cops investigate cops is ludicrous. A civilian board is the best bet.

I also cannot reiterate enough that any police officer found guilty of any criminal offense should be fired immediately. Not only does it bring into question the force he/she works for but every case they ever touch or come close to would have to be tossed out because a first year law student would have no problem discrediting the individual and painting a picture of corruption and misdeeds.

I know it sounds harsh to destroy a career over 1 mistake but that is the standard required from the police. If they are not above reproach they cannot do their job.


Considering the weapon of choice was water and possibly silly string his reaction is still excessive and he should be treated accordingly. I don't care if he loses 19 years of pension and winds up divorced & homeless, might make the next cop think before he throws a punch at a citizen.


So you don't know the difference....as I thought.


Sorry, you are incorrect and have been eliminated from the competition. Better luck in the next life.

Why don't you quit blowing smoke and prove those statements that you made....

"I'm right because I say so" just doesn't cut it!

 

[gopher]

When I watched the video (The short clip that is available and there must be more) the officer's arm was swinging around her to restrain her, moved too fast and hit her in the face, Sucker punch would have been on the back of her head.
He could have even hit her with an open hand, for what we can see......
Videos are two dimensional and show only what the cameraman wants you to see.
I seem to recall a while back about a seemingly "innocent" woman at a Ron or Rand Paul rally....

So I'll save my opinion until more is known

A bloodied face is more than ample proof of sucker punch. Next time she and the others there need to assert their 2d Amendment rights and be fully armed to the teeth just like the Black Panthers in Houston. This way they will show the government who's really boss.

 

[shadowshiv]

Not sure I get these unions either. He is a cop who committed a crime. Don't know about you but as I see it that's where it ends. If they were to only suspend him like his union lackey suggests could you imagine the line up to have him arrest you...."your honor we cannot believe a word this criminal says in accusing my client, I move for complete dismissal".

Whatever happened to the premise in our society that people in positions of trust & authority are held to a higher standard? Seems to me that the cops & pols are now held to a much lower standard than the rest of us.

A lot of issues like this with the cops comes directly from their quasi-military training. They teach them how to punch & kick and mace but it would seem they don't teach them how to talk politely and reduce the need for force.



(vulgarity removed) and pay attention. She didn't attack anyone! The cop, as is normal these days, decided he could assault anyone within range because he got a wittle wet. ******** Pigs! Far too many like him today and firing is too good for his a$$. Let her hit him in the mouth with a brick.

Have you forgotten the message from Andem asking that the language in the non-Member forums be toned down? If you did not read it, I am letting you know here. Tone down the language.

 

[CDNBear]

Let say the Officer starts with an aggressive act, no questioning involved. You
don't run, but simply go with the motions and go to the ground in cooperation
while waiting for an explanation. A couple of pot-shots to you and some
expletives directed at you with some threats, but no explanation.
What then? No questions and no investigation. Just an assault.
I've been there, & I didn't resist anything 'till I'd had enough.

At that point, I just stood up, and shrugged a couple of times until the officer
slid off my back, and told them to get the **** off my lawn. It took them twenty
minutes or so of much swearing and threats on their part, and my lawyers wife
arriving (my lawyer was out'a town and they thought she was my lawyer) to get
them to leave. It was totally surreal and I know it totally sounds like fiction, but it
was real & I was sooooo hoping one of the neighbours was videotaping this, but
no such luck. Without video it's my word against theirs, which means my word
is worthless. Been there, experienced that, and didn't even get the T-shirt.

I once met a couple officers that really didn't like me coming into their jurisdiction, selling dope, being a goon or otherwise up to zero good. Even though whenever they had contact with me, I was polite, not aggressive and called them sir.

The first couple time they rousted me, they just took my kit and sent me packing.

When that didn't work, they took me to Cherry St, handcuffed me to a tree, that's still there in Clarke Beach Park, and laid a beating to me. Two or three times if I remember correctly.

I still have contact with one of those cops, I call him friend. In fact, he testified at my trial on my behalf when I was arrested for assault. He also owned a small business and hired me to work for him for a bit, when I got out of jail.

If you asked him why they did what they did, he'd tell you it was because I was just a messed up guy doing stupid things, I deserved to get slapped around, but they didn't think I needed jail time for being a two bit hood.

The vast majority of them act appropriately...

Full stop.

I also cannot reiterate enough that any police officer found guilty of any criminal offense should be fired immediately.

This officer was fired before the investigation started.

Considering the weapon of choice was water and possibly silly string his reaction is still excessive and he should be treated accordingly.

How many times must you be told, his reaction is to a fleeing assailant.

You certainly don't have the observational skills or deductive reasoning skills that the overwhelming majority of Officers are trained to have.

I don't care if he loses 19 years of pension and winds up divorced & homeless, might make the next cop think before he throws a punch at a citizen.

You really are an idiot.

So you don't know the difference....as I thought.

LOL, liar, you don't think.

Sorry, you are incorrect and have been eliminated from the competition. Better luck in the next life.

No I'm not, lol.

It's outlined clearly in the CCoC, R.S.C. Chapter C-46. Again proving you're an idiot.

“peace officer” includes

• (a) a mayor, warden, reeve, sheriff, deputy sheriff, sheriff’s officer and justice of the peace,
• (b) a member of the Correctional Service of Canada who is designated as a peace officer pursuant to Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and a warden, deputy warden, instructor, keeper, jailer, guard and any other officer or permanent employee of a prison other than a penitentiary as defined in Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act,
• (c) a police officer, police constable, bailiff, constable, or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace or for the service or execution of civil process,
• (c.1) a designated officer as defined in section 2 of the Integrated Cross-border Law Enforcement Operations Act, when
  • (i) participating in an integrated cross-border operation, as defined in section 2 of that Act, or
  • (ii) engaging in an activity incidental to such an operation, including travel for the purpose of participating in the operation and appearances in court arising from the operation,
• (d) an officer within the meaning of the Customs Act, the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 2001, or a person having the powers of such an officer, when performing any duty in the administration of any of those Acts,
• (d.1) an officer authorized under subsection 138(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,
• (e) a person designated as a fishery guardian under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act and a person designated as a fishery officer under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act,
• (f) the pilot in command of an aircraft
  • (i) registered in Canada under regulations made under the Aeronautics Act, or
  • (ii) leased without crew and operated by a person who is qualified under regulations made under the Aeronautics Act to be registered as owner of an aircraft registered in Canada under those regulations,

Everyone has the right to be stupid from time to time, but you're abusing that right.

 

[captain morgan]

Let say the Officer starts with an aggressive act, no questioning involved. You
don't run, but simply go with the motions and go to the ground in cooperation
while waiting for an explanation. A couple of pot-shots to you and some
expletives directed at you with some threats, but no explanation.
What then? No questions and no investigation. Just an assault.
I've been there, & I didn't resist anything 'till I'd had enough.

At that point, I just stood up, and shrugged a couple of times until the officer
slid off my back, and told them to get the **** off my lawn. It took them twenty
minutes or so of much swearing and threats on their part, and my lawyers wife
arriving (my lawyer was out'a town and they thought she was my lawyer) to get
them to leave. It was totally surreal and I know it totally sounds like fiction, but it
was real & I was sooooo hoping one of the neighbours was videotaping this, but
no such luck. Without video it's my word against theirs, which means my word
is worthless. Been there, experienced that, and didn't even get the T-shirt.

If I didn't (literally) stand up for myself, and my lawyers wife didn't arrive when
she did, I would have been one of those 'innocents' in jail that you refer to. It
happens, & I'm no bleeding heart liberal by anyone's yard stick, but not
everyone behind bars belongs there or initiated the act that put them there,
with all due respect. Anyway, sorry for the sidetrack.

Alright Ron - I guess that the best solution is to completely eliminate the police's street presence and set up some kiosks in various communities where wrong-doers can simply turn themselves in as their conscious dictates.

Crime may go up a bit (a few thousand percent or so), but that's a small price to pay seeing how every police officer is incompetent at their job at all times

 

[PoliticalNick]

I once met a couple officers that really didn't like me coming into their jurisdiction, selling dope, being a goon or otherwise up to zero good. Even though whenever they had contact with me, I was polite, not aggressive and called them sir.

The first couple time they rousted me, they just took my kit and sent me packing.

When that didn't work, they took me to Cherry St, handcuffed me to a tree, that's still there in Clarke Beach Park, and laid a beating to me. Two or three times if I remember correctly.

I still have contact with one of those cops, I call him friend. In fact, he testified at my trial on my behalf when I was arrested for assault. He also owned a small business and hired me to work for him for a bit, when I got out of jail.

If you asked him why they did what they did, he'd tell you it was because I was just a messed up guy doing stupid things, I deserved to get slapped around, but they didn't think I needed jail time for being a two bit hood.

Full stop.

This officer was fired before the investigation started.

How many times must you be told, his reaction is to a fleeing assailant.

You certainly don't have the observational skills or deductive reasoning skills that the overwhelming majority of Officers are trained to have.

You really are an idiot.

LOL, liar, you don't think.

No I'm not, lol.

It's outlined clearly in the CCoC, R.S.C. Chapter C-46. Again proving you're an idiot.

“peace officer” includes

• (a) a mayor, warden, reeve, sheriff, deputy sheriff, sheriff’s officer and justice of the peace,
• (b) a member of the Correctional Service of Canada who is designated as a peace officer pursuant to Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and a warden, deputy warden, instructor, keeper, jailer, guard and any other officer or permanent employee of a prison other than a penitentiary as defined in Part I of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act,
• (c) a police officer, police constable, bailiff, constable, or other person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace or for the service or execution of civil process,
• (c.1) a designated officer as defined in section 2 of the Integrated Cross-border Law Enforcement Operations Act, when
  • (i) participating in an integrated cross-border operation, as defined in section 2 of that Act, or
  • (ii) engaging in an activity incidental to such an operation, including travel for the purpose of participating in the operation and appearances in court arising from the operation,
• (d) an officer within the meaning of the Customs Act, the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 2001, or a person having the powers of such an officer, when performing any duty in the administration of any of those Acts,
• (d.1) an officer authorized under subsection 138(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,
• (e) a person designated as a fishery guardian under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act and a person designated as a fishery officer under the Fisheries Act when performing any duties or functions under that Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act,
• (f) the pilot in command of an aircraft
  • (i) registered in Canada under regulations made under the Aeronautics Act, or
  • (ii) leased without crew and operated by a person who is qualified under regulations made under the Aeronautics Act to be registered as owner of an aircraft registered in Canada under those regulations,

Everyone has the right to be stupid from time to time, but you're abusing that right.

First off I agree that he should get his day in court and then if found guilty of a crime his a$$ gets fired and his pension & benefits go bye-bye.

Now explain this Einstein....if a police officer & peace officer are the same thing why do cops swear 2 different oaths? 1 to the queen to act as a peace officer and a 2nd oath to the corporation of Canada to be a police officer. Once you get that you might understand where the difference lies. To help you a bit....Judges swear 2 oaths as well...1 to the queen & 1 to the corporation of Canada.