AZ Police Officer Acted "Within Policy" Assaulting 15-Year Old Girl...

[Quantum Windbag]

I have wondering this for a while, why does everyone automatically assume she is guilty of something? What if the other girl had been trying to steal her money, and she was fighting her off, would that change your sympathy levels

Because we can read.


From AZCentral:

The video shows a girl in a physical fight with a woman, whom Crump identified as the girl's mother, in a parking lot.

The incident occurred in January, Crump said. The girl reportedly was serving alcohol out of a water bottle to other students, was belligerent and drunk, and was being removed from school after assaulting a teacher, he said. Her mother had called the police, Crump said. The girl was charged with aggravated assault, Crump said. According to another department spokesman, Sgt. Steve Martos, the girl had no injuries.

And the cop knew that when he arrived? Does a parent have a right to attack a child in public? Am I supposed to believe Crump because he has a weird sounding name?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where is the story that goes with that video?
Why was the other girl wrestling with the one that got tackled?

Bingo.

No one, including that cop, knows what was going on, yet he was still justified in attacking someone who is, conceivably, the victim of a crime.

No, she broke the law right off the get go, when she started leaving the scene of a crime.
But I want to know more about it.

Feel free to cite the law that makes it illegal to walk away from the scene of a crime.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Victims don't usually try to leave the scene.

Gads but you guys are dense. Cops are assholes. Get over it, stay out of their way, and if they tell you to stop, fucking stop, morons.

Believe it or not, cops do not have the authority to make me stop just because they want to. The only way we can get them over thinking they can do stuff like that is to refuse to cooperate when they do something like that.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

No, she broke the law right off the get go, when she started leaving the scene of a crime.
But I want to know more about it.

What if she was the victim of a brutal attack? That's why we're all innocent until proven guilty. And what if she was your daughter or sister? Think about that a bit.

Victim or not
You are still breaking the law by leaving the scene of a crime.

But he SLAMMED HER HEAD UP AGAINST THE WALL!!!

I wonder if the mother saw that happen and, if so, what her reaction was. Because most mothers would go ballistic to see their 15-year-old daughter's head slammed up against a wall by a grown man. I suspect the mother is probably the root of the problem here...she obviously has no compunction about using physical force, that's probably where her daughter learned it. She raised the kid, after all.

 

[skye]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."

The police officer was absolutely right, his actions are to be commended

Brat that she was!

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

Now look at this video. See the difference. The cop punches a girl in the face, BUT SHE WAS FIGHTING WITH HIM! Totally different scenario. I am on the cop's side in this one.

But in the video that is the subject of this thread, the girl was walking away, the cop called out and she did stop and turn, but he immediately slammed her head up against the wall. Totally different situation. She did not fight him. She did not swing at him. She stopped and turned to look at him.

SEE THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE?????

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0WTcTzN96s]Seattle Police Brutality: Cop punches teen girl in face - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."

The police officer was absolutely right, his actions are to be commended

Brat that she was!

Police look at a video and say a cop acted within policy, what a surprise. My guess is those same experts would say the police who shot two women in a blue Toyota pickup were within policy even though they were looking for a black man driving a grey Nissan.

 

[earlycuyler]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."


Police brutality in Arizona - YouTube

Okay Paul, got to give you this one. The cop was out of line just going off the video.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Now look at this video. See the difference. The cop punches a girl in the face, BUT SHE WAS FIGHTING WITH HIM! Totally different scenario. I am on the cop's side in this one.

But in the video that is the subject of this thread, the girl was walking away, the cop called out and she did stop and turn, but he immediately slammed her head up against the wall. Totally different situation. She did not fight him. She did not swing at him. She stopped and turned to look at him.

SEE THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE?????

Seattle Police Brutality: Cop punches teen girl in face - YouTube

I think he could have handled it better, but I agree that he was justified under the circumstances.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why Policeman don't shoot her?

You probably think you're being funny but --

Its Arizona. No holds barred and EVERYthing is a capital offense if you're brown or black.

Be that as it may (IS!), cops should be able to handle most 15y/o's without giving them a concussion.

OTOH, 15 year olds are different now from what they were when I was that age.

 

[Esmeralda]

Why Policeman don't shoot her?

You probably think you're being funny but --

Its Arizona. No holds barred and EVERYthing is a capital offense if you're brown or black.

Be that as it may (IS!), cops should be able to handle most 15y/o's without giving them a concussion.

OTOH, 15 year olds are different now from what they were when I was that age.

I've watched this video several times now. I certainly don't endorse police brutality, but I don't think this qualifies at all. ~She was trying to flee the scene. I believe, based on the video, she ignored the policeman telling her to stop. He didn't bash her head against the wall; he pushed her so she would fall down, and then tackled her to keep her down. It looks like her head may have hit the wall, but he did not purposely bang it against the wall. It also doesn't look like it hit the wall hard enough to concuss her. Had she not been trying to flee the scene, he would not have had to do anything violent with her at all. She is the violent one: she is the one who was in a street fight, and based on the part of the video where they were fighting, she was the agressor, at least during the part of the video that shows the fight.

I've seen enough of these teenagers who are aggressive and violent to know they are frightening and scary; I would not want to have to deal with one who was out of control. I expect the cop has seen far more of this type of behavior from people, both male and female, of that age than I have. They are not nice kids; they are capable of great violence. They are often bigger than the previous generations: this girl, at 15, is nearly as big as the male cop. He is within his rights to do what he did to stop someone fleeing the scene of a violent altercation.

 

[SteadyMercury]

It's not okay for someone to have consensual sex with her because she's a child, but it is okay to slam her head up against the wall because then she's a girl.

Wow did you ever get off track in your logic. Nobody claimed it was okay to do anything because she was a girl, the reason was because she was walking away after assaulting someone (her mother) and ignored commands while moving hands around that cop couldn't see.

 

[SteadyMercury]

And the cop knew that when he arrived? Does a parent have a right to attack a child in public? Am I supposed to believe Crump because he has a weird sounding name?

The mother called the cops, so they might well have known that when they arrived.

Where did you get that the parent attacked the child? As much time as you've spent wagging your finger about others for making assumptions (that turned out to be correct) here you are making a big one.

Who cares what you believe, if you want to think people at the school lied about her being drunk and attacking a teacher, then got her mom in on the conspiracy by having her call the cops on her own daughter, then this Crump fellow and the police are all in on it. You've made you your mind and are obviously shutting down any semblance of logic at this point.

Feel free to cite the law that makes it illegal to walk away from the scene of a crime.

I'm not going to look it up but I suspect if you googled AZ statutes for evading arrest and hindering prosecution you'd probably find what you're looking for.

Believe it or not, cops do not have the authority to make me stop just because they want to. The only way we can get them over thinking they can do stuff like that is to refuse to cooperate when they do something like that.

You are correct, cops can't make a stop just because they want to.

We'll be sure to let you know when drunk teenage girl assaulting her mother qualifies as "because they want to" okay?

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

Why Policeman don't shoot her?

You probably think you're being funny but --

Its Arizona. No holds barred and EVERYthing is a capital offense if you're brown or black.

Be that as it may (IS!), cops should be able to handle most 15y/o's without giving them a concussion.

OTOH, 15 year olds are different now from what they were when I was that age.

I've watched this video several times now. I certainly don't endorse police brutality, but I don't think this qualifies at all. ~She was trying to flee the scene. I believe, based on the video, she ignored the policeman telling her to stop. He didn't bash her head against the wall; he pushed her so she would fall down, and then tackled her to keep her down. It looks like her head may have hit the wall, but he did not purposely bang it against the wall. It also doesn't look like it hit the wall hard enough to concuss her. Had she not been trying to flee the scene, he would not have had to do anything violent with her at all. She is the violent one: she is the one who was in a street fight, and based on the part of the video where they were fighting, she was the agressor, at least during the part of the video that shows the fight.

I've seen enough of these teenagers who are aggressive and violent to know they are frightening and scary; I would not want to have to deal with one who was out of control. I expect the cop has seen far more of this type of behavior from people, both male and female, of that age than I have. They are not nice kids; they are capable of great violence. They are often bigger than the previous generations: this girl, at 15, is nearly as big as the male cop. He is within his rights to do what he did to stop someone fleeing the scene of a violent altercation.

She was totally immobile on the ground for several seconds after he slammed her head in the wall. I'm pretty sure she was knocked out. She wasn't trying to flee him. She stopped and turned to look at him when he called out.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

It's not okay for someone to have consensual sex with her because she's a child, but it is okay to slam her head up against the wall because then she's a girl.

Wow did you ever get off track in your logic. Nobody claimed it was okay to do anything because she was a girl, the reason was because she was walking away after assaulting someone (her mother) and ignored commands while moving hands around that cop couldn't see.

I was simply pointing out the irony of people using the term "child" for a 15-year-old when it suits their purposes. And not using it when it doesn't.

We don't want to say a copy slammed a child down, hitting their head against a wall, now do we?

But if someone makes love to her, with her consent, suddenly she's an abused "child."

Ridiculous. Is she a child or isn't she?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And the cop knew that when he arrived? Does a parent have a right to attack a child in public? Am I supposed to believe Crump because he has a weird sounding name?

The mother called the cops, so they might well have known that when they arrived.

Did she call on Skype so they had a picture of her, or did they just read minds when they arrived?

Where did you get that the parent attacked the child? As much time as you've spent wagging your finger about others for making assumptions (that turned out to be correct) here you are making a big one.

Where did the cops get that the girl walking away was guilty of fleeing the scene of a crime?

By the way, using ridiculous arguments to mock other ridiculous arguments is not making any type of assumption.

Who cares what you believe, if you want to think people at the school lied about her being drunk and attacking a teacher, then got her mom in on the conspiracy by having her call the cops on her own daughter, then this Crump fellow and the police are all in on it. You've made you your mind and are obviously shutting down any semblance of logic at this point.

If she was drunk and distributing alcohol at school why didn't they call the police? If she assaulted a teacher why didn't they call the police for that? Wouldn't they be required, by law, to report anyone who gives alcohol to anyone who is not old enough to drink? Did the police subsequently arrest the people at school who sent her home instead of reporting a criminal act?

Damn, I can poke more holes in the official story, which you claim is logical, than you can poke in my version, is that because mine is based on the actual evidence, and yours is based on the claims people are making?

Feel free to cite the law that makes it illegal to walk away from the scene of a crime.

I'm not going to look it up but I suspect if you googled AZ statutes for evading arrest and hindering prosecution you'd probably find what you're looking for.

I would take that bet if I thought I could get you to pay when I won.

Believe it or not, cops do not have the authority to make me stop just because they want to. The only way we can get them over thinking they can do stuff like that is to refuse to cooperate when they do something like that.

You are correct, cops can't make a stop just because they want to.

We'll be sure to let you know when drunk teenage girl assaulting her mother qualifies as "because they want to" okay?

Other than the fact that the person I was responding to flat out said that cops are assholes, and that I should stop if they say stop, even if they are wrong, you have a point.

 

[Esmeralda]

You probably think you're being funny but --

Its Arizona. No holds barred and EVERYthing is a capital offense if you're brown or black.

Be that as it may (IS!), cops should be able to handle most 15y/o's without giving them a concussion.

OTOH, 15 year olds are different now from what they were when I was that age.

I've watched this video several times now. I certainly don't endorse police brutality, but I don't think this qualifies at all. ~She was trying to flee the scene. I believe, based on the video, she ignored the policeman telling her to stop. He didn't bash her head against the wall; he pushed her so she would fall down, and then tackled her to keep her down. It looks like her head may have hit the wall, but he did not purposely bang it against the wall. It also doesn't look like it hit the wall hard enough to concuss her. Had she not been trying to flee the scene, he would not have had to do anything violent with her at all. She is the violent one: she is the one who was in a street fight, and based on the part of the video where they were fighting, she was the agressor, at least during the part of the video that shows the fight.

I've seen enough of these teenagers who are aggressive and violent to know they are frightening and scary; I would not want to have to deal with one who was out of control. I expect the cop has seen far more of this type of behavior from people, both male and female, of that age than I have. They are not nice kids; they are capable of great violence. They are often bigger than the previous generations: this girl, at 15, is nearly as big as the male cop. He is within his rights to do what he did to stop someone fleeing the scene of a violent altercation.

She was totally immobile on the ground for several seconds after he slammed her head in the wall. I'm pretty sure she was knocked out. She wasn't trying to flee him. She stopped and turned to look at him when he called out.

Bullshit. This is absolutely not in the video. Absolutely does not exist. When she was on the ground, he did not slam her head into the wall. Absolutely not. She was clearly not knocked out. She was indeed trying to flee him. It is clear in the video he was calling out to her as he followed her and she ignored him. At the point she turned her head around, it was probably to see how close he was. She didn't look like she was either stopping or surrendering.

She also does not at all appeared to be knocked out.

This is not a case of police brutality.

 

[beagle9]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."


Police brutality in Arizona - YouTube

It appears that the cop may have had prior information on or prior experiences with this woman before, so immediately he took action against her it seems because he had known this woman as a trouble maker, in which by the video it seems as if this perp is street savvy and a bully also, so she may have just got what she had coming to her, who knows really ? Who knows what these officers go through on a daily basis, and who tries them on a daily basis? He may have took it easy on this woman before, and it may have caused him some serious pain and suffering when took it easy on her before, so this time maybe he wasn't playing any longer. He may have known this was the only way to deal with this woman, in order to keep her from spitting on him or kicking him and such ? Who knows really?

What about the victim she was assaulting, does anyone care about her ?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."


Police brutality in Arizona - YouTube

It appears that the cop may have had prior information on or prior experiences with this woman before, so immediately he took action against her it seems because he had known this woman as a trouble maker, in which by the video it seems as if this perp is street savvy and a bully also, so she may have just got what she had coming to her, who knows really ? Who knows what these officers go through on a daily basis, and who tries them on a daily basis? He may have took it easy on this woman before, and it may have caused him some serious pain and suffering when took it easy on her before, so this time maybe he wasn't playing any longer. He may have known this was the only way to deal with this woman, in order to keep her from spitting on him or kicking him and such ? Who knows really?

What about the victim she was assaulting, does anyone care about her ?

Replace woman with child in your post.

 

[Esmeralda]

"Sources tell us Larrison has at least 3 experts within the department who watched the video and agree he acted within policy."


Police brutality in Arizona - YouTube

It appears that the cop may have had prior information on or prior experiences with this woman before, so immediately he took action against her it seems because he had known this woman as a trouble maker, in which by the video it seems as if this perp is street savvy and a bully also, so she may have just got what she had coming to her, who knows really ? Who knows what these officers go through on a daily basis, and who tries them on a daily basis? He may have took it easy on this woman before, and it may have caused him some serious pain and suffering when took it easy on her before, so this time maybe he wasn't playing any longer. He may have known this was the only way to deal with this woman, in order to keep her from spitting on him or kicking him and such ? Who knows really?

What about the victim she was assaulting, does anyone care about her ?

Replace woman with child in your post.

Physically, she is as big, as tall and thick, as most women, and she is drunk as well. I've been around kids like this, big and brutish, and they are dangerous physically. I've not been around them when they are drunk, which makes them even more dangerous.