Police Sergeant Chokes Subordinate Officer -- Was He Wrong?

We don’t know. It isn’t covered in the article and the video is without sound. Prove using the evidence we have that the Sergeant was not threatening to kill the guy in custody.

You can’t. We don’t know. What we do know is that one officer attempted to intercede and deescalate. We know the Sergeant is on desk duty. We know it is being investigated.
It IS covered in the article. It said he merely threatened to use mace. Learn to read.
 
Our system is fucked up -- but it aint because cops don't get enough breaks....

Many people in this country have been telling you the system is fucked up for decades -- but since they were of a certain demographic -- they were ignored....

Now with the introduction of cameras (both by civilians with cameras on their phones or police body cams) -- the rest of the country that had been ignoring the warnings -- now see what you just admitted to -- they see the shit that the cops have been getting away with for years.....and the solution WILL NOT BE to turn the cameras off
You have me wrong, Biff!

I did not "admit" that cops have been getting away with shit for years, I stated what to me is an obvious truth. Other than that I agree with your reply.
 
Right wingers are generally supportive of law enforcement unless they arrest right wing criminals like the Capitol insurrectionists. How do they live with this gnawing at their rancid souls ?

The problem is that even if police want to do good, they have to do whatever the person who signs their paycheck wants, which is often corrupt.
And generally whomever signs their paycheck is someone wealthy, who then wants a right wing slant on law enforcement.
I could never be a cop because I would never enforce the War on Drugs, pulling people over for an air freshner hanging from the rear view mirror, etc.
 
Pullease (what a name for a police officer) is an old-school cop who has not realized what having a body cam means. Prior to the cams, police got away with that kind of shit all the time and honestly believed they were doing the right thing. He didn't pepper spray the arrested guy, he threatened to pepper spray him in an effort to gain compliance. Was the guy kicking the seat in front of him or trying to get out of the vehicle? Dunno, the article left that out.

Still, it was not the brightest thing for the woman officer to try to get physical with a large man displaying (apparently) out of control behavior.

We need far more training for police in how to be professional and not take every thing so goddamn personally. They need to think of the perps they come in contact with as animals, not worthy of eliciting an emotional response. They need to stop going into situations with people who are lawless and out of control and expecting "respect" from them. Control them, and if they can't control them, call for more backup who can get them under control.

As a teacher of kids with behavior issues such as emotional disturbance, oppositional-defiant disorder, severe ADHD, and autism, I was trained in how to restrain an acting out student. When a student was too much for one teacher, more were called in and the training was for the first teacher to step back and allow the arriving teachers to take over, just in case the first teacher might be experiencing the natural emotions of being defied and attacked.

The inexperienced officer should have asked her fellow officers for help.

On the other hand . . . the officers who were on scene when Derick Chauvin killed George Floyd during an apprehension gone wrong are still awaiting trial in legal limbo as the State and the Federal prosecutors decide who gets to take a crack at them first. At least one of them tried to convince Chauvin to get off of Floyd, but that was not enough to keep him from being treated like a murderer himself.


So maybe the female cop decided that it would be better to be fired for putting her hands on her sergeant than to spend years with her life turned upside down,

Our system is fucked up, is my main point, I guess . . .

The whole procedure these days is just wrong.
Arresting people for things like the War on Drugs is so wrong as to be criminal, and the proper way to arrest is to call for a van with several burly types so that threats are not necessary.
 
Hey bro, where did you go??

You were supposed to tell me who you voted for in the last "police chief" elections in your city
Ohhh, you still think you had a point there? You STILL dont understand why i am mocking you for believing politics dont effect the decisions of police captains? :laugh:
 
Candice Owens is the one telling people to take colloidal silver.
So I know I am a LOT smarter than Candice Owens.
She is more articulate than I, but not smarter.
I have run into Blacks as intelligent as I, but anyone who buys into the current criminal justice system, is not intelligent, but instead brainwashed.
The current criminal justice system is fatally flawed over things like unfair land and tax laws, the War on Drugs, mandated sentences, asset forfeiture, domestic terrorism laws, etc.
Anyone accepting any of these obviously criminal abuses by an obviously criminal legislative and executive, is not a critical thinker.
The justice system is only flawed with regards to how the persecute and wrongfully convict Christian conservative patriots....

The War on Drugs was very effective at targeting the people who were the most violent and criminal....we should have done more, the whole 3 strikes policy by the racist Dems pretty much gave these thugs 2 more chances to steal rape and kill....one conviction and that's it....life in prison...that is how you stop crime..
 
Ohhh, you still think you had a point there? You STILL dont understand why i am mocking you for believing politics dont effect the decisions of police captains? :laugh:
Took you that long to figure out a way to respond huh?

Now....since dic suckers like you are always thrilled when a cop uses excessive force against those colored folks -- wouldn't the police chief be better served politically by suspending the lady cop and backing the sergeant??

Why is this police chief such a cuck that he wouldn't back his fellow officer instead of some lady cop who doesn't belong??

And.....who did you vote for in the last police chief elections??
 
Threatening to use mace is meant to get that shithead to cooperate. That is deescalating.

Once handcuffed in the back of the car, you do not and should not even talk to the suspect.
Threatening mace is illegal at that point.
The fact the sergeant is emotionally unstable is obvious from the reaction to the female cop.
No matter what she did, his response is totally and completely inappropriate and illegal.
I would not immediately fire him without knowing the full situation, but I would certainly not allow him to be a sergeant.
 
The justice system is only flawed with regards to how the persecute and wrongfully convict Christian conservative patriots....

The War on Drugs was very effective at targeting the people who were the most violent and criminal....we should have done more, the whole 3 strikes policy by the racist Dems pretty much gave these thugs 2 more chances to steal rape and kill....one conviction and that's it....life in prison...that is how you stop crime..

Totally wrong.
Crime is ALWAYS the result of injustice, lack of opportunity, oppression, etc.
Humans do NOT have criminal behavior in our DNA as a natural behavior.
It has to be taught by injustice and oppression by a wealthy elite who greatly deserve crime.

The War on Drugs is totally and completely illegal, with any participant being a criminal.
The source for legal authority in a democratic republic comes ONLY from the defense of inherent individual rights.
The War on Drugs does not at all in any way defend the inherent rights of anyone else, so is an illegal and arbitrary attempt to mandate the actions of others.
In no way could that EVER be legal in a democratic republic, and is totally the actions of an illegal dictatorship.
It does not matter at all if drugs are stupid, destructive, or a bad idea.
There is no legal way to criminalize them.

And apparently you do not at all understand law.
The reason why mandated sentences are always inherently illegal is that all cases have mitigating circumstances, which legally are suppose to then be up to the judge to judge. That is why we have judges, to judge.
And mandated sentences are an attempt to essentially eliminate judges, which is obviously totally illegal and in violation of the Bill of Rights.
 
Took you that long to figure out a way to respond huh?

Now....since dic suckers like you are always thrilled when a cop uses excessive force against those colored folks -- wouldn't the police chief be better served politically by suspending the lady cop and backing the sergeant??

Why is this police chief such a cuck that he wouldn't back his fellow officer instead of some lady cop who doesn't belong??

And.....who did you vote for in the last police chief elections??

The lady cop represents the whole population better.
We, the people, do NOT want abusive cops.
In fact, I do not want cops at all, as I think they are always inherently abusive and unnecessary in a democratic republic.
 
It IS covered in the article. It said he merely threatened to use mace. Learn to read.

While we do not know why the sergeant was in the back seat with the suspect, we can tell he was being abusive 3 ways.
One is that the suspect was already handcuffed and in the car, so there was no need to say anything to him.
Two is that the woman cop disagreed with his behavior.
Three is that the actions by the sergeant then were obviously illegal, dangerous, abusive, and inappropriate, indicating he has a defective personality an was in an inappropriately agitated state of mind.
 
If rich folk went to jail more often then they would be a lot more comfortable and focus on rehab rather than just punishment.
In that situation you are saying that if the female cop talked to the perp he would have listened and been totally peaceful. a lot of trouble starts after the perp is recognized and police try to take them in. This happens a lot. It is not an easy thing. There is a libertarian idea for turning some prisons into forced drug rehab institutions. Time is served with others with the same issue and rehabilitation done to keep them clean and maybe even clean up the record a bit if not violent.
 
The justice system is only flawed with regards to how the persecute and wrongfully convict Christian conservative patriots....

The War on Drugs was very effective at targeting the people who were the most violent and criminal....we should have done more, the whole 3 strikes policy by the racist Dems pretty much gave these thugs 2 more chances to steal rape and kill....one conviction and that's it....life in prison...that is how you stop crime..

So you want to pay higher taxes. Got it. Because one conviction and life in prison would mean about 25% of our population would be in prison. That would be rather expensive wouldn’t it?
 
In that situation you are saying that if the female cop talked to the perp he would have listened and been totally peaceful. a lot of trouble starts after the perp is recognized and police try to take them in. This happens a lot. It is not an easy thing. There is a libertarian idea for turning some prisons into forced drug rehab institutions. Time is served with others with the same issue and rehabilitation done to keep them clean and maybe even clean up the record a bit if not violent.

All humans can be talked to without resorting to or inciting violence.
So then yes, the female cop likely could have been MUCH more effective.
Threatening NEVER works really.

The way to deal with drugs is just to de-criminalize.
Hand them out for free if you have to.
That way there is not profits, crime, or desperation involved.
It becomes totally a medical problem, which is then easily cured when someone wants to be cured.
 
So you want to pay higher taxes. Got it. Because one conviction and life in prison would mean about 25% of our population would be in prison. That would be rather expensive wouldn’t it?

Worse than that, since there is nothing inherently unethical about taking drugs, that would mean we would have an authoritarian dictatorship that could imprison for life arbitrarily, for any act or thought the dictatorship did not like.
That would mean imprisonment for just wanting to get paid a fair salary, which then would quickly lead to the return of slavey.
 
What the fuck would YOU know about escalation and when its needed? I'll go with the instincts of the veteran over the rookie female, who probably doesnt deserve the position in the first place. :cuckoo:
Lol, his cheif disagree s. I will go with the cheif and the rookie over you and a dumb fuck hot head.
 
All humans can be talked to without resorting to or inciting violence.
So then yes, the female cop likely could have been MUCH more effective.
Threatening NEVER works really.

The way to deal with drugs is just to de-criminalize.
Hand them out for free if you have to.
That way there is not profits, crime, or desperation involved.
It becomes totally a medical problem, which is then easily cured when someone wants to be cured.
The truth is with addicts it is not that easy. The have their own support networks and they are needed. And in potential volatile criminal situations there are some nasty perps. By backing off it is a fact that violent crimes with more people injured and killed has happened. I believe reforms are needed for police departments. But cops are not computers, and someone has to do the dirty part of the job. If every encounter becomes a several hour negotiation and sweet talk event, there will not be nay cops to respond to other calls. There are a lot of variables that need to be dealt with. There in reality is a small percentage of cops on the streets at any time compared to the size of departments.
 

Forum List

Back
Top