Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Michael ("Big Mike") Brown's conduct was an extreme departure from the "politeness" toward police which you recommend.No where did I say the police are above the law. I simply offered common sense advise on how to deal with encounters with them, it's never failed me. You don't have to follow it, then you might end up like Michael Brown, he had a lets get tough with the cops attitude.
I agree with your advice to be polite in encounters with police -- but only when the police conduct calls for reciprocal politeness. Otherwise a polite response to an unnecessarily oppressive or offensive demeanor amounts to slavish subservience which far too many contemporary cops seem to expect (See, COPS, the tv "ride-along" documentary series).
Unfortunately too many cops are inclined fabricate charges against subjects who fail to behave subserviently toward them, a fact which to a significant extent has much to do with the presently emerging anti-police atmosphere.
I'm not suggesting that all or most cops are guilty of arrogant and/or generally rude conduct toward the public, but enough of them are to have alienated a substantial number of individuals who can recall having unpleasant encounters with nasty cops. And all it takes is one such encounter to form a lasting impression.
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.Uhmmm touching someone's arm is not a potentially life-threatening act.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed....
The fact that a cop tells you to do something does not automatically make it a "legal command".
Unless you're doing something wrong. In her case...trespassing at a private pool and refusing to leave...3 times.
If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.
For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
When there is no one around to stop you, you can do anything you want, but cops, like you, will eventually answer for their actions. I think you need to grow up and tune into reality.
That's what this thread did starting at post number one. Perhaps it's time to catch up.
Or perhaps not.
No this thread was started by second guessing the actions of an office who was trying to get control of a situation, no one on this board who hasn't worn the uniform and been in the situation are qualified to do that. And evidently pointing out that fact is an unforgivable sin.
BTW, the folks on this board who have worn the uniform tend to agree with me.
This is the internet dood. ALL of us have "worn the uniform". We're also Supreme Court Judges, expert attorneys, leading brain surgeons and the Pope. Appeal to Authority Fallacy dismissed.
And regardless, neither Casebolt's own chief, nor the other 11 cops on the scen -- NOR CASEBOLT HIMSELF -- the guys in real life with uniforms -- agree with you. He has acknowledged he was in the wrong -- why can't you?
It's worth bringing this point up again since you prolly missed it last time --
If this country were attacked by the nation of Generica and Generica won the war and was now patrolling the streets with an occupying military force, would you be out there Quislinging for them?
-- Because that's exactly what this paramilitary mentality police disease is doing. There's no difference except they don't represent the nation of Generica. They represent the Nation of Testosterone.
Police are supposed to be public servants -- not your fucking daddy who delivers regular whippings.
>> The two officers in this brief video represent two different policing styles, two different mindsets that officers use as they interact with civilians: the Guardian and the Warrior. As a former police officer and current policing scholar, I know that an officer’s mindset has tremendous impact on police/civilian encounters. I’ve described the Guardian and Warrior mindsets at some length here and here; for now, suffice to say that the right mindset can de-escalate tense situations, induce compliance, and increase community trust over the long-term. The kids interacting with the first officer were excited, but not upset; they remained cooperative. Had they gone home at that moment, they’d have a story for their friends and family, but it would be a story that happened to have the police in it rather than being a story about the police.Oh, that's by a guy who "wore the uniform" btw.
The wrong mindset, on the other hand, can exacerbate a tense encounter, produce resistance, and lead to entirely avoidable violence. It can, and has, caused longterm damage to police/community relations. We shouldn’t be surprised that the kids Corporal Casebolt was yelling at weren’t eager to do what he was ordering them to do—no one likes being cursed at and disrespected in front of their peers, and people of all ages, especially teenagers, resent being treated unjustly. That resentment can lead to resistance, and Police Warriors—taught to exercise unquestioned command over a scene—overcome resistance by using force.
Although the short video does not provide a complete picture of the scene, it appears likely that force in this case could have been avoided. Consider how Corporal Casebolt took issue with the way a group of girls standing on the sidewalk some distance away were “running their mouths,” so he yelled at them: “Leave!” and “Get your ass gone!” As one bikini-clad girl, 15-year-old Dajerria Becton, did exactly that, Corporal Casebolt stopped her—possibly after some verbal exchange not captured by the camera—and wrestled her to the ground. When quickly approached by two young men who appear unhappy with his treatment of Becton, he unholstered his firearm almost two seconds after those two young men began backing away from him. About ten seconds later, as Becton continued to sit on the ground where he left her, Corporal Casebolt again grabbed her and forced her down, pushing her face into the ground and planting a knee in her back as she cried. The kids now have a story about an officer, and it may well be one that sours their faith in police for years to come.
What should officers do in similar situations? For starters, they must realize that the public—even a group of non-compliant teenagers—are not an enemy to be vanquished, but civilians to be protected, to the extent possible, from indignity and harm. A Guardian mindset encourages officers to be “procedurally just,” to ensure that their encounters with civilians are empowering, fair, respectful and considerate. Research of police and military encounters strongly suggests that officers are most effective at fostering goodwill and reducing antagonism when they approach each encounter with the goal of building civilian trust. << ---- What Went Wrong in McKinney
It's a really simple thing, police are human, of course you have never done anything that seemed right at the time but later regretted it, right? The guy was officer of the year at one time, should one incident where no one was hurt end his career? Demanding perfection of any human will lead to certain disappointment. But then you have a record of demanding perfection of people you disagree with, so never mind.
::::wwwhoooosssh::::
That entire point just sailed right by you, did it? SMH
Here's your problem right here in a nutshell:
this thread was started by second guessing the actions of an office who was trying to get control of a situation
Go watch the video and note the cop who appears between 0:35 and 0:40. He's approached closely enough that you an hear his tone of voice in conversation. He's got a willing audience, voluntarily conversing in a rational maner as if they're all human beings. THAT is having a situation under control. Suddenly at 0:48 in comes Batman Casebolt, screaming at people, cursing at kids in front of the whole neighborhood and then assaulting two young teenage girls in bathing suits. THAT is taking a situation out of control.
Here's what you authoritarian slaves don't get: you don't "get control" of an ordinary situation by force and you sure as fuck don't earn any kind of respect busting heads. Casebolt, and he ALONE, made this into a story and damn near incited a riot. Had anyone in the area been taking the advice of the gun nutters on this forum and played the part of "good guy with a gun", he could have got himself shot, and it would have arguably been justified.
The situation was already in control. Casebolt did all he could to undermine that. Which is why he's unemployed right now, and good riddance.
Funny, I didn't see any blood in the video, who got their head busted?
Make that twice.
Btw about that "poor misunderstood storm trooper" ranthe was allowed to resign and thereby keep his pension, instead of getting fired. But nooo, that's not enough...
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.Uhmmm touching someone's arm is not a potentially life-threatening act.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.Unless you're doing something wrong. In her case...trespassing at a private pool and refusing to leave...3 times.
If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.
For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
In this case his own chief pointed at him as the bad guy. Thats why he doesnt have a job as a cop anymore.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
"Complied"? "COMPLIED"??She was already evacuating the area when Casebolt went and got her, pulled her back (by the hair) toward (fortunately) the camera shot. Then he tells her to "get on the ground" -- while she's already on the ground.
And then he gets up to brandish a gun on people stepping in when they see the assault, and leaves her alone for at least ten seconds, more than enough time for her to get away. Does she do so? No, she stays where she is, probably frozen in fear for her life, whereupon he returns to assault her further.
Furthermore he's already acknowledged and apologized for being way out of line, as well as resigned, and may still be charged.
"Bitch"?? Holy shit dood, could you be any more of a racist prick? That girl represents ALL of us who have ever been or might be attacked by what is supposed to be a public servant, but thinks they're some kind of military occupation force. And that's what you all a "bitch"??
Thanks for coming out. Always good to know who's got my back -- and who the sycophants are.
Fuck you asshole, my response would be exactly the same if it were a white mouthy bitch trying to demonstrate to her friends how fucking tough she was. Ignorant assed monday morning quarterbacks like you and your dear leader are what's wrong with this country. You validate people disrespecting authority and cry your little commie asses off when there are consequences. When you've put on the badge and went to calls blind you might have room to talk.
Michael ("Big Mike") Brown's conduct was an extreme departure from the "politeness" toward police which you recommend.No where did I say the police are above the law. I simply offered common sense advise on how to deal with encounters with them, it's never failed me. You don't have to follow it, then you might end up like Michael Brown, he had a lets get tough with the cops attitude.
I agree with your advice to be polite in encounters with police -- but only when the police conduct calls for reciprocal politeness. Otherwise a polite response to an unnecessarily oppressive or offensive demeanor amounts to slavish subservience which far too many contemporary cops seem to expect (See, COPS, the tv "ride-along" documentary series).
Unfortunately too many cops are inclined fabricate charges against subjects who fail to behave subserviently toward them, a fact which to a significant extent has much to do with the presently emerging anti-police atmosphere.
I'm not suggesting that all or most cops are guilty of arrogant and/or generally rude conduct toward the public, but enough of them are to have alienated a substantial number of individuals who can recall having unpleasant encounters with nasty cops. And all it takes is one such encounter to form a lasting impression.
Just another example of why you politely comply regardless of the cops attitude, then you take it up with the department if need be.
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
Do you immediately give them a BJ as well or do wait for them to push your head towards their groin area which would indicate they are granting permission?Michael ("Big Mike") Brown's conduct was an extreme departure from the "politeness" toward police which you recommend.No where did I say the police are above the law. I simply offered common sense advise on how to deal with encounters with them, it's never failed me. You don't have to follow it, then you might end up like Michael Brown, he had a lets get tough with the cops attitude.
I agree with your advice to be polite in encounters with police -- but only when the police conduct calls for reciprocal politeness. Otherwise a polite response to an unnecessarily oppressive or offensive demeanor amounts to slavish subservience which far too many contemporary cops seem to expect (See, COPS, the tv "ride-along" documentary series).
Unfortunately too many cops are inclined fabricate charges against subjects who fail to behave subserviently toward them, a fact which to a significant extent has much to do with the presently emerging anti-police atmosphere.
I'm not suggesting that all or most cops are guilty of arrogant and/or generally rude conduct toward the public, but enough of them are to have alienated a substantial number of individuals who can recall having unpleasant encounters with nasty cops. And all it takes is one such encounter to form a lasting impression.
Just another example of why you politely comply regardless of the cops attitude, then you take it up with the department if need be. The police in the small town I live near have a very bad reputation if you go by what people say, yet in my few encounters with them I have seen nothing but professionalism and a generally good attitude.
He was charged with battery? I was unaware of this.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.Uhmmm touching someone's arm is not a potentially life-threatening act.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.Unless you're doing something wrong. In her case...trespassing at a private pool and refusing to leave...3 times.
If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.
For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
"Complied"? "COMPLIED"??
And then he gets up to brandish a gun on people stepping in when they see the assault, and leaves her alone for at least ten seconds, more than enough time for her to get away. Does she do so? No, she stays where she is, probably frozen in fear for her life, whereupon he returns to assault her further.
Furthermore he's already acknowledged and apologized for being way out of line, as well as resigned, and may still be charged.
"Bitch"?? Holy shit dood, could you be any more of a racist prick? That girl represents ALL of us who have ever been or might be attacked by what is supposed to be a public servant, but thinks they're some kind of military occupation force. And that's what you all a "bitch"??
Thanks for coming out. Always good to know who's got my back -- and who the sycophants are.
Fuck you asshole, my response would be exactly the same if it were a white mouthy bitch trying to demonstrate to her friends how fucking tough she was. Ignorant assed monday morning quarterbacks like you and your dear leader are what's wrong with this country. You validate people disrespecting authority and cry your little commie asses off when there are consequences. When you've put on the badge and went to calls blind you might have room to talk.
The crazy right winger who spends several hours per day insulting our president wants to give a lecture on respecting authority. Do you realize how much of an ass hole that makes you?
Do you immediately give them a BJ as well or do wait for them to push your head towards their groin area which would indicate they are granting permission?Michael ("Big Mike") Brown's conduct was an extreme departure from the "politeness" toward police which you recommend.No where did I say the police are above the law. I simply offered common sense advise on how to deal with encounters with them, it's never failed me. You don't have to follow it, then you might end up like Michael Brown, he had a lets get tough with the cops attitude.
I agree with your advice to be polite in encounters with police -- but only when the police conduct calls for reciprocal politeness. Otherwise a polite response to an unnecessarily oppressive or offensive demeanor amounts to slavish subservience which far too many contemporary cops seem to expect (See, COPS, the tv "ride-along" documentary series).
Unfortunately too many cops are inclined fabricate charges against subjects who fail to behave subserviently toward them, a fact which to a significant extent has much to do with the presently emerging anti-police atmosphere.
I'm not suggesting that all or most cops are guilty of arrogant and/or generally rude conduct toward the public, but enough of them are to have alienated a substantial number of individuals who can recall having unpleasant encounters with nasty cops. And all it takes is one such encounter to form a lasting impression.
Just another example of why you politely comply regardless of the cops attitude, then you take it up with the department if need be. The police in the small town I live near have a very bad reputation if you go by what people say, yet in my few encounters with them I have seen nothing but professionalism and a generally good attitude.
He was charged with battery? I was unaware of this.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.Uhmmm touching someone's arm is not a potentially life-threatening act.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.Unless you're doing something wrong. In her case...trespassing at a private pool and refusing to leave...3 times.
If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.
For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
He was charged with battery? I was unaware of this.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.True. But it could be construed as a simple assault if no invitation, or benign or justifiable reason can be offered for doing it. The reason being we all have a protected right to move about without being touched or offensively accosted.
Pepper-spraying someone who suffers from a serious respiratory affliction can (and has) caused severe incapacitation and death. Taser-shocking someone who has a serious cardiac condition (or pacemaker, etc.) can have a lethal effect.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.If that were true. you might have a point, but it isn't. Where did you hear those lies, fox?
You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?For over eighteen hundred posts now we've been patiently waiting for somebody to post the "run your mouth" law. And/or the "flap your lips" law or the "uppity statute". We have yet to see it.
What we do have is what Dajeeria Becton was actually charged with, i.e. ........... nothing.
Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
"Complied"? "COMPLIED"??
And then he gets up to brandish a gun on people stepping in when they see the assault, and leaves her alone for at least ten seconds, more than enough time for her to get away. Does she do so? No, she stays where she is, probably frozen in fear for her life, whereupon he returns to assault her further.
Furthermore he's already acknowledged and apologized for being way out of line, as well as resigned, and may still be charged.
"Bitch"?? Holy shit dood, could you be any more of a racist prick? That girl represents ALL of us who have ever been or might be attacked by what is supposed to be a public servant, but thinks they're some kind of military occupation force. And that's what you all a "bitch"??
Thanks for coming out. Always good to know who's got my back -- and who the sycophants are.
Fuck you asshole, my response would be exactly the same if it were a white mouthy bitch trying to demonstrate to her friends how fucking tough she was. Ignorant assed monday morning quarterbacks like you and your dear leader are what's wrong with this country. You validate people disrespecting authority and cry your little commie asses off when there are consequences. When you've put on the badge and went to calls blind you might have room to talk.
The crazy right winger who spends several hours per day insulting our president wants to give a lecture on respecting authority. Do you realize how much of an ass hole that makes you?
Yep, it will be nice when we get a real president instead of a piece of shit chicago gutter trash community organizer who has no respect for the country that gave him so many opportunities. Unfortunately he would never put his life on the line every day like the cops he and you so readily denigrates.
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
No reason to record a cop behaving like he should. It's the asshole "Cops Gone Wild" that get recorded. and they don't generally give much warning before they go nuts. Would you prefer every cop be recorded by citizens all the time so we get the assaults recorded from the very beginning?
Oh I got you. You are some fucking douchcanoe talking out of his ass on the internet. Thanks for letting me know. Freaking hilarious watching an idiot like you trying to pretend to be a lawyerHe was charged with battery? I was unaware of this.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.Touching someone's arm is not equivalent to pepper spraying them or even tasering them. The question was is it or is it not ASSAULT when a cop gives your arm a little tug. It's nonsense.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.You can hear the cop telling her to leave, she gets out of frame and stops and runs her mouth, I guess you lack the ability to recognize disorderly conduct when you see it. Had she kept her mouth shut and kept walking nothing would have happened to her. That's not lies, it's documented on the video.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:
(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
PENAL CODE CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
I didn't say he was charged with battery, dumbass. However, the girls parents haven't decided how far they are going to pursue the situation yet. That is certainly a possibility
Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
No reason to record a cop behaving like he should. It's the asshole "Cops Gone Wild" that get recorded. and they don't generally give much warning before they go nuts. Would you prefer every cop be recorded by citizens all the time so we get the assaults recorded from the very beginning?
That would beat the hell out of the out of context crap that everyone is so willing to judge. How many millions of police encounters do you think occur to get the few videos everyone is so riled up about?
Oh look, more bloviating from fuckface over here. Have anymore leagal opinions you want to pull out of your ass?Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
Funny how those videos never capture the entire encounter from beginning to end. They always seem to pick up somewhere in the middle after the situation has been escalated. The cop is always pointed to as the bad guy by you folks.
No reason to record a cop behaving like he should. It's the asshole "Cops Gone Wild" that get recorded. and they don't generally give much warning before they go nuts. Would you prefer every cop be recorded by citizens all the time so we get the assaults recorded from the very beginning?
That would beat the hell out of the out of context crap that everyone is so willing to judge. How many millions of police encounters do you think occur to get the few videos everyone is so riled up about?
Using your logic, Jeffery Dahmer eating people wasn't a big deal because it was, after all, just one person out of all the millions in the country. Newsflash dumbass. Bad behavior matters. Especially if we are paying them and giving them a badge.
Oh I got you. You are some fucking douchcanoe talking out of his ass on the internet. Thanks for letting me know. Freaking hilarious watching an idiot like you trying to pretend to be a lawyerHe was charged with battery? I was unaware of this.Incorrect. I looked it up. What the cop did to the first boy... by tugging on his arm, at best could be called battery, unwanted touching. That's not the same as Assault. I have a lawyer friend that gave me the heads up. I looked it up and ... well that's the way it is. Now what he did to the two girls.. punching one and throwing the other to the ground... that's assault.BS. You saw the definition of assault. At this point you are just being stubborn. If you were someone else I would call you a fucking idiot and be done with you. Show your intelligence. I know you can do it.
What he did to the girl was battery.
At common law, battery is the tort of intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) and voluntarily bringing about an unconsented harmful or offensive contact with a person or to something closely associated with them (e.g. a hat, a purse). Unlike assault, battery involves an actual contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law.
Talking isnt disorderly conduct moron. Thats why he is unemployed.So where did she do any of this and why wasnt she ever charged?
Many people do stupid shit and are detained and not charged. If the little bitch wasn't trying to impress her friends and complied, she would have had a much better day. Why are you ignorant leftist ignoring the group dynamic involved here?
Why are you ignoring the so called "cop warrior" dynamic that has been videoed so often lately?
I didn't say he was charged with battery, dumbass. However, the girls parents haven't decided how far they are going to pursue the situation yet. That is certainly a possibility
