Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

[Cops Gone Wild] Pepper-sprayed toddlers edition

2»

Posts

  • bebarcebebarce Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    WTF?

    Murphy should have explained this all to you already.
    bebarce on
    firstbanner.gif
  • PLAPLA Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Leitner wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Why don't we wait for the inevitable trial before we make shit up to defend the police with?

    The irony there is pretty thick, but lets set it aside.

    You've got a person doing this, and it's a high traffic area with multiple people nearby/passing. What's your use of force, given you have said that pepper spray is off the table because there are children present?

    I'm not going to pepper spray a family.

    Nor would I use pepper spray in a busy public area because other people could get affected.

    Don't police learn to grapple anymore? It was a while into my life when I started hearing about this "pepperspray" gadget.
  • bebarcebebarce Registered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Leitner wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Why don't we wait for the inevitable trial before we make shit up to defend the police with?

    The irony there is pretty thick, but lets set it aside.

    You've got a person doing this, and it's a high traffic area with multiple people nearby/passing. What's your use of force, given you have said that pepper spray is off the table because there are children present?

    I'm not going to pepper spray a family.

    Nor would I use pepper spray in a busy public area because other people could get affected.

    Yep. Nor do cops use pepper spray when suspecting a person is reaching for a concealed weapon.

    Additionally blinding a person on a subway platform creates an incredibly dangerous situation.

    I think the bottom line here is that if a family with kids got pepper sprayed, or people were thrown down stairs, or harrassed, then it is most likely excessive and illegal use of force. If even none of this story were true but that children were pepper sprayed then it is an indication of excessive and irresponsible force.

    If it didn't happen and this was all a fabrication, then everyone would agree that this is a moot point.

    The reaction seen in this thread should not be on arguing whether or not this happened, but given the potential for this to happen, as it is highly documented that things of this nature do, what is the best means for correcting this behavior. The visceral imagery of a toddler vomitting from blinding pain will stir a reaction in even the most callous of observers.

    If you want though, I'm typing this while sitting an office down from the police department, and don't mind popping by and talking to some of the guys about this.
    firstbanner.gif
  • CangoFettCangoFett Registered User regular
    The amount of people who make up complaints about cops that are 100% false is staggeringly high.

    The amount of cops who do illegal stuff is also way too high.

    Personally, in my office, 100% of the complaints that our guys who have cameras have received, have been exonerated by the camera.

    Her allegation is that after having done nothing illegal that a cop for no apparent reason other than "Maybe she didn't buy a ticket but we aren't sure" decides to pepper spray her while she does her motherly duty of consoling her child, then shoves her down a flight of stairs, then harasses her afterwords. That seems really implausible, but by no means impossible. Police brutality cases are usually more along the lines of "The cops were in a helluva fight with that guy. They cuffed him, and one of the cops got in a few sucker punches after he was handcuffed." Or "After that guy ran over that cop and was ejected from his rolling vehicle, one of the cops gave him a couple knees to the rib when he was unconscious." and less "He pepper sprayed us and beat us for literally no reason at all"


    In summary its a fishy story with no witnesses or evidence. The whole "Innocent until proven guilty" thing applies to cops too. If this cop did do this, I hope he gets fired and put in jail for it. My money is on someones mad they got pepper sprayed / arrested, and is trying to make a quick buck. Even if they completely made it up, the department will likely settle out of court.

  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    CangoFett wrote: »
    The amount of people who make up complaints about cops that are 100% false is staggeringly high.

    The amount of cops who do illegal stuff is also way too high.

    Personally, in my office, 100% of the complaints that our guys who have cameras have received, have been exonerated by the camera.

    Her allegation is that after having done nothing illegal that a cop for no apparent reason other than "Maybe she didn't buy a ticket but we aren't sure" decides to pepper spray her while she does her motherly duty of consoling her child, then shoves her down a flight of stairs, then harasses her afterwords. That seems really implausible, but by no means impossible. Police brutality cases are usually more along the lines of "The cops were in a helluva fight with that guy. They cuffed him, and one of the cops got in a few sucker punches after he was handcuffed." Or "After that guy ran over that cop and was ejected from his rolling vehicle, one of the cops gave him a couple knees to the rib when he was unconscious." and less "He pepper sprayed us and beat us for literally no reason at all"

    In summary its a fishy story with no witnesses or evidence. The whole "Innocent until proven guilty" thing applies to cops too. If this cop did do this, I hope he gets fired and put in jail for it. My money is on someones mad they got pepper sprayed / arrested, and is trying to make a quick buck. Even if they completely made it up, the department will likely settle out of court.

    Don't you also have the issue that while the alleged victims are free to make any claims that they want / speak to the media, the police are far more limited in what they can say about an ongoing investigation? Both for the investigation of police conduct, and the investigation that may lead to possible charges for this woman?

    I mostly agree with you - I'm not completely discounting the possibility that this happened, but it seems a bit implausible that this scenario happened exactly the way she described with no extenuating circumstances or provocation.
    steam_sig.png
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    Are you saying that a cop is at a disadvantage in these circumstances? Because in my experience a cop pretty much has to execute a minor on camera for there to be greater than a 50% chance of punishment
  • saint2esaint2e Registered User regular
    Are you saying that a cop is at a disadvantage in these circumstances? Because in my experience a cop pretty much has to execute a minor on camera for there to be greater than a 50% chance of punishment

    I read it as "there are less repercussions for alleged victims making stuff up in cases like these than for a police person to make stuff up".

    If that is what the post was implying, I'm not sure I agree or disagree with the sentiment.
    banner_160x60_01.gif
  • LorekLorek Registered User regular
    I read it as just it as the implication that its standard practice not to comment on ongoing investigations; so while Joe Public yells everywhere and anywhere about what happened, the NYPD say nothing until the investigation is complete. The implied disadvantage is that it lets Joe Public build up some sympathy since everything the public hears is one-sided.
    steam_sig.png
  • saint2esaint2e Registered User regular
    Lorek wrote: »
    I read it as just it as the implication that its standard practice not to comment on ongoing investigations; so while Joe Public yells everywhere and anywhere about what happened, the NYPD say nothing until the investigation is complete. The implied disadvantage is that it lets Joe Public build up some sympathy since everything the public hears is one-sided.

    Ahhh, that makes more sense. In our society as well, silence is implied guilt, too.
    banner_160x60_01.gif
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    joe public building up sympathy doesn't actually matter though

    I got a friend who's house was busted into by the cops and tazered in the head (causing medical issues he still suffers from) because they literally had the address confused (st vs ave) and he lost the civil suit against them, it's very very hard for sympathy to translate into anything
    override367 on
  • LorekLorek Registered User regular
    joe public building up sympathy doesn't actually matter though

    I got a friend who's house was busted into by the cops and tazered in the head (causing medical issues he still suffers from) because they literally had the address confused (st vs ave) and he lost the civil suit against them, it's very very hard for sympathy to translate into anything

    Oh, for sure. If anything, keeping quiet helps any legal cases even more than yelling and screaming around town. But it sure makes it easy to yell about terrible cops on an internet forum.
    steam_sig.png
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Buttcleft wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Deebaser wrote: »
    Police officers are in it to collect a paycheck, just like the rest if us.

    They're not punished for breaking the law like the rest of us.
    I went through police explorers(like boy scouts/rotc, but for police training) at an early age, pre 9/11 in a smaller city. TRT(like swat), all "less" lethal ordinance is to be avoided in use where civilians that could be susceptible to permanent damage (EG elderly hostage + flashbang = heart attack) it is not to be used unless it has to be. This included things like pepper spraying around kids. It's "less" lethal instead of "non" lethal, because it just kills at a lower rate than a gun.

    The above guideline about "others before arresting" is a funny one, as the guidelines regarding high speed pursuit dont apply to this in most cases. That and the supreme court has said that officers have no requirement to protect, or to help someone in danger.

    The only video that ever needs to get linked in these threads (and it should be in the OP every time) is the 45 minute one where the layer speaks, and repeats over and over "dont talk to police, eeeeeeeeeeevvvvvvvvvveeeeeeeeeeerrrrrr", and then hands it over to a current detective who goes "he's right, and I can tell you this, because criminals are idiots and wont listen anyways"

    edit: in direct relation to the case, I'd excuse myself until we have more information, like the police report or literally anything else. I seriously doubt the story went "STOP! POLICE!"->scared child->mother bend over->peppersprayed

    WTF?

    Basically the police aren't liable if crimes are committed, even if they are called and notified.

    It makes sense, in that the police can't be everywhere immediately, and if they were liable for crimes / damages everywhere they couldn't be, or couldn't get to in time, it would be impossible for them to do their job.

    The original case was one where some intruders had broken into a house and captured some of the homeowners. Other people in the house called the police, who drove by / knocked on the door but didn't stop the crime - I think something about how it was reported as a suspected burglary instead of burglary / kidnapping type situation.

    EDIT - It doesn't mean a cop can walk away from a crime, or let a crime happen...although if - for example, they are calling for backup - they wouldn't be liable for the harm their inaction caused. Until a special relationship (promise / action to act w/ knowledge that injury can result, direct contact between police and the individual, and justified reliance that the police will follow through) exists, the police have no obligation to any particular individual.

    Thanks for clearing that up. :mrgreen:

    I thought the case that declared cops dont have to do shit for you involved women living together being held hostage and repeatedly molested/raped for almost a day after they managed to call 911.

    Here is the case
    Meanwhile, Warren and Taliaferro crawled from their window onto an adjoining roof and waited for the police to arrive. While there, they observed one policeman drive through the alley behind their house and proceed to the front of the residence without stopping, leaning out the window, or getting out of the car to check the back entrance of the house. A second officer apparently knocked on the door in front of the residence, but left when he received no answer. The three officers departed the scene at 0633, five minutes after they arrived.

    Warren and Taliaferro crawled back inside their room. They again heard Douglas' continuing screams; again called the police; told the officer that the intruders had entered the home, and requested immediate assistance. Once again, a police officer assured them that help was on the way. This second call was received at 0642 and recorded merely as "investigate the trouble;" it was never dispatched to any police officers.

    True heroes.
    Yes, I am still angry
Sign In or Register to comment.