Police Burtality or Preformance of Duty???

Strongarmed? I have literally no rights during the investigation. If I don't talk to IA I get fired. If I go to the media and talk, I get fired. All anyone has to do is say "officer did this" and offer no proof and my life is turned upside down. Who is doing the strongarming?

Don't get me wrong I love the idea of videotaping. Because of the two IA's I had I demanded video tape in my car and body mike because had I had them the investigations would have ended the day it started. By the same token if someone is going to falsely accuse me then I should have the right to go after them in court.
 
My point as well. Good honest cops don't worry about the complaint. They worry that their career has just been ended by someone making false claims which stay in their permanent file.
 
Unless the guy had just fire-bombed an orphanage or something, police brutality. The suspect was restrained and under control, both arms, about to be handcuffed. I fail to see how the officer felt threatened.
 
Nope, not here in the US. The New York Times just ran an article not too long ago on the fact that even expunged records are still showing up on background checks. If you're found not guilty here in the states, the records check will either say "dismissed" or "not guilty", and that's if there is even a disposition listed, which a lot of times there isn't.



I think with limited exception, you have to file your excessive force compliant at the station where the arresting officer is. LA is a very obvious exception due to the consent decree.



The very fact that the victim of police brutality has to, with limited exception, file with the station where the arresting officer took place is a big part of it. Threatening people with false reports is another good one. I've seen and heard about enough investigations, half the time it's a kangaroo court with the officer getting the benefit of the doubt.
 
Well Nordic I am just now getting to this thread and I have to agree with Gangrel and the rest! The one cop went too far. They had control and it was 2 on one. Not trying to read into the video but the guy was down and all they had to do was apply Pressure Point, Pain Compliance Techniques to get the guy cuffed. Striking a suspect in that positions simply can not be justified!

Thought the cop may have felt "justified" Gangrel points out that any lawyer that has any 1983 law experience will be serving that cop up for a civil suit! One less cop working the beat soon and I say good riddance.
 
Gangrel, I know that as a lawyer, you and I look at issues differently. I understand full well that "adversarial" procedure within the criminal justice system. Stop for a moment and just hear me out. I am so glad that we have review boards, citizen review panels, and lawyers like yourself that "Police" the Police. I honestly think the system weeds out a lot "bad cops". But I do think that many good cops get smeared just because they take up the badge.

When I was working corrections I was sued 2 times; once for "assualt" (waking an inmate up for an Inmate count with a notepad to the foot), and for failing to move an inmate before he was assaulted. The first one was tossed out in court for lack of evidence. The second one I was not even on duty the during the alleged time. The inmate just knew my name because I spoke Spanish! And this case took 3 years to resolve. I was cleared.

As a cop, I received complaints often and fortunately I had video and audio and whole lot of extra training on the Use of Force. That did not stop the lawsuits. Nor did it stop lawyers, who got paid to pursue these complaints, from filing. So, even though I was cleared each time, I had to do the dance. Your colleagues got paid, the complaintants lost their money, and I had to have my character dissected. No problem since I knew what to expect with my career choice. But I think sometimes, as a lawyer, you should help ascertain the validity of a client's claim before filing lawsuits. My personal solution to this is that who ever loses in a lawsuit, they pay the court, the fines, and all fees associated with the trial. I don't think many lawyers like my idea though.

As I have said, I respect you and your profession. I think that getting rid of "bad apple" cops is a good thing and we need people like you to keep watch over us. Just don't be quick to hate us all!
 
Narc,
You bring up some good points here. Something that is all over MAP these days is the whole polarized thing. Show one video of something and everyone squares off into their camps and believes the only viewpoint or component of discussion on the subject is the one their camp is spouting. Total black-n-white-itis. One more polarized thread where both sides refuse to see any possible viewpoints of the other side.

When I worked as an EMT and later as a paramedic we had to work closely with cops/sheriff's on a daily basis... they are usually at scene long before us. While there were some total asses out there... many were just doing their job - not as easy as it seems many don't really have an idea of what it entails. Many of them made our jobs much easier. It's surprising how many severely injured people don't want help or are not in the right frame of mind to make that decision for themselves. Many times it was a cop/sheriff's who kept us from being attacked by the person who we're supposed to be helping or by an irate family member, relative or homeboy.

So there are several officers I can think of that I have a huge amount of respect for... just for being able to keep a cool head and that kept us from getting attacked or simply just allowed us to concentrate on doing our job.

Now, that being said... as a kid I got more than one raw deal from a cop... as I posted before I'd have been the first to split if they rolled up. All my friends were the same. Where we grew up we had lots of bad ones... it was well known for it... but at the same time... there were some decent ones. Only that at that age in that kind of a neighborhood you're not likely to find that out. Had I not eventually moved out and moved on in life I'd probably still have all my concepts of cops/sheriffs deputies based on my early raw deal experiences with them.

At any rate - this thread is one of those situations where I find that people just retreat into their corners and aren't willing to try to look at it from another persons shoes. Not that I'm completely innocent of it... ... but it seems that these days threads in the off-topic forum just go that way immediately. Anytime police are brought it... it goes that way even quicker for some reason.
 
Totally agree Slip! The first time I was pulled over as a kid the Sergeant thought my name was A&&hole!

"License and registration A$$hole!"

I wound up going to court and winning the ticket and cop got a tongue lashing from the judge. So I am well aware that "Bad Cops" are the symbol for Cops in general. Hopefully, some where in this thread, someone will get the fact that law enforcement officers are just a cross-section of humanity as a whole. We are held to a higher standard of conduct then any other level of citizenry because we can "inhibit" someones rights. Even Government officials, Lawyers, Judges, Doctors, don't have the intensive background checks for employment that we do. And believe me, they don't have the constant oversight that we get.

Don't get me wrong here, I want that oversight! I want bad cops gotten rid of. But remember that we are human and we make mistakes too. Because of our job, the mistakes we make can be VERY serious to ourselves, our families, and others!
 
Narc,
We used to often relate it the contrast between what the general public feels about firefighters and what they feel about cops.

Everyone loves a firefighter.
Everyone hates a cop.

But how often did you ever have to call a firefighter for help? How many firefighters ever got drunk drivers off the street - how many firefighters ever nabbed a rapists? The list goes on and on... is largely one based on misunderstanding or misperceptions of the police officers job and all that entails.

The problem as I always saw it was that for the most part cops have to deal with the crap of humanity on a daily basis. That can wear... and because of the nature of the job and an organization like a police force... it's not only until just very recently where the consideration of work/emotional stress issues has even been broached in regards to police officers and police work. It's a very real issue that most people haven't even considered.
 
Here, here... slip and narc. Balanced perspectives being held up! why I never thought I'd see the day!
 
Here we reach an impasse due to the inadequacies of the U.S. again! However, it is worth noting that had such information been on Ian Huntley's records in teh u.K. then two small girls would still be alive. I think that is worth a little thought as soon as "civil rights" flags are waved.

Like everything else I suppose it is a balancing act



Yep, same over in the U.K. However, I fail to see why this is an issue. Not all complaints need to be resolved in court when a good rollicking from the supervisor will suffice. UK stations smust be a bit friendlier!



Threatening people with false reports is only bad if the report is not false. If it is then the complainant should bear the penalty for making such a report would you not agree? Surely it is worse to make a false report and get away with it?

If the police make up charges against someone you would be on them like a rash (and rightfully so). It is hypocritical to not apply the same standard to members fo the public.

It seems that there is a huge gulf in UK/US procedures with regards to this whole complaints thing, yet the problems are common to both.
 
When a person feels victimized by the police and then has to go into the same station said police work out of and then gets told if they file a "false reports" charge they will face criminal penalties, that's not exactly an encouragement to do the right thing and file a report. It just adds to the feelings of victimization by the police.
 
Wrong!!!!! All that is required is getting the paper from ANY station. It can be mailed or hand delivered to ANY station and it will forwarded to IA. And you seem to be overlooking something. He has not had to PROVE anything to file the complaint. Before charges are filed for false reporting we have to PROVE they made it up. Not exactly easy thing to do.
 
And they're supposed to go where to get the paper and file it? Three towns over, use some common sense! And then they get whacked with the false reports rap when they get interviewed? Yeah, real comforting.

And by the way... If you think proving false reports is "not exactly an easy thing to do", I have a client or two who would laugh in your face.
 
I knew something was all wrong...

mm...u..st.... fi...gh...t.... urg..e .... to.... b...e ..... ba...lan..ce....d
 
Again I suspect this is a gulf between U.S. procedure and my experiences in the U.K.

But what is wrong with telling them that if the report is proved false then they will face charges? It is - or rather it should be - the truth so what is to fear? There is a big difference between genuine grievances and the dross that most people come in with. But again I stress this is within the U.K.

It is worth pointing out that there is no penalty AT ALL for filing a false complaint in the U.K. - that is the problem.

I have been subjected to 3 complaints. One where I broke a suspects arm (during an arrest) - investigated and entirely justified. The second was by a complete gibbon who was as mad as a sack of frogs and complained I treated her as a suspect not a victim (overlooking the fact she actually did it!) and the third by a well-known gangster who was caught on CCTV committing a crime and tried to claim I stitched him up!

Now in the first two I had no issue with the complaints per se (although with the "mad one" it shoudl not have even been entertained). the thirs one though was a mud-flinging exercise that was so patently false to beggar belief. It was merely an attempt to divert attention away from his own crime (like OJ did!). I ask you objectively, how can that be justified as a complaint and why should he not have any comeback against him?



For what reasons? False reports and Unverified reports are two totally diffrent things. There is a big gap between "proven to be false/lies" and "cannot substantiate allegations"

Why not send the complaint via recorded delivery and have a supervisor/IA rep contact you to discuss it further?

99% of us LEO's are decent guys trying to do a hard job in a crappy world - but I guess "dog bites man" does not sell papers..or make people money.
 
Back
Top