User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/28/2015 4:40:47 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are trained to be be proficient with handguns. Would it have been okay to shoot him because they were trained? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. They are trained to be be proficient with handguns. Would it have been okay to shoot him because they were trained? I was going to try and explain (again) that there wasn't even a need for force at all, but I suppose this is a much more succinct answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2015 5:10:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a move is useful on 190 pound people but catastrophic on 140 pound people then it shouldn't be used on 140 pound people. I also find the idea of taking training one time and calling ones self proficient on the task forever to be incredibly disturbing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. If a move is useful on 190 pound people but catastrophic on 140 pound people then it shouldn't be used on 140 pound people. I also find the idea of taking training one time and calling ones self proficient on the task forever to be incredibly disturbing. I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2015 5:12:04 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was going to try and explain (again) that there wasn't even a need for force at all, but I suppose this is a much more succinct answer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. They are trained to be be proficient with handguns. Would it have been okay to shoot him because they were trained? I was going to try and explain (again) that there wasn't even a need for force at all, but I suppose this is a much more succinct answer. I don't think the use of force was necessary at all either.I'm just agreeing with the guys saying he wont be found guilty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2015 11:45:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. If the procedure/training is that far off, and that bad, that's going to be catastrophic in the civil suit. It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. Have you ever been in a fight? I can leg sweep you, give you a shove and have your head/shoulders contact whatever the fuck you land on. I can leg sweep you, maintain a grip, guide you to the ground & maintain a primary position on you. I can leg sweep you, wrap my arms around you, elevate and use our combined body weight to royally fuck you up. Anyone who says they are a cop & were trained in the 3rd option is a lying fuck. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 12:02:35 AM EDT
[#5]
I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 12:17:39 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it. Fuck that! This is Murica not the third world! You step to the hammer of justice you get breakfast through a straw. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 7:37:35 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have you ever been in a fight? I can leg sweep you, give you a shove and have your head/shoulders contact whatever the fuck you land on. I can leg sweep you, maintain a grip, guide you to the ground & maintain a primary position on you. I can leg sweep you, wrap my arms around you, elevate and use our combined body weight to royally fuck you up. Anyone who says they are a cop & were trained in the 3rd option is a lying fuck. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. If the procedure/training is that far off, and that bad, that's going to be catastrophic in the civil suit. It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. Have you ever been in a fight? I can leg sweep you, give you a shove and have your head/shoulders contact whatever the fuck you land on. I can leg sweep you, maintain a grip, guide you to the ground & maintain a primary position on you. I can leg sweep you, wrap my arms around you, elevate and use our combined body weight to royally fuck you up. Anyone who says they are a cop & were trained in the 3rd option is a lying fuck. Well said. This is a good example of inadequate or poor training. The advantage of martial arts, as you point out, is it can be measured and scaled to the threat. If he had produced a knife, then by all mean, slam his shoulder/neck into the ground. Otherwise, it's possible to take someone down without so much as a bruise. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 11:03:58 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was shown in this thread that that is a trained takedown in quite a few areas. I don't see how he'll get convicted of a move they are trained to do.If the guy weighed 190lbs there probably wouldn't have been an injury. I'm not a cop and not defending what happened,just pointing out what I have learned from the cops on this board.I don't think the sweep was necessary either. If a move is useful on 190 pound people but catastrophic on 140 pound people then it shouldn't be used on 140 pound people. I also find the idea of taking training one time and calling ones self proficient on the task forever to be incredibly disturbing. I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. I agree with you. I do however believe that if the case goes away on "that's how I was trained and it's an approved maneuver" then whoever approved it knowing that doing it on a 140 pound person would have a likely outcome of being catastrophic should be next up. Although I frankly don't see how the move as the officer did it was ever not likely to cause permanent disability even on a 200 pound guy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 1:41:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree with you. I do however believe that if the case goes away on "that's how I was trained and it's an approved maneuver" then whoever approved it knowing that doing it on a 140 pound person would have a likely outcome of being catastrophic should be next up. Although I frankly don't see how the move as the officer did it was ever not likely to cause permanent disability even on a 200 pound guy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. I agree with you. I do however believe that if the case goes away on "that's how I was trained and it's an approved maneuver" then whoever approved it knowing that doing it on a 140 pound person would have a likely outcome of being catastrophic should be next up. Although I frankly don't see how the move as the officer did it was ever not likely to cause permanent disability even on a 200 pound guy. The same technique is taught to all officers regardless of size. In practice they will rotate training partners and so if you are in class with a 110lb female she will get the same take down as the 200 pound guy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 1:42:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it. So you are good with politicians having sway in the criminal justice system? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 1:56:46 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The same technique is taught to all officers regardless of size. In practice they will rotate training partners and so if you are in class with a 110lb female she will get the same take down as the 200 pound guy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. I agree with you. I do however believe that if the case goes away on "that's how I was trained and it's an approved maneuver" then whoever approved it knowing that doing it on a 140 pound person would have a likely outcome of being catastrophic should be next up. Although I frankly don't see how the move as the officer did it was ever not likely to cause permanent disability even on a 200 pound guy. The same technique is taught to all officers regardless of size. In practice they will rotate training partners and so if you are in class with a 110lb female she will get the same take down as the 200 pound guy. There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 5:19:22 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 8:38:04 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." The Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" inquiry is whether the officers' actions are "objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation. Pp. 490 U. S. 396-397. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 9:21:16 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." I'll keep saying it: I think the bigger issue is that he shouldn't have done it all. That's why I believe he's going to be convicted. The move itself, executed right, wrong or indifferent, just wasn't necessary to any reasonable person looking at the video. My .02. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 9:25:11 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." The Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" inquiry is whether the officers' actions are "objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation. Pp. 490 U. S. 396-397. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Your response was off topic and in any case, you are arguing with a lawyer... which means you have left your lane and entered his. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 9:58:13 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you are good with politicians having sway in the criminal justice system? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it. So you are good with politicians having sway in the criminal justice system? You mean other than police chiefs, DAs, sheriffs, judges, and attorneys general? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 10:03:07 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean other than police chiefs, DAs, sheriffs, judges, and attorneys general? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it. So you are good with politicians having sway in the criminal justice system? You mean other than police chiefs, DAs, sheriffs, judges, and attorneys general? Yeah that made me giggle too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 10:26:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah that made me giggle too. Wait until he finds out about legislators.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2015 11:38:39 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah that made me giggle too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the Governor of the State already apologized to the Indian Ambassador and advised they would be doing all they could to help bring the officer who committed the illegal act to justice. Does not bode well for the cop, nor should it. So you are good with politicians having sway in the criminal justice system? You mean other than police chiefs, DAs, sheriffs, judges, and attorneys general? Yeah that made me giggle too. I was referring to mayors, governors and the president. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:38:33 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The same technique is taught to all officers regardless of size. In practice they will rotate training partners and so if you are in class with a 110lb female she will get the same take down as the 200 pound guy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm not saying it was a good move or defending the use of force. I'm just saying why I don't think he will be found guilty. I agree with you. I do however believe that if the case goes away on "that's how I was trained and it's an approved maneuver" then whoever approved it knowing that doing it on a 140 pound person would have a likely outcome of being catastrophic should be next up. Although I frankly don't see how the move as the officer did it was ever not likely to cause permanent disability even on a 200 pound guy. The same technique is taught to all officers regardless of size. In practice they will rotate training partners and so if you are in class with a 110lb female she will get the same take down as the 200 pound guy. So the instructor actually stops the John Cena highlight DVD to allow practice, or does he wait until afterwards? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 8:00:53 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not guilty in both courts is my prediction. I agree-they will find he followed procedure/training. Procedure and training are not defenses to a criminal prosecution. "It was proper procedure. It was in accordance with my training" is another way of saying "I was just following orders." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 2:16:16 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of the cops in this video were found not guilty in federal court.  http://youtu.be/SzpFheEY6ssQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still think nothing will come of it. Oh, he will be convicted, and rightfully so. All of the cops in this video were found not guilty in federal court. http://youtu.be/SzpFheEY6ssI was curious about what happened in the civil trial that resulted from that incident so I looked it up. The parties settled for $460,000 with $1,000 going to the beaten guy, while his attorneys got $359,000 in fees and $100,000 in expenses. (Apparently civil rights cases are just like divorces in that they settle when the money to pay the lawyers runs out.) In addition to the $1,000 the beaten guy also got 20 years for his crimes. I haven't found any criminal trial case for the officers yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 2:17:30 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was curious about what happened in the civil trial that resulted from that incident so I looked it up. The parties settled for $460,000 with $1,000 going to the beaten guy, while his attorneys got $359,000 in fees and $100,000 in expenses. (Apparently civil rights cases are just like divorces in that they settle when the money to pay the lawyers runs out.) In addition to the $1,000 the beaten guy also got 20 years for his crimes. I haven't found any criminal trial case for the officers yet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I still think nothing will come of it. Oh, he will be convicted, and rightfully so. All of the cops in this video were found not guilty in federal court. http://youtu.be/SzpFheEY6ss
I was curious about what happened in the civil trial that resulted from that incident so I looked it up. The parties settled for $460,000 with $1,000 going to the beaten guy, while his attorneys got $359,000 in fees and $100,000 in expenses. (Apparently civil rights cases are just like divorces in that they settle when the money to pay the lawyers runs out.) In addition to the $1,000 the beaten guy also got 20 years for his crimes. I haven't found any criminal trial case for the officers yet. All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 2:33:32 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:08:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still think nothing will come of it. Oh, he will be convicted, and rightfully so. All of the cops in this video were found not guilty in federal court. http://youtu.be/SzpFheEY6ssI was curious about what happened in the civil trial that resulted from that incident so I looked it up. The parties settled for $460,000 with $1,000 going to the beaten guy, while his attorneys got $359,000 in fees and $100,000 in expenses. (Apparently civil rights cases are just like divorces in that they settle when the money to pay the lawyers runs out.) In addition to the $1,000 the beaten guy also got 20 years for his crimes. I haven't found any criminal trial case for the officers yet. All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. While that outcome is certainly a likely outcome, do you know that as a fact or are you just assuming? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:14:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. Seriously? Or snark? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:23:36 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
While that outcome is certainly a likely outcome, do you know that as a fact or are you just assuming? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. While that outcome is certainly a likely outcome, do you know that as a fact or are you just assuming? 
http://www.myfoxal.com/story/14431993/five-birmingham-police-officers-will-be-reinstated |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:27:08 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seriously? Or snark? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. Seriously? Or snark? I did some further checking and found: Only 2 were indicted and tried but they were found not guilty. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/01/two_former_birmingham_police_o.html All were reinstated. It didn't say anything about back pay but probably got that. Dunno about promotions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:32:28 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? Irrelevant and won't be answered. The maneuver that was done on the guy ended up with 400 pounds of people landing on the guy's head and neck. Was that either performed correctly or incorrectly? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:32:32 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I did some further checking and found: Only 2 were indicted and tried but they were found not guilty. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/01/two_former_birmingham_police_o.html All were reinstated. It didn't say anything about back pay but probably got that. Dunno about promotions. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/05/trial_date_set_for_lawsuit_aga.html Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. Seriously? Or snark? I did some further checking and found: Only 2 were indicted and tried but they were found not guilty. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/01/two_former_birmingham_police_o.html All were reinstated. It didn't say anything about back pay but probably got that. Dunno about promotions. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/05/trial_date_set_for_lawsuit_aga.html the officers will be quickly put back to work and receive full back pay and benefits dating back to May 14, 2009, http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/04/jefferson_county_personnel_boa_5.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:43:52 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: the officers will be quickly put back to work and receive full back pay and benefits dating back to May 14, 2009, http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/04/jefferson_county_personnel_boa_5.html Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All of the cops were found not guilty, go their jobs back with promotions and backpay. Seriously? Or snark? I did some further checking and found: Only 2 were indicted and tried but they were found not guilty. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/01/two_former_birmingham_police_o.html All were reinstated. It didn't say anything about back pay but probably got that. Dunno about promotions. http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/05/trial_date_set_for_lawsuit_aga.html the officers will be quickly put back to work and receive full back pay and benefits dating back to May 14, 2009, http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/04/jefferson_county_personnel_boa_5.html At the reinstatement hearing, 'the city failed to present any evidence in support of termination of the five officers'. Reading between the lines, with a civil suit against the city coming up for trial, the city made a choice to not defend the firing of the cops so as not to increase the evidence against the city in the civil suit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:50:04 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Reading between the lines, with a civil suit against the city coming up for trial, the city made a choice to not defend the firing of the cops so as not to increase the evidence against the city in the civil suit. That makes it a bit different than it seems on the surface. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:55:11 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At the reinstatement hearing, 'the city failed to present any evidence in support of termination of the five officers'. Reading between the lines, with a civil suit against the city coming up for trial, the city made a choice to not defend the firing of the cops so as not to increase the evidence against the city in the civil suit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
the officers will be quickly put back to work and receive full back pay and benefits dating back to May 14, 2009, http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/04/jefferson_county_personnel_boa_5.html At the reinstatement hearing, 'the city failed to present any evidence in support of termination of the five officers'. Reading between the lines, with a civil suit against the city coming up for trial, the city made a choice to not defend the firing of the cops so as not to increase the evidence against the city in the civil suit. Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:55:58 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Irrelevant and won't be answered. The maneuver that was done on the guy ended up with 400 pounds of people landing on the guy's head and neck. Was that either performed correctly or incorrectly? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? Irrelevant and won't be answered. The maneuver that was done on the guy ended up with 400 pounds of people landing on the guy's head and neck. Was that either performed correctly or incorrectly?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 4:33:13 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: the officers will be quickly put back to work and receive full back pay and benefits dating back to May 14, 2009, http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/04/jefferson_county_personnel_boa_5.html At the reinstatement hearing, 'the city failed to present any evidence in support of termination of the five officers'. Reading between the lines, with a civil suit against the city coming up for trial, the city made a choice to not defend the firing of the cops so as not to increase the evidence against the city in the civil suit. Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:48:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I too thought your question was ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:49:37 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? And since every cop on scene did it then it's obviously what a reasonable cop would do. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:32:59 PM EDT
[#38]
I imagine once he's back on the job he'll get a cool nickname like the Kolkata crippler or something clever befitting his accomplishments
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:41:39 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I imagine once he's back on the job he'll get a cool nickname like the Kolkata crippler or something clever befitting his accomplishments Desi Destroyer Gujarati Slayer |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:45:53 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Desi Destroyer Gujarati Slayer Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I imagine once he's back on the job he'll get a cool nickname like the Kolkata crippler or something clever befitting his accomplishments Desi Destroyer Gujarati Slayer Nursing home nightmare |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:48:59 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? Irrelevant and won't be answered. The maneuver that was done on the guy ended up with 400 pounds of people landing on the guy's head and neck. Was that either performed correctly or incorrectly? Typical condescension. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:52:30 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Typical condescension. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There's really two options on the move that the officer did: - He did it wrong which resulted in the guy getting overrotated and ending up with his head and neck supporting two men's weight - He did it correctly and the move is unsafe, leaving whoever approved it liable for the predictable outcome Just so we're all clear: Every single fire & EMS call you've been involved in has had the same exact expected results when a trained technique was applied? Irrelevant and won't be answered. The maneuver that was done on the guy ended up with 400 pounds of people landing on the guy's head and neck. Was that either performed correctly or incorrectly? Typical condescension. Typical GD ignorance |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 9:52:46 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nursing home nightmare Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I imagine once he's back on the job he'll get a cool nickname like the Kolkata crippler or something clever befitting his accomplishments Desi Destroyer Gujarati Slayer Nursing home nightmare Old Man Obliterater |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:50:12 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 12:47:54 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. Ridiculously difficult to convict cops no matter how wrong they were. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 3:17:17 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ridiculously difficult to convict cops no matter how wrong they were. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. Ridiculously difficult to convict cops no matter how wrong they were. That whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" thing is a mother fucker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 4:27:18 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" thing is a mother fucker. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. Ridiculously difficult to convict cops no matter how wrong they were. That whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" thing is a mother fucker. More than that, the standards for convicting an officer are very high and the standard in a civil rights case is incredibly high. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 6:14:57 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Combat_Jack
More than that, the standards for convicting an officer are very high and the standard in a civil rights case is incredibly high. umm.....the standard for civil court it a "preponderance of evidence",,,which is incredibly low. Like a 51% probability that what was alleged happened. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 10:38:34 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury.  So what you are saying is that the cop that was punching the unconcious non-resisting guy in the head was doing the right thing?
I thought that the excuse at the time was that they were just amp'd up from the pursuit and the fact that they thought he killed the cop he almost ran over. Getting amp'd up and emotional (angry) isn't an excuse for throwing punches, if it is then most domestic violence arrests are pure hypocrisy. I'm sure we agree that those arrests are good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 10:57:20 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So what you are saying is that the cop that was punching the unconcious non-resisting guy in the head was doing the right thing? I thought that the excuse at the time was that they were just amp'd up from the pursuit and the fact that they thought he killed the cop he almost ran over. Getting amp'd up and emotional (angry) isn't an excuse for throwing punches, if it is then most domestic violence arrests are pure hypocrisy. I'm sure we agree that those arrests are good. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Nope. Chief Roper was fairly new on the job and wanted to make a name for himself so he knee jerked fired these guys. I called it way back when it happened. BPD paid a six figure payout on a shoot that was ruled a good shoot by everyone. BPD also paid out major bucks to two officers fired for arresting the then mayors daughter. They got fired, rehired and fired again and were basically told we will keep firing you even though we know the board will keep making us hire you back. How much for you to just walk away? My understanding is those were 7 figure payouts. 5 guys beating on a motionless and unconscious perp is a knee jerk firing? What was the justification for hitting the guy as he lay on the ground? Maybe he is faking it after being ejected from a roll over crash and he was resisting by not putting his hands behind his back when ordered? He was brand new in the job and wanted to make a splash. He fired them without doing it the proper way, that is why he did not appear before the board because he knew he was wrong. Officers were cleared by federal trial jury. So what you are saying is that the cop that was punching the unconcious non-resisting guy in the head was doing the right thing? I thought that the excuse at the time was that they were just amp'd up from the pursuit and the fact that they thought he killed the cop he almost ran over. Getting amp'd up and emotional (angry) isn't an excuse for throwing punches, if it is then most domestic violence arrests are pure hypocrisy. I'm sure we agree that those arrests are good. I took Bama's "he knew he was wrong" comment to mean that the chief knew he fired the officers without going through the proper process, not that beating the guy was doing the right thing. So if the chief didn't do it right the first time, can he fire them properly once they were rehired back or is it too late? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
