El Monte and Alabama excessive force incidents and End of Chase Syndrome

[OuTcAsT]

The second guessing and breast beating about the excesses of Police work are just two of the reasons I and many of my fellow LEOs stopped proactive Police work. We are getting results also, Chicago had more murders than Baghdad last year. But, the bright side a lot less "rights" were violated and I haven't been sued federally in over 6 years.

OK, Thanks for clearing that up. I hope I am misunderstanding you, but this sounds like a "Jack Nicholson" answer, the whole " You give me the dirty jobs to do and then question the way I do it" ? I expect this kind of response at some point, pardon me if this one comes as a surprise.

Anyone notice the poor innocent motorist running down the cop who tried to spike the van at the first of the video?

I saw the motorist who is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And therein lies the rub, while anyone who saw the video has no doubt that the motorist is likely to be convicted when his case goes to court, until that happens he has specific rights that should be protected.

When even a scumbag gets the crap beat out of him under color of law it is still illegal. Lets assume that the video showed a soccer mom (your wife, girlfriend, daughter or mom) pulled over for a minor traffic infraction only to get beaten within inches of her life, would that make a difference? According to law, does the scumbag have less rights than the innocent soccer mom? The simple answer is no.

Sure, watching some guy try to clip a copper trying to stop him is inflammatory, but if it is OK to kick his a$$ over it, why would it be less OK for the soccer mom to get pounded? They are still both entitled to equal protection under the law, so by that reasoning, also should get equal treatment ? No ?

Unless things like this are prosecuted, I fear that is the direction we are headed. If you have a subset of people who can operate above the law, they are going to do just that.

[BlueTrain]

And another trend I don't care for is the increasing use of abbreviations on this forum. I don't understand half of them. Maybe I ought to get out more.

[OuTcAsT]

And another trend I don't care for is the increasing use of abbreviations on this forum. I don't understand half of them.

I may have contributed to the confusion, let me see if I can help;

MOS=Military Occupation Specialty ( your job in the military)
LE=Law Enforcement
LEO=Law Enforcement Officer
LEA=Law Enforcement Agency
DA= District Attorney
BDU=Battle Dress Uniform (Fatigues)
ROE=Rules of Engagement ( The rules for a combat situation )
APC= Armored personnel carrier
Hope that helps,

[zxcvbob]

Who has the responsibility and authority to bring such charges ? Would it not be the States Atty. / Local DA ?
Is it really as simple as the fact that the DA is unwilling to bring such charges ?

Yes, it is that simple. However the FBI also has juridiction, so it could end of prosecuted by the feds (that seldom seems to happen either.)

[D.Delozier]

Dont forget they have the Internal affairs people, LOL thats like letting the fox watch the hen house! All such incedents should be taken out of the offending departments hands and given over to a public review board of some kind.Maybe then these kind of things will be delt with in a more fair and just manner.

[Dust Monkey]

The second guessing and breast beating about the excesses of Police work are just two of the reasons I and many of my fellow LEOs stopped proactive Police work. We are getting results also, Chicago had more murders than Baghdad last year. But, the bright side a lot less "rights" were violated and I haven't been sued federally in over 6 years.

So, correct me if I am wrong, you and other officers have "stopped" doing your job just because you cant or are unable to do it within the scope of the law?

Proactive is great, just do it within the confines of the constitution.

Anyone notice the poor innocent motorist running down the cop who tried to spike the van at the first of the video?

The suspect motorist is presumed innocent. And yes I saw him almost hit an officer. I also saw the officer step away from the safety behind a patrol car to attempt to thow a spike strip in front of the suspects vehicle, which was being chased at a high rate of speed. Common sense should tell you that if you are trying to apprehend someone that is not wanting to be apprehended, and you step in his way, he most likely wont stand down. Not blaming the officer or stating that its the officers fault that the suspect almost hit him. Just saying that if you touch a hot stove, dont be surprised if you get burned.

Last thought. If you cant do a job within the rules and regulations laid out for said job, you need to quit.

[Wagonman]

So, correct me if I am wrong, you and other officers have "stopped" doing your job just because you cant or are unable to do it within the scope of the law?

Proactive is great, just do it within the confines of the constitution.

I have turned into report taker because it's not worth the aggravation to play police. But, as I said I haven't been sued or received a complaint in over six years.

The suspect motorist is presumed innocent. And yes I saw him almost hit an officer. I also saw the officer step away from the safety behind a patrol car

Last thought. If you cant do a job within the rules and regulations laid out for said job, you need to quit.

You can presume him innocent all you want he is still guilty on the street.

No, you saw a Officer doing his job.

Last thought. you will get the society you deserve, God help you.

[B. Lahey]

I'm no expert, but it seems to me that Chicago must be a hell of a hard place to be a cop. Politics aplenty, "advocates" crawling out of the woodwork to screech and protest and sue every time little Johnny Criminal gets his hair messed up, corruption, neverending scandals. I'm not surprised at all that Chicago cops find themselves playing it safe.

You should move out of IL to the civilized world, Wagonman. It's different over here, and we need cops too.

[Wagonman]

You should move out of IL to the civilized world, Wagonman. It's different over here, and we need cops too.

To far in pensionwise sadly.

[RedneckFur]

You can presume him innocent all you want he is still guilty on the street.

If this is how the law inforcement in our country feel and act, then our legal system has failed.

[Dust Monkey]

Still guilty on the street. Since when were cops given judicial powers.

That statement speaks volumes about the problem.

And I did not say that the spike strip officer was not doing his job. I opined that he was careless and made a very stupid decision, IMO.

[B. Lahey]

If this is how the law inforcement in our country feel and act, then our legal system has failed.

If our system had cops acting as judges or performing other legal resposibilities, I would agree with you, but that isn't the case. The way our system works, I don't see how the way a cop mentally regards the person being arrested has any bearing on the situation.

If they see somebody in violation of the law, that person is indeed "street guilty", and they get treated like a criminal temporarily.

If a cop sees some maniac waving a huge Bowie knife in some grandmother's eye, what are they supposed to do? Kindly ask "innocent" Mr. Psychopath to come along down to the courthouse so that he may be tried?

No. That man gets treated like a criminal as a practical matter. The term "guilty" in its strict legal sense don't even come into it, that's for later on down the road, and cops are not the ones who make that call.

[BlueTrain]

Hey, Outcast, you left these out:

TDY
RPG
PDW
PFD
BAR
SMG
SGM
MSG
HCR

You get a gold star if you figure all them out.

[Dust Monkey]

B. Lahey,

Stop the "street guilty" crap. With regards to people breaking the law a cops job is to arrest, gather info to put together a case to forward to the DA. The DA decides to charge or not and Judge/jury decides guilt or not. This "he is already street guilty" put the officer in a biased mindset.

And your statements on how cops treat potential criminals. I sure hope you are not a cop. No on in this thread has suggest for a cop to treat a knife weildng suspect in the manner as you described. You description is flippant crap. Your see there is this certain thing called "Use of Force". It outlines and guides an officer on how and when to respond to a threat. No where in the Use of Force does it say you get to beat the hell out of an unsconscious suspect or kick a compliant suspect in the head. So I do not know where your getting that I and others are advocating what BS you decsribe in your post about treating suspects.

FWIW. If you have a criminal armed with a knife that is an IMEDIATE threat to you or the public, use of deadly force is justfied. Just dont beat the hell out of the dead body afterwards.

[Wagonman]

B Lahey, you expressed my point far more eloquently than I did and for that I will never forgive you.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'm disturbed a bit about street justice also. A few years ago I went to a meeting of the American Society for Criminology. Lots of LEO researchers attend. A fair number of criminologists have LE backgrounds. One telling presentation was about a small but noticeable number of departments that focus on clearing cases regardless of the guilt or innocence of the 'suspect'. Their methods were, as you might imagine, not in accord with basic civil rights. It is not being soft to expect professionalism. If one burns out, despite pension and financial issues - you shouldn't be on the front line. It is true for most professions.

One argument against civilian carry was the fear of vigilante justice. If folks can make that argument - can we, in the gun world, chortle about police acting in the same manner?

Gun culture also prattles about the Constitution and basic rights. Then we find folks wanting to violate them in some aggressive hissy fit. He's a criminal, blah, blah. So which is it? Rights or it's fun to be violent in violation of basic rights, if you don't like the guy.

Last, red herrings, pseudo-vivid instances as rhetorically hogwash. What if it was a knife wielding psycho - are you supposed to be nice to him. Horse manure - that is an active on coming threat as compared to an unconscious or restrained individual.

[Wagonman]

TDY Temporary Duty
RPG Rocket Propelled Grenade
PDW Personal Duty Weapon
PFD Personal Floatation Device
BAR Browning Automatic Rifle
SMG Sub Machine Gun
SGM Sergeant Major
MSG Master Sergeant
HCR I dunno

[BlueTrain]

Personal Defense Weapon, which is dumb.
Household Cavalry Regiment (didn't think you'd know that).

I knew what some were, finally figured the others out, didn't see the one with APC, which also means all-purpose capsule.

To bring this back on track, do people think that the behavior of law enforcement officers is different in different parts of the country, or the type of agency they belong to? By the latter, I mean state police, county or city police, federal agencies, or sheriff's department, where there is one. In Fairfax County, Virginia, the Sheriff's Department has different duties from the Fairfax County Police Department but I know that in more rural counties the local sheriff's department had the regular law enforcement function.

At one time, of course, there were only sheriffs and not so many of them, plus in territories, there were US Marshals and their deputies. Law Enforcement has been a minor growth industry, you might say.

I am tempted to say that the police in larger cities, though not all, are more likely to be "not so nice" as those in other places. I have virtually no basis for making that statement, however, with only the slightest first hand encounters with the police anywhere. I am also tempted to say that once things like SWAT teams are organized and on hand, there could be a temptation to use them more if only to justify their existance but again, that is only a supposition.

[hogdogs]

Blue, I am 100% convinced that LEA's vary from region to region thru out the states... I am a Floridian by birth but raised thru out the USA. Aside from Louisiana at 18, all my adult years I have lived in Fla. The peninsula of florida is basically "big city" type living and even the rural areas are rife with tourists and other riff raff common to big city life.
I am no angel and have been on both sides of the "blueline" many times, that said...

In the peninsula of florida, I have never had a cop approach me on the side of the road broke down, using the phone, reading my map etc. and not turn it into a "traffic stop". Blues flashing and asking for ID and POI and registration and often asking permission to search my ride.
Up here in the panhandle, sitting on the side of the road getting cel service or whatever, I have never had one do anything but pull alongside and ask if I was okay... Down yonder, if you lip off YOU WILL AT LEAST BE TAZED... Up here I know of one guy who I personally witnessed or my son witnessed (ex bossman) get out and bow up in the face of a deputy or trooper only to be threatened with arrest if he didn't "chill out"...
I bowed up on one deputy before LTL tazers were carried down yonder but he knew he was wrong and I was right or he would have either whooped my butt or shot me... All in all up here is the most laid back LEO's I have ever encountered. They are real life not blowed up super human above the law types... They relate to their own self unlike other locales. Had the law been called to report "possible full auto firearms" claims down yonder I doubt I would have spent better than an hour on my porch explaining the .22lr pistol speed firing and requiring the deputy get a "super" involved and brining out the pistol and demonstrating the rate of fire then letting them do the same...
Brent

[OuTcAsT]

One argument against civilian carry was the fear of vigilante justice

And just what is vigilante justice?

Webster defines it ;

vigilante
One entry found.

Main Entry:
vig·i·lan·te Listen to the pronunciation of vigilante
Pronunciation:
\ˌvi-jə-ˈlan-tē\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Spanish, watchman, guard, from vigilante vigilant, from Latin vigilant-, vigilans
Date:
1856

: a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate) ; broadly : a self-appointed doer of justice

I would think for the purpose of this discussion, and in keeping with the current context, everyone has a similar idea of what constitutes "vigilantism".

If we look at some of the statements thus far;

The second guessing and breast beating about the excesses of Police work

But, the bright side a lot less "rights" were violated

it's not worth the aggravation to play police

You can presume him innocent all you want he is still guilty on the street.

you will get the society you deserve

It would appear that this is, at least on the surface, what LE has become. Someone said:

If our system had cops acting as judges or performing other legal responsibilities, I would agree with you,

Yet that is exactly what is happening. When someone is presumed "Street Guilty" that is a judgement plain and simple. Maybe not a legal one, but certainly one which is going to effect the manner in which a suspect is treated.

At one point in our society, justice was served up by the gun and rope. After a while people saw that there were many legally innocent people who were "collateral damage" in this sort of broadsword-type justice, and some reforms were needed to mitigate the possibility that someone might be tried, convicted, and possibly executed on the whim of the public at large. Some would argue that a return to that sort of system would reduce the violent crime we see today. The fact remains that those checks and balances were put in place to protect the innocent. There is no question that the same system also can be exploited to the criminals advantage, but that is seen more so in the courtroom than on the street.

I am not advocating that someone who has allegedly just shot, stabbed, or raped someone be "asked nicely" to come along to court. LE has to do whatever it takes, within the law to bring that person to court. But, once he is in custody, they have fulfilled their role to the public, which was to get him off the street. Afterwords their responsibility changes, they are then charged with a duty to protect that persons rights, much as LE once had to protect prisoners from lynch mobs.

Sure it is difficult for most of us to detach ourselves from the emotions we feel about the crime, and worry about the prisoner's rights, until you are the prisoner. I will postulate that each and every person who has flamed my position, would, if you are arrested, (say for an investigation into a self defense shooting) want every single one of your rights protected. You will expect to be handcuffed, ( just not too tightly ) transported safely, ( watch your head on the door )
without having your A$$ kicked, to the precinct, where you will immediately request a lawyer. Those are your rights, and you will expect LE to protect every one of them.

That is perfectly fine, since you have done nothing wrong.

But, you cannot have it both ways. That robber, rapist, murderer, also have, the same rights as you until they are convicted. We preach and posture about our rights when it serves our purpose, but can just as easily dismiss someone else their rights because we place ourselves in a position of "street judge" Perhaps some should re-read the definition I provided.

Also, I don't think an officer should be sued for civil rights violations, I think he should be held to the same standard I am. If he is outside the law he should be arrested, tried, and either convicted, or exonerated. If our legal system cannot function within it's own guidelines, then how can those of us that might get caught up in it expect to be treated fairly?

[ilbob]

Up here I know of one guy who I personally witnessed or my son witnessed (ex bossman) get out and bow up in the face of a deputy or trooper only to be threatened with arrest if he didn't "chill out"...

What is "bow up"?

I saw the video of the El Monte incident. I am sort of ambivalent about it, but I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to a law abiding person over a violent street thug every time, if there is some doubt.

I think police agencies all over the country are going to have to rethink the way they operate to more closely align what they do with public perceptions of what they should be doing. Video is pervasive and won't go away. And many cases where video is produced there is a rush to get it in the public domain.

Much of the way policing was done in the past was done in the shadows, without much public knowledge of what was going on. Maybe a good analogy is how hot dogs are made. We liked to think that the way police work and how police officers were portrayed on Adam12 and Dragnet was real. We are now starting to get snippets of what it really is like sometimes, especially in some of the urban hell holes.

What we are seeing does not comport well with what we as a society would like to believe is the way things should be. Some of it is the view that cops should never make a mistake, or have any human failings while performing their jobs. Being as cops are human, that is not an especially realistic expectation, and no amount of training or policies is going to change that. We are going to have to find a way for the system to accept those human failings, yet provide protection from those failings to the people at large. Probably not an easy task.

[OuTcAsT]

What is "bow up"?

Brent can correct me if I'm wrong, pretty sure the definition is the same here in TN, But to "Bow Up" would be to "Aggressively assert your point of view" Usually this type of display is sprinkled liberally with colorful metaphors, and comments concerning one's family lineage, their "close" relationship to their Mother, etc. You get the Idea.

[ilbob]

Brent can correct me if I'm wrong, pretty sure the definition is the same here in TN, But to "Bow Up" would be to "Aggressively assert your point of view" Usually this type of display is sprinkled liberally with colorful metaphors, and comments concerning one's family lineage, their "close" relationship to their Mother, etc. You get the Idea.

That would seem to be a fairly poor way of dealing with people, especially those whose training, experience, and temperament leads them to need to be in control of the encounter.

[hogdogs]

In my definition... To "bow up" is to aggressively posture physically. No physical contact, just to posture intent or threat of such. It may or may not include verbal content... In fact, the inclusion of verbal content such as family lineage and possible profession of one's momma usually shows less true intent of physical force compared to a silent show of posturing ie:bowing up...
And I wasn't referring to the LEO as bowing up although I have seen that too many times as well...

Bob, yes it is a risky move to posture up on a LEO... In the instance I did it I was 100% in the right and he was in the wrong and I was willing to go to the next level to defend my position of being wronged by an over zealous officer. it was one of those traffic stops performed after a running of a tag and him trying to come up with a justified reason for a stop. His excuse was "The tag comes back to a woman so I thought you may have stolen the car..." My wife was with me (tag in her name) and the car was 15 years old and not custom (no reason to expect the car to be worth more than $500-$800 bucks!)

Brent

[Wagonman]

"Street Guilty" that is a judgement plain and simple. Maybe not a legal one, but certainly one which is going to effect the manner in which a suspect is treated.

No his actions are going to dictate how he is treated. "street guilty" is a temporary judgement which is nothing more than Probable Cause to arrest or legal justification for use of force.

I am a judge, I decide who is going to jail. However, I have checks and balances. My Watch Commander has to approve the arrest, The SA has to approve felony charges, an actual judge and or jury has to find said offender guilty or innocent. So this arguement collapses under it's own weight.