Posted on 12/11/2014 1:02:07 PM PST by TigerClaws
A Sacramento County sheriff's deputy has been placed on paid administrative leave after a video surfaced showing him using his foot to force a man's head against the ground and a flashlight to strike the man.
(Excerpt) Read more at kcra.com ...
Woohoo! paid time off!
“I asked him kindly to move the car,” Reyes said. “He glared at me and stared at me. And then, I said an expletive, ‘You need to move the car because I can't get through.’”
The confrontation escalated as the officer questioned Reyes about being on probation. Reyes has been arrested in the past for drug possession and carrying a concealed weapon.”
This is what you get for taking to a peace officer. Of course bring up the irrelevant past, which has no bearing on the request/beat down.
I know police officers are under a lot of scrutiny which is why they should always assume their actions are being recorded. The boot to the head may be justified but wasn’t there some other way? Now he’ll be busy defending that action as it’s played over and over on the news and in court.
Well, that's just shocking!
Most people call that a vacation.
Really? What did the officer direct him to do? Sounds like he got pissed because the guy asked him to move his car and swore at him so he tased and beat him. Why was his car blocking the intersection anyway?
That is a ridiculous, almost nonsensical, statement. Yet we here it over and over again from police officials. And too many conservatives seem to swallow it whole.
Why does that statement bother me so much? Because it translates into: If you don't obey a police order, the police are justified in doing whatever they want to you.
I try to be open minded about these situations, and not go into them with knee-jerk preconceived opinions. There are times when that statement is true. But if Undersheriff Lewis is going to say that he ought to at least say what directives were not complied with. If he is still investigating it, how does he know what directives the officer made, if any, or that Reyes refused to comply? If there were real reporters, they would ask him. Also, why don’t they give the officer’s name? Wouldn’t it make sense to ask if he had other complaints in the past?
I'd go further than that. The statement ("had the subject complied with the officer's directives...") is almost always true.
But noncompliance should not be an excuse for extreme police over-reaction. Unfortunately, that's what we are seeing too much of these days. Many cops take any minor noncompliance as a personal insult.
We used to call this Felony Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Kidnapping.
Try watching this one and notice the attitude of the a$$hole who’s in charge of these CHiPs:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Berkeley-Man-Near-Death-at-the-hands-of-CHP-206494311.html
No one deserves to be abused like what you see here!
I read the story. The fellow wanted to read the ticket. The cop took that as noncompliance. But the fellow turned out to be correct. The lawman had incorrectly read the truck log hours of a couple days earlier, and mistakenly wrote up a ticket for too many hours driven, which was not true. Then the cop escalated the incident with accusations of drug use for having (shudder) table salt in the truck. The cop (trained as a fist boxer) clearly wanted to do a beatdown and got his wish. He should be sued for every penny he's got.
The cop just lost his temper, seems so far to me. Cops like this are the problem. He needs to be fired and referred for prosecution.
Once the nasties know they can not get away with brutality, it will stop. They have no verbal skills, ethics nor sense of humanity. No professionalism. It’s just shock ‘em or glock ‘em. These few idiots are going to have the population looking at all cops with suspicion and disrespect. Bad things will then escalate. It has to stop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.