Shocking Moment Cop floored woman with savage sucker punch during parade

DailyMail ^ | October 1, 2012 | Daily Mail Reporter

[Altariel]

This is the shocking moment a police sergeant punched a young woman in the face because he thought she sprayed silly string at him during a peaceful parade.

The video was recorded during yesterday's 50th anniversary Puerto Rican Day parade in Philadelphia - where around 1,500 people were in attendance.

The 36-second clip shows a number of people milling around enjoying the festivities in the 'City of Brotherly Love'.

From the left-hand side, someone can be seen throwing an unidentified liquid towards a group of police officers.

At the same time, a young woman is walking past - who also gets hit by the liquid.

As she turns around to see where it came from, a police officer in a white shirt - which means he has acquired the rank of sergeant - comes towards the woman and delivers a brutal punch to her face, knocking her to the ground.

[Altariel]

Once again, you are attempting to distract from what is plainly evident in the video—a police officer punched a private citizen.

A man punched a woman.

A government employee committed battery against a non-government employee.

That action is unacceptable. Period. Unless one supports the progressive notion that hitting women is justifiable.

[Altariel]

By the way, a police officer who chooses to punch a private citizen arguable is attempting to start a riot.

If you don’t want an October Surprise, as you claim, stop defending government employees who commit assault and battery against private citizens.

[Uncle Chip]

Are you referring to the woman who was spraying silly string on the police then ran away, and then was going back over to do it again, tried to run away again, but got caught this time??? Is that the one???

[Altariel]

Still scurrying?

I am referring to the government employee who punched a woman, publicly.

I am referring to the little boy who couldn’t control himself in public.

I am referring to the Fool who blatantly violent the most basic principles of his own occupation.

[Altariel]

Still scurrying?

I am referring to the government employee who punched a woman, publicly.

I am referring to the little boy who couldn’t control himself in public.

I am referring to the Fool who blatantly violated the most basic principles of his own occupation.

[Uncle Chip]

I want to make sure that we are talking about the same woman that you denied had been doing anything remotely wrong.

Are we talking about the woman that has the can of silly string in her hand harrassing the police with it and then running away???

[Ken H]

From the Daily Mail...

_____________________________________________________________

The 39-year-old was then arrested and was issued a summary citation for disorderly conduct, on which police reported she had thrown beer at them.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211717/Just-ladies-Philadelphia-police-officer-accused-punching-unarmed-woman-posed-topless-sexy-sergeant.html

_____________________________________________________________

What say you now?

[Ken H]

Updated information at #287. Here's a working link.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211717/Just-ladies-Philadelphia-police-officer-accused-punching-unarmed-woman-posed-topless-sexy-sergeant.html

(what's the deal with his nipple ring and earring?)

[Uncle Chip]

The executive director of Concilio, the organization responsible for putting on the parade every year, called on police to fully investigate: 'While we have no knowledge of what led to the incident,

You don't??? Look at the very start of the video:

What is she doing that causes an officer to go after her??? And what is she doing with that can of silly string as she hops away waving it in the air??? And why is she going back over toward the police again with that can??? And why did she try to run away when they turned around???

The video shows more than just the punch.

[Uncle Chip]

Translating for her mother, her daughter Keysha, 19

Ohhh so now she can't speak English.

She is clearly seen saying the words: "I didn't do it" to the police. Do what??? Did they tell you what in English or Spanish???

But now she needs a translator.

[Ken H]

Look at this from Chief Ramsey! Your nipple-ringed pretty boy is going down.

____________________________________________________________

"Obviously, it's a video that's very troubling. When you see it, it's very clear and from what I saw, it's difficult to justify the actions that took place," Ramsey said.

The video of the incident at 5th and Lehigh during a Puerto Rican Day Parade after-party quickly went viral and has now been viewed almost a million times across the web.

-snip-

"If there was an arrest to be made, you use only the force necessary to affect that arrest. From what I saw that was in excess of what was needed," Ramsey said.

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8833059

____________________________________________________________

[Uncle Chip]

You forgot this:

Deputy Police Commissioner Richard Ross said of the incident: 'We'd be remiss if we didn't acknowledge that the video is disturbing.

'Clearly, the one issue at hand is she does appear to be walking away. She does not appear to be facing Lt Josey at that time.'

[Ken H]

Here's something else. The Philadelphia Inquirer has an editorial today about your pretty boy. BTW, his name is Lt Jonathan D. Josey II.

Inquirer Editorial: Cop's sucker punch gives force another black eye

http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/inquirer/20121003_Inquirer_Editorial__Cop_s_sucker_punch_gives_force_another_black_eye.html

[OneWingedShark]

I don't know their answer, but from my point of view, enlightened only by reading crime fiction books, there may be many scenarios where a throw down gun may help the good guys.

No, you are wrong. Both legally and morally: first the telling of lies under oath is perjury; second, the Bible clearly says “You must not testify falsely against your neighbor.” [Exodus 20:16, NLT].

If some crime must have the prosecution resort to lying to secure the conviction, then regardless of the actual-guilt of the accused the accused ought to have been acquitted. -- That is the introduction of lies on part of the prosecution is, in itself, reason to cause a reasonable doubt.

[Uncle Chip]

“An arrest may occur (2) by any act that indicates an intention to take the arrestee into custody and that subjects the arrestee to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest.” [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/arrest]

Was her walking away from him an attempt to resist arrest??? Was she resisting being handcuffed when she was on the ground???

[OneWingedShark]

No conservative should make excuses for a man who punches a woman.

While I generally agree with you on this thread, this statement is too far. There are times when it is acceptable to punch a woman; incidents such as the one where a goup of teen-aged women decided to beat some other woman up, filming it, and posting it on facebook would be one such instance (during the beating, I mean)... to claim otherwise is to claim that a man cannot "be the hero" in this sort of situation.

Also this mode of thought invites the horrid, self-devaluing principle of non-violence at any cost. IOW, it is the action of refuting that you have a right to defend your own life; this philosophy is absolutely destructive to society.

[dmz]

A set of facts that you asked for from the video that you cannot refute.

<><><><

You mean like her resisting arrest? Here’s my refutation. She was not charged with resisting arrest.

Or like you claiming she sprayed them with silly string? Here’s my refutation. The cops claim she threw beer on them. And they were there. You were not.

Or your claim that she attempted to flee? Here’s my refutation. She was not charged with attempting to flee.

So, as I said before, you have made a very transparent attempt to introduce your own set of facts into this discussion, every one of which is refuted by the cops themselves and the charging document.

Do you see how that works?

[OneWingedShark]

Very excellent post.

[Uncle Chip]

<>Or like you claiming she sprayed them with silly string? Here’s my refutation. The cops claim she threw beer on them. And they were there. You were not.<>

“She was cited for spraying silly string, according to police.”

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Officer-Jonathan-Josey-Hits-Woman-Video-Philadelphia-172121941.html

And they were there. You were not.

[OneWingedShark]

Hating cops, law and order is a liberal characteristic. Wear it.

Funny thing; if you love justice and [right/just] law, then you must be predisposed to hating cops [as-a-group] for the evil they do by both action and inaction.

Let me give you an example; the New Mexico State Constitution says, in Art II, Sec 6:

[Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms. (As amended November 2, 1971 and November 2, 1986.)

Yet, the state does abridge the right to keep and bear arms, both in its statutes [see NMSA 30-7-2.4] and in its own 'rules.' This last case is particularly insidious because it takes the color of law, without being law: to wit, the courthouses in New Mexico have signs, prominently displayed, proclaiming "No Weapons, violators will be prosecuted" (or similar). Now if that were by law, it would violate the underlined portion of the State Constitution, if it is not law then it is a federal felony, actually two, that is being perpetrated. More disturbing is that even municipal courts have such signs, which unambiguously violates the second sentence of the cited section of the state constitution.

You may be inclined to argue that weapons should not be allowed in courthouses; but the USSC has ruled, repeatedly, that the police are not under an affirmative obligation to provide for the safety of any particular private citizen.

It is also worth noting that a citizen may be compelled to appear in court despite not even being accused of a crime (jurors and witnesses); that they are deprived of their weapons combined with the legal obligation to appear is a travesty against justice and a de facto denial of the individual's inherent right to defend themselves.