Posted on 09/22/2007 8:03:54 AM PDT by beltfed308
ST. GEORGE — A police officer who was recorded berating a motorist earlier this month has lost his job.
The board of aldermen voted 5-0, with one member absent, to fire Sgt. James Kuehnlein on Monday. The vote was cast in a session closed to the public and wasn't announced until Wednesday, when a notice was posted at the City Hall of this tiny south St. Louis County community.
In a video that got wide viewership on the Internet, Kuehnlein taunts and threatens motorist Brett Darrow, 20, sometimes shouting and using profanity, after questioning him in a commuter lot near Interstate 55. Darrow posted the footage of the Sept. 7 incident on the web.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
I'm glad they're still here. Like yourself, their posts are so over-the-top I've sometimes wondered if they're not libertarians in disguise. They, like you, certainly drive more folks into the libertarian camp.
It’s hell when the sheep start carrying...
Sure. Compare my theory (the cop was set up -- boom) vs. his story about the forgotten cell phone, get dressed and meet half way, 2am, deserted parking lot, got to have my phone right now even though I have my moms, yada, yada.
Please.
We did. The evidence says your theory sucks.
But you have such a good track record...still want to claim this is a "high crime area"? LOL!
You know, Drew's story about the cell phone does sound a little too convenient. But you know as well as I do that it is also completely irrelevant. He is not charged with any crimes and he doesn't need an alibi. If that were the case, then the police could check phone records for a little more evidence that the story is true (they already have two witnesses.) But they won't do that. Because it is irrelevant. It was legal for him to be in that parking lot, it was legal for him to be a smart a$$, and the cop was clearly abusive during the incident, and possibly criminal in its aftermath.
Perhaps you can point to us where the start/stop button is for the camera, that you can see his hands moving away from after he started it.
Again, rather than ask him you just throw out wild accusations. I'd say you were just playing for comic relief, but I've seen you do the same thing in this forum enough that you're one of 3 people I normally have filtered out with my greasemonkey trollblocker.
I'm saying the above coupled with numbnuts pulling into this lot at 2am and immediately start giving the cop a hard time when the cop asks "who are you" and "why are you here" -- legitimate questions given the above.
"The cop's behavior is 100% indefensible.
I agree. And since it's on tape, his superiors have little choice but to fire him. It's immaterial that he was set up and goaded into responding the way he did - but it's true. In my opinion.
The sole point I was attempting to make was that the kid did this intentionally with the hope that he could goad the cop into screwing himself. He succeeded.
First of all, I'm honored. I think it saves us both a lot of wasted effort - me moreso than you.
Second, I hope you didn't pay a lot for that software because it doesn't seen to be working.
"Perhaps you can point to us where the start/stop button is for the camera"
I have no idea. I don't care. He used the turn signal six seconds after recording, meaning he knew something was going to happen.
Thank God he got it all on tape. This “officer” is a disgrace to the uniform....what an abuse of power.
Fernwood,
If what he did was wrong but not illegal..
Then that means Citizens treatment will be dependent upon the Policies of each Police Department and not the Law, That is very improper, very wrong.
The young person in this incident here pointed out that his impression when speaking with the Department Chief was that the Chief was more concerned the Officer was caught than by the Officers conduct.
Unfortunately I find that believable. It also supports my earlier contention that the Officer is being used as a scapegoat, being thrown under the bus to avoid addressing the real issue.
Since this sort of conduct is not legally pro-scripted there really is no common standard and two citizens in the same situation could be impacted in dramatically different ways when interacting with LEOs from different departments and areas. Even in different ways depending upon the Officer.
That is very wrong. even dangerous for both the citizen and the police.
Should not some “Standard” be established as a “bright line”? A codification saying this conduct is not lawful..
For example;
An Officer may not threaten a citizen or threaten to retaliate if he does not gain compliance or the citizen refuses to comply with the Officers request when he is not legally required to do so.
It seems to me that at this time both the Civilian Officer and the Citizen are caught up in a no win situation where both must guess at what is acceptable and non acceptable conduct and that the goal post (the standard) is a moving target.
That is not right or fair to either the Civilian LEO or the Citizenry.
Make the law clear.
Establish a statewide, better still a nationwide legal standard regarding this.. that will be progress.
W
PS
I still say something good can come out of this for everyone Civilian LEO employees and the Citizenry. We should not allow this Officer to be the Scape Goat and instead demand that our legislative bodies change the laws related to this.
Make the law clear and unambiguous. That is a much better result than just firing one LEO and allowing the system to cover up the problem.
The cop was acting like an untrained spoiled brat not a trained 40 year old man. If this kid could push his buttons so easily this lying psycho cop should be flipping burgers on the night shift after he gets out of therapy.
PS: The cop started it all by being an asshole. I am glad he is not on the street working under the color of law.
Then I guess the only point where we disagree is that I consider it utterly irrelevant whether the kid deliberately set him up or not. If all it took to "set him up" was to obey the law, but be a little prickly when questioned about that, then Occam's Razor leads me to conclude that this cop had a history of abusing his power, and quite possibly falsely charging people and getting away with it. He comes very close to saying that on the tape.
Now, I've been questioned by cops when they saw me alone in the wee hours. I tend to be polite, and considered it a conversation, not an investigation, and it never went further than that. I wasn't even asked for ID. Maybe Drew could have done the same thing, but I think we've all read enough by now to realize that both he and the cop came into this with some history. Drew's history led him to believe he needed to protect himself by videotaping his driving. The cop's behavior on the tape suggests that Drew was right.
Personally, I'm glad that cops have recorders in their cars, because I think it protects me from abuse - or at least provides evidence of it later. And I don't think good cops have anything to fear from civilian cameras, no matter what the motivation of the cameraman.
No doubt. The cop fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Why go so far as to "set up" the cop--unless there have been complaints about him before and the Police Department did nothing?
The intent was to get indisputable proof. The burden of proof is always on the person bringing the complaint, and unfortunately, when it comes down to the word of the average citizen vs. the word of the police, especially in the absence of witnesses, the injustice system will usually side with the police. This police officer knew that, since he threatened to trump up more charges. He knew he could get away with it. That's abuse of power.
The kid didn't get him fired. His own actions did. I wouldn't be surprised if some of his co-workers at the Precinct are happy to see him gone, too.
Retaliation by his buddies?
Your opinion and experience is irrelevant in this case, because there is videotape.
As soon as we all record encounters with your heroes with both audio and video, you will have to hire your own police force.
Thanks for that.
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.