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 ...
Should good cops ever threaten to invent charges against detainees? Should it be in their nature to even consider such a thing?
Had the cop refrained from such threats, he might still have his job. But since such threats were in his nature, he should be off the force. Cops whose nature would not lead them to make such threats should have little to worry about.
Such a threat is not "going to far". Such a threat will not be on a good cop's scale of escalating conflict. That a cop was willing to make such a threat at all, no matter what the circumstances, proves that he is not a good cop.
But it shows that though times, places and names change, people don’t.
I once read a little book titled: “Are We All Nazis?”
This gist was that every country, every civilization, every little town, has both decent people and people who would be the Gestapo over us if they could get away with it legally.
That hypothesis is not only borne out in the actions of this rogue cop and what appears to be an equally rogue police dept...which gives cops like this the freedom to ratchet up their power-trip = but from the posts in this thread, one can ferret out who, given the chance, would pull on the Jack Boots.
Chilling, especially in a conservative forum.
Rank the following in order of criminal severity: (1) to accidentally take someone's coat (e.g. because it was similar to, and on a rack near, one's own), (2) deliberately taking someone's coat because it's nicer than one's own) or (3) threatening to harm someone unless he surrenders his coat?
Police officers are sometimes given a pass on violating suspects' rights if they can reasonably argue that such violations were unintentional. Threatening to deliberately violate someone's rights proves malice and throws the "accidental" argument out the window.
LOL
Point is - the lot WAS empty - what 'cars' was he going to break into?
Are you implying that a person can't pull into a parking lot without becoming suspicious?
ARe we a police state?
The normal types of lies and subterfuge in which police would engage would involve deceiving a suspect about what other suspects had said, etc. I am unaware of anything that authorizes cops to threaten suspects with criminal harm.
That was indeed the point.
e gad.
Your post was bad enough the first time around - did you have to submit it twice...
Then why didn't he have, AS LAW REQUIRED, his dashcam on?
Methinks his behavior was not a one-time thing, but a habit, getting off intimidating people - the little-guy-big-gun syndrome - and didn't want a record of it. Not having his dashcam on is a tipoff. The only thing he was cautious about was not having his actions on camera
That concept has been proved by:
The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment
Address:http://www.prisonexp.org/
-- from the posts in this thread, one can ferret out who, given the chance, would pull on the Jack Boots.
Chilling, especially in a conservative forum.
Lots of conservatives confuse being an authoritarian with supporting our constitutional republics principles.
Actually, those basic principles are about protecting individual liberty, -- not about bowing to majority rule.
this cop was walking up to a car in the middle of the night, alone and not knowing what to expect.
should the cop have had thicker skin? absolutely! this punk kid wasn't worth it. but other cops see this scenario and know that they could fall into this kind of trap simply if they were having a bad day, things at home aren't going well, boss giving you crap, etc...
it's just a function of cops in general thinking that society doesn't respect them or their job and the everyday citizen has no idea what cops are asked to do day in and day out. this situation will only amplify cops feelings of isolation. that's my point.
this cop was wrong, but all cops know guys who would have handled this situation just like he did. it brings it all closer to home.
Equally damning is that the patrolman's audio/video of the incident is nowhere to be found.
Cops are delegated authority to investigates crimes and make appropriate arrests. The are not given authority to bully someone who drives into a lot at 2am.
Professionalism would dictate that the cop approach the car and ask what they are doing. When answered NOYB then just get ID and run the tag. The cop can wait around and see if any illegal activity occurs. The cop has no right to abuse his authority and bully someone because they refuse to give information.
If all cops know other cops that would act the same way, then those cops need to get in another line of business. Massive egos and bullies do not belong in the police department.
cops can just wait around to see if anything illegal occurs? that's a good one. lots of crime is committed in the presence of a marked police car.
once again, i condemned the officer in question and made a valid point about officer psychology and someone jumps on cops as bullies and tells me AGAIN that this cop was wrong. well, i'm that sorry 100% of cops don't conform to your definition of perfect.
this kid knew what he was doing and that he would be stopped because he made himself suspicious. and then he stonewalled a cop who approached him. he did not just give him his ID. he acted stupid by saying (paraphrasing), "why are you stopping ME officer? have i done something wrong?" idiot punk. he knew he would be stopped and then antagonized the officer. but i guess i'll have to say it again, the officer went too far.
You do realize the courts and law enforcement work hand in hand. If the courts and law enforcement were a private sector corporation, it would just be like two different departments or divisions of the same corporation.
I have watched countless times, people in court get hammered by both sides, never standing a chance against judges that bump bellies with those on the police department.
And I am totally pro LE.... lol
“cops are simply people who are entrusted with a great deal of authority, discretion, and must deal with a variety of possibly dangerous circumstances.”
This cop certainly dropped the ball.
“this cop was walking up to a car in the middle of the night, alone and not knowing what to expect.”
Sorry, I have to disagree with that. This cop asked for an ID, the kid asked what he had done, and the kid did in fact show his ID, the ID didn’t stop the cop from going ballistic.
“but other cops see this scenario and know that they could fall into this kind of trap simply if they were having a bad day, things at home aren’t going well, boss giving you crap, etc”
Good, cops should realize that they’re public servants, not overlords. If this incident makes another cop stop and think, before he goes Wyatt Earp on somebody, then that’s a good thing.
“it’s just a function of cops in general thinking that society doesn’t respect them or their job and the everyday citizen has no idea what cops are asked to do day in and day out. this situation will only amplify cops feelings of isolation. that’s my point.”
So it’s ok that the cops act like thugs because they collectively have an inferiority complex. As far as what they have to do day in and day out, if you don’t like your job, find a different one.
“this cop was wrong, but all cops know guys who would have handled this situation just like he did. it brings it all closer to home.”
Then they have no business being cops.
I’ll bet you throw that “cop-hater” tag around a lot.
why don’t you do a little research? my posts are readily available. then you’ll realize you’re talking out of your...
i can see your point in smaller departments.
in my experience, it doesn't pay to "trump up" charges. too many checks along the way. you have to call a boss to the scene in order to verify the arrest. they can tell you to cut the guy loose or write and summonse and let him go at the scene.
if you do arrest, then you have to draw it up with the ADA who can decline prosecution right out of the box over the phone.
and you don't want a reputation as someone who can't handle a situation and has to arrest everyone who gives you attitude.
From the part I watched, and the transcript I read, the officer deserved to be fired.
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.