Posted on 08/08/2013 7:38:34 PM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Prepare to be outraged.....Shocking Surveillance Video Captures Cop Brutally Beating Female Shoplifter In Front Of Her 1 Yr Old Child in Iowa.
I worked in corporate loss prevention a long time ago...let me tell you...this is beyond lawsuit...these cops should be in prison.
Video: http://www.ktrh.com/pages/michaelberry.html?article=11556885
I read she was arrested in April for shoplifting again??
I’m not the person you asked, but yes, it is.
At 13:28:26(actual tape time) the cop begins moving towards her.
A person in a red shirt is sitting behind the desk, and a man in a dark suit is walking into the room.
An cut occurs, and now the red shirted person is standing in the doorway...unless red shirt teleported, there is something edited out. Wonder why?
And the timestamps are conveniently blurred even though no one’s face is around the area of the timestamps.
It doesn’t take long to take a couple of steps away from the desk...so why was it cut? Certainly not to save time.
To fit the agenda...that is why.
The shoplifting/beating incident is not the only time she has been arrested for the same crime WHILE using the child as an accessory.........according to the police.
The video has been cut/altered. It makes for a poor record of what happened if there are parts missing. If this video record has been handed out by the thief or her representatives you have to wonder what they cut out so that it looked better for her.
Mel
I couldn’t care less about the scumbag shoplifter, but how stupid were the cops to not remember there was a video camera in that room? It’s a shame there wasn’t audio. The scumbag shoplifter must have really said something stupid.
It's hard to analyze the situation simply from this video. They say that a photograph doesn't lie, and that may be so, but it doesn't necessarily tell the entire truth.
I think a lot of people are confused. A lot seem to think the cop flew off the handle. The fact is, he told her to comply, she didn’t, either yelled or spit, continued to talk on her phone, and the cops began taking her into custody. What is significant is that the cop only begins hitting her after the missing portion in the video, he didn’t walk over to her and punch her. He began the process of taking someone into custody who doesn’t think they need to be arrested. What exactly should a cop do when he says ‘you’re under arrest’ and you ignore him? Walk away? Sheesh.
It doesn’t matter what she said.
What matters is that she was being arrested and refused to comply.
If you notice in the video, the cops are talking to her. They didn’t run into the room and start punching her. She leans forwards and either yells or spits at the cops...a reasonable person would conclude that she is showing defiance in the face of a lawful arrest. It is the cop’s duty to take her into custody...how she goes is up to her. This is why we have cops...to arrest criminals, not to go on errands with them or to babysit them while they conduct business on the phone.
When you’re under arrest, you’re under arrest. Your choice in the matter is limited to comply or don’t comply.
If you get caught stealing, the best advice for you is to comply with the cops when they tell you to get off of your phone, stand up, and turn around.
Because if you don’t, they’re still going to take you into custody. The hard way.
And it is entirely legal.
Imagine a world where criminals got to dictate the terms of their arrest. Maybe they should all be allowed to turn themselves in later, when they’re done with their business.
And for all the people saying that it was wrong to do that in front of her kids...maybe if she doesn’t want her kids to see her arrested she shouldn’t bring them along on her thieving trips. Or just stand up and turn around. Pretty simple.
“Ah, so you would just let her bite your finger off.”
NO finger biting going on before the attack so far as I can see from the video as it is presented. And It would be hard to imagine that there’s more unedited film that would show something beforehand since the assaulting “officer” is farther from her than his finger could reach at the outset. I don’t like criminals, but in this situation both parties are criminals. Cops should be jailed.
This may be a classic instance of people allowing themselves to get carried away by their emotions on the basis of a disturbing picture.
At 13 seconds, he lunges after her.
I don’t give a crap about any “cut” after that.
At 13 seconds, he starts pounding her.
How does anybody know the video wasn’t edited by the news station as they seem to have made quite the little montage for their broadcast.
13 seconds....the beating begins with no physical contact initiated by her.
Any other point is moot.
I don’t care if she hired a black lawyer, don’t care if she’s got a black community organizer boyfriend or a half-black kid.
Nobody deserves to be beaten for smarting off.
Nobody.
Hmmm, tough choice: cops or feral city animals.
At 00:35 of this video...
http://www.ktrh.com/pages/michaelberry.html?article=11556885
there is clearly something cut out.
People are skipping magically around the room, and someone’s head blurring conveniently decides to remain over the timestamp even after the head moves. Odd coincidence, that.
Red shirt and dark suit move to the other side of the room. It was not edited out for time since it would take a couple of seconds at most for them to move. Why was it removed?
The most damning evidence is that the punching only begins AFTER the inexplicable cut.
Wonder why? Why...why...why! would the thief and her lawyers remove parts of the video immediately preceding the punching?
Guess we’ll never know.
Uh, why did LEO nearly run from behind the desk, rush her and physically attacker her in the first place?
Where are you getting all that information?
Are you suggesting the LEO placed her under arrest from the other side of a desk, while he was 5 or 6 feet away from the suspect?
“At 13 seconds, he lunges after her.
I don’t give a crap about any “cut” after that.
At 13 seconds, he starts pounding her.”
My friend, you’re absolutely mistaken.
The cut is between when he goes hands on and when he begins punching.
It absolutely matters. Because the cop claims she bit him and he began punching her, but for some reason the woman and her lawyers edited out the time immediately preceding the punching of the woman.
Why do you suppose that is?
The cut isn’t ‘after’ he begins punching, but between the time he begins to take her into custody and the time he begins punching. The edit was made by her lawyers.
Why do you suppose that is?
She ‘got beat for smarting off’ like Trayvon got killed for walking to the store.
She had the option at any time to comply with her lawful arrest for being a thief.
Your attempt to play the race card is weak.
From your own link
_____________________________________________________
The officer, Scott Crow, said in his report he hit Redell because she bit his finger and wouldn’t let go.
The video, however, shows Crow striking Redell with both fists.
Sympathy for the devils.
She traveled to Chicago to hire a black...
Well! I've heard enough. Crush her skull!
When a cop tells you that you’re under arrest...and you refuse to comply
Are you suggesting the LEO placed her under arrest from the other side of a desk, while he was 5 or 6 feet away from the suspect?
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.