Why? It's the only conclusion you can come to after reading the article.
Never mind, you all have convinced me that you are right.
The woman was a drunken whore, and deserved to be beaten and arrested for having the gall to stand her ground when she had permission from the owner to be there.
I've finally got my mind "right", and will join the ranks of the cop apologists here at FR.
The only conclusion I can come to is that the woman is saying this happened. The veracity of said claim is, at present, unevaluated.
However, she used the standard "white cops looking for a woman of color to abuse" claim that increases my skepticism level considerably. Note that skepticism is not a conclusion. It is an opinion, and it may or may not be borne out by the facts.
No, its the only conclusion you will come to.
It is certainly possible that things transpired as you assume, but unlikely.
The woman was a drunken whore, and deserved to be beaten and arrested for having the gall to stand her ground when she had permission from the owner to be there fighting with cops.
There, that's better.
Cool Hand Luke, you aint.