Posted on 02/27/2009 5:39:58 PM PST by microgood
SEATTLE - A security video released Friday shows a King County sheriff's deputy purportedly shoving and kicking a 15-year-old girl in a holding cell after her arrest.
The security video was obtained by KOMO News under the state Open Records Act.
The deputy, Paul Schene, 31, has been charged with fourth-degree assault in connection with the Nov. 29 incident in a holding cell at SeaTac City Hall. Schene pleaded not guilty to the charge Thursday, and he was released on his own recognizance.
According to court records, Schene and another deputy arrested a pair of 15-year-old girls for investigation of auto theft after they were stopped driving a stolen car.
The girls were taken to the holding facility at SeaTac City Hall for fingerprinting and other processing.
Trouble allegedly began after Schene escorted one of the teens into a holding cell. While trying to take her shoes off, the girl kicked off her left shoe, which struck the deputy in the shin, the document said.
The video shows the girl crossing her arms and kicking off her shoe through the doorway of the cell. The video then shows the deputy's violent response. (Watch the video clip.)
Court records say Schene kicked the teen in the upper thigh area, then pushed her into the back wall before taking her down on the floor and putting her in a handcuffing position. Once on the floor, Schene grabbed the teen's hair and yanked her head and neck upward, the document said.
With the help of the other deputy, Schene then handcuffed the teen, the document said. While doing so, Schene appeared to strike the teen twice overhead, investigators noted. However, due to the angle of the camera, they could not determine whether the deputy had actually hit the teen.
The document states teen then began complaining about not being able to breathe. She later told investigators she was pulled up to her feet by her hair and taken back to the regular holding area. Medics were called to tend to her, but she was not taken to the hospital.
Both girls were booked into the Youth Center on auto theft charges. One of the girls was also booked for assault for allegedly assaulting the deputy.
Schene's attorney, Anne Bremner, released a statement Friday in response to the video's release. The statement said:
"We had argued strenuously that the video tape released to the media this morning not be released because it does not tell the whole story of the incident. As we argued to the judge, it will inflame public opinion and will severely impact the deputy's right to a fair trial. We will defend this misdemeanor case in court. No story can be sliced so thin that it does not have two sides. We hope that judgment will be reserved until all the facts of this case are given fair consideration in court."
On Dec. 1, the detective assigned to the auto theft and assault case checked the security video as part of her follow-up investigation. She saw the holding cell video and immediately notified her supervisor.
An investigation then began, and the accused deputy, an 8-year veteran of the force, was placed on paid administrative leave the following day. He currently remains on leave.
Sgt. John Urquhart said the surveillance video shows Schene "using more force that was necessary as far as the prosecutor's office is concerned. And as far as we're concerned, that rises up to the level of an assault."
Schene said the teen had become enraged when she found out she was going to be booked into the Youth Center, the document said.
The teen told detectives she had not meant to hit the deputy with her shoe, and said she never resisted arrest. She also said the incident left a bruise on her right hip, as well as scratches on her arm and neck.
The second teen later told investigators her friend and Schene had been "arguing at each other" since the traffic stop.
The second deputy said the alleged victim was "real lippy," calling the deputies names and "basically trying to piss us off."
Schene refused to explain why he had made the two strikes toward the teen in the holding cell since he and his partner appeared to have the teen under control. He also refused to say whether the strikes actually made contact.
Now that the criminal investigation is complete, the sheriff's Internal Investigations Unit will launch its own probe. The result will determine discipline, which could include termination.
“I say a reasonable police officer (note, the standard for excessive force claims is what a reasonable Police Officer believes, not what a reasonable newspaper reader believes)...”
I assure you, if I am on the jury, that will NOT be the standard I use when I find him guilty.
“But since it’s a “girl” it looks worse....had it been a grown man nobody would care.”
It wasn’t a grown man - it was a little kid.
More to the point, if you were on tape using the same moves on your own 15-yo daughter, you would be jailed for child abuse.
She wasn’t a car thief, she took her mom’s car without permission. A flinging shoe by a 15 year old girl is not a threat to two grown men. A lippy 15 year old girl is not a threat to two grown men. A girl that while being advanced on by two grown men who drops into a “fighting stance” is also not a threat, that’s defense.
At any time the cops could have slammed the door on her and that would have put an end to it right quick like.
This was police brutality straight up, not “police doing their job correctly” unless brutality is part of department policy.
Love people that defend out of control police unquestioningly. Boot lickers.
Heh heh! You mean you don't want them to. I would recommend you not bet your lunch money on it.
You don't have to LIKE the law, you merely have to OBEY just laws.
Does that include LEOs obeying TITLE 18? See link in my prior post.
I don't think missy here will ever think about putting her grubby paws on something she doesn't own or have permission to again, do you?
She won't have to, thanks to the idiot cop. He, and possibly the second cop have got bigger problems. If a federal prosecutor decides to go for it, they are hosed under TITLE 18: § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law; and § 4. Misprision of felony.
These carry prison sentences of anywhere from 1 to 10 years! If I were in their shoes, I'd be worried. This numnuts is going to be bested by a 15 year old girl, LOL!
If it had been your 28-yo wife, it would have been spousal abuse.
There are different "rules" for cops.
I, uh, gave up beating my wife for Lent.
;)
LOL my parents made it very clear from the first time I was allowed out of their sight unsupervised that if I ever got into trouble, don’t bother calling them...shut up and take my licks that I earned. Kinda put a damper on any youthful foolishness and kept me from going along with false friends for stupid reasons, hey.
This girl’s mother dobbed her in for the car. You think she’s gonna back her? Sounds like she’s cut from the same cloth as my mother, and my mother would have been asking why there was a tooth left in my mouth and how I could still open my eyes if I’d dared sling a shoe at a cop.
Now, I have no idea whether TITLE 18 will be applied, but nevertheless it's there. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and § 4. Misprision of felony are serious Federal crimes and carry stiff prison terms. See post #119 for the particulars.
"Act in haste, repent at leisure."
Maybe you can defend a bully who isn’t a real man, I can’t.
Your responses to an obvious case of a police officer out of control are truly telling. And frightening.
If you are in police work currently you may want think about a change of life and profession.
No normal person would react to the video in question the way you have.
You are poisoned, and dangerous.
Good luck.
Just for stealing a car, they would have walked. Their real crime was being disrespectful to a cop.
Shoelaces?
Alleged? WTF kind of Allegation is that, it’s video, an electronic witness, PROOF! Stupid headline.
Last time I looked at the law, getting pissed off is not a defense for assault. The cop is a scumbag...well that’s starting to get redundant isn’t it.
What does that say about a LEO, that he can’t just walk away from a mouthy kid? Doesn’t have much self control, does he? She may be mouthy and aggravating, but isn’t he the adult? The one in control? Now he’s put himself down to lower than her level, by letting her get to him like that.
Why didn’t he just shut the cell door and walk away? Then he wouldn’t have been in any danger, from her or her fingernails.
Oh yeah! That was the real crime...
Can King George have his American colonies back?
Roger that.
God put authority there? Did he put cops there?
I'm grateful the law didn't agree with you. I saw today on the news that this guy (only the worst one unfortunately) is in BIG trouble. He overstepped his boudaries, he lost his temper. With cops, that is not a good thing, they need to remain in control.
If I recall correctly he's charged with assault. Hope he's also charged with child abuse.
.. All kinds of things out there are possible...
Well, yeah. I've asked three times: What possible thing or circumstance in your mind would exculpate the LEO in instance?
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.