Posted on 05/09/2010 7:01:34 AM PDT by dangus
From the video article: "As the uncuffed detainee goes to wipe his eye, he gets one violent kick to his head. Looking at it again, it's possible the officer was trying to stomp on the suspect's hand, and instead skipped the toe of his boot off the suspect's head."
It's just damned stupid of the officer to have made the threat, no matter wha prompted the racial outburst. Unfortunately, the video doesn't show what elicited that response. If you watch the video tape ( http://www.kirotv.com/video/23482801/index.html ), you'll see that what the reporter calls the suspect "wiping his eye" is in fact the suspect pointing two fingers to his temple.
From what I can see, it's very possible that the suspect was indeed wiping his eye. It's also possible that he was signaling to someone to put a bullet in the brain of the officer, a gang unit member. Comments?
It ain’t pretty now. Needs surgery.
Doen’t mean he was innocent - just not the guy that tiem.
Yes, a nice carefully edited video that omits everything leading up to the incident.
But for the record:
1 of the 3 people on the ground WAS perpetrating a series of robberies.
What I’d like to know, but is missing in this instant hysteria is:
What association existed, if any, between the perpetrator and the two others apprehended by the police? Any, besides location? Or by “innocent” does the news report mean, “not actually found with the stolen property on their person, but hanging out with the actual criminal at the time of the crimes.” Boy, I wish that instead of sensationalizing that the journalists actually did their jobs and told us how the police came to stop the two “innocent” suspects.
Who said the victim/suspect was merely wiping his eye? The journalist reporting what she thinks she saw? The victim/suspect? IAD? One of the cops present? Because it looks to me like it could reasonably be taken as “kill this cop.”
Oh, well that makes it better. /s
I see nothing to indicate any resistance of arrest. Do you?
Is that the 1990s Boston case you are referring to?
lol..you are more upset about the racial slur than the kick to the head?
good lord dangus..
this PC shite has killed common sense
I can see it next:
“Damn ese, that pig shot my vato in the head for nothing and then called him a lousy greaseball whose momma ate dogfood tacos, I don’t think I will ever get over hearing that racial epithet being uttered when he got capped, ya know what I’m saying main?”
Sometimes I think noobs like you show up here on FR to post crap like that to give us a bad image.
Get lost, jerk.
Well, I actually DID watch the entire video, read the whole original news piece, and the several related stories. The fact that he was not the perpetrator of the crime to which the police were summoned seems to have little to do with whether he was flashing a gang signal, or whether the cop’s response was reasonable if that’s what the cop thought he was doing.
I thought this happened in California. The video was posted on FR a few years ago.
Uh, no. In fact, I never mentioned an ever-loving thing about a racial slur. I mentioned a threat of severe violence. Big difference. The fact that the threat was stated in a way that made it appear ethnically motivated actually does worsen the situation, but I never even mentioned that.
As far as being kicked in the head, even the otherwise hysterical news report conceded that the kick to the head appeared to be incidental; the intent was stomping on the hand, which is also *quite* painful, but raises the question to me of why the officer did that, simply because it’s odd.
If someone breaks into a house and steals money and jewels, you presume the motive is that the robber wanted money. If someone breaks into a house and steals a sock... it makes you wonder what else is going on. This is one of those instances. And when I look closer at what was going on, I see that the victim/suspect was making a hand signal that TO ME looks like how people signify pointing a gun to someone’s head.
And I believe my point was that the video purposefully shows only what they want you to believe. Doesn't show what the suspects said, did or didn't do to find themselves on the ground. Doesn't show cops beating down anyone. It shows a cop kicking the suspects hand, and maybe hitting him in the head.
Is the cop a racist out of control lunatic, I don't know. Neither does anyone else, but I'd not convict them based on part of the evidence.
I must have misread this: I absolutely agree that there is no justification for the racial threat.
For the record, I am concerned about the possibility of police abuse in this instance. However, this article is being splashed as major, national story, and will almost certainly be used to justify striking down Arizona’s constitutionally obligatory immigration law. In this light, the police officer’s ethnicity-tinged threats are significant. As far as the stepping on his hand... this is potentially troubling and — I’m wondering — potentially justified. But for the record, the police are tasing people for heckling a lowlife golfer, and no-one seems to upset. In fact, FReepers are hooting and hollering about how wonderful it is a teenager got tased for running onto a ballfield. While tasers certainly have their place —it’s far better to tase someone than to have to beat the crap out of an enraged angel-dust user like Rodney King — they certainly are more dangerous, and I expect even far more painful than getting your hand stomped on.
Didn't they say the same thing about Rodney King?
S.O.P. for jackbooted thugs
1. Terrorize
2. Brutalize
When video gets out you weren’t able to seize and
3. Sanitize
Then your cheerleaders rush in to
4. Demonize
If that fails to sway public opinion in favor of police brutality, then...
5. Apologize
Making many empty promises of cleaning up that never
6. Materialize
I'm stunned that so many people who are part of a community called "Free Republic" are condoning, almost celebrating in some posts, what these two LEOs did. I don't care what color they were, what clothes they wore, or what accents they had. That is NOT how defenders of civil rights are suppose to act.
The Seattle Post Intelligencer has an interview with the cameraman. He says that the young man who was kicked told him he is stationed at Ft. Lewis, intimating that he's in the Army. There is really no way to confirm this until his identity has been positively confirmed. And, I'm a little dubious because he's wearing an earring, although I have seen service members in other branches wear earrings off-base, so I suppose it's possible.
In any event, this will be even more disturbing if he really is a US soldier, and I wonder if that is the case, will anyone of the posters on this thread offer any apologies. I won't hold my breath.
Hey, as long as the right people are getting boots to the head, why shouldn’t these good law abiding folk celebrate?
After all, they have to be guilty of something, or the police wouldn’t have arrested them. They did arrest them for some heinous crime, right? Right?
The perp flipped the cop off. What does he think is going to happen?
Saturday, December 19, 2009 5:39:29 PM · 17 of 42
John-Irish to Behind Liberal Lines
Memo to Mr. Garrison: Like it or not, Jesus was a nice Jewish boy. He really was. His father Joesph, they were carpenters. Used to make crucifixes for the Romans. Oy, they were glad to get the work.
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.