I heard it reported on the news (ABC, CBS or NBC) that the kid was unconscious. Which would explain why he appeared as dead weight when they picked him up and slammed him onto the car 242
Firstly this "kid" was not unconcious. If you view the tape you will see the "kid" speaking to or saying something to the MOS after being struck in the face.
I have watched the tape several times. Apparently you have limited reading comprehension "skill". I wrote about what happened prior to the kid punched in the face, not after -- which you failed to discern.
Secondly, Handcuffs do not stop backward motion, their purpose is to restrain physical attack by an agressor by restraining the ability to use both hands in a coordinated manner. If you have even been handcuffed you would realize that you would be able to reach backwards for a significant distance while cuffed.
Apparently you've just gone delusional. The only thing I wrote about in post 242 (see above) was the report of him being unconscious and I added that from point A (lying on the ground) to point B (when he was slammed on the car) he appeared limp like dead weight. Check your meds. ;^)
From the video it appears that the brother struck the perp for no reason, however appearances can be decieving. I have been grabbed by perps from time to time and depending on what they are holding onto, one is trained to step into the perp to get them to release.
Ummmm, thanks for your insights. Not that it has anything to do with the possibility that the kid was unconscious from point A to point B.
BTW, welcome aboard.
[bold mine]
Wasn't there an allegation that the boy was earlier the subject of a choke hold. He could have come to by that point.
Why don't you speak plainly and lay your cards on the table. You can not reasonably be claiming that this kid, with his hands cuffed behind his back, was a threat to the officers. Maybe if an officer got right behind him, he could reach out and grab them, but they could easily grab him by the upper arm and hold him away.
What you are really claiming, I submit, is that if the kid grabbed the officer, the officer was justified in slamming him down and punching him as payback-- instant discipline. Is that your position?