It should read: The taxpayers of Vallejo were forced to pay $300k while the officer, and the officers union, had no consequences and will do this again.
Cop in America doing a bad job, again
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
Remember this one?Vallejo is quite the shithole & could very much use the $300K desperately in other areas...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Those days really convinced me the US is spiritually a third world country, and not because of the rioting.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Ah, yes, the Minnesota 'light 'em up' embroglio of 2020. High water mark for line cops.Remember this one?
Those days really convinced me the US is spiritually a third world country, and not because of the rioting.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Withnail
Full Member
The lunatic at fired twice. He got fired again after they let him back following the disgusting incident with the homeless man.
How was he not locked up?
Jaap
Full Member
The person in the video was one of three who ran from the car and as a suspect rightly taken into custody.
Source for that?The person in the video was one of three who ran from the car and as a suspect rightly taken into custody.
Jaap
Full Member
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
I stand corrected. Thought it was the guy who had initially put up his hands.The person in the video was one of three who ran from the car and as a suspect rightly taken into custody.
WI_Red
Redcafes Most Rested
what are you doing!!! The proper response is to double down. You're never going to survive in the social media wars.I stand corrected. Thought it was the guy who had initially put up his hands.
Jaap
Full Member
All is good, pal.
We should really only start to criticize their work once we fully know every detail (we may never). Not beforehand.
We should really only start to criticize their work once we fully know every detail (we may never). Not beforehand.
It was.I stand corrected. Thought it was the guy who had initially put up his hands.
To be fair, you made a claim in this thread that is not fully verified information. You just read on a news website that the police said so, which we should know by now doesn't make it a fact. But I'm not holding that against you, because that's the human thing to do. We all make assumptions and take positions before all the information is out, it's impossible not to.All is good, pal.
We should really only start to criticize their work once we fully know every detail (we may never). Not beforehand.
Jaap
Full Member
That‘s correct, yes.To be fair, you made a claim in this thread that is not fully verified information. You just read on a news website that the police said so, which we should know by now doesn't make it a fact. But I'm not holding that against you, because that's the human thing to do. We all make assumptions and take positions before all the information is out, it's impossible not to.
Should give this a few days before we fully know what went on.
Drainy
Full Member
Been watching the Aaron Dean trial (cop shot a woman in her home while investigating a reported open door), pretty convinced he wouldn't be found guilty but holy hell the defence closing argument was distasteful.
The victim did literally nothing wrong in the situation. That doesn't necessarily mean that her shooting was a crime because of mutual self defence, and justification being based on reasonable belief but the defence were arguing that she knew he was a cop and did it anyway! Wankers.
Wouldn't be surprised if that didn't piss a few jurors off, it did me and I wasn't convinced by the prosecution case that it was a crime based on what was presented at trial.
The victim did literally nothing wrong in the situation. That doesn't necessarily mean that her shooting was a crime because of mutual self defence, and justification being based on reasonable belief but the defence were arguing that she knew he was a cop and did it anyway! Wankers.
Wouldn't be surprised if that didn't piss a few jurors off, it did me and I wasn't convinced by the prosecution case that it was a crime based on what was presented at trial.
Drainy
Full Member
Aaron Dean has been found guilty of manslaughter and facing between 2 and 20 years in prison.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Which cop is this? The child freezer?Aaron Dean has been found guilty of manslaughter and facing between 2 and 20 years in prison.
Drainy
Full Member
Nah. Fort Worth Texas, call from a neighbour reporting an open front door at 2am, police were dispatched.Which cop is this? The child freezer?
They spot the open door so look around the house for signs of forced entry and while investigating the home owner spots them through a ground floor window and pointed a gun with a Lazer Aim at the officer. He drew his weapon while yelling show me your hands and shot .6 seconds later.
Homeowner was babysitting so her 8yo nephew and they were up playing video games and he witnessed the whole thing. Was apparently begging them not to arrest him. Horrendous situation.
Withnail
Full Member
Not at the level of most examples in the thread but infuriating all the same and I'm struggling to believe this isn't a skit.
Two old ladies who were trapping feral cars in order to nueter them and get them homes were arrested, charged and convicted by a jury in Alabama.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...ladies-jury-guilty-stray-feeding/10891723002/
Two old ladies who were trapping feral cars in order to nueter them and get them homes were arrested, charged and convicted by a jury in Alabama.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...ladies-jury-guilty-stray-feeding/10891723002/
lonelyred
Full Member
It is infuriating.
By the way, is the use of handcuffs mandatory during an arrest in the US? As far as I know, they are used in many countries only in case you are aggressive towards the others or yourself. Can’t they just take someone to the police station without humiliating them?
By the way, is the use of handcuffs mandatory during an arrest in the US? As far as I know, they are used in many countries only in case you are aggressive towards the others or yourself. Can’t they just take someone to the police station without humiliating them?
Last edited:
Sky1981
Fending off the urge
By refusing to comply you forced the other party ot escalate though.Even if she was refusing to comply, it doesn't warrant assault
If i was told to step out of the car and refuse, the cops would have no options than to force me to. Same if a person was asked to leave a plane. Refusing to leave would meant the officer needs to escalate to the point of physical contact.
It's not the system fault, the system is fine but if the officer are racist and intend to hurt you there's not much you can do.
What they need to do is fix the underlaying racism, otherwise whatever method they come up to would come to the same problem. Disobedience and escalations.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Salt Bailly
Auburn, not Ginger.
I blame Tesla for the rise of all these feral cars.
Skizzo
Full Member
It’s policy, yes.It is infuriating.
By the way, is the use of handcuffs mandatory during an arrest in the US? As far as I know, they are used in many countries only in case you are aggressive towards the others or yourself. Can’t they just take someone to the police station without humiliating them?
lonelyred
Full Member
It’s policy, yes.
But why is it a policy? Looks unnecessary in so many cases. It sometimes feels there are arrests that even would not provoke "resistance" if the cuffs were not involved (I believe there are examples of some other countries showing that)
Also, when you say it's a policy, does it mean it's just a kind of customary/recommended practice or is it a regulated, mandatory procedure?
(Anyway, thanks for replying to my pretty old post.)
Skizzo
Full Member
most policies come into play because of prior incidents, some just become implemented. You never know how someone will react to being arrested, taken to jail etc, so everyone under arrest goes in handcuffs. If handcuffs spark a resistance in someone before they go on, that’s probably someone that would resist when they get to jail too…so I’d rather them be in handcuffs to avoid that issue arising. I also wouldn’t want to be driving someone to jail that is under arrest for whatever It may be, and sat in a car with them unrestrained. Lots of people are chill until they find out they’re about to go to jail, or until the reality sets in as we get there.But why is it a policy? Looks unnecessary in so many cases. It sometimes feels there are arrests that even would not provoke "resistance" if the cuffs were not involved (I believe there are examples of some other countries showing that)
Also, when you say it's a policy, does it mean it's just a kind of customary/recommended practice or is it a regulated, mandatory procedure?
(Anyway, thanks for replying to my pretty old post.)
and by policy I mean anyone that’s arrested goes in handcuffs. If you’re old, injured, or visibly pregnant, the handcuffs can go in front, otherwise it’s behind the back.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
lonelyred
Full Member
Thank you for the explanation, Skizzo. Still I don’t get if this policy is part of a mandatory procedure, regulated by the law or any kind of written rules or just a usual, probably recommended and obviously widespread practice.most policies come into play because of prior incidents, some just become implemented. You never know how someone will react to being arrested, taken to jail etc, so everyone under arrest goes in handcuffs. If handcuffs spark a resistance in someone before they go on, that’s probably someone that would resist when they get to jail too…so I’d rather them be in handcuffs to avoid that issue arising. I also wouldn’t want to be driving someone to jail that is under arrest for whatever It may be, and sat in a car with them unrestrained. Lots of people are chill until they find out they’re about to go to jail, or until the reality sets in as we get there.
and by policy I mean anyone that’s arrested goes in handcuffs. If you’re old, injured, or visibly pregnant, the handcuffs can go in front, otherwise it’s behind the back.
Last edited:
Skizzo
Full Member
I don’t believe it’s written in to any kind of law, but each department will have their own policy. It’s standard procedure to place someone in handcuffs if they’re under arrest, but each departments policy may differ slightly if they’re allowed to be handcuffed to the front, or how the hands will be placed, etc etc.Thank you for the explanation, Skizzo. Still I don’t get if this policy is part of a mandatory procedure, regulated by the law or any kind of written rules or just a usual, probably recommended and obviously understandable practice.
TheReligion
Abusive
Don’t like that policy very much.most policies come into play because of prior incidents, some just become implemented. You never know how someone will react to being arrested, taken to jail etc, so everyone under arrest goes in handcuffs. If handcuffs spark a resistance in someone before they go on, that’s probably someone that would resist when they get to jail too…so I’d rather them be in handcuffs to avoid that issue arising. I also wouldn’t want to be driving someone to jail that is under arrest for whatever It may be, and sat in a car with them unrestrained. Lots of people are chill until they find out they’re about to go to jail, or until the reality sets in as we get there.
and by policy I mean anyone that’s arrested goes in handcuffs. If you’re old, injured, or visibly pregnant, the handcuffs can go in front, otherwise it’s behind the back.
Applying cuffs is a use of force and I don’t think things like that should made policy as it lets officers hide behind it.
Every use of force should always require justification by the individual.
Skizzo
Full Member
Well once you bleed over into excessive force, that’s different, and “use of force” doesn’t necessarily mean there’s any pain compliance and such included. Officer presence and “verbal judo” are also considered uses of force. There’s case law and penal code that covers handcuffing in regards to someone under arrest.Don’t like that policy very much.
Applying cuffs is a use of force and I don’t think things like that should made policy as it lets officers hide behind it.
Every use of force should always require justification by the individual.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
TheReligion
Abusive
It’s very different here in it UK in terms of that.Well once you bleed over into excessive force, that’s different, and “use of force” doesn’t necessarily mean there’s any pain compliance and such included. Officer presence and “verbal judo” are also considered uses of force. There’s case law and penal code that covers handcuffing in regards to someone under arrest.
There’s no handcuffing policy and you’d be required to give justification for doing so.
I simply feel the moment you start trying to make certain things mandatory is the moment officers stop thinking for themselves. That said policy can be broken as people often forget. I certainly wouldn’t be handcuffing a frail elderly person or a young child.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Any police who didn't refuse to participate in that is a fecking scumbag.
cesc's_mullet
Get a haircut Hippy!
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 27,066
- Supports
- Arsenal
All it takes is one person that's arrested to be hiding something, or to kick-off once they're back at the Station, for it to ruin it for everyone.It is infuriating.
By the way, is the use of handcuffs mandatory during an arrest in the US? As far as I know, they are used in many countries only in case you are aggressive towards the others or yourself. Can’t they just take someone to the police station without humiliating them?
cesc's_mullet
Get a haircut Hippy!
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 27,066
- Supports
- Arsenal
Who ratted the poor bloke out in the first place?Any police who didn't refuse to participate in that is a fecking scumbag.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Hospital staff.Who ratted the poor bloke out in the first place?
cesc's_mullet
Get a haircut Hippy!
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2006
- Messages
- 27,066
- Supports
- Arsenal
Are there any officers in here?
I know of a Senior Sergeant (a Station Commander) from Melbourne that did a tour of the US, in relation to mental health among other things. He spoke with the first responder to one of the large school shootings for example.
Anyway he did a ride along in Arizona with a female officer, who came out to the vehicle with two guns (I believe her own). That day they intercepted 13 vehicles, 10 of which were at gunpoint (due to firearms warnings, etc).
That is simply unheard of here in Australia, you'd be lucky to draw your firearm that many times in your entire career, and you'd never have to do it for a vehicle intercept.
You'd never work by yourself either, you'd always be working with an offsider.
The US is a completely different world.
I know of a Senior Sergeant (a Station Commander) from Melbourne that did a tour of the US, in relation to mental health among other things. He spoke with the first responder to one of the large school shootings for example.
Anyway he did a ride along in Arizona with a female officer, who came out to the vehicle with two guns (I believe her own). That day they intercepted 13 vehicles, 10 of which were at gunpoint (due to firearms warnings, etc).
That is simply unheard of here in Australia, you'd be lucky to draw your firearm that many times in your entire career, and you'd never have to do it for a vehicle intercept.
You'd never work by yourself either, you'd always be working with an offsider.
The US is a completely different world.