Bad Cop Going Down (hopefully) - Citizen Sure to Get Payday

[lashicoN]

Makes the majority of LEO's look bad.

Only to those who live by unrealistic stereotypes. I believe in individuality and I believe individuals are responsible for their own actions.

What videos like this make me think is that individuals should be equal, on all levels. Battery with a loaded weapon is a crime and justice should be served.

When we have a profession whose members can walk around smashing people in the head with loaded guns and not face battery with a loaded weapon charge, we aren't living in an equal society. God created all men equal, but the possession of a police badge lifts one to superiority? I don't think so.

 

[Archaic_Entity]

You may recall that the 'fight' manifested simply because I shared that I am not going to put blind trust in an aggregate of people who in my experiences have proven untrustworthy, particularly in the times when it really mattered. You might also recall that the aforementioned discussion turned on the automatic assumption that the aggregate of people involved is above reproach. Besides that, I would still like to know what makes me an unacceptable person for insisting on having a sound understanding of the facts of the situation before making a life-ending decision.

My comment isn't so much about the discussion in a separate thread, so much as your "portend" that the "apologists" will immediately flock to an otherwise obvious wrong-doing of one man and give him a free pass because he wears a uniform.

I was simply stating that no one here has, or likely would, do(ne) that. I'd rather like to keep the two discussions separate, since that's exactly what they are, rather than make blanket statements about one population because of who they are/what they wear/what they do.

Nothing makes you unacceptable for wanting to have a sound understanding of facts before making a decision. I'm not an apologist for any particular group, LEO or otherwise. But it seems to me that you just want to be an antagonist about LEO's in general without understanding all the facts.

 

[Lex Concord]

That is truly horrible. Makes the majority of LEO's look bad. The idiot rogue cop should rot in jail.

No, it makes this ONE cop and whoever in the department helped him play CYA look bad.

You know, the thin brown ring (it was so popular I had to bring it back).

 

[rw496]

First, the suspect isn't walking away. If you watch the video, he was running his ass off. When he enters the frame he turns around and bends at the waist because he was gassed. The white shirt he is carrying was wrapped around his face moments before because he WAS about to do a robbery. When the two cops yelled for him to stop he took off running, but smokin' all those blunts and drinkin' '40's all day don't make for good cardio. Unquestionably, the cop f**ed up by lying in his report. But, as you can see everybody loves to jump on the bandwagon to hang a cop so he thought he better cover his ass. Was it objectively reasonable to hit the guy in the face with his gun? I don't know. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment: You are an experienced cop working midnights in a bad neighborhood. You see two guys who, based on your experience and their behavior, you believe are about to commit a robbery. You jump out and yell for the masked man to show you his hands. He takes off running and you chase him to the point where both of you are ready to collapse. Luckily he runs out of gas first. You don't have the strength left to fight a guy 10 years younger so you end it with one fell swoop before he can recover. Would you do the same? There is no racial profiling going on, that's lawyers trying to get paid. Everybody in that neighborhood is black how you going to pick one out based on race? Stupid. All of a sudden the career criminal is the victim. The only thing this is missing is the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

 

[eatsnopaste]

you didn't see the other cop right behind the first one? He administered a beat down because he needed a breather?

 

[phylodog]

Was it objectively reasonable to hit the guy in the face with his gun? I don't know. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment: You are an experienced cop working midnights in a bad neighborhood. You see two guys who, based on your experience and their behavior, you believe are about to commit a robbery. You jump out and yell for the masked man to show you his hands. He takes off running and you chase him to the point where both of you are ready to collapse. Luckily he runs out of gas first. You don't have the strength left to fight a guy 10 years younger so you end it with one fell swoop before he can recover. Would you do the same?

Obviously I will give the benefit of the doubt to LE in most situations because I've lived similar scenarios but the actions that officer took were neither objectively reasonable nor tactically sound. If the officer was gassed from chasing the suspect then engaging him was a bad idea, if it hadn't ended it right then and the fight was on the officer would be ill prepared for a ground fight (especially with his pistol in his hand).

The intelligent, reasonable, tactically sound thing to do would have been to close the distance and give commands while holding the subject at gun point.

I'll argue that there are situations where smacking someone upside the head with a handgun could be reasonable, this simply isn't one of those situations. Had the officer been giving commands with the subject at gun point and the subject jumped on him it may be a different story.

 

[edporch]

First, the suspect isn't walking away. If you watch the video, he was running his ass off. When he enters the frame he turns around and bends at the waist because he was gassed. The white shirt he is carrying was wrapped around his face moments before because he WAS about to do a robbery. When the two cops yelled for him to stop he took off running, but smokin' all those blunts and drinkin' '40's all day don't make for good cardio. Unquestionably, the cop f**ed up by lying in his report. But, as you can see everybody loves to jump on the bandwagon to hang a cop so he thought he better cover his ass. Was it objectively reasonable to hit the guy in the face with his gun? I don't know. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment: You are an experienced cop working midnights in a bad neighborhood. You see two guys who, based on your experience and their behavior, you believe are about to commit a robbery. You jump out and yell for the masked man to show you his hands. He takes off running and you chase him to the point where both of you are ready to collapse. Luckily he runs out of gas first. You don't have the strength left to fight a guy 10 years younger so you end it with one fell swoop before he can recover. Would you do the same? There is no racial profiling going on, that's lawyers trying to get paid. Everybody in that neighborhood is black how you going to pick one out based on race? Stupid. All of a sudden the career criminal is the victim. The only thing this is missing is the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

Ok, let's assume for argument's sake that he was justified in pistol whipping the perp.

There still needs to be accountability for apparently doing it with his finger on the trigger.
So now he needs to show he was justified, AND that his finger was off the trigger and it just discharged on it's own.

That bullet went SOMEWHERE and could've hit an innocent person.

 

[rw496]

Obviously I will give the benefit of the doubt to LE in most situations because I've lived similar scenarios but the actions that officer took were neither objectively reasonable nor tactically sound. If the officer was gassed from chasing the suspect then engaging him was a bad idea, if it hadn't ended it right then and the fight was on the officer would be ill prepared for a ground fight (especially with his pistol in his hand).

The intelligent, reasonable, tactically sound thing to do would have been to close the distance and give commands while holding the subject at gun point.

I'll argue that there are situations where smacking someone upside the head with a handgun could be reasonable, this simply isn't one of those situations. Had the officer been giving commands with the subject at gun point and the subject jumped on him it may be a different story.

All of that is true. Pulling your gun or not in a foot pursuit is always a case by case. I've found its tough to climb a fence with a gun in hand. The cop made numerous bad choices on the fly and after. I'm not defending those things, I'm just saying it isn't a case of blatant abuse of power, racial profiling or whatever other nonsense they are coming up with. That cop made some difficult, ultimately poor, choices in a tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving situation.

 

[hornadylnl]

First, the suspect isn't walking away. If you watch the video, he was running his ass off. When he enters the frame he turns around and bends at the waist because he was gassed. The white shirt he is carrying was wrapped around his face moments before because he WAS about to do a robbery. When the two cops yelled for him to stop he took off running, but smokin' all those blunts and drinkin' '40's all day don't make for good cardio. Unquestionably, the cop f**ed up by lying in his report. But, as you can see everybody loves to jump on the bandwagon to hang a cop so he thought he better cover his ass. Was it objectively reasonable to hit the guy in the face with his gun? I don't know. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment: You are an experienced cop working midnights in a bad neighborhood. You see two guys who, based on your experience and their behavior, you believe are about to commit a robbery. You jump out and yell for the masked man to show you his hands. He takes off running and you chase him to the point where both of you are ready to collapse. Luckily he runs out of gas first. You don't have the strength left to fight a guy 10 years younger so you end it with one fell swoop before he can recover. Would you do the same? There is no racial profiling going on, that's lawyers trying to get paid. Everybody in that neighborhood is black how you going to pick one out based on race? Stupid. All of a sudden the career criminal is the victim. The only thing this is missing is the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

If everything is as you state, these guys were in fact going to commit a robbery, were running from the cops, etc, this cop should still be terminated immediately. The fact that the video shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he lied in his report, he should be terminated. He has ZERO integrity. Once you have proven that you have no integrity, he should be gone. If there should be criminal charges, he's innocent until proven guilty. If the system thinks his career should be determined in court, then enjoy the reputation they've earned.

 

[rw496]

If everything is as you state, these guys were in fact going to commit a robbery, were running from the cops, etc, this cop should still be terminated immediately. The fact that the video shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he lied in his report, he should be terminated. He has ZERO integrity. Once you have proven that you have no integrity, he should be gone. If there should be criminal charges, he's innocent until proven guilty. If the system thinks his career should be determined in court, then enjoy the reputation they've earned.

I can't really argue with that. He was (for the most part) OK, right up until he lied in his report..bad move.

 

[hornadylnl]

I can't really argue with that. He was (for the most part) OK, right up until he lied in his report..bad move.

And why should it take months or years of investigations to determine if he's fit for the job? I'd much rather him skate from all criminal prosecution than to remain one of the king's men. It is my understanding that Bisard is still an employee of IMPD. Paid or not, why has it taken so long?

 

[Archaic_Entity]

If everything is as you state, these guys were in fact going to commit a robbery, were running from the cops, etc, this cop should still be terminated immediately. The fact that the video shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he lied in his report, he should be terminated. He has ZERO integrity. Once you have proven that you have no integrity, he should be gone. If there should be criminal charges, he's innocent until proven guilty. If the system thinks his career should be determined in court, then enjoy the reputation they've earned.

There is where I can agree without hesitation. If there's anything an officer must be more than any other citizen, it is trustworthy. They must have the highest integrity, specifically because of the job they're entrusted to do.

I would fire an employee of mine if I caught them lying to me on their reports (assuming I owned a business), and I see no reason that a police department shouldn't do the same.

 

[hornadylnl]

There is where I can agree without hesitation. If there's anything an officer must be more than any other citizen, it is trustworthy. They must have the highest integrity, specifically because of the job they're entrusted to do.

I would fire an employee of mine if I caught them lying to me on their reports (assuming I owned a business), and I see no reason that a police department shouldn't do the same.

I can understand taking the time for investigations on he said/she said matters on whether to terminate a cop. This isn't he said/she said. What would his report have said if the discharged bullet killed the guy?

I fully understand the mentality behind the thin blue line. Everyone makes bad choices as we're all human. What's important to me is the intent behind the choice and intent is a very difficult thing to determine. In my line of work, my choices can cost the company thousands very quickly. If my coworker made a bad choice but thought he was doing the right thing, I would want to stick up for him as I don't want a precedent set that could lead to me getting fired in the future. I would never say that his choice didn't lead to the outcome but I would defend his decision making. If I knew his intent was bad, I wouldn't stand up for him at all and state what happened.

If this cop's report matched exactly what happened, I wouldn't demand an immediate termination and let an investigation take it's course. The breach of the public trust is a far greater crime than any other he commited that night. The fact that he still believes he's innocent proves it.

 

[Archaic_Entity]

If this cop's report matched exactly what happened, I wouldn't demand an immediate termination and let an investigation take it's course. The breach of the public trust is a far greater crime than any other he commited that night. The fact that he still believes he's innocent proves it.

Exactly. I'm not defending nor attacking his actions, because I don't know the whole story. What I cannot abide is the lying in the police report. That shows his lack of integrity.

Making a bad decision for the right reasons is fine, you were just wrong. Making a bad decision for the right reasons, but then lying about the fact you made the bad decision is not fine. What that does is call to question every time you made a decision and whether or not you lied about making that decision.

Case in point with this video, if it didn't come out, all that we would have to go on is his word against the assailed, and his police report. Who's going to believe a black kid in the ghetto when he says he didn't attack the cop? No one. But who's going to believe the tape? Everyone.

 

[rambone]

but smokin' all those blunts and drinkin' '40's all day don't make for good cardio.

Source?

All of a sudden the career criminal is the victim.

Source?

He was (for the most part) OK, right up until he lied in his report.

Nothing in that video looked OK to me, his falsified report notwithstanding. This guy was irrational, irresponsible, and highly negligent... AT BEST. His coverup and false reporting proves he has the character of a criminal.

Imagine if an armed guy from the neighborhood went around predicting crimes before they happen. And imagine this gun-owner going up and pistol-whipping some guy who did nothing. Is that OK behavior, for the most part, whatsoever?

 

[rw496]

Source?


Source?


Nothing in that video looked OK to me, his falsified report notwithstanding. This guy was irrational, irresponsible, and highly negligent... AT BEST. His coverup and false reporting proves he has the character of a criminal.

Imagine if an armed guy from the neighborhood went around predicting crimes before they happen. And imagine this gun-owner going up and pistol-whipping some guy who did nothing. Is that OK behavior, for the most part, whatsoever?

1.) stereotype.
2.) generalization.
First, he is not some armed guy from the neighborhood; he is a police officer who's job it is to deter crime. He was indirectly put into that position by those you elected. So, it is his place to predict crime. Second, the suspect did do something, he resisted law enforcement. He was acting suspicious enough in light of that officer's experience to justify a detention. He fled after being told to stop and got arrested for it. Maybe the haymaker pistol whip was excessive, maybe not; that's for a jury to decide.

 

[jsharmon7]

First, the suspect isn't walking away. If you watch the video, he was running his ass off. When he enters the frame he turns around and bends at the waist because he was gassed. The white shirt he is carrying was wrapped around his face moments before because he WAS about to do a robbery. When the two cops yelled for him to stop he took off running, but smokin' all those blunts and drinkin' '40's all day don't make for good cardio. Unquestionably, the cop f**ed up by lying in his report. But, as you can see everybody loves to jump on the bandwagon to hang a cop so he thought he better cover his ass. Was it objectively reasonable to hit the guy in the face with his gun? I don't know. Put yourself in his shoes for a moment: You are an experienced cop working midnights in a bad neighborhood. You see two guys who, based on your experience and their behavior, you believe are about to commit a robbery. You jump out and yell for the masked man to show you his hands. He takes off running and you chase him to the point where both of you are ready to collapse. Luckily he runs out of gas first. You don't have the strength left to fight a guy 10 years younger so you end it with one fell swoop before he can recover. Would you do the same? There is no racial profiling going on, that's lawyers trying to get paid. Everybody in that neighborhood is black how you going to pick one out based on race? Stupid. All of a sudden the career criminal is the victim. The only thing this is missing is the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow PUSH Coalition.

I'm going with phylodog on this one. Sure age, physical condition, injuries, ability, etc. all come into play on use of force issues. But, a strike to the head with a blunt object does not appear justified or reasonable. Would you not consider strikes to the head with a blunt object such as a baton or gun to be deadly force? If the officer felt justified in using deadly force, why would he have chosen pistol whipping as his method of subduing this subject? Hold at gunpoint and issue commands, you have backup three steps behind you. His decision to strike the subject with a pistol was bad, but to then lie about it on the report is worse. The only thing an officer has in his profession is integrity. You're pretty much useless in court after something like this comes out.

 

[rambone]

1.) stereotype.
2.) generalization.

You're going off about how no stereotyping went on that night, while spouting off ignorant stereotypes. If you don't like it when all officers are stereotyped, then try to limit your stereotypes about citizens you're supposed to be serving. This kind of stuff doesn't help anything.

Excuse me while I go do some blunts and 40's with my career criminal friends.

First, he is not some armed guy from the neighborhood;

Why not? We normal people can stop felonies and perform citizen's arrests too. How do you think that scenario would play out, minus the badge and the coverup-team?

Maybe the haymaker pistol whip was excessive, maybe not; that's for a jury to decide.

He negligently shot off a round against a guy's head, because of his monumentally negligent sneak attack. People like this should be promptly thrown under the bus, for the safety of the public and the integrity of the police force.

 

[downzero]

God, why do I always lack the ability to rep rambone?

 

[NYFelon]

God, why do I always lack the ability to rep rambone?

reputation has been dispensed to rambone on your behalf.