Indy cops story doesnt match video

[buckstopshere]

The ONLY way I could justify this beat down is if the guy spat in the officers face,
which would be hard to see on the vid.

Hard to see in the video for sure but if that happened, the officer would've noted that in his report. I can't imagine a detail as big as being spat on would not make it into the report.

 

[level.eleven]

It ain't that deep. If the department publicized each and every complaint levied against officers then there would be virtually zero public trust and support. Would it matter that those accusations are largely unfounded and often brought by disgruntled folks who are looking to jam-up an officer or by folks who just simply don't understand the law? Nope. It wouldn't. Even before I was in LE, I was very familiar with, and abided by, the "praise in public, punish in private" school of thought.

Yeah, I feel the same about newspapers that print arrests and websites that publish them and then charge you to take down the posting. I haven't seen a newspaper with a charges dropped or a not guilty column. Honestly, this reply only strengthens your previous post. Praise in public punish in private...are you sure you want to say that?

 

[Trigger Time]

Interesting, I agree, we are just people who must also follow the law, the law applies to us sames as you. I would argue that ANYTIME an officer makes the news, we are 100% guilty (everyone like to hate a cop) and the news just LOVES painting us into a corner, some are valid and some are total BS. Of course we are not the protectors of freedom per se, that is for CERTAIN lawyers to do. However, we do (as part of our daily duties) protect personal freedoms DAILY. If you follow the law it happens whether you try or not. I have defended the rights of anti-abortion protesters, religious zealot protesters, arresting a person ONLY where PC is present (you would be surprised how many citizens "command" us to arrest a person where there is NO PC to do so), we mediate evictions/repo's where no court order is present...I can go on and on. Just a point of view not many have thought of or are aware of.

I agree with you on the perception of accused cops being guilty before proven guilty. It's not right but its kindof like citizens being treated guilty by some law enforcement and especially prosecutors before convicted. So I believe it equals out. Also the news attacks plenty of innocent citizens as well.
i think the common denominator here is the corrupt media. They keep everyone pitted against each other.

 

[foszoe]

Interesting, I agree, we are just people who must also follow the law, the law applies to us sames as you. I would argue that ANYTIME an officer makes the news, we are 100% guilty (everyone like to hate a cop) and the news just LOVES painting us into a corner, some are valid and some are total BS. Of course we are not the protectors of freedom per se, that is for CERTAIN lawyers to do. However, we do (as part of our daily duties) protect personal freedoms DAILY. If you follow the law it happens whether you try or not. I have defended the rights of anti-abortion protesters, religious zealot protesters, arresting a person ONLY where PC is present (you would be surprised how many citizens "command" us to arrest a person where there is NO PC to do so), we mediate evictions/repo's where no court order is present...I can go on and on. Just a point of view not many have thought of or are aware of.

When I was a child back in the hills of WV, cops and military were heroes to me. If I saw a person in uniform, I thought of them as even superheroes. I remember trying to come to terms with how the service acadamies could lose a football game because I was raised with the attitude that those men were the best and brightest and I believed it. I still have that in my DNA. I still want to believe that in some way.

But age does change things. When a hero falls, in death or into criminality, its more noticable then when its another citizen, because my expectations were greater and my sense of loss is more. Then I encounter others who have had different experiences than an ole white country boy. People who were treated in a manner unbefitting them. At first I am unbelieving but when I see, hear, and read things that disagree with my beliefs/understanding, somethings has to give and at some point I began to realize there are police officers that are not the wholesome person I imagine them to be. I have yet to knowingly meet them. Yet I want to believe that things change for the better.

The biggest fear I have now though, is reading/watching stories about "SWAT" teams or techniques being used in arrests that don't seem to my knowledge to merit such techniques. Its a further deterioration of my ideallic world. It introduces too much of a possibility for herd mentality, ie hearing one gunshot sends adrenalin pumping and more fingers grip triggers tighter. If more cops receive this type of training and then encounter a citizen while on patrol away from their unit, how will that training affect a traffic stop, an encounter in a lobby, or a PI encounter? Can an officer become "over aware"?

I still believe they are heroes. When I see an officer out in uniform at a restaurant, I will buy the meal anonomyously. Its also why I like this forum. It is a chance to meet in person some of my heroes at meet n greets etc. Seeing VUPD eating sushi for example and wondering if the voice I hear on the scanner is another of the boys in blue that frequent here. The first compliment/reputation I received on here after all was from a cop, although I didn't know it at the time

I still have no conclusions only questions really about how to understand this kind of stuff.

 

[88GT]

No I will not make this my new sig line.

Whew!

 

[searpinski]

People lie, officers lie, lawyers lie, judges lie. It's really quite unsettling.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

People lie, officers lie, lawyers lie, judges lie. It's really quite unsettling.

Some, not all.

 

[KG1]

Whew!

It was close.

 

[j706]

Looks to be a little bit of back peddling on the part of C8.
Expert analyzes controversial arrest video

 

[Trigger Time]

Looks to be a little bit of back peddling on the part of C8.
Expert analyzes controversial arrest video

Sorry but that "expert" sounds like a moron to me

 

[VUPDblue]

Sorry but that "expert" sounds like a moron to me

I don't know about "moron" but he is a bit out-dated. The continuum is out and "reasonableness" is in.

 

[Trigger Time]

I don't know about "moron" but he is a bit out-dated. The continuum is out and "reasonableness" is in.

Yeah your right. I shouldn't have said moron. An i should have clarified that I only thought that about his statements. I'm sure the guy is intelligent with his past credentials.
his reasoning is off for sure (I think) but I'm not in that line of work. Just an arm chair expert

the part where he talked about the look in the guys eyes had me giggle.

 

[buckstopshere]

Looks to be a little bit of back peddling on the part of C8.
Expert analyzes controversial arrest video

How is this back peddling? We want our news to be balanced. C8 ran the story and now they've followed up giving IMPD expert an opportunity to voice his opinion on the matter. Sounds like the right thing to do to me. I certainly wouldn't call it back peddling especially when the expert is saying that the second throw down outside is going to be tough to explain. He sorta just reinforced the whole point.

As for the experts analysis of the lobby, meh, it doesn't change my opinion on the matter. I don't care what the guy was saying, the officer completely overreacted.

 

[SSGSAD]

The officer deserves a new job. McDonalds is hiring.

YES, so is Speedway .....

 

[SSGSAD]

It ain't that deep.
If the department publicized each and every complaint levied against officers then there would be virtually zero public trust and support. Would it matter that those accusations are largely unfounded and often brought by disgruntled folks who are looking to jam-up an officer or by folks who just simply don't understand the law? Nope. It wouldn't.
Even before I was in LE, I was very familiar with, and abided by, the "praise in public, punish in private" school of thought.

THAT, is EXACTLY what the MILITARY Teaches..... Public PRAISE, Private Punishment .....

 

[Bunnykid68]

THAT, is EXACTLY what the MILITARY Teaches..... Public PRAISE, Private Punishment .....

That is the way I have always been with my kids

 

[IndyDave1776]

It ain't that deep.
If the department publicized each and every complaint levied against officers then there would be virtually zero public trust and support. Would it matter that those accusations are largely unfounded and often brought by disgruntled folks who are looking to jam-up an officer or by folks who just simply don't understand the law? Nope. It wouldn't.
Even before I was in LE, I was very familiar with, and abided by, the "praise in public, punish in private" school of thought.

While I can understand the logic in this position, I do have to ask how you counteract the perception that can form that there is neither accountability nor punishment involved private or otherwise. That can be at least as detrimental to public trust as public knowledge of complaints. It also leads us back to a previously raised question of why one group should enjoy such treatment while all others are made public at the point of accusation without similar dissemination of backpedaling or such persons being found not guilty.

 

[VUPDblue]

I would argue that the police disciplinings are matters of public record, no matter if criminal charges were filed or not, so the cops are actually more exposed than non-cops. The fact that media outlets publicize arrests is the bed that they make and I never said that I agree with that.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I would argue that the police disciplinings are matters of public record, no matter if criminal charges were filed or not, so the cops are actually more exposed than non-cops. The fact that media outlets publicize arrests is the bed that they make and I never said that I agree with that.

Fair enough. I don't advocate public scrutiny every time someone claims an officer is ugly and his momma dresses him funny, but I have seen situations in which malfeasance was never addressed which has a significant deleterious effect on public trust.

For what it may be worth, it has not escaped my notice that IMPD does a pretty good job of maintaining internal discipline so far as I have seen. Everyone drops the ball once in a while, but this does not seem to be a common problem. So far as the actual subject of this thread is concerned, aside from the chief saying a couple of things that would inspire a response of 'no s**t?' I see due process being addressed diligently, which in my reckoning is what the chief should have said rather than making the lame sounding statement he did. That, of course, does not change the fact of the matter, so I will have to give a tip of the hat to the department for acting accordingly when confronted with new evidence (I certainly don't expect omniscience of internal affairs).

 

[j706]

How is this back peddling? We want our news to be balanced. C8 ran the story and now they've followed up giving IMPD expert an opportunity to voice his opinion on the matter. Sounds like the right thing to do to me. I certainly wouldn't call it back peddling especially when the expert is saying that the second throw down outside is going to be tough to explain. He sorta just reinforced the whole point.

As for the experts analysis of the lobby, meh, it doesn't change my opinion on the matter. I don't care what the guy was saying, the officer completely overreacted.

Ah but the news is not balanced by any stretch of the imagination. If C8 was a credible news organization they would have contacted an expert first instead of jumping to conclusions. The officer might have been wrong. He also might not have been wrong. Just because C8 decides to do the story does not mean the officer was wrong. The policing business can be ugly. Many people don't want to see ugly...it makes them feel bad.

As for the throw the happened outside, sure it needs to be explained. And it just might be. The point with all of this jazz is no one here was there. We don't know what all happened. But that doesn't keep many people from jumping all over the "lets hang the officer" band wagon.