VIDEO - Officers threatens to execute Ohio CCW holder

[Jake46184]

This story has gone viral on FB. below is a quote from a very serious man who is a former LEO:

"Here's a perfect example of a man who has no business being in a position to exercise the police powers of the state. He also seems to be one of those morons who believes only cops should have guns. Now imagine if in the middle of his abuse of the this citizen a couple of rifle rounds came out of the dark and ended the abuse."

Criminals expect to be treated like... well, criminals. You turn the law abiding into criminals, don't be surprised at the consequences.

These types of responses, while perhaps understandable, are just as irritating as the conduct of this loser LEO. The place to right this type of wrong is in a courtroom. By-standers witnessing this episode would have no right or reason to intervene and would surely deserve prosecution for doing so.

 

[iChokePeople]

I erased part of what I wrote before I posted. But since you bring it up, he did make me wonder if he had killed someone before that ticked him off and got off with a good shoot.

I'll bet a lot of his 'perps' have resisted arrest. He seems way too comfortable and confident with a dash cam rolling.

 

[henktermaat]

Yup!
And I haven't seen any LEO's here, active or retired, defend this jerk.

You're coming mighty close.

 

[Jake46184]

@ 3:25 driver turns & gets flashlight in face..

Looks like your grabbing for something, singlestack. It's ok to be wrong. I am all the time (not this particular time, however.) Read post #150 again.

 

[Rookie]

I had to stop reading at page two...

Terrible Display of Officer Safety and Public Disrespect

Isn't this one of the largest police forums on the net?

 

[Indy317]

On thing that stands out the department's 2009 report.

Page: 5/22:
OBJECTIVE 1.2 Institute high visibility and aggressive patrol tactics

 

[Rookie]

You're coming mighty close.

I disagree...

 

[singlestacksig]

Looks like your grabbing for something, singlestack. It's ok to be wrong. I am all the time (not this particular time, however.) Read post #150 again.

I am not wrong, yiou can see the hat of the driver turn towards the cop in the back, the cop raises his flashlight to the drivers face something is said, driver turns back forward..
an attempt to communicate something was done right then..

 

[Jack Burton]

What would be of more use to the thread would be for you to read post #150 and tell all of us if you agree or not? I'm not trying to humiliate or belittle you. Just discussing the facts as presented. Surely you can do the same. We'll all thank you in advance.

Oh... I agree completely... if you'll agree that a police officer can factually throw a person into the street and then arrest them for obstructing traffic.

After all, the person was, no doubt about it, facts are facts, actually obstructing traffic, eh.

Did you feel humiliated or belittled? Didn't bother you too much to humiliate or belittle a fellow member of your alleged chosen profession who isn't here to defend himself.

 

[HDSilvrStreak]

Jake - I would point out that this was not a LEO stop. The three people were already "stopped" and the LEOs rolled up on them and then started to address the others (not the driver). In my mind, this doesn't qualify as a "stop" until later.

Even if you're right about not informing in a timely manner (you're not, but let's pretend you are), it cannot be denied that there was LEO intimidation from the outset of this. If a LEO tells me to "shut up", you can bet that I would, especially a large, angry LEO.

 

[UncleMike]

You're coming mighty close.

Whatever!

 

[GuyRelford]

Let's get to the real point: let's assume that the driver blatently and intentionally violated Ohio's current "duty to inform" law (which is extremely questionable, but we'll move beyond that). What exactly justifies this officer's conduct after that point?

The driver is 100% cooperative - even meek - in interacting with the officers. He's got his CCW in his hand when he's hauled out of the vehicle. He never presents any cognizable threat to the officers, except his voluntary disclosure that he has a legally concealed handgun. So - for the sake of the discussion - arrest him for a misdemeanor, but threaten to execute him? Seriously?

 

[T.Lex]

No offense T. Lex but any LEO stop is a "law enforcement purpose." Probably best to leave the interpretation of such things to those who live it.

Back at'cha.

 

[UncleMike]

I had to stop reading at page two...

Terrible Display of Officer Safety and Public Disrespect

Isn't this one of the largest police forums on the net?

They claim to be but I personally don't know any Officers that go to their forum pages.

 

[Bunnykid68]

They did not pull him over did they. Looked like they were driving around with their lights off and pulled up behind a stopped car.

 

[Jake46184]

Jake - I would point out that this was not a LEO stop. The three people were already "stopped" and the LEOs rolled up on them and then started to address the others (not the driver). In my mind, this doesn't qualify as a "stop" until later.

Even if you're right about not informing in a timely manner (you're not, but let's pretend you are), it cannot be denied that there was LEO intimidation from the outset of this. If a LEO tells me to "shut up", you can bet that I would, especially a large, angry LEO.

I understand your confusion but it doesn't change what happened. It is indeed a stop per Ohio code from the moment they approach the vehicle. What you think and what is codified may not be the same.

You have no evidence to suggest that the driver was told to "shut up" prior to 3:30 on the video. In fact, the video suggests exactly the opposite. The video tells an unbiased tale if you let it. He had, at minimum, a full minute to notify the LEO who was searching the back of the car. He did not. Ignore the Ohio website text that was added...it would be so at trial.

Always argue, whether in court or on an Internet forum, from the facts. You'll always have firm, high ground upon which to stand. I hope this helped. Now, go read post #150 again and see if it makes more sense.

 

[mrjarrell]

I had to stop reading at page two...

Terrible Display of Officer Safety and Public Disrespect

Isn't this one of the largest police forums on the net?

Pretty typical of the gang members over there. They're always defending the worst behaviours out there by their "brothers". Nothing's too egregious for them and condemnation is unlikely in most cases.

 

[SideArmed]

The problem singlestack is that the text added by the Oho website doesn't match what happens in the video. We can all view it again together. It's on page 10 of this thread. Take a look from about 2:45 to 3:30. The "sane" LEO enters the back seat of the car. There is no discernable audio from the driver. The LEO never shines a light at him. Everything you're quoting is from the text that was added by a biased source.

Now read post #150 again. Tell us if you agree (especially with #3.)

Ok so I have read all your posts defending the actions of the officers, or more correctly, trying to build the failure to notify case for the Canton PD, and I have read your post #150 (multiple times), and have watched the video multiple times. it is CLEARLY shown at 3:25 that the officer shines his light on the driver and the driver is turned toward him as if saying something to him.

So now I ask you, as per the code that you cited in post #150, define promptly, it doesn't say imedeately as every has taken to saying, it says promptly, so when is "Promptly"?

Oh and here is a screen capture of the moment in question, just to clear that up:

 

[EnochRoot43]

I had to stop reading at page two...

Terrible Display of Officer Safety and Public Disrespect

Isn't this one of the largest police forums on the net?

Wow.....way worse than I thought it would be. And then somebody pipes up with the line that "becoming too argumentative is treading a thin line" because one or two people dare to call the defense of this incident absurd? I am speechless.

 

[Jake46184]

The best thing about a thread like this is that you quickly find out who is who!

I'm going to leave it to the rest of you experts to figure out. Thanks for the lively discussion.