Question to LEOs and others

[meuge]

I came across this article in the New York Times after watching the story unfold for a few days:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/nyregion/30about.html

In short, a youtube video has surfaced of a man being pushed off the bicycle to the ground by a police officer, who was not provoked (as it appears). The man was later charged with assaulting the police officer (the officer claimed the man tried to run into him with a bike, and then threw him to the ground), as well as multiple other offenses.

Now, I am not sure what the circumstances were that surrounded this event, but there are a number of aspects of the story where the officers' accounts clearly part ways with reality as seen in the video.

What struck me the most, however, was the way the police union representatives have handled this story. To quote the statement I watched on the news this morning: "Sometimes it's not pretty to see the police enforcing the law". Instead of assuring the public that a thorough investigation would be conducted, and if the officer acted illegally, this would be taken seriously, the police officials flatly denied any wrongdoing, despite the evidence to the contrary.

Now, I have the greatest respect for people who place their lives on the line to protect myself and others, as police officers, and in no way do I intend this post to be a criticism of the police force in general. Which is why, knowing that there are a number of LEOs who frequent this forum, I would appreciate it if they shared their take on the events in question.

 

[ackbar]

I hate to say it but Mr Long needs to hire a lawyer and take this officer/city to the cleaners. That is the only way we can keep dishonest people out of positions of authority. Hit them where it hurts.. their pocket books.

 

[LowBat]

Not easy to draw a conclusion based on the video alone. Reminds me of the video game "frogger".

 

[Monocrom]

Video "evidence" can easily be manipulated. Remember the Rodney King case? And how outraged everyone was, when the officers were found not guilty?

What most of the Public never saw was the beginning of the tape.... The one showing Mr. King acting like a deranged lunatic, and attacking the cops. The jury got to see that part though. But what gets ratings?.... A tape of officers stopping a deranged suspect, or a group of violent cops beating an "innocent" motorist for "no reason at all."

Don't believe everything you see.

 

[meuge]

Video "evidence" can easily be manipulated. Remember the Rodney King case? And how outraged everyone was, when the officers were found not guilty?

What most of the Public never saw was the beginning of the tape.... The one showing Mr. King acting like a deranged lunatic, and attacking the cops. The jury got to see that part though. But what gets ratings?.... A tape of officers stopping a deranged suspect, or a group of violent cops beating an "innocent" motorist for "no reason at all."

Don't believe everything you see.

To be sure... but even if the suspect was detained for a legitimate reason, it is disturbing that the officers' account of events was not in accordance with what is seen in the video. If the suspect was indeed detained while being enough of a threat to be thrown to the ground, then why the disparity?

Based on the video, my guess was that the rider probably said (read: screamed) something offensive at the officers while riding by, which precipitated a physical response by the cop. But certainly, that's pure speculation on my part.

 

[IcantC]

A few key points.

1) First of all, it was Critical Mass. Enough said. If you follow news or events you will understand what I mean, better yet if you have met some of them.

2) Do you see what the bicyclist did prior to being hit? How do you know he did not rob someone? All you see him is enter and be hit.

3) I did not read what the officer said, if he lied, that is wrong and I do not agree with him or his actions. If you F up, man up and admit it. If you lie, kiss your career good bye.

4) In regards to point 3, once again, LEO are not angels and handpicked by God. They are like any other profession and will have their share of bad apples.

5) Media and a lot of people always will be the first to highlight any "incident" cops have, whether it is true or false. How often do you see reports aired when they save someone, get shot or make some bust?

6) I have nothing against bicyclists, but watch some of them drive. Not sure where you are from? Sit in Chicago, count and tell me how many you see obeying traffic laws. There are many bad apples that give the bicyclists a bad name as well.

 

[meuge]

A few key points.

1) First of all, it was Critical Mass. Enough said. If you follow news or events you will understand what I mean, better yet if you have met some of them.

2) Do you see what the bicyclist did prior to being hit? How do you know he did not rob someone? All you see him is enter and be hit.

3) I did not read what the officer said, if he lied, that is wrong and I do not agree with him or his actions. If you F up, man up and admit it. If you lie, kiss your career good bye.

4) In regards to point 3, once again, LEO are not angels and handpicked by God. They are like any other profession and will have their share of bad apples.

Those are very fair points.

5) Media and a lot of people always will be the first to highlight any "incident" cops have, whether it is true or false. How often do you see reports aired when they save someone, get shot or make some bust?

Actually I don't think the "media" is as bad as people make it out to be. I regularly see news of police officers doing their duty and protecting society from criminals. I would certainly bet that the ratio of positive to negative reports is much less than the ratio of positive to negative actions, but that's the case for any news the media reports - bad news simply sells better.

The only thing I wish for, in this situation, is more transparency on the part of the police department.

One wonders, though, what kind of an impact the proliferation of private recording devices will have on the frequency of these kinds of incidents brought to light, for better or worse. I also wonder, whether when a critical mass (forgive the pun, but I couldn't help it) of them accumulates, if legislatures will take action to ban filming of officials on duty.

 

[IcantC]

As for recording, I wouldn't mind. The problem is, how do I know the guy recording me isn't armed or will attack? Officer safety is the number one concern. Especially when you are alone, trying to handle more than one person. Last thing you need is a car that pulls up and is recording you. You never know what/who is in that car.

 

[KC2IXE]

As for recording, I wouldn't mind. The problem is, how do I know the guy recording me isn't armed or will attack? Officer safety is the number one concern. Especially when you are alone, trying to handle more than one person. Last thing you need is a car that pulls up and is recording you. You never know what/who is in that car.

That is paranoia - Hey, taxi drivers have a much more dangerious job than police officers - should they be allowed to go off on people if someone pulls up and starts recording them? How about Farmers? Coal Miners? Guys who work on radio towers?

 

[IcantC]

That is paranoia - Hey, taxi drivers have a much more dangerious job than police officers - should they be allowed to go off on people if someone pulls up and starts recording them? How about Farmers? Coal Miners? Guys who work on radio towers?

They are all dangerous, with variety of danger. One job requies you to run to shots fired, while everyone else runs the opposite way. When was the last time you had to deal known felons who are armed and dangerous? Or been attacked by some crazed person on drugs or someone with a knife?

 

[KC2IXE]

They are all dangerous, with variety of danger. One job requies you to run to shots fired, while everyone else runs the opposite way. When was the last time you had to deal known felons who are armed and dangerous? Or been attacked by some crazed person on drugs or someone with a knife?

As a civilain NYer, who is more likely to be shot by a member of the NYPD, than a member of the NYPD is by a civilain (look up the numbers for the last decade or so) I'd say every time I've had to deal with the NYPD

 

[IcantC]

As a civilain NYer, who is more likely to be shot by a member of the NYPD, than a member of the NYPD is by a civilain (look up the numbers for the last decade or so) I'd say every time I've had to deal with the NYPD

Apparently you are anti LEO and have already formed an opinion. I am done here.

 

[KC2IXE]

Apparently you are anti LEO and have already formed an opinion. I am done here.

Actually, I'm quite friendly with a number of LEOs on the NYPD, and other departments. It's just that when LEOs start going paraniod about being watched, I have a real problem

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

As I've said, I know a LOT of LEOs. I'd say 10% get "the attitude" They are running late for role call so they'll blow lights. Almost all will expect "professional curtesy" even when off duty (dudes, you too are supposed to follow the law) - Most give their wife and family members shields so they can get curtesy too. Yes, you should watch your back, but if someone is taking photos of you, tough poop - you are in public, and are a civil servant, not a civil god

edit:
Oh, and when was the last time I delt with a crazy person with a kinfe? Last time my older brother in law broke dawn, and the ploice were over an hour in responding. The first time, when he hit a mutual friend George with a hammer, the police would not take my B-I-L because "they didn't witness the incident" - 2 days later, I help defend my father in law from his son when his son was coming at him with a steak knife

I object to any law or rule that gives a Police Officer any rights that everyone does not have - see Article1, section 9 of the US Constitution

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."

We have come dammed close to not only making Congress Nobility, but also making Police and the like a sub class of Nobility - the minute someone has a right, that others do not, they ARE Nobility

 

[IlluminatingBikr]

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0729081bike1.html

Deponent further states that upon instructing the defendant to cease the above-described conduct, the defendant steered the defendant's bicycle in the direction of deponent and rove defendant's bicycle directly into deponent's body, causing deponent to fall to the ground and causing deponent to suffer lacerations on deponent's arm.

I agree that we can't see what happened before the incident, but clearly the above statement, made by officer Patrick Pogan, is inconsistent with the video.

 

[ackbar]

Ok.. sorry about my knee jerk reaction but I think people in power SHOULD be held to a higher standard than the rest of us.

I didn't realize that Critical Mass participants don't follow traffic regs. I hate cyclists who do that. It just makes drivers hate them more.

 

[KC2IXE]

Ok.. sorry about my knee jerk reaction but I think people in power SHOULD be held to a higher standard than the rest of us.

I didn't realize that Critical Mass participants don't follow traffic regs. I hate cyclists who do that. It just makes drivers hate them more.

Oh yeah - and as much as I say the police officers should not mind being photographed (in fact, I think that it would be "interesting" if we could find a way to make sure we film them at all times), the folks at Critical Mass not only deserve a good beating, they usually deserve to be run over by a truck

 

[RyanA]

There seems to be a lot of documented arrests for critical mass riders on youtube. It seems that the nature of this "event structure" can be a catalyst for criminal behavior http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/372948_criticalmass31.html
IE group behavior, deindividuation again. This is the sort of stuff that causes things like sports riots, often it's enough just to get a lot of people together and for it to be be dark. It seems pretty apparent why Law Enforcement would already have a negative disposition towards these events and their participants.
Whether if they are just a side effect of the disorganized and unsanctioned nature of the rides or if they are individuals out there acting on a sort of confirmation bias (actively trying to be arrested or goad officers into violence to prove a point (political, I guess:shakehead.) It has always been my opinion that if an individual goes out looking for trouble long enough they will find the very person willing provide it.

 

[RyanA]

the folks at Critical Mass not only deserve a good beating, they usually deserve to be run over by a truck

+1
If anyone decides to "cork" the streets where I live they're moving or getting a beating. See if people run down the streets yelling "civilian brutality".

 

[RyanA]

Actually, I'm quite friendly with a number of LEOs on the NYPD, and other departments. It's just that when LEOs start going paraniod about being watched, I have a real problem

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

As I've said, I know a LOT of LEOs. I'd say 10% get "the attitude" They are running late for role call so they'll blow lights. Almost all will expect "professional curtesy" even when off duty (dudes, you too are supposed to follow the law) - Most give their wife and family members shields so they can get curtesy too. Yes, you should watch your back, but if someone is taking photos of you, tough poop - you are in public, and are a civil servant, not a civil god

edit:
Oh, and when was the last time I delt with a crazy person with a kinfe? Last time my older brother in law broke dawn, and the ploice were over an hour in responding. The first time, when he hit a mutual friend George with a hammer, the police would not take my B-I-L because "they didn't witness the incident" - 2 days later, I help defend my father in law from his son when his son was coming at him with a steak knife

I object to any law or rule that gives a Police Officer any rights that everyone does not have - see Article1, section 9 of the US Constitution

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."

We have come dammed close to not only making Congress Nobility, but also making Police and the like a sub class of Nobility - the minute someone has a right, that others do not, they ARE Nobility

I wouldn't say that it is a position of nobility. More like servitude. Yes they have arrest powers but realistically speaking they have less rights than a typical civilian, they are certainly subject to much more scrutiny. For example, It's not nice, but bouncing, we often beat the snot out of people, with zero legal authority to do so. But no-one says Boo about it. :shrug:
Vigilantism is much easier than actual police work.

 

[KC2IXE]

I wouldn't say that it is a position of nobility. More like servitude. Yes they have arrest powers but realistically speaking they have less rights than a typical civilian, they are certainly subject to much more scrutiny. For example, It's not nice, but bouncing, we often beat the snot out of people, with zero legal authority to do so. But no-one says Boo about it. :shrug:
Vigilantism is much easier than actual police work.

and they have a federal law that allows them to carry off duty anywhere in the USA - a law granting them a right that no one else does