Here's one that should start a nice debate...

[barnone]

I don't why she ran. Narcotics intoxication does funny things to the mind. I'm sure she thought she would escape. What I should have said is: "she should have known full well that her efforts would end one way or another, on the same concrete."

What rules were broken? As of yet no one has said what alleged "rules" he broke. Where are these "obvious, easy to follow rules"? Their written policy says they can use a Taser on an escaping suspect. Did you not read the article? It appears that you are speaking out of outrage and emotion rather than fact, as you have no facts to support your position.

So you see nothing wrong with taking away someones right to a trial because they fled?

[KAG]

I am in favor of lifting sovereign immunity and allowing personal suits against cops in some cases.

Cops get sued on a daily basis, over obviously legal uses of force. So you've gotten your wish. The reason people usually sue departments rather than individuals is simple, departments have money, officers don't.

So you think she deserves to be a vegetable? You dont think she deserved a trial?

Of course she didn't "deserve" to be a vegatable. But SHE chose that path, no one else. She was given her right to trial, and it is still intact should she ever recover. It is through her actions only that she is not in court today.

[Jamie J. Skibicki]

"
Can you give an example of an officer using force that was illegal and getting away with it?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_867020.html

Here's one.

G20 in pittsburgh was a cluster fuck as well.

[KAG]

Mehserle. The issue isn't that the force is illegal, the issue is that it ISN'T illegal.

I'm very familiar with former officer Mehserle. He was tried, convicted, and punished by a jury of his peers. And he still faces federal charges, with more prison time. His action WAS deemed illegal. So again you can not provide an example of an officer who committed a clear offense and got away with it.

[barnone]

Cops get sued on a daily basis, over obviously legal uses of force. So you've gotten your wish. The reason people usually sue departments rather than individuals is simple, departments have money, officers don't.



Of course she didn't "deserve" to be a vegatable. But SHE chose that path, no one else. She was given her right to trial, and it is still intact should she ever recover. It is through her actions only that she is not in court today.

She wasn't given a right to trial because the cop took matters into his own hands

[The Emancipated Freak]

I don't why she ran. Narcotics intoxication does funny things to the mind. I'm sure she thought she would escape. What I should have said is: "she should have known full well that her efforts would end one way or another, on the same concrete."

What rules were broken? As of yet no one has said what alleged "rules" he broke. Where are these "obvious, easy to follow rules"? Their written policy says they can use a Taser on an escaping suspect. Did you not read the article? It appears that you are speaking out of outrage and emotion rather than fact, as you have no facts to support your position.

I misread it. I thought it said they couldn't tase people in the back while they're handcuffed. It does say they shouldn't be tasing people who are handcuffed at all though.

But the fact of the matter is that when you tase someone, they will fall down. When they fall down, they tend to do so very hard. When you fall on concrete hard, your head will hurt.

The only outrage I have is the fact that cops like this exist. It was incredibly obvious that she wouldn't have gotten away, regardless of whether or not she thought she would. He could have reached out his arm and grabbed her. She might have punched him in the balls, but at least we wouldn't be dealing with an idiot in a vegetative state and another idiot who will be back on the job by next week.

[tertius]

Cops know very well what level of force is acceptable to their department, and calibrate their use of force accordingly.

This isn't to say they don't get called on it, but they know where the line is., and most of the time they get a slap on the wrist for crossing it, or are rehired even after they've been fired for misconduct.

This site: http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/ is full of examples of this.

[barnone]

I'm very familiar with former officer Mehserle. He was tried, convicted, and punished by a jury of his peers. And he still faces federal charges, with more prison time. His action WAS deemed illegal. So again you can not provide an example of an officer who committed a clear offense and got away with it.

He may have been tried but he basically got off. HAd the situation been reversed the citizen would have gotten life.

[KAG]

"
Can you give an example of an officer using force that was illegal and getting away with it?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_867020.html

Here's one.

This is still an active investigation, so therefore no one has "gotten away" with anything. But if a grand jury of the citizens finds they did nothing wrong, then what exactly would you take issue with?

However you really should edcuate yourself on the facts of the case. But that's another discussion for another time.

[Jamie J. Skibicki]

"It does say they shouldn't be tasing people who are handcuffed at all though."

No, it doesn't.

"FHP policy says troopers can use Tasers on escaping suspects. It also says they should avoid using them on people who are handcuffed — though it allows exceptions to that provision."

"
However you really should edcuate yourself on the facts of the case. But that's another discussion for another time."

I couldn't find court documents which I "prefer" to read (they are horrible to read but the best source of information), But I did read several article and follow ups. Nothing I read indicated that sweep of the raids was justified or that they were carried out in a skillful manner.