Hey, there! Log in / Register
What's going on in this video?
By adamg on Wed, 10/27/2010 - 3:53pm
The Globe reports Police Commissioner Ed Davis promises an investigation into whether the force used to subdue a teenager with outstanding warrants at his arrest at Roxbury Community College was justified after somebody posted this video (possibly NSFW):
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Kid's got a problem
It shouldn't be, but it is absolutely illegal to record police in the line of duty in Massachusetts. The videographer is likely to face penalties of his own.
I am not a lawyer, but from what i understand, it is perfectly legal to VIDEO record police as long as you are out of the way and on public/your own property. However, because wiretap laws in MA, you are legally responsible to get permission to record AUDIO of situations. Therefore, unless that guy was recording video only, he could potentially face penalties/video not admissible as evidence.
Audio illegal, visual legal
It's the audio that is illegal in Massachusetts, not the visual part of the video.
That said, it's just a matter of time before there is a good test case that will come through the courts which will overturn the Massachusetts law as inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution.
BPD policy to arrest people making a video/audio recording
of them without permission is a misreading of the law. A guy who was arrested for doing it sued with the help of the ACLU and won.
There is no expectation of privacy in a public place, and therefore there is no need to obtain consent to make an audio recording. Is RCC a public place. I think so.
Anyone know if what BPD's policy is now?
There is no policy.
Just the law. And it doesn't really have anything to do with the public place, just the expectation of privacy one might have in that public place, and the intent of the audio.
If the police are investigating a crime in a public place and an audio recording of the investigation might hinder that investigation, an officer may tell someone to stop audio recording, just like they can put up police tape and keep people out of public places.
There are a lot of grey areas with the law, but not in this case here. The people who shot the cell phone video will not be charged and shouldn't be charged.
There was a case where an officer pulled over a motorist for speeding, and the motorist audiotaped the interaction without informing the officer. The motorist was charged with the illegal audiotaping and was found guilty under MA law.
I'll rephrase the question
Is it still procedure for BPD officers to arrest bystanders who do not stop recording video/audio recording the police in performance of their duty in a public place?
Has their procedure changed (what have they been told/trained to do) or will they still make the arrest?
Like most of police work.
It depends on the totality of the circumstances.
I know you think being a police officer is a simple job where every situation can be solved by something you can study in some magic law book.
So there is no answer to your question.
Thanks for trying Mr Nice
Anyone who knows what there talking about have an informed answer?
I know exactly what I'm talking about.
And it is clear that you don't.
But fill us in on your experience with criminal procedure, law, defensive tactics, arrest and booking procedures, case law regarding the above, or your own personal experience in courtrooms and what you can tell us on your own imperical observations of the above?
Oh wait, you can't. All you have is what you think you know from reading the world wide web.
You can go about your life now. You aren't making an impact on anyone here, and no one is going to bite anymore on your obvious trolling.
I mean, are you the only one who notices that when you put up posts and ask questions for answers that you think you already know that no one responds (except for yourself)? You aren't doing a good job trying to open an honset dicussion because you do a horrible job trying to disguise the rhetorical devices that you use in these posts. That's why most people ignore you.
I don't ingore you because I think there is a lot you can learn. Maybe its time for me to just let you go on talking to yourself? I don't know, I like having good discussions on these boards about this type of stuff, but you seem to have your own agenda with everything you post.
But the answer to your question still depends on the totality of the circumstances. You should google that quote since most of your questions would have that answer.
What are BPD officer trained to do
Have BPD officers been told (aka trained) that its legal for citizens to video/audio BPD officers in public or not?
Since you don't work there it's likely you wouldn't know the answer to my question. That would be ok as long as you don't continue to pretend you do. Knowing that you were once a police officer, I don't expect that you could shut up now. Somehow I expect you'll insist on having the last word. See if you can prove me wrong.
Who said I didn't work there?
I'm not trying to have the last word, just trying to answer your question. But I'll type it in caps since I think you understand that better.
IT DEPENDS ON THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES SINCE SOMETIMES IT IS NOT LEGAL FOR CITIZENS TO VIDEO/AUDIO BPD OFFICERS IN PUBLIC.
But seriously, if you really want to know and don't believe me, then why don't you just call the Boston Police and ask them? Not many people in the middle of a blog post are going to know the answer to that question. Kind of a dumb place to ask it.
This is not true.
The law is its illegal to
The law is its illegal to record anyone without their consent, not just government employees. However, they only seem to enforce this when people record cops. Did the people at the mosque all consent to being recorded when that group got a woman from wellsley to record them letting kids pray there? So why isn't that woman being prosecuted? Cops too busy beating people up?
That is not true.
It is illegal to audiotape anyone without permission, regardless of their job.
it is no more illegal to record a police officer...
... than it is an ordinary citizen. we have no "line of duty" law. what we do have is a law about two-party consent, which applied to both officers and citizens alike. it is illegal to secretly record conversation without the consent of both parties. so folks who get arrested for recording police officers generally due so under the illegal wiretapping law.
I agree with what you've
I agree with what you've said, except that Massachusetts is not a third party consent state. Rather it is illegal to "secretly" record the voice of another. The police seem to believe their consent is required, but it is not.
Since so many people replied
Since so many people replied to tell me I'm wrong, I'll just reply to myself to clarify.
Yes, I'm sorry, I was not specific enough. It's not the video that's the problem, but the audio. I'm fully aware of this. But he recorded both video and audio, so that question is largely moot.
My point was, he violated the Massachusetts wiretapping laws, and he's likely to face a significant headache from the cops.
Massachusetts v. Hyde, 750 N.E.2d 963 (Mass. 2001).
The Massachusetts wiretapping law "“makes no exception for a motorist who, having been stopped by police officers, surreptitiously tape records the encounter.”
See in particular, page 967 of the opinion, where the Supreme Judicial upheld the indictment because all conversations are protected, whether public or private.
In other words, you DO need (in Massachusetts) the police officers' consent to record them.
Maybe it shouldn't be the case (highly recommended: http://www.law.suffolk.edu/highlights/stuorgs/lawr... ), but it is.
He (or she) isn't going to face anything for the audio tape.
The only time that happens is when the officer tells them to step back if they are too close to a police process, they tell them to turn off the audio, or if someone is secretly audiotaped without their knowing in a semi-private situation. This wasn't that secret, cell phone cameras are common and audio taping from them is common, and this was a public place where they really wouldn't expect any privacy.
How many Youtube videos are there right now that were filmed in MA in public without permission?
The operative word
is "surreptitiously." This appears to have been done out in the open.
I'm not one for police brutality, etc. That's not what I see here though. The guy was not compliant and pulled his arms underneath him. He had just escaped a detention facility. Clearly this guy has a problem obeying authorities.
throw them both in
throw them both in jail....
Truth is we have to know what happened before this video starts--squirming and noncompliance are completely understandable when some goon is whaling away on you (more so when half a dozen grown men are holding you in place).
But if this isn't brutal I don't know what is. Is there really no other more civilized recourse to take when you have a small army of armored men on one 16 year old?
I understand that people are alarmed by the recent spike in violence, and the city can be a scary place sometimes. But we need the police to be a little better than this.
Maybe the city needs to do a better job recruiting- do police department recruiters ever visit the universities? I sometimes suspect that we might be welcoming a few too many PTSD cases and dudes with unstable temperaments to the ranks these days.
Dan, I don't know what dream
Dan, I don't know what dream world you live on, but most cops are college educated. Many have advanced degrees.
Here is the issue with that Dan.
And I agree with you about getting more educated cops (although that would have made no difference with this arrest).
The Police recruiters do visit the universities but college kids do not want to be cops, and they usually go to the bottom of the list anyway. Massachusetts Police departments, including the Boston police have to use civil service which makes the rules as to who they can hire or not hire. Veterans, minorities, and Boston residents get put at the top of the list regardless of their education, work history, score on the civil service test, etc.
The bottom line is that the police will not be found to have acted in the wrong from this video. I will bet anyone money on that.
16 or 18 years old? funny
16 or 18 years old? funny how the "facts" get distorted right from the outset. and those 2 years DO make a difference.
i thought you had to be 21 to
i thought you had to be 21 to get beat up by a cop.....
i was just going on what the youtube video said, and still says: 16
If you WATCH the video, the
If you WATCH the video, the narrator says, at around 00:52 "yo, this kids like 18 years old with with 12 cops on 'im dude". her headline reads "16". on dogs.
what happened before she started videotaping? just curious.
How can I WATCH something a
How can I WATCH something a narrator says?
I WATCHED, and I SAW 16.
Also what is "like" 18 years old? Is 18 like 18? Is 16 "like" 18? 20?
WTF is the point anyway? 16, 18. 10 or 100. It makes no difference. Brutality isn't conditioned to adulthood.
If there's a "more civilized recourse", name it.
They told him what to do and he refused. He also clearly has no problem attempting to flee (thus the dog piling) given his record of escaping a detention center. He pulled his arms under himself instead of putting them behind his back. How do you suggest they get compliance on getting his arms behind his back? Wait him out? A knee or fist to certain points on the body weaken the muscle/ability to continue resisting. It's actually less force than using a lever (like a baton) or taser or chemical deterrent (pepper spray).
They have no idea if this guy is armed yet and so they can't let him have any degrees of freedom or he might reveal a weapon and the entire situation becomes a whole lot worse for everyone involved AND the spectators.
I see a lot of people crying over the guy laying on the ground who has a total disregard for the police arresting him. I don't see a lot of suggestions on how they should have handled this differently that would have assured public safety in the process.
were you there or something?
were you there or something? How do you know this sequence of events?
I'm only going on what I see in the video. First thing I see is what appears to be a finger over the lens, then I see a tight huddle of officers, with a sneaker sideways under what seems to be an undercover officer. I see the officer attacking something, then I'm able to make out a squirming body. This video shows the officer striking before it shows anyone resisting, not putting arms where instructed, etc. That is all I can go on.
As far as naming a more civilized recourse: I imagine that the dozen or so cops leaning on their proverbial shovels could apply some horse power in detaining the suspect. I realize there are some geometry and physics problems to be worked out, but really I have a hard time imagining that these cops could not stabilize this kid using just gravity and their weight and some strategically placed knees. My friends and I had no problem doing it to my brother growing up, and adjusted for scale these guys have a better mass advantage than we did.
You're kidding right?
Comparing a backyard beatdown of your lil bro to a police arrest of a fugitive?
Wanted fugitive in a crowded school is the bottom line.
I'm no fan of the BPD and have some members do despicably iilegal acts.
That, from the video. didn't happen here.
The moral is "Get cuffed up or get roughed up."
Believe me, he would have been tased and pepper-sprayed if he weren't in the school.
And he deserved to be.
Cops NEED to subdue, search, and put into custody (that's handcuffs) suspected violent criminals.
Never thought I'd say it but I'm team cop on this one.
Just raise your hands and obey orders. It's worked for me all my life.
Why the cops have to hit him.
First off, It is very easy to keep your arms away from someone if you are on the ground. If you have ever wrestled or done any kind of this training, it is very hard to get someones arm out who doesn't want it to be out.
That being said, if the kid had a gun, he could have pulled it out and shot someone. All cops have seen hundreds of videos of criminals doing this sort of thing, so the necessary amount of force can be used to make people keep their hands away from their body.
And criminals who do have guns often times act like this kid was acting like.
How was he acting before the
How was he acting before the cop started assaulting him? My video doesn't start until after he was struck by the officer.
Obvious troll is obvious.
Obvious troll is obvious.
My experience with Boston cops?
99.9% of the time they don't go out of their way to assault innocent or criminal people.
But you are right. He could have been handcuffed and the cops could have all been there just holding him down and taking some shots for the fun of it.
Were it recreational use of
Were it recreational use of force, that's the lamest showing I've ever seen.
It would not have gone on so long, had they not been so restrained in the use of force.
The kneeing didn't look like perfect technique in that situation, and it's not something you want on YouTube. But I would use that to improve training, not sanction the officer over it, nor consider the suspects rights to have been violated.
Well there are about 2000
Well there are about 2000 cops in this city, so assuming your experience was significant and accurate there are likely two bad apples out there-- that's enough to make me cautious (and i'm white)
Well there are more than a few bad apples.
But they wouldn't use excessive force 100% of the time.
Everything is justified, nothing is ever amiss, we just don't get it because it's special cop bullying/hitting/brutalizing and not real hitting/brutalizing, excessive force. Etc.
Heaven forfend that training is required on a regular basis, policies are enforced, and consequences ever follow misdeeds. That's because cops can't ever do anything wrong when there is Copslaining to cover for every single little atomized action that the public sees as potential brutality. Because it's not real brutality, injury and death it's just super special copstuff. Yeah. That.
Swirly you and I can look up 1000 videos online of police brutality, and we can find 1000 videos online of criminals committing crimes and then being arrested legally with the proper amount of force.
This to me did not seem that bad.
What matters is this: until police investigations and evaluations become professionalized to the point that they, like other professions, can come up with something other than "nope, they did it right he just died uh huh yeah must be a prexisting something that" and start owning their mistakes, prescribing solutions to their training problems, and getting rid of bad behavior and firing bad cops I'm not going to believe any of it.
Was the guy whose appeal just got smacked down by the SJC fired yet? The one who thought it was fun to attack and beat a motorcyclist and destroy his bike?
I really can't think of any other profession where people are so very immune to responsibility and so indifferent, condescending, and dismissive of those who provide their funding.
They already do that.
The Boston police suspend, fire, investigate and arrest hundreds of cops every year. That is a fact.
I didn't know you were at the scene of the biker who got arrested and knew that the cops thought it was fun to beat someone up!
If you didn't see this video here, you may have thought it was as bad as the Rodney King incident if the person who shot the video told the story. And if the Rodney King incident wasn't video taped, you may have only heard that a man resisted arrest and cops had to baton him because he didn't listen to them.
The cop using excessive force and the SJC throwing out his contention that a cop on duty can't be liable for his behavior is a finding of fact in court. Read the opinion - they quickly concluded that a rational cop would not have found such force to be necessary under the circumstances.
In other words, the only "rational" explanation was he did it because it was fun for him and he thought he could get away with it.
Yea but that case has more to do with other things....
like cops not being able to be sued for lying on the stand and other procedural quirky loopholes.
The other rational explaination for this is that the cop may have thought the man was trying to get away and he needed to use force to stop him from getting away.
Excuse me why I laugh. You'd
Excuse me why I laugh. You'd be begging for just one of those cops to be hanging around when you're being assaulted, robbed, raped or murdered. And you know it.
Not if said cop was impaired by drug use - including the steroid abuse that is well documented and the Boston cops refuse to test or account for - or otherwise incompetent.
If the cops beat someone up or otherwise behave unprofessionally in the line of duty, that rapist, robber, etc. could end up walking free in the general population. That's hardly any solace.
and if he wasn't? Let's not
and if he wasn't?
Let's not go down that slippery, let's generalize everyone, slope.
Hey, Pollyanna, I mean,
Hey, Pollyanna, I mean, Swirlygirl, news flash: some people suck! And do really shitty things! And some of them are cops! But others are bankers, or lawyers or stay-at-home moms!
And in this particular, specific videotaped arrest, nothing untoward is happening. So "super special cop stuff" reads a little like "women can't do science" or "all black people have rhythm".
Is it S.O.P. these days for cops to actually throw punches like stereotypical Charlestown thugs in a brawl? And at a guy being held down by other cops?
What's the matter with these guys, anyway? I thought there was a physical fitness requirement for cops- are they all that out of shape that fucking five of them can't handle one kid without dirty fighting? Where's the professionalism, and the genuine toughness? This kind of stuff doesn't help to engender respect for police.
Right on, also I love how
Right on, also I love how you've got the one hero-thug who is resorting to moves he learned on the playground, while about 10 cops stand there, chat, and stare. My god what did the arrest of this penny-ante drug pusher just cost us? If you factor in salary of the many cops while they were there, the cost of the impending investigation, the paid leave this officer will be put on, legal fees.... not to monetize it completely, but how many times a day does this happen? It adds up.
Also while half the force was watching the wrasslin show who was covering for them over in Boston's new AK-47 zone?
how do we know he's not
how do we know he's not somehow affiliated with the recent bloodbaths? people might not be so quick to slam the cops if this kid was one of the triggermen in any of the recent shootings.
We don't, but he's not being
We don't, but he's not being charged with anything related to it
what's he being charged with?
what's he being charged with?
The juvenile was apprehended
Why does it matter?
Their job was to arrest the guy. Not convict him and render street justice.
That needs to be done in a professional manner, regardless of what he is accused of.
My point is: they have no
My point is: they have no idea with whom they are dealing - how dangerous, or unstable or angry or armed that person might be. I think, given the danger and the demands of the profession, and the volatility and adrenaline involved in a situation like this, they acted in an extremely professional manner.
What "street justice" was
What "street justice" was rendered out here?
The suspect wasn't complying, He was actively resisting their commands, and they apply appropriate force to get his hands out and cuff him and stopped once they did. They didn't hit him over the head, or in any other critical area.
I'm sorry that a bunch of people here and a few on the council have the vapors; but this was a textbook arrest of a person who is acting aggressive towards officers and not complying.
If only they asked "please" first....
This isn't the jackass who beat the stopped buy unconscious over the head with a flashlight, shot a guy driving away, or a baton beat down. Police work is dangerous, and many times involves scuffles with people who have no respect for the profession, and don't stop to think that these people also have families and loved ones too. The video isn't pretty, but it's exactly what you should expect if you're a little shit and struggling with an officer. He's going to act like you're armed and make sure he disarms you and cuffs you.
They can't win. The same
They can't win. The same people objecting to how they handle a hot-headed kid just escaped from detention will also scream about how they're not doing anything about all the shootings in the city. You can't have it both ways - they don't know what the kid's got in his hands or pockets and what he might do with it.
You want to shit on cops doing what they're trained to do in a volatile situation? Work as a cop for a few years and your criticism will have some validity.
they don't know what the
You can't see the problem with this as a guiding theory of justification for the use of extreme force?
But the force wasn't
But the force wasn't extreme.
Cops asked for compliance, he refused, and the cops used justified force in a localized are to make him more his hands.
It's one thing if they where beating the kid senseless about the head. Hitting him in the shoulders, ribs to be able to move his arms isn't out of the ordinary.
One wonders what kind of run ins and for what you've had with the cops for such a hatred.
sure it could be
but what do you want them do in situations where they actually do try to pull their hands away?
People actually do have guns though, and people sometimes try to shot cops with those guns. The cops didn't shoot the kid first, and they didn't hit them with their metal batons either.
How many times this year have cops shot someone and then said they "thought they had a gun", and how many of those times did the other person actually have a gun, how many times did the cops lie, and how many times were they just mistaken?
Cops being murdered is a terrible thing
which is also very rare. When's the last time a Boston Police Officer was shot to death? I'll bet it's been over a decade. Perhaps it's tactics like these that have greatly reduced such incidents- I don't know, and I'm not sure whether the ends always justify the means.
Sure it is rare.
But I'm not going to take that chance with my own life if someone is going to break the law, resist arrest, and put his hands somewhere where he may have a gun.
I'm not going to shoot the kid and ask questions later, but I will do what I'm trained to do, and that's what these cops did here.
You can't articulate why this
You can't articulate why this is not a reasonable justification for the use of not-even-close to extreme force?
Dan: Why bring Charlestown
Dan: Why bring Charlestown into this? I got no respect for you either........
I was trying to refer to the Hollywood stereotype
No offense intended- my apologies.
Is it S.O.P. these days for
If they're afraid the suspect will actually shoot them like a stereotypical Mattapan thug on the street.
how many does it take to change a light bulb 500 one to hold the bulb 499 to turn the building around. They could of accedently been hitting themselves. there was not enough meat to go around 2 wings a breast and 2 drumsticks.
What's going on? Someone is
What's going on?
Someone is resisting arrest, police seem to be having lots of trouble gaining compliance and restraining til wagon arrives, possible questionable use of force in parts (unclear), some bystander woman wails a bit at the beginning, and some person who's annoying to listen to gets video.
What is she talking about calling the transport van a Paddy wagon? I'm offended. She should be ashamed. racist pig.
they beat up more than just kids..
...a Boston cop was just arrested for beating up their wife.
Police brutality is only
Police brutality is only allowed in the inner city, duh!... Thats why you didn't see this in the media. "Don't tase me bro" however...
The only thing offensive I
The only thing offensive I see, well hear, in this video it the poor use of the English language on behalf of whoever is using the video camera
I'm no grammarian myself, but....
I don't think you are using "on behalf of" properly, the "well hear" is kind of clumsy written as it is, and you typed "it" when you meant "is".
Beyond that, thanks for your thoughts Professor!
Ill tell you all what.
How many of you would consider the following.
I'll have a gun in my waist and lie face down on the ground. 5 of you of you can have guns, batons, and pepper spray. Then you can all try to handcuff me. How would you do it? What if I didn't put my hand out? What if I reached for my gun? What would you all do?
Remember that these cops don't know if the kid has a gun so they can't take a chance shooting an unarmed man.
You're starting to win me
You're starting to win me over. Or at least, I'm beginning to see your point better.
I don't know police procedure for this specific situation aside from all those years watching COPS (which I wouldnt equate with actually having gone through police training, but I imagine is somewhat more accurate than purely fictional portrayals).
OK so we have asked you to lay down and you complied, but you will not pull out your hands, and while you have a gun in your waist we don't necessary know that, but we are cautious to the possibility but also don't want to shoot an unarmed man.
Of course I don't know how close we are to you when this happens, or the layout of the space. But with that as the situation, I would imagine we have guns drawn pointed at you from different vantage points, and you realize it. We scream to show your hands, but you don't. We scream ultimatums. We threaten to shoot. No hands. We have cops on different sides of you, slowly moving in toward you, guns pointed. As officers we are literally putting ourselves at risk, but we are armored to some degree, and know we are trained for this situation, while the suspect is not. At some point, we pounce. At the point several things could happen:
1. you pull out a gun, but we recognize the gun and kill you before you can hit one of us, an ideal situation and one we are trained for.
2. you pull out a gun, and shoot one of us before we can recognize the gun, but we know you can only get off one. you are killed.
3. you pull out your hands, we recognize this and don't shoot.
4. you keep your hands hidden. I have 8 other men crowded around you. they may not be able to pull your arms and hands out from under your body, but they sure as hell can keep you from bringing them out yourself. With some weight and muscles you can be fairly well restrained, if you are too wily: pepper spray. Taser. Cork bullets. Whatever, we have a whole arsenal of things to use, right? Why would we need to resort to thuggish tactics?
I mean I know that the taser and spray and cork bullets are potentially very dangerous themselves but there is logic and science to them, and an exercise of control, that isn't there with the thug punches and cheap-shots. And to be honest at that point you could even tell the dude look show us your goddam hands our we're going to taser you.
Also why don't cops in this day and age record their own situations like this? They can do it from cruisers, but why not have a protocol for it away from cruisers. If they are following their own rules it can only help them in court, and save us tons of money on investigations like this. It wouldn't be too tough for one of those cops standing around watching to be video (not audio) recording.
Yea here is the thing.
Well First off the Boston Police don't have tazers, so they couldn't be used here. Then there is the debate whether or not the tazer is more force than the punch. If you punched 1000 people and tazed 1000 people, more people would probably be hurt by the punching. But people do die from being tazed, but most of those people who do die actually die from heart attacks because they are on drugs anyway, as the majority of people who resist arrest are under the influence of some sort of drug as well. And drug users have weak hearts, and will die more often than the normal person when their body is put under the stress of fighting cops and resisting arrest.
You also find that many people who resist arrest don't listen to anything you say even if you have a gun pointed at them.
Plus when you finally get the guy, pointing the guns at them doesn't do much either. Then there is the actual point where they actually resist arrest. Guys who have illegal guns when confronted by the cops do many different things. Many just realize that giving up is the safest thing for them. Others may realize that they are facing a lot of jailtime, especially if they are someone who may already have a murder warrant on them. Then they are at the end of their rope. Who knows when the guys will shoot.
Watch this video for instance. (WARNING, this is VERY GRAPHIC).
Here is a guy with a gun who shoots himself in a police station. He could have killed anyone within the time of this video. What if the cops searched him and the guy started to resist? At what point does this guy decide to kill himself or the police? These are the situations you need to avoid. You have to get the gun out of his hands, and the hand punching is often times the best way to do it.
And actually, from the same site, watch this video of a guy similar to the one from Boston here (also very graphic)
This is what could have happend here. Do you take the chance?
Trust me, police work can be easy, but these situations are never easy to handle. You always prepare for the worst, and you have to go by how you were trained. In my opinion, the officers in this video did what they were trained to do within the law.
And this guy ran and was
And this guy ran and was taken down.
You don't get 7-8 officers on a guys back like that if he's complying.
Also keep in mind that they knew they were being
vdeotaped, at least after the first minute or so of the video. I often wonder what goes on that doesn't make it to Youtube.
Yo...what do you mean,yo?
Yo...what do you mean,yo?
....this kid resisted arrest and needed to be detained. He has a history of crime and also fleeing a detention center. The only thing heard lately out of Roxbury/Dorchester/Mattapan has been the need for more cops in its neighborhoods to clean up the criminals. When these residents get the attention they then question the methods (which if dealing with a person resisting arrest are warranted). How exactly should police officers handle the escalating situations inside these communities? As a resident of Neponset I will gladly take back the cops we have lost patrolling our neighborhood due to the "out cry" in these other neighborhoods.
Not to derail, but...
You haven't been doing much listening if "The only thing heard lately out of Roxbury/Dorchester/Mattapan has been the need for more cops in its neighborhoods to clean up the criminals." There are tons of great things going on in these neighborhoods every day.
No brutality on the face of
No brutality on the face of it. I heard about this before I saw the video. I was expecting much worse.
Nothing gratuitous or excessive stands out on first viewing.
As far as I'm concerned the cops were just trying to cuff the kid. If he had allowed that immediately then the incident would have been over.
Cops beating on disarmed, searched, and/or cuffed prisoners is a whole different ball game. They should do hard time.
Couple body blows and knees while making a difficult arrest don't seem excessive to me.
They could have tased him AND pepper sprayed him as far as I'm concerned.
Reasonable force to safely take him into custody.
He could have put his hands behind his back immediately and avoided all of this.
As far as I'm concerned the
Where in the videotape do you see that?
Have any of you ever done jury duty? You assess based on evidence you are presented. This video only shows a cop punching a kid, who is trying like hell to get away from it.
At this point any of you who wasn't present at the scene but can vindicate the cop's actions--based on a notion that the kid was resisting arrest, wouldn't show his hands, or jumped up and did the macarena on the hood of a cruiser--is doing so purely on your own imagination of events not shown here.
I'm not saying that this is necessarily enough to convict the cop, either, but how anyone can look at this video and say "oh i think it's justified" is beyond me.
I'm not a fan of people who abuse power and I'm no expert on police procedures (not even a novice), so I don't honestly know whether this case is extreme or not. I know I wouldn't want to be punched like that, but I don't want to be shot either.
I think an important point here is in your jury duty comment. Universal Hub is not a jury. None of us have been called as expert witnesses (good thing because none of us were there). The point of a message board like this is to have a conversation, voice an opinion. Opinions and cowboy hats, every asshole has one. Some people might have more insight than others. Some might feel more strongly than others. But given that none of us are appearing in the dock, swearing on a bible and stating our names for the record, well, everyone's opinion is sort of holding equal weight here for the most part.
But honestly, are people sitting down at the keyboard in a black robe and powdered wig ready to cast judgment on every friggin' thing, from incidents like this to tuna cans nailed to trees? A Rodney Kingesque video'd beat-down, the umpteenth delay on the T within a week, something kind of insightful observation (yet still Seinfeld-like in its picayune nature), well let's hear it. Maybe it'll start an interesting conversation.
But getting so riled up on every happening -- y'all gonna have ulcers.
I get it, it's a public
I get it, it's a public forum, and here we are presented with a fairly grave current event in our society, one that seems illustrative of one or more problems with our society. So we all chime in. I"m just saying that the humility and logic that is embedded into the jury process is a pretty good model for conducting oneself in a discussion about this. I'm not trying to mandate moral code or tell people they are doing it wrong, rather saying "hey this is how you would make a real decision about this".
Where did I see that? It was
Where did I see that?
It was the gist of the entire video.
He wouldn't cuff up and got put into submission until he did.
No prisoner can be considered safe until he is cuffed AND searched.
Of course the cops could have taken the avant garde method and tickled him until he fessed up.
I know people that have been subjected to this- on the street and in prison.
Once the cops want to cuff you up you have 2 choices:
Comply or fight for your life trying to get away or inflict injury on your opponents.
No mercy or money for the kid.
Gist is not visible, that is
Gist is not visible, that is your imagination filling in gaps based on perceived norms.
That is just the difference between you and I it seems. In my life I try to make decisions based primarily on facts. If they tell an incomplete story, and it is acceptable for me to remain undecided (as it is here for me) then I wait for more evidence.
End result of a city on edge
I saw nothing out of line here. Given the fact that 9 year olds carry MP5's in this city, the cops must have felt that they needed more of them to serve this warrant on a kid who apparently has a reputation for rabbiting. Obviously these cops weren't taking any chances and the kid obviously resisted. Which you just don't do, dawg.
That's criminal. An MP5 is
That's criminal. An MP5 is way too expensive to give to a 9 year-old.
I mean, a Mazda mp5 would be hard for a 9-year-old to drive very well anyway.
City-council president outraged
Statement from Mike Ross:
Mike Ross is a ever
Mike Ross is a ever increasing douchebag
Mike Ross has turned into a Robot.
I knew him since he was a kid. Very nice person but everything is political with this guy. He can't take a stand and talking to him now is like talking to a robot.
Which goes to show politics
Which goes to show politics corrupts absolutely. If not in criminal terms, in soul.
he realizes the suspect was a college kid, on the fringe of Mission Hill. Medals all around.
Ayanna Pressley, too
She tweeted this morning:
That was nothing....who're
That was nothing....who're the babies whining? Why so many cops? Because the 'kid' was a menace and non-compliant with the laws of a civilized society. If a suspect refuses to comply with law enforcement, what should a cop do? Let him/her go? Tase him/her? Beat them with a club? Shoot them? He's not an angel, and will probably be a societal problem his entire life.
I grew up in the so-called ghetto and this is typical behavior; lot's of melo-drama, out of control, lack of discipline at home, in schools, general chaos, and of course non-stop violence. Many people, kids and adults, act like children and the cops, social services, the government are substitutes for a real, responsible mom and dad. It's pathetic. If the 'kid' acted like a man and took responsibility for his transgressions, he wouldn't have had 6-9 'white' cops holding him down, trying to put cuffs on him. BTW: would the chick commenting on the video prefer if the cops were black? Would that have made her feel better? Black cops would have done the exact same thing. They don't want to be wrestling with a 'kid', trying to cuff him, not knowing if he has a gun on him and about to start shooting. She be damn happy to see just one of those cops show up when she's being jumped, assaulted, robbed, raped, murdered. She'd be singing a different tune.
And taxpayer funded R.C.C. shouldn't even be still open for business. It's been badly managed for decades and has a well deserved crappy reputation.
BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A
BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY DUMB ASS...U SOUND STUPID U THINK U SOUND SMART BUT U DONT.... OF COURSE THE POLICE WOULD BE THERE WE CANT TAKE THINGS IN OUR OWN HAND..IF SOMEONE WAS BEING BEAT UP, RAPED WAT EVA THE POLICE IS THE ONLY ONES THAT CAN DO ANYTHING BOUT THE SITUATION..SHUT THE HELL UP RIDING THE POLICE d^$K LIKE THAT THEY DONTEVEN DESERVE..HOW THE HELL 7 PPL GET SHOT IN 17 HRS HUH..FUCKING SMART GUY
Please check your keyboard
Please check your keyboard for a broken cap locks key.
Herald: Kid was using cop's handcuffs as weapon
The Herald provides some excerpts from the police report on the incident, adds:
Will somebody explain why two people making $12 an hour at a house for older retards or mental patients manage to restrain and subdue a nutty resident without such force, and five cops have to punch? Seriously - these guys are lame and they would be fired immediately for that shit!
Maybe the cops should go work in nutty houses for $12 and hour and learn to do it right? Or does being paid 10x as much as a house aid does make them too special to learn?
People in these places do not have guns first of all.
And do you really thing the workers in these places (I won't even get into what you want to refer to them as) have perfect restraint practices?
You have hundereds, maybe thousands of mental patients killed every year in this country by staff or by themselves in locked facilities. There are easily thousands of additional lawsuits against mental facilities for improper handling of patients that lead to injury, death, torture etc.
And the funny thing is, didn't this kid escape from one of these places in the first place? Maybe if the cops were trained there, this kid would still be free?!
(The above comment probably didn't deserve a civil response anyway but I bit)
Cops TV Show
I love watching the TV Show "Cops" when they show a person resisting being cuffed. They struggle and scream bloody murder. After they're subdued they say,"I wasn't resisting."
BPD @ roxbury comm. college
why isnt what happen before you see 12 officers trying to put this kid in handcuffs and IS IN FACT RESISTING. there werent 12 boston police officers just hanging around out front of the college just waiting to pick out somebody to mess with. is this kid even a student at the college? and as far as the kid taping making racial remarks himself and quoting that his aunt is a state rep. what does that mean? he's untouchable? and ive been in situations where there were all black police officers and myself being a white male, does that mean its ok to do whatever i want and i can pull the 'racecard'? and if this were a 'racial' issue, there are at least 3 black officers in this video and maybe even more. and yes i will agree that what you see on the video is a little agressive but again where the footage of what happen before they were able to get him on the ground? funny how thats not there...