Comments on: When Police Officers Commit Assault

By: mirriam

mirriam — Fri, 28 May 2010 14:43:51 +0000

Yes, but I don’t disagree with it in the way that DA confidential does. He defends the police, which would be the reasonable and predictable thing for a DA to do (as I sit here and look at my old DA badge from years ago). I am confused by your post because I can’t figure out if you think its bad or good that this guy got hit squarely in the eye with such force that it looks like that while being ‘subdued’. I’d like to know what the other people looked like as well.

So, on the one hand, it seems like you are saying its bad. But its not bad in this case since this guy deserved it. How do we figure out which is which?

By: jamison

jamison — Thu, 27 May 2010 21:07:06 +0000

Mirriam: I am always confused which perhaps explains your confusion. In addition, you weren’t the only one to disagree with this post. DA Confidential called me out at the link below:

http://daconfidential.blogspot.com/2010/05/rush-to-judgment.html

By: mirriam

mirriam — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:48:38 +0000

I read the article it said he was ‘hit’ as he was being subdued. But your post confuses me. If he deserves to be beat up, then what’s the problem? As far as the cops are concerned, they ALL deserve it.

By: JW

JW — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:03:44 +0000

This may be little consolation, but brighter days are ahead, and there’s little the police can do about it. And by brighter, I mean for both honest police and those who are detained by them.

My girlfriend recently got, as a graduation present, a new Flip HD video camer. It is about twice as thick as an iPhone and about as big. It shoots two hours of HD video and switches on in 1-2 seconds after you hit the power button.

Psychologically, we like to think the police don’t commit crimes. We will hide that dirty truth behind closed doors, in shadows, in pixelated and grainy surveillance footage if need be.

But as portable video cameras become even more popular, easier to carry, use and have better quality, judges and juries will soon find themselves face-to-face with high-quality footage of what REALLY happened.

This will have a two-fold effect. As footage of police brutality becomes more apt to hit YouTube or another online services, the public relations issues that will surface among law enforcement higher-ups will bring downward pressure on the officers. Less beatings in the first place.

Secondly, those officers who do choose to let their aggression get the better of them will more quickly be found out and removed from their position. The fewer bad apples in the force will spread to other areas, as the “good cops” will no longer have to turn a blind eye or worse to keep their jobs/status in the agency.

And because I don’t think this comment is QUITE LONG ENOUGH … let me say this: if I was defending this guy, I’d do some internet searching for YouTube, blog or any other post I can find in reference to that particular day at the Phillies-National game. It’s not beyond belief that a random guy within view of the event has a blog, and he came home that night to make a post that said “Went to the Phillies game tonight, watched a guy get puked on, then the pukee got beaten and arrested.”

To that random guy, he might have no idea the importance of what he saw, but to the chubby kid who drank too much, it could mean a fair trial.