New orleans cop's beat 64 year old guy..

Post by **andyman** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 7:52 pm

reefsurfer wrote:
andyman wrote:i like how the one guy kept holding his pass up and almost got beat down
My bad...it was his PRESS pass.

And the story is that the cops found the old guy drinking licquor in puplic and they got raged.

is that you in your icon?

Post by **tnf** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:00 pm

reefsurfer wrote:3 cops beating an old guy til he lies bloody in the streets... only thing that justifice that is if he was waving/shooting with a gun.

One cop beats him 3 times in the back of his head WHILE he is being restrained by 2 others... use of unessecary force eeh?

Then one cop grabs a guy with a press pass and push him up against a car threathing him.... hmmm...

yea, read my post about justification vs. some of the possible reasons that the cops tensions might be running so fucking high they are all at breaking points right now...

nobody is saying they did the right thing necessarily, but fuck, put any one of yourselves in the shoes of a New Orleans cop who has been through the last month and see if some old drunk giving you shit doesn't just put you close to going over the edge and wanting to beat the fuck out of him, as well as giving a shove to the smartass AP reporter who is there getting in your face about the incident.

I thought the whole thing was rather kewl.

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:10 pm

reefsurfer wrote:3 cops beating an old guy til he lies bloody in the streets... only thing that justifice that is if he was waving/shooting with a gun.

One cop beats him 3 times in the back of his head WHILE he is being restrained by 2 others... use of unessecary force eeh?

Then one cop grabs a guy with a press pass and push him up against a car threathing him.... hmmm...

Cops hit people all the time when they resist arrest. It's a way of subduing them. Its either that or force them into submission with a tazer or something. Sure the cop may have hit a few too many times, but there are pleanty of times where hitting is justified. The guy clearly wasnt "going peacefully", as they had 4-5 cops on him to keep him still. Basically, when you do something wrong and are being arrested, you go quietly and obey otherwise you risk getting manhandled and possibly hurt.

Post by **reefsurfer** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:21 pm

Canis wrote:
Cops hit people all the time when they resist arrest. It's a way of subduing them. Its either that or force them into submission with a tazer or something. Sure the cop may have hit a few too many times, but there are pleanty of times where hitting is justified. The guy clearly wasnt "going peacefully", as they had 4-5 cops on him to keep him still. Basically, when you do something wrong and are being arrested, you go quietly and obey otherwise you risk getting manhandled and possibly hurt.

Edit*
Never mind.

Post by **R00k** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:25 pm

tnf wrote:yea, read my post about justification vs. some of the possible reasons that the cops tensions might be running so fucking high they are all at breaking points right now...

nobody is saying they did the right thing necessarily, but fuck, put any one of yourselves in the shoes of a New Orleans cop who has been through the last month and see if some old drunk giving you shit doesn't just put you close to going over the edge and wanting to beat the fuck out of him, as well as giving a shove to the smartass AP reporter who is there getting in your face about the incident.

I thought the whole thing was rather kewl.

Yea, if the old guy was trying to pick a fight with them or intentionally provoking them, I could understand them getting pissed in rare form after what they'd been doing.

Unfortunately, so far there hasn't really been any context provided with the events, and it's pretty damn hard to side with 4 cops beating down a drunk 60-year-old without some serious reasons for it happening.

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:30 pm

Just like it was easy to side with Rodney King when the media showed that very short clip of his beating with no lead-up.

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:36 pm

Nightshade wrote:Just like it was easy to side with Rodney King when the media showed that very short clip of his beating with no lead-up.

Precisely. I dont think any leniency should be given because some guy is drunk off his ass. Actually, I think they are even more justified in being more forceful with intoxicated people. The dude may be in his 60s, but he's still big enough to fight back, and who knows what happened before the clip. Maybe other methods would have been better, such as using a tazer or something; however, when someone is combative, force is the only option.

Post by **R00k** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:36 pm

Rodney King wasn't a 60-year-old inebriated street walker.

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:38 pm

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:38 pm

R00k wrote:Rodney King wasn't a 60-year-old inebriated street walker.

No, but that doesnt take away from the fact that this guy was able to put up a fight and was resisting.

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:40 pm

He obviously needed some stick time.

Post by **R00k** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:41 pm

And fuck that anyway. I never "sided" with Rodney King. But I still detest the amount of force that was used on him. If a man has broken bones, and is unable to stand up, there is no reason to continue laying into him with nightsticks and pepper spray.

As far as being provoked and such - yes, police can be provoked just like any of us; and just about any of us could be provoked into beating a person senseless under the right circumstances.

But if a police officer does it, he should be subject to the same due process that I would be subject to if I bashed someone's brains in on the street.

That's my beef with these kind of discussions. People say that they can understand why the cop might have done it. That's cool - I can usually identify with that as well. But if I did it to someone, then I would go to jail. If the cops do it to someone, they should have to go to jail too, unless they can convince a jury that that kind of force was necessary. Once you're caught on tape beating someone's brains in without any explanation, you should immediately be called "defendant," no matter who you are.

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:46 pm

You don't think those cops are going to be under intense scrutiny for the next couple weeks?
I also think that the LA cops that beat Rodney used excessive force, but that's not my point. Rodney King was a fucking scumbag that attacked those cops after leading them on a 120+mph chase while hopped up on goofballs. MY beef with arguments like this and people like reefsurfer is that they're all so quick to fall for bleeding-heart liberal bullshit when cops lay the smack down on someone.

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:47 pm

If you beat someone who's coming after you you wouldn't go to jail. However, it's the cops job to subdue and arrest the guy, so that gives them rights in this area that other folks do not have. I think we all agree to an extent, but it's just about the details of when specific force and such is justified. I saw a case where some guy with broken wrists was still punching cops. In the video it was clear his wrists were and awkward angles, but he was still thrashing at the police and wasnt feeling a thing due to all the drugs he was on. How are cops to deal with folks like that? To have him receive a beating and have only that be caught on tape would result in the same uproar we saw with Rodney King (minus the racism because he was white).

Post by **reefsurfer** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:47 pm

Canis wrote:
No, but that doesnt take away from the fact that this guy was able to put up a fight and was resisting.

Canis wrote: and who knows what happened before the clip. .

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:49 pm

reefsurfer wrote:
Canis wrote:
No, but that doesnt take away from the fact that this guy was able to put up a fight and was resisting.

Canis wrote: and who knows what happened before the clip. .

There's no contradiction there. We dont know what happened before, but during the course of the tape he was clearly resisting, and therefore putting up a fight. Cops dont get in that situation with someone unless there's an altercation and a fight between them and the perpetrator.

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:52 pm

Canis wrote:To have him receive a beating and have only that be caught on tape would result in the same uproar we saw with Rodney King (minus the racism because he was white).

I don't think you'd see 1/10th of the uproar if he was white.

Post by **Canis** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:53 pm

Nightshade wrote:
Canis wrote:To have him receive a beating and have only that be caught on tape would result in the same uproar we saw with Rodney King (minus the racism because he was white).
I don't think you'd see 1/10th of the uproar if he was white.

Which is another problem kept alive by residual racism all in itself...

Post by **Nightshade** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:54 pm

Post by **R00k** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:05 pm

Nightshade wrote:You don't think those cops are going to be under intense scrutiny for the next couple weeks?
I also think that the LA cops that beat Rodney used excessive force, but that's not my point. Rodney King was a fucking scumbag that attacked those cops after leading them on a 120+mph chase while hopped up on goofballs. MY beef with arguments like this and people like reefsurfer is that they're all so quick to fall for bleeding-heart liberal bullshit when cops lay the smack down on someone.

Well, I also believe Rodney King was a fucking scumbag. And on a personal note, it's very possible that he deserved what he got, because I've known a few people like that who would have deserved it.

But I don't believe that cops should do that sort of thing without the full understanding that they are going to be punished for it exactly like anybody else would.

Hell, I didn't go looting in April 1992. It just looked like another dumbass getting the shit kicked out of him to me. My disagreement started when the police department began sticking up for them, and trying to keep them from being punished. Those guys should have already been expecting some serious assault charges and maybe worse, as far as I'm concerned.

The only thing that stops me personally from kicking some fool wigger's head when he tries to act tough downtown, is the knowledge that I'll probably go to jail if I do. I play by the "Limited Golden Rule" which means that I'll treat you like I want to be treated, right up until the point you prove to me that you're not worth it. And if you try to pick a fight with me, then we'll go rounds.

But if I hit you enough that you stop coming after me (hey, I'm not a great fighter, but it's happened before), then I am not going to keep beating you into a bloody mess right there on the street. If I did that, I would expect to be locked up for it, whether I was wearing a badge or a judge's robe or a fucking halo.

And to be perfectly honest, even if you punch somebody out in complete self-defense, you're still going to get arrested for it if you don't leave the scene. I've seen it happen dozens of times.

So the thought of cops getting away with beating somebody while they're already incapacitated, and not even going to jury trial for it - simply because it's their "job" (not public service) to detain these people, kinda makes me sick.

Post by **reefsurfer** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:06 pm

R00k wrote:
So the thought of cops getting away with beating somebody while they're already incapacitated, and not even going to jury trial for it - simply because it's their "job" (not public service) to detain these people, kinda makes me sick.

Agreed.

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:19 pm

clearly excessive force - it was unnecessarily brutal. Anger and hate lead to these kinds of incidents.

They also punched him in the head while he was on the ground.

If you can't control yourself in those sorts of situations you don't belong in the force.

period.

Post by **Freakaloin** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:22 pm

the negro was one thing but them attacking that media dude was out of line...

Post by **plained** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:24 pm

all those new "subdue gadets" they always have on tv, when they getting issued i wonder ?

Post by **+JuggerNaut+** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:27 pm

tnf wrote:
+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
Mr Davis, 64, of New Orleans, was charged with public intoxication, resisting arrest, battery on a police officer and public intimidation. He was treated at a hospital and released into police custody.

someone care to explain the police use of the phrase "public intimidation" as it applies here?

well, if he is trying to publicly intimidate other folks on the street (or doing so as a result of his drunken behavior) perhaps that was why.

I haven't seen the whole video, but the clip I have seen doesn't show much of what leads up to it. was this guy harrassing people on the street? any other behaviors he exhibited?

also, and not as a defense of the cops actions necessarily, but i think we need to realize that the entire area has been a pressure cooker for the cops. many have had their own homes looted while they are out defending the property of the people who are doing the looting (at least those cops who aren't looting themselves). Families are all over the place, houses are gone, etc., etc., etc....

tensions are obviously going to be running high, and everyone has a breaking point where some random thing is just going to put them over the top.

Again, it's not a justification, but I think its something we need to at least consider in looking for an explanation for their behavior (instead of folks always wanting to jump on the race card bandwagon...)

ah ok. i was referring the

to the battery on the officer. i wasn't sure what exactly "public intimidation" meant as far as the law is concerned.