Cop Caught on Video Groping Restrained Woman’s Breasts and Genitals, Woman Cries

originally posted by: onequestion
She was peacefully assembling for a protest and was picked up for a snatch and grab.

Show me exactly what the reasonable suspicion was.

I watched the video and she was already zip tied so how can anyone determine what transpired prior to this? Is there another video we are not seeing that shows her being randomly singled out?

a reply to: Grovit

Did you read the article? Dont believe?

Dont care.

Prove otherwise.

Oh wait you cant.... biased much?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It says so in the article did you read it?

Can you prove otherwise?

Probably not.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Praetorius

I already respond to you see my above posts.

I'm not really seeing a clarifying response to my points as yet. I see you mentioning snatch & grab, but even per your source:

It appears that this woman may have been a victim of “snatch and grab,” but we cannot confirm at this time.

We don't know from any official or other corraborating source WHY she was being detained and searched.

Regarding the 'groping,' just from personal experience, I know some women wear some pretty heavily padded gear that could be used for concealment, and would imagine there is a range of specialty concealment garments as well. I still see no sexual assault here or anything directly abusive (athough as I mentioned previously, such things DO definitely occur) in this instance.

Thanks.

originally posted by: projectbane
Also, like I said in a previous thread....I can hardly take your word at face value...can't be trusted. Sorry my friend but we have to disagree on this one.

i just said the same thing to him before i read this.

i think because he thinks the law is this way or that, then it really is
must be it

he says grope, must be grope
his article says grope, must be grope

when in fact its not...

i also dont get how a vid about cavity searches from another state has anything to do with this...

a reply to: Grovit

prove reasonable suspicion.

Protesting is not reasonable suspicion its guaranteed to us through the Constitution.

You dont like it?

Well maybe you shouldnt have sworn to protect it.

originally posted by: onequestion

It says so in the article did you read it?

That is not an article. An article has a byline and typically a link to the author to verify facts and/or circumstances. That appears more to be a social activism website.

Can you prove otherwise?

Did you just ask me to prove a negative? The video begins with her in zip ties, anything prior to that is speculative.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Grovit

Did you read the article? Dont believe?

Dont care.

Prove otherwise.

Oh wait you cant.... biased much?

nope. i watched the vid from the article though...what the video headline says happened is not what happened.
why read the article for more bs reporting

im not proving anything..dont want to. dont need to.
just dropping my .02 in your thread.
based? no
i just know what i saw on the vid....
my eyes work
thats enough for me

what the article said happened and what the video header said happened didnt.
so, i dont need to read the article cause none of it matters

See if this works, I can't preview properly same thing last night all written text not loading.

a reply to: onequestion


Well you are unwilling to listen to anyone on your thread who doesn't share your opinion. That's your right and it is your thread.


I will bow out of this thread as you have your hands full with people who are constantly proving your view wrong on this particular thread.

Please do enjoy the debate...however, see thing from another perspective, whatever you did and whatever happened to you in the past should not effect your reasoning skills today. Put all your problems aside and look at the facts and the video properly. You see Grope....I see legal pat down OVER the CLOTHES!!

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I have a source and a video to support my post.

Do you have any source or do you expect people to believe you simply because you say so?

So far.. non of your arguments would be valid for court. You would lose.

originally posted by: onequestion

Protesting is not reasonable suspicion its guaranteed to us through the Constitution.

You dont like it?

Well maybe you shouldnt have sworn to protect it.

we dont know thats all she was doing...your article that lied about the video said that so i cant really trust it..you know
i dont think you understand what a peaceful protest is by law...so there is that

and, what are you talking about

i didnt swear to protect anything

originally posted by: onequestion


SHE DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME HELLO HELLO HELLO

How do you know that? The video commences with her already in zip ties.

a reply to: projectbane

No dude...

I am perfectly coherent in my responses and they are absolutely valid.

The police cannot in America just pull you out of a protest for no reason, absolutely no reason and walk up behind you and start grabbing your private parts before they release you.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Did you read the article?

originally posted by: onequestion

I have a source and a video to support my post.

Do you have any source or do you expect people to believe you simply because you say so?

I am using your source. Your source begins with her already detained. You source claims it was because she was most likely the weakest protester. Where is the evidence of her being singled out for this treatment in your source?

originally posted by: onequestion
Did you read the article?

There is no article. There is a person speculating on what transpired prior to the video and then claiming she is being sexually assaulted on the video.