Cops manhandle teens at Dallas pool party after complaints from neighbors

On the 6th of March, 2011, some Syrian teens were spray painting anti-government graffiti on a wall. They were arrested and some even tortured. That was when the world became aware of the trouble Syria would become years later. Now we have millions fleeing, barrel bombs and ISIS.

There is nothing more likely to touch of wide-spread anger and downright violence than the rough handling of children by authorities.

Just saying...

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Dimithae
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes
Okay now watch this part again starting at 2:34,he is telling the guys sitting down what they did wrong yes? And there is a group of girls standing on the sidewalk and the one is running her mouth.Look at what she is wearing,it is the SAME outfit of the girl her finally AFTER several times warning her about her mouth,then grabs and throws down.

She wasn't making threats. She has a right to freedom of speech. I have watched the video more than once, and she didn't do anything to warrant arrest. She was released with no charges, as well. That says a lot.

And yet, right there in the state of Texas, we have Houston v Hill, a somewhat similar situation, wherein the city of Houston decided that they could arrest you for not shutting up when a cop told you to shut up:

"The Houston ordinance is much more sweeping than the municipal ordinance struck down in Lewis. It is not limited to fighting words nor even to obscene or opprobrious language, but prohibits speech that "in any manner . . . interrupt[s]" an officer.10 The Constitution does not allow such speech to be made a crime.11 The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state"

That little gem? It's from the Supreme Court. Who ruled that you do NOT, indeed, have to shut up when a Texas cop says to.

eta: If Texas LEOs don't know that, then they're incompetent. If they do and arrest you for not shutting up when they say, then they're criminals in costumes, posing as LEOs.

Either way, if Officer Jackass is shown to be in the wrong, and his on-scene buddies are competent to KNOW that he's in the wrong, and they had time to stop him and did not, then they've failed their legal duty to intervene. All of them should be suspended.

So the SC struck down the Houston law? Good for them! That's scary, that they'd even try and pass such a thing, anywhere. I never cared for Houston, though. I'd love a link to that case, and the SC decision, if you have them! Seems the cops maybe could use one, too. A lot of cops need to read and learn that one.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Excellent, excellent link there btw. Know your right people. The current LEO paradigm makes a living circumventing your rights hoping you dont know any better about the fact you are being wronged while at the same time commiting multiple felonies to hide said wrongdoing. It's systemic and it needs to change. Before the most embarrassing thing about our country becomes our largely criminal LEO community.

Credit to Pimpish for posting it first. Excellent info, I agree. It even says deadly force is legal. Of course, the schools don't teach this stuff, and if you carry around a copy of the Constitution, the government considers you a "potential terrorist", according to that DHS list that was leaked some years back.

That last? It's getting there fast. This isn't the same country in which I grew up.

a reply to: masqua

How do police get away with it in the US then?
Posse Comitatus is pretty much a solely US forum, our cops would never get away with the stuff I see on ATS, ever, you would see the riots in your international news.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I think this is the video of the mom who was fighting with one of the kids,

a reply to: BASSPLYR

That is utter crap dude. Give me a direct quote, not a paraphrase, not a loose interpretation, not a ridiculously spun concoction but an actual quote of where I said they CAN'T do anything. I'll wait.

A police officer can ABSOLUTELY be arrested in full uniform and duty gear.

The ONLY time you would be likely to see an officer getting manhandled by other officers at an incident scene is if that officer were to commit a serious felony. Throwing somebody on the ground and unleashing a profanity laced tirade, no matter how d-baggish it may be, is not a serious felony.

Actually you know what? I'm done here. I'm so disgusted by how massively you distorted and spun my post I'm out.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
That's scary, that they'd even try and pass such a thing, anywhere.

A lot of municipalities try (or used to) to claim you're "obstructing" a LEO if you don't shut up like a good boy when they say.

The claim is if they have to hear you, then you are distracting them, and thus you are impeding their action.

Hill had the temerity to address an officer during an arrest and say "Why are you acting the way you are" (more or less) for which they arrested him for obstruction. But the Supremes put them in their place. Basically, if you try to state that any speech other than "fighting words" is obstruction, your claim is struck down by the HvH decision.

Some district courts have ruled that "cops should have thicker skin" and thus do not support ANY claim of obstruction/interference due to any form of speech, but the 5th isn't one of them. None the less, short of screaming "I #ed your mom" to a cop during an arrest, you can say what you will. If a cop says no, he's a criminal, or incompetent.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Looks like the white trash started it from the article and the video. All I see is a grown adult assaulting and pulling the hair of a child while the child's friends try and pry her free from the adults clutches. To be honest this really does reek of racism.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I don't advocate riots, but if our cops were like the examples I see every day in Posse Comitatus then riots would be the cake of the day in the UK.
They are not, and we don't riot.
It is a mutually beneficial arrangement,

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Looks like the white trash started it from the article and the video. All I see is a grown adult assaulting and pulling the hair of a child while the child's friends try and pry her free from the adults clutches. To be honest this really does reek of racism.

did you notice the little kids in the SUV crying for their mom, Jesus, what a mess.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
The ONLY time you would be likely to see an officer getting manhandled by other officers at an incident scene is if that officer were to commit a serious felony. Throwing somebody on the ground and unleashing a profanity laced tirade, no matter how d-baggish it may be, is not a serious felony.

About that...

The second case, decided September 30th 2003, found that the law with respect to officers who have an opportunity to intercede in excessive force is clearly established and may create liability for officers who fail to do so, Jones v. City of Hartford, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17340 (Dist. CT. 2003).

Jones was a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped following a phony car-jacking call to the police. Officer Nichols and Rodriguez of the Hartford CT. Police Department approached the driver, Easterling, while Officer Murtha approached Jones.

After Jones was taken from the car, he protested that he had done nothing wrong. Officer Murtha then allegedly threw Jones to the ground and kicked him several times, including kicks to the face that caused a bloody lip. Murtha then picked Jones up from the ground, kneed him in the groin several times and then ripped his pants off him. It should be noted that the officers acknowledged Jones’ bloody lip and ripped- off pants.

The court found that Officer Nichols and Rodriguez had no opportunity to intervene in the kicks, but had opportunity to intervene in the other acts allegedly committed by Murtha.

In refusing to dismiss claims against Rodriguez and Nichols the court asserted: “ Police officers have an affirmative duty to intercede on behalf of a citizen whose constitutional rights are being violated in their presence by other officers.” Officers who fail to intervene may be liable for the harm caused by their colleagues.

link

a reply to: Bedlam

Oh, that''s not much different than claims that making a video is obstructing', either. The fact is, they just don't think anyone should disagree, and they don't want video evidence that they can't control. Nice to see that the courts are deciding the right way on such cases, but bad to see that so many cops still try and push it anyway. Where is the control?? What is needed is charges against any and all cops that try and make such illegal demands. That, and people to stop being sheep and assuming that a cop can demand anything at all, and you are obligated to comply!! Cooperation is fine and good, if the cop isn't acting badly. For example, a cop pulled me over one night to inform me a headlight was out. Very polite, and friendly (young black guy,f or the record, reminded me of Conrad in the Matlock episodes), and he did make a request. He asked me to open the door, since the window motor isn't working, and I can't roll it down. I didn't have any issue, and understood that he just wanted to be sure he was safe, since it was night, and a quiet area. Had he been a jerk, the response would have been quite different. I have encountered one cop I wouldn't have trusted, at night, with the door open.

a reply to: Shamrock6

So only when commiting serious felonies? But not regular ones will they uphold the law against a on duty felonious officer?

You yourself said of course they wont arrest him. Hes in body armor and has a gun. Besides he's their superior officer, it wouldn't go over well.

That's tacitly admitting they were aiding and abetting a felony and criminal activity. It's their job to stop crime right or only when people not in your gang commit them?

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
www.huffingtonpost.com...

I think this is the video of the mom who was fighting with one of the kids,

I wonder if that woman was arrested or if she left the scene after committing a crime before any arrest could be made.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

So walking up to a minor 1/3 your size. Cranking their neck, slamming them to the ground and prying their arms back behind their shoulders and applying with your knee 200 pounds plus of pressure per square inch in opposition the load baring structures of a child's spine isn't felony assault on a minor? Or only when another person not a LEO does it in undisciplined anger?

Don't argue with me that it was perfectly safe and fine the way he was man handling her. A lot could have physically gone wrong and it would have been 100 percent his fault.

Hope the girls family sues the putz into the gutter.

a reply to: FraggleRock

I wonder why the US seems to allow rogue cops when the UK would be rioting if our cops were the same. We really would, you would see it on your international news.
I also wonder who is more controlled, the thought saddens me.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: FraggleRock



The party was also advertised on social media.



Twitter

This could explain the large turnout. Teens thought it was free and anyone could come and neighbors said it was free to the members only (and those with guest passes) . A big misunderstanding, apparently.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Also the community should also be sued to the enth degree. if they wanna be a bunch of racist pricks and use their local police cronies to do your racist bidding doesn't go over well in the civilized world.

a reply to: Jaellma
Another Cop incident in TX, Cops peper spray guy filming an arrest.

a reply to: ugmold


Strongarm theft under color of law for the phone, chemical assault for the spray. Time for criminal charges!

Only, APD will never be held responsible by Austin TX's legal system.