Talk On Cell Phone? = GO TO JAIL AND GET FACE BEAT IN

A man was talking on his cellphone minding his own business when he was brutally assaulted by armed thugs in uniform for no reason.

The police department responded to this video by issuing this statement:

Safety Manager Ron Perea, who oversees the police department and has final say on discipline, has rejected Rosenthal’s argument that the officers should be fired.

“The video, when viewed in isolation, seems to portray the subject officers as overly aggressive for the situation,” Perea said. “There is no audio and it appears that there is a man on the phone ignoring but not being overtly aggressive towards the officer when the officer takes him down. The video, however, does not tell the entire story.”

Of course they shouldn’t be fired.

The slaves need to be taught a lesson in humility. Talking on your cellphone in the presence of a God is an outrage. The slave should have been licking boots and offering himself up as a human sacrifice instead.

Clearly the officers were justified in beating his face in with a leather wrapped metal pole and knocking him unconscious while giving him a concussion. Anything less would be ridiculous.

Of course, the man getting his face beat in was charged with obstruction. Shockingly, the DA turned out to not be a total idiot and dismissed the charges after watching the tape.



[edit on 19-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

mnemeth1,

You have no idea what he was saying to the person on the other end of the phone. He was cleaarly in a highly agitated state and may have been verbally assaulting the police, maybe even issuing threats of violence.

Please don't make judgements without knowing all the facts.

Regards,
Jim.

Oh by the way, I love how the cop operating the camera zooms out and pans away as soon as he realizes one of his criminal pirate buddies is illegally beating the tar out of a slave.

Rather than focusing in on the fight, which is what all normal humans would do in such a situation, the criminal camera operator had the wherewithal to recognize the crime being committed and cover for his pirate shipmate.

Originally posted by Slippery Jim
mnemeth1,

You have no idea what he was saying to the person on the other end of the phone. He was cleaarly in a highly agitated state and may have been verbally assaulting the police, maybe even issuing threats of violence.

Please don't make judgements without knowing all the facts.

Regards,
Jim.

Of course, we shouldn't pass judgement on a clear video that shows a man talking on a phone getting his face beat in.

We need more facts.

Obviously the slave was a violent threat to the officers.

He was probably armed with a fully automatic M60 machine gun in his pants.

Must have been one of those super spy "gun phones" all the kids are running with these days.

These cops actually used that excuse for beating the crap out of a guy on his phone: on the phone? get shot by the cops!

Original article

Watch out old ladies with canes. The cops are going to start laying you out just in case there's a machine gun hidden in your walking stick.

[edit on 19-8-2010 by thisguyrighthere]

I'm going to say there is no audio so for all we know the man on the phone could be verbally assaulting the cop. We Don't know. Yeah it could be a dirty cop but, the men and women of the force work hard and are under a hell of a lot of scrutiny putting their lives on the line. Just remember not everything is what it seems. We Don't really know. So I'm sticking with the neutrality on this one it could be assault it could be warranted.

reply to post by Xiamara


Since when is it okay to beat the crap out of a person then detain them for "verbal abuse?"

I'd like to see a non-cop pull off that one in a court of law claiming self-defense of verbal abuse.

Watch those sticks and stones around cops. They be sensateeve.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Of course, we shouldn't pass judgement on a clear video that shows a man talking on a phone getting his face beat in.

We need more facts.

Obviously the slave was a violent threat to the officers.

He was probably armed with a fully automatic M60 machine gun in his pants.

The point is that you do not know what the citizen was saying. Neither did the camera operator and I too thought it suspicious that he zoomed out and panned away. That is merely a reflection of what the camera operator thought might be happening and he didn't want the cop crucified by people who will always disregard the actual facts and just presume they know what was being said. I'm not saying that was the correct thing to do but its understandable given your automatic condemnation of the police officer even though you have no idea what was being said during the incident.

Regards,
Jim.

give this man the chair!!! HE SHOULD HAVE BROKEN HIS PHONE IN HUMILITY!!!

It is standard procedure to tackle the guy protesting police brutality. I know this from firsthand experience. The act of using the wrong restroom is much more of a crime than using violence is to most cops.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


The thing is we don't know, what is said for all we know he could be threatening to hang up the phone and beat the cop up. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I know cops personally and they get a lot of crap from people and its a tough job.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Xiamara

 

Since when is it okay to beat the crap out of a person then detain them for "verbal abuse?"

I'd like to see a non-cop pull off that one in a court of law claiming self-defense of verbal abuse.

Watch those sticks and stones around cops. They be sensateeve.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS SAID!

For all we know he may have threatened violence, in which case would you be happier if the cop had let him get a free punch in before he tried to restrain him?

We just don't know! The cop may have been in the wrong. The cop may have been perfectly justified in his response.

Ask yourself this question: Why would a cop who was actively restraining a suspect on the ground get up and assault someone just because he was talking on a mobile phone?

Think about it.

Regards,
Jim.

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Slippery Jim]

reply to post by Xiamara



"verbally assaulting"

as if words hurt people and justify an armed attack with a metal pole.

I'm sure the guy stopped his conversation on his cell phone so he could "verbally assault" the officer.

news flash, the constitution protects your right to "verbally assault" officers, who must conduct themselves professionally at all times no matter what is said to them.



[edit on 19-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

Originally posted by Xiamara
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

The thing is we don't know, what is said for all we know he could be threatening to hang up the phone and beat the cop up. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I know cops personally and they get a lot of crap from people and its a tough job.

Exactly!

And I want to marry your avatar.

reply to post by Slippery Jim


Exactly I agree with you Jim. It doesn't make any sense what so ever he could certainly loose his job over this so why do it?


Edit: Lol I'm glad people like my avatar. Still trying to find the skirt in the picture for my halloween costume... Got everything else.

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Xiamara]

Originally posted by Slippery Jim

Originally posted by Xiamara
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

The thing is we don't know, what is said for all we know he could be threatening to hang up the phone and beat the cop up. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I know cops personally and they get a lot of crap from people and its a tough job.

Exactly!

And I want to marry your avatar.

So if I call you a jackass, that grants you the right to beat me with a metal pole?

reply to post by Slippery Jim


Threatening violence?

Did the guy move toward the cop?

Did the guy point or flail about in a menacing manner?

Foul language, insults and even verbal threats do not justify a physical assault.

Maybe on a grade school playground or in some inbred Chav hell they do but not in the real world.

Besides, say the guy was going off yelling about those "f'n pigs always power trippin'" and what not. What exactly was accomplished by a cop beating the crap out of him? He would have just proved him right. And given him cause to line his pockets with taxpayer dollars.

What spoken words to you would justify reacting with physical force? I really want to know what I would have to say to make you feel like pounding my head into the concrete is a just and righteous thing.

Originally posted by Xiamara
reply to post by Slippery Jim

 

Exactly I agree with you Jim. It doesn't make any sense what so ever he could certainly loose his job over this so why do it?

because he's a petty tyrant on a power trip?

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Xiamara

 

"verbally assaulting"

as if words hurt people and justify an armed attack with a metal pole.

I'm sure the guy stopped his conversation on his cell phone so he could "verbally assault" the officer.j
Now you're just being obtuse. I can't see any point in continuing this discussion as you clearly have issues with the police and simply won't listen to a reasoned argument.

Regards,
Jim.

news flash, the constitution protects your right to "verbally assault" officers, who must conduct themselves professionally at all times no matter what is said to them.



[edit on 19-8-2010 by mnemeth1]

Not sure what the Hell happened there! I think everyone was replying to posts at the same time and it got a bit mixed up!

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Slippery Jim]

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Slippery Jim

 

Foul language, insults and even verbal threats do not justify a physical assault.

WOAH THERE BUDDY - YOU STOP RIGHT THERE

Any insulting of a God is grounds to be knocked unconscious.

The man probably committed blasphemy by telling the God he should leave his friend alone.