Female Officer LITERATELY Beats The Shoes Off A Man With Her Baton

I thought all police officers had pepper spray or O2, why not use that? What about learning how to wrestle? Do you really need to beat someone in the head with a stick 20 times? If the average citizen did that they would be arrested!!

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


maybe they would

but is it just me or do the police have a right to use reasonable force if you resist arrest?
i thought it was just common knowledge that once you resist the police can use force in proportion to the amount you are resisting.

www.legalmatch.com...

reply to post by lifeform11


tackle you, spray you, tazer you...... NOT BEAT YOU OVER THE HEAD WITH A STICK 20 TIMES

(especially if you do not have a weapon)

When will we start fighting back?
When will we stand our ground?
When will the tyranny stop?

When the blood of Patriots and Tyrants is spilled all over our land, THAT'S WHEN...

Scary? Yes but I need some context. What was happening before the video starts?

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


so what are batons for then?

en.wikipedia.org...

Other uses for truncheons and batons include crowd control or the dispersal of belligerent or non-compliant targets.

reply to post by Domo1


I don't know, I never went to the police academy. I never want to go to the police academy. But I know for a fact they don't say, "If a suspect resists arrest, beat him bloody."

Just because you have a lack of imagination and compassion for fellow human beings, and believe that a brutal, beating is the only way to control a person, doesn't mean that I have to believe or act that way.

-Lightrule

reply to post by jude11

This is what happens when you put weapons in the hands of a person that has anger management issues as well as a superiority or maybe an inferiority complex.

Where is this coming from? Where are you getting angermanagement issues or inferiority complexes out of this video?

The guy is clearly resisting. And were not talking about peacefully "going limp" resisting. Were talking about actively resisting arrest.

The police are allowed to use force when confronted with resistance to a lawful arrest. That includes using the ASP baton to confront this sort of resistance.

Then pin a badge on their chest that says you are above the law.

Numerous officers have been charged with crimes, convicted and sentenced to jail. If the police were "above the law" as you suggest then how is this possible?

Give them weapons and say "Go get 'em!"

Its more like give the police a charter to enforce the law and say "go arrest people who you have probable cause to believe broke that law." And here are some weapons to use against those that would choose to use violence against you or another member of the public.

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by ProphecyPhD

 

so what are batons for then?

en.wikipedia.org...

Other uses for truncheons and batons include crowd control or the dispersal of belligerent or non-compliant targets.

Thats like saying what are nooses or electric chairs for. They (along with batons) are out dated and much better technology exists. Batons should be in museums, not on 21 century police officers waists.

To me it looked like she really enjoyed beating that man that's why she continued beating him when he was just trying to protect himself from the blows.

reply to post by ProphecyPhD


wether they should or should not exsist is not the point, if i as an average citizen know that police can use force if i resist, and know what the use of a baton is for (wether i agree) and then i resist arrest, should it really be a surprise if i get hit with the baton for fighting the cops?

did the police do anything that are against accepted rules/laws, if they did it was only the extra hits once he was down.

This video has been copied title and all on another website!! Check out the date and time i posted this and then check out the date and time of the first comment on THIS WEBSITE I feel famous

reply to post by ProphecyPhD

WHat about the "info" that you do have? i.e. the video!! The man is clearly unarmed and on the ground being punched and beaten with a baton.

The use of a baton when confronted with this sort of resistance is within most department's policy on use of force. If you are being non-compliant but not actively resisting arrest, then I would say that strikes with a baton are not warranted. But if one is grabbing, pushing or in any other way striking the officer, then the use of a baton is warranted.

Let me also point out that strikes to the head, neck, groin or spinal area are always off limits because that can constitute deadly force.

Would you try to protect yourself/escape from that situation

I would say that this is irrelevant to the incident at hand. Are you asking would I, as a law abiding citizen who would not attempt to resist arrest or fight the police in any way, try to protect myself or escape from that situation? Because if you are asking me, as a law abiding citizen who would not attempt to resist arrest or fight with the police in any way, I would say it is irrelevant because I would take no action to precipitate a need for the police to use that amount of force on me.

If they started beating him for no reason then I would say that is a different story but there is no evidence to suggest that.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

i can't believe people stand by and let this happen. i wouldn't. i don't know what he did, but really? just beating him while he's restrained...

At no point in the video was he ever "restrained." Were not talking about the police beating a man who is handcuffed and lying on the ground. He was actively resisting arrest. The police were justified in using force to overcome that resistance and take him into custody.

So you would have gone over and helped the guy fend off the police? After seeing exactly what all of the rest of us saw in the video?

What if the guy had just robbed that gas station? Or, he committed some other crime and the police located him and were attempting to arrest him? So you would walk over and help the guy fend off the police and say, "there you go sir, happy I could help defend you against injustice."

No, I do not think after seeing what everyone else saw in the video and having no other facts do I think it would be rational to do something like that. Mainly because you do not know all of the facts or what the man is suspected of.

reply to post by ProphecyPhD

So you believe this is proper protocol? If you ever "resisted" arrest would you understand if this happened to you

There is no justifiable reason to resist arrest. Unless, you get a case where the police are so unlawful in their actions that it is blatantly obvious that they are violating your consitiutional rights.

If the police walk up to you and say, "we are here to beat you, arrest you for a misdemeanor without a warrant, hold you indefinitely without a trial and then probably kill you," then yes I would say you are justified in resisting that arrest.

If the police walk up to you and say, "we have probable cause to believe you committed a crime and you are under arrest," then no you do not have the right to resist arrest. Belief of innocence is not justification to resist arrest.

Originally posted by kro32
That's just funny. He should pick his vagina up off the ground grab a tissue out of his purse and dry his little tears.

Sickening excuse of a man.

Oh that's the best laugh I've had all day...thank you...may I borrow that line for future come-backs??

reply to post by ProphecyPhD

So why aren't civilians allowed to jump to said conclusions? If i shoot someone who has a knife i will be arrested but yet police can beat unarmed people because they "might" have a weapon

I am with you. I don't think the man had a weapon. But, that is not why they were using force.

If you are legally allowed to carry a weapon and someone comes at you with a knife, then no you will not be arrested or charged with a crime. In some states it is legal to openly carry a handgun. Those states have very explicit laws stating when someone is justified in using their firearm for self defense. If it is within those laws, then it will not result in criminal prosecution.

OK I just want to restate my points. Any officer abusing the position should be punished. Anyone who hurts another human being because they are angry or feel insulted should be punished. ATS has a tendency to lynch cops without looking at the whole picture. That bothers me.

In response to all the questions asking if this is legal, YES it is. It is if the situation warrants it. No one here, INCLUDING ME knows if the violence was warranted.

None of us, cop supporters, cop haters, victim advocates or I, know all, or really ANY of the facts. Judging and condemning ANY action in this video paints you as a fool. We just don't know. I suppose I have been a little pro cop here, but that is because I know that so many people on this site will not even give the cops a chance.

The cop hate on this website is equally as disturbing as the 'Us vs. Them' mentality you fight against. Can both sides please grow up, admit there are problems with the police, and at the same time admit not every violent interaction with an officer o the law is the fault of said officers? Can we please, please, stop this BS on this site?

Okay went back and watched the video again, something screamed out at me that I missed the first time.

The guy getting beat repeatedly says things like "Yes" "Okay" "Yeah" "I am" when he is being told to get on the ground.

Now when you pay close attention to the timings of "Get on the ground!" and the swings of her baton you can clearly see the female officer is already in the process of swinging the weapon at the suspect before issuing the order, then to top it all off, the female officer allows the suspect about .003 nanoseconds to comply with the order before the baton is once again striking her target. These strikes are repeated over and over again, along with the order to get to the ground. Once they had him on the ground, the female officer instead of jumping on the suspect and helping her partner decides now is a perfect time to get in a few more swings and proceeds to hit the suspect in the head and face multiple times.

No one can be beaten like that and refuse the natural reaction to go fetal, flee or fight back, I believe they call this flight or fight. Its not hard to imagine the suspect decided flight was in his best interest as even when he was on the ground telling the female officer "Okay, stop!" he was still being beat relentlessly.

Its also hard to deny that police love to give suspects about 0.5 seconds to comply before they are justified using excessive force. If those hands aren't behind your back fast enough all the officer needs to say to you is, "Stop resisting arrest." in order to justify his beating your teeth down your throat with his baton. To get himself off the hook for his vicious beating of you he only has to write, "resisted arrest" in his report.

The police will always have their excuses;

Its for your safety.
Its for our safety.
Its policy.
We cannot comment because we cannot see the entire situation in the video.
etc.
etc.

Personally I'm sick of hearing their excuses in court, I'm sick of reading the excuses on ATS, I'm quite frankly just sick and tired of the whole dog and pony show we call "The System".

To finish this post I call on ATS to deny police ignorance. Refuse these goons their power and hold them accountable. Violence begets violence, as tempting as it is to give into the emotions these video stir up, we can't. That female officer needs a hug more than a baton to the head, as tempting as it might be.

-Lightrule

What I saw on the video from a LEO perspective was a subject actively resisting arrest by repeatedly trying to get up, holding his arms into his chest to resist handcuffing and rolling around. A pr-24 is an intermediate weapon used when someone is actively resisting. Thats all I can gather from a short clip like this, it looks ugly but not all departments have "tazers", and the alternative to tasers is baton strikes. None of it looks pretty on tape but the guy was not subdued or handcuffed in this case.