PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Jim Logajan on January 18, 2018, 05:51:32 PM
-
There is body cam video in the following article of a deputy who has a panic attack and starts shooting wildly - watching it is downright disturbing (at least I found it so):
https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2017/10/16/sevier-deputy-suffered-panic-attack-while-armed-couple-charged-causing/759465001/ (https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2017/10/16/sevier-deputy-suffered-panic-attack-while-armed-couple-charged-causing/759465001/)
From Reason magazine's article on the incident:
http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/18/tennessee-deputy-who-suffered-panic-atta (http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/18/tennessee-deputy-who-suffered-panic-atta)
-
The type of official misconduct apparent, if this news report is to be taken as truthful, is why people hate the police.
At the least the deputy should have been fired. At the worst a case could be made for falsifying his report, which is a government record.
Of course, if we can't indict Hilary for destruction if evidence and corruption, why should any government agency follow the law?
-
Typical useless story. Why are there paramedics there? Why are they manhandlling the woman?
-
Typical useless story. Why are there paramedics there? Why are they manhandlling the woman?
The paramedics were there because of an unseen woman (morbidly obese) who had fallen and was having some sort of disorientation. Apparently she is a tenant of the lady on the ground's mother, and they live in a mobile home next to the one where the lady on the ground and her boyfriend live.
While the paramedics were attending the unseen obese woman, she complained that the others had stolen her purse and I surmise that's when the paramedics called the law. The deputy came to investigate the stolen purse allegation and the lady that ended up on the ground was indeed acting suspiciously (attempted to flee the deputy). I'm guessing the paramedics came to her aid also after she ended up on the ground after having her shirt ripped by the deputy. Meanwhile her boyfriend comes out on the porch and starts filming everything with his cell. The deputy mistakes the device for a gun and rightly reacts in self defense although not correctly (fired without warning) although I don't know all the rules, if a LEO believes someone is imminently about to shoot him if they are still required to shout a warning before defending themselves.
In any case he demonstrates extremely bad training in gun fighting skills (doesn't take cover, fires shots without knowing what's around and behind the target, indeed does not verify that his target is actually a threat, has terrible aim if he is targeting the guy, muzzle sweeps the innocent paramedic etc etc etc)
It's unclear why the lady was so uncooperative and resisted arrest. Either she was indeed guilty of taking something from the tenant or maybe she had drugs or something although there's no mention of charges other than assault on the deputy and resisting arrest unless I missed it.
We also don't know anything of the back story in this community. The following is speculation but plausible: The officer is African American (possibly of an urban Democrat background) and the others are what urban Democrats stereotype as gun toting racist hillbilly rednecks. The deputy thinking he heard someone behind him say "I've got a gun $&@!" seems to support him going into the situation with a pre-formed expectation.
Conversely the residents likely have a stereotype of LEOs black or otherwise since there IS in reality a very unjust persecution of the poor in both black inner cities AND poor white hillbilly communities because the war on drugs ends up logging arrests among the poor as opposed to rich drug lords. Hence they too entered the scenario with pre-formed notions.
So there might be a strong mutual lack of trust and stereotypical prejudices on BOTH sides as a background to this incident.
It was handled extremely badly on everyone's part. Even the paramedic stupidly gave the deputy back his gun. He should have taken charge of the situation based on his judgment of medical incapacitation of the deputy. But then I'm arm chair quarterbacking, he also had no business pointing the gun back toward the residences although I get that he thought he was "covering" the "bad guys". Again poor gun handling; around and behind, you got trailers here with little kids looking out the windows for all you know! The lady should not have tried to run, nor talk back to the deputy (did she use a racial epithet?) and her boyfriend should not have tried to film it all, indeed he should have stayed inside, the deputy even ordered him "back in the house" when he first came out and he disobeyed, although he did act correctly by dropping the phone when ordered. Stupid all the way round.
That deputy has psychological problems and has no business being a LEO.
-
That deputy has psychological problems and has no business being a LEO.
That sentence I agree with. Everything else appears to be butt covering and lies made up to fit the innuendo, IMO, and is an exceptional example of why people choose to hate the police.
People are allowed to walk around their own property.
People are allowed to film the police.
Pretending that the phone was a gun, is a common lie police use to justify illegal actions on the part of the deputy. He is NOT allowed to intimidate, attack, shoot, or abuse citizens who CHOOSE to film them at work.
Not firing that pile of stupidity is simply criminal negligence. Allowing someone that unstable, and of that poor judgement to wear a badge and use a gun in official business is gross negligence.
-
That sentence I agree with. Everything else appears to be butt covering and lies made up to fit the innuendo, IMO, and is an exceptional example of why people choose to hate the police.
People are allowed to walk around their own property.
People are allowed to film the police.
Pretending that the phone was a gun, is a common lie police use to justify illegal actions on the part of the deputy. He is NOT allowed to intimidate, attack, shoot, or abuse citizens who CHOOSE to film them at work.
Not firing that pile of stupidity is simply criminal negligence. Allowing someone that unstable, and of that poor judgement to wear a badge and use a gun in official business is gross negligence.
Agree that not firing him is criminal gross negligence but I can believe that he isn't lying about the phone and might actually have thought at first that it was a gun. If my theory of his prejudice is true, he thought he was going into a hotbed of Trump voting deplorables and has been marinating in a growing hatred of same for the past year fed by the media.
No that doesn't excuse mistreatment of citizens on their own property, but if you have a lunatic LEO ordering you to stop and drop, I'm not sure running and back talking him is the wisest course.
There is one thing this demonstrates beyond question: police abuse is not limited to black victims.
-
There isn't nearly anything on the bodycam to determine exactly what caused the deputy to go off or whether or not it is reasonable.
Retraining is certainly called for. I suppose it is fortunate that it is difficult to hit someone at more than about 15 yards with a standard handgun.
I suppose the lessons should be never to startle a LEO.
-
I suppose the lessons should be never to startle a LEO.
And Don't film them when they're breaking the law, or behaving like mentally deranged snowflakes, or you'll get shot.
-
And Don't film them when they're breaking the law, or behaving like mentally deranged snowflakes, or you'll get shot.
were they breaking the law? I didn't see that.
It's weird because another board I participate in had a posting last Monday called "Bad weekend to be a cop" and observed that it must have been "shoot a cop" weekend.
Pick your poison.
-
There was a State Supreme Court decision that said that running from the police isn't a crime nor a probable cause for suspicion of crime. In this case, the court specifically talked about Black men running from police but I'd imagine that the court opinion could be cited for a White female running also.
-
Not to make light of the situation, but Sevierville has a nice little airport with a nice aviation museum with it. Lots of cool planes that actually fly, including two P-47's. It is convenient to Pigeon Forge/Gatlinburg. I have flown in and out of there, and parked the plane their for several days. Great experience.
http://tnairmuseum.com/
-
There was a State Supreme Court decision that said that running from the police isn't a crime nor a probable cause for suspicion of crime. In this case, the court specifically talked about Black men running from police but I'd imagine that the court opinion could be cited for a White female running also.
Without knowing the details of that case, I would agree with that ruling. But I bet police don't follow it; they probably use the fact that someone runs as probable cause all the time.
So does this mean if a cop walks up to you and addresses you in any way, you are not under obligation to respond whatsoever? Unless he is arresting you, you may just turn and walk away and he cannot legal restrain you unless he's got "probable cause" to suspect you've committed a crime?
If so that ruling is very important.
-
There seems a yugge disconnect between police officers and police officers that actually know the laws their enforcing, or breaking.
Going solely on the facts as presented in the article, that deputy was so far out of line discharging his firearm under such pathetically clear circumstances that an ADA could have asked and gotten an indictment for several crimes.
The first one is the way in which the deputy attempted to stop a purely un involved citizen to believe he was in legal jeopardy for filming the activity. His presence posed no obstacle to making an arrest except that it seemed to annoy the deputy, who was either chemically altered, or just simply mentally unstable, if not both.
I had a similar confrontation with a deputy not that many years ago.
I was sitting in the sun, on private property enjoying the warm day, when a deputy pulled off the road, drove straight up to me, rolled down his window and demanded I identify myself and provide him with my drivers license.
As I recall my reply was, "Go get a warrant and next time ask nicely. In the meantime, get off this property."
He was pissed and exited his car with his hand on the butt of his gun and repeated his demand.
Having run out of patience with this freaking bully, I said,
First: I am on private property, in broad daylight, where no crime has been reported, nor is their one being committed within my eyesight.
Second: You have no reasonable suspicion, nor probably cause to harass me and we both know it.
Third: If you pursue this harassment I will file suit against you and demand the DA also charge you criminally. Failing to get his attention in the matter, I will submit the video that is running at this very instant to the news media for public commentary and as proof of my claims that you are committing a crime.
Fourth: If you still wish to harass me, call your boss right now, because the second you leave, I am calling him, right after I call my attorney.
Fifth" You have chosen to trespass against my wishes and after I have ordered you to remove yourself from this property. Any further action on your part that doesn;t include an apology and getting your dumb ass off this land is continued proof that you intended to commit the crime of criminal trespass and will be submitted as evidence against you.
Sixth: Go find an encyclopedia and read up on the United States Constitution.
Cops that choose to abuse their power need to be stopped. The only way to stop them is to refuse to allow to commit crimes just because they know how to act like a bully. The deputy was clearly acting outside of the law and butt covering by his detective and the DA is a crying shame.
-
Without knowing the details of that case, I would agree with that ruling. But I bet police don't follow it; they probably use the fact that someone runs as probable cause all the time.
So does this mean if a cop walks up to you and addresses you in any way, you are not under obligation to respond whatsoever? Unless he is arresting you, you may just turn and walk away and he cannot legal restrain you unless he's got "probable cause" to suspect you've committed a crime?
If so that ruling is very important.
This addresses both of your questions
https://www.snopes.com/massachusetts-run-from-police/
-
SNOPES has even credibility than CNN.
As for racial profiling, you need to buckle up, because the truth is that you profile as badly, as much to do with racism, and as bluntly as any LEO. The main difference I've seen is that you think you deserve to be treated with a respect you refuse to offer, and then proclaim that you are the victim of racism when you don't get your way.
Lets be honest about this. The victim-hood excuse has been, and is being played to death.
Lesbians think their victims because they demand the legal right to walk around topless, then go postal because people look.
Sheila Jackson-Lee claimed racism because people spoke out about her torrential abuse of citizens, staff members and peers.
The nut-job trannies claim to be victims because heterosexual men won't kiss them on TV.
Every time someone speaks out about the crimes of Obama he whined like a pussy and blamed racism.
Everyone living off of make believe victimhood is just another in a long line of whiners who need to buckle up and get back to work.
Just because I vehemently disagree with many things you claim in your posts doesn't make me a racist. The fact that you instantly go there is proof that you might be.