Recommended Posts

I'm going to say this as simply as I can now, since either you don't have a good grasp of the English language, or you are just reading what you want to see.

 

I did not say the shove was accidental. I know that was on purpose. 

 

The injuries she sustained were accidental I believe, I don't think he would deliberately cause her that kind of injury, especially knowing he was on film. I bet he intended to shove her into the cell and leave, if she'd remained upright like a sober person probably would have, nothing would have become of this. When he saw what had happened, he got her medical attention. 

 

The video does not "speak for itself". The cop doesnt walk in with a sign pointed at the camera that said "I want to cause this woman horrible injuries".

 

He shoved her, she fell. We're discussing whether or not it was intentional that she got hurt. This is something that is open to interpretation. Something the video can't show plain as black and white.

 

OK, I'll reply to you in simplified American English that you can understand, This was not a mistake or an Accident, It was deliberate force and he should be fired.

 

He pushed this drunk female prisoner into a cell with exerted force knowing all too well she was drunk and she couldn't maintain her footing forcing her upon the seating.

 

All prisoners under their care, specially under the influence of alcohol must be treated with care and not abused and the police code demands it.

 

So just to sum it all up for you in case your eyes glazed over, HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE PUSHED HER IN THE FIRST PLACE and took her into the cell and seated her appropriately.

It's no wonder this happens in America frequently with the response(s) here.

  • Like 1

If she just got drunk and slept in her car, I'm sure she wouldn't have been charged for drunk driving.

That's not true. In many jurisdictions it is an offence to be drunk in a vehicle, even if it has not been driven. But that's irrelevant to the point I was making, which is that she wasn't going to kill anyone parked at the side of the road. That's not to excuse her earlier actions, which were illegal and for which she accepted responsibility.

 

You do know what a strawman is right? I don't feel I'm disregarding key parts of your argument. People are in here trying to put across that he deliberately set out to cause harm to her. Even you when you called it police brutality. Brutality meaning deliberate use of excessive, cruel force.

You were refuting points I didn't make, implying that I or others in the thread had suggested the officer only applied first aid to cover his own back and that cops are brutish thugs that get off of making other people suffer. As for brutality, his use of force was clearly excessive and his actions cruel and harsh - that fits the definition.

 

Disagree all you want. People like you will only change your tone when you are at the receiving end of DUI.

You are mistaken. I object to police officers using excessive force when dealing with suspects, especially in a case like this where the attack is unprovoked.

 

In just the other thread you were attacking Boots despite them being right in the eyes of the law. 

That has nothing to do with the discussion here. They stated that people who drink and drive "deserve worse than [their] face smashed", which I disagreed with and also stated was incongruent with the law.

Do the people defending the cop seriously believe that suddenly pushing someone from behind, with considerable force, into a 2m x 1.5m brick-walled cell with a concrete bench at the end of it could possibly end in anything other than serious injury?

  • Like 2

 

OK, I'll reply to you in simplified American English that you can understand, This was not a mistake or an Accident, It was deliberate force and he should be fired.

 

He pushed this drunk female prisoner into a cell with exerted force knowing all too well she was drunk and she couldn't maintain her footing forcing her upon the seating.

 

All prisoners under their care, specially under the influence of alcohol must be treated with care and not abused and the police code demands it.

 

So just to sum it all up for you in case your eyes glazed over, HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE PUSHED HER IN THE FIRST PLACE and took her into the cell and seated her appropriately.

It's no wonder this happens in America frequently with the response(s) here.

 

 

Please stop with the insults and try to at least read and understand what McKay said for goodness sakes.

 

McKay clearly says and I quote, "I did not say the shove was accidental. I know that was on purpose."

 

Her injuries are clearly the result of the excessive force used in pushing the detainee into the holding cell.  I do not believe the officer intended for her to fall into the bench and receive those extensive injuries.

 

McKay states and again quoting, " The injuries she sustained were accidental I believe, I don't think he would deliberately cause her that kind of injury, especially knowing he was on film."

 

Did the officer use excessive force?  Yes

Should he be disciplined?  Yes  (according to the rules, procedures and the laws governing that jurisdiction)

Was she right to file lawsuit? Yes

Should this behavior by law enforcement officials be accepted?  Absolutely not

  • Like 1

Please stop with the insults and try to at least read and understand what McKay said for goodness sakes.

 

McKay clearly says and I quote, "I did not say the shove was accidental. I know that was on purpose."

 

Her injuries are clearly the result of the excessive force used in pushing the detainee into the holding cell.  I do not believe the officer intended for her to fall into the bench and receive those extensive injuries.

 

McKay states and again quoting, " The injuries she sustained were accidental I believe, I don't think he would deliberately cause her that kind of injury, especially knowing he was on film."

 

Did the officer use excessive force?  Yes

Should he be disciplined?  Yes  (according to the rules, procedures and the laws governing that jurisdiction)

Was she right to file lawsuit? Yes

Should this behavior by law enforcement officials be accepted?  Absolutely not

You obviously didn't bother to read what he said if you think i was "insulting" him, given I am not "English".

Just because he thinks the cop didn't mean harm doesn't make him right, the fact was he did cause harm and he had a job to do to protect a citizen, not fling her into a cell regardless of her crime, and I've already said he should be disciplined and lose his job, that is my assessment. Just because i am not American or English, doesn't make my opinion or debate on this matter any lesser than is or you trying to say I'm wrong.

You obviously didn't bother to read what he said if you think i was "insulting" him, given I am not "English".

Just because he thinks the cop didn't mean harm doesn't make him right, the fact was he did cause harm and he had a job to do to protect a citizen, not fling her into a cell regardless of her crime, and I've already said he should be disciplined and lose his job, that is my assessment. Just because i am not American or English, doesn't make my opinion or debate on this matter any lesser than is or you trying to say I'm wrong.

 

I didn't try to say you were wrong. And no one said anything about your opinion being "lesser" than anyone's.  You seemed to misunderstand what McKay was trying to explain and you seem to be overreacting, in fact you still are.  Lighten up!

I didn't try to say you were wrong. And no one said anything about your opinion being "lesser" than anyone's.  You seemed to misunderstand what McKay was trying to explain and you seem to be overreacting, in fact you still are.  Lighten up!

You were trying to say i was insulting someone who already said i had little grasp of the English language then tried to tell me their reply was the one that made sense to you and not me undermining my opinion and reply because they were trying to explain something to me and i couldn't understand it because it was in English and now i should lighten up?

Who's insulting who now?

Anyways, I have stated my disgust and personal opinion on this matter and that will be the end of it.

You were trying to say i was insulting someone who already said i had little grasp of the English language then tried to tell me their reply was the one that made sense to you and not me undermining my opinion and reply because they were trying to explain something to me and i couldn't understand it because it was in English and now i should lighten up?

Who's insulting who now?

Anyways, I have stated my disgust and personal opinion on this matter and that will be the end of it.

 

Wow, suit yourself.  Good, glad that's the end of it.  :/

She can view it as a lesson learned.

 

Remind me to say that to you should you ever be arrested for something and then assaulted by the cops.

 

No one, no matter WHAT they've done, deserves to be beaten by the cops after they've been arrested.

  • Like 1

So the victim should assume no responsibility at all? It doesn't work like that. Just because you're a victim doesn't mean you are absolved of all responsibility for your actions. 

 

She's responsible for her actions of driving her car whilst drunk.  She's not responsible for being tossed across a room and having her face smashing in.

  • Like 1

 

OK, I'll reply to you in simplified American English that you can understand, This was not a mistake or an Accident, It was deliberate force and he should be fired.

 

He pushed this drunk female prisoner into a cell with exerted force knowing all too well she was drunk and she couldn't maintain her footing forcing her upon the seating.

 

All prisoners under their care, specially under the influence of alcohol must be treated with care and not abused and the police code demands it.

 

So just to sum it all up for you in case your eyes glazed over, HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE PUSHED HER IN THE FIRST PLACE and took her into the cell and seated her appropriately.

It's no wonder this happens in America frequently with the response(s) here.

 

First off, I'm not American. Secondly, Have I ever said he should have pushed her? No. I know he shouldn't have pushed her. You're like the 4th person in here trying to imply I've said things that I haven't. 

 

You really think he deliberately meant to smash her face in? In a cell with CCTV? Knowing full well it would be viewed upon her lawyer seeing her injuries? He pushed her in the cell and turned right around and left, didn't stay to see her in pain, when he noticed her in the condition she was in he sought medical help for her. 

She's responsible for her actions of driving her car whilst drunk.  She's not responsible for being tossed across a room and having her face smashing in.

I wish people would read the rest of the comments before replying to one half way through a discussion. I'll repeat this again so yet another person hopefully sees it and doesn't take my post out of context. Again.

 

I was referring to victim blaming in general, that in many scenarios the victim is partly responsible. I didn't say it applied in this case. 

Well that huge shove did not look justified in any way, if we could see video from outside the cell it may show that the suspect was being violent and thus that is why she was shoved like that to get her into the cell. She would have not been in that predicament if she had taken a cab, but that does not justify from what we can see on this video as right action by the police. 

 

Hey it is just my two cents....

Again he didn't want to force her into the cell right? he just made an accident by using his full weight to throw a drunk scrawny 110lb woman through a cell door and walk away leaving his colleagues to mop up her blood. He "knew" she was unstable (DUI after all) and as a cop knew exactly what he was doing, he's not 10 years old.

 

He *knew* no such thing. He assumed she was unstable, whereas the reports indicate she was being calm, quiet and completely cooperative.  Therefore his actions of throwing her into the cell were totally disproportionate.

I don't think I defended "this guy."

 

However, when you do something that puts EVERYONE you pass in the road at risk, you deserve worse than your face smashed.

 

Incorrect parking causes inconvenience at most. Drunk driving kills.

 

It's a good job she decided NOT to drive and park up to sleep it off then, right?

 

DUI is illegal and rightly so. She deserves a fine, her license to be revoked, and possibly minor jail time.  Proportional punishment for the crime committed,  She doesn't deserve her face being smashed, or even worse.

  • Like 1

Partakes in drugs.

Then decides to break the law and drive.

Gets caught.

Gets shoved into a cell and smashes her face in.

 

a la Trayvon fans..."SHE DIN DO NUFFIN"

 

It's almost as if people are born these days with no concept of common sense, self respect and doing the right thing.

 

Lucky for us this model citizen didn't plow into someone else or innocent bystanders while doing nuffin. Far from slagging off the police for perceived rough treatment...in cases such as these it should be par for the course. Dole out a kicking. Go right ahead.

 

Well, seeing as you can't even bother to get the basic facts of the case right, you're clearly trolling.

  • Like 2

This would of never happend if she hadn't got into a car and drive knowing she was still drunk.

So the cop was ok to shove her because she was drinking? like the video says he is not the person to be dishing out the punishment.

 

She'd been drinking. Its difficult to gauge how stable they are upright. 

Oh well shove as hard as you can then I guess...

  • Like 1

And she wouldn't have been shoved at all had she not been driving drunk.  Fault = entirely hers.

I guess if I am abused by the cops for anything then it's all my fault as it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't left the house this morning

  • Like 2

Watched the video again several times again.

There is no way she could have been expected not to fall down face first onto the bench.

The ex-cop who pushed her is lucky he is not being tried for manslaughter -- she could easily have broken her neck or cracked her skull open.

  • Like 2

So the cop was ok to shove her because she was drinking? like the video says he is not the person to be dishing out the punishment.

 

Oh well shove as hard as you can then I guess...

 

I give up, I'm washing my hands of this thread, everyone seems to be coming in, reading my first comment or 2, and then replying to those instead of reading the rest of the thread. 

I give up, I'm washing my hands of this thread, everyone seems to be coming in, reading my first comment or 2, and then replying to those instead of reading the rest of the thread. 

 

People tend to respond to posts in the order they make them (including me). Don't forget, different time zones and all...

People tend to respond to posts in the order they make them (including me). Don't forget, different time zones and all...

 

If I'm new to a thread and I see a post I want to respond to, I'll hit multiquote and carry on reading. For all I know at that point, someone or several people might have asked the same questions or made the same point I was about to make.

Remind me to say that to you should you ever be arrested for something and then assaulted by the cops.

No one, no matter WHAT they've done, deserves to be beaten by the cops after they've been arrested.

This was not a beating it was a shove. I've seen kids shoved harder than that playing in our front yard. That she was falling down drunk probably has more to do with her face plant than anything. A person with half normal faculties could have stayed vertical or landed on the bench.

FYI we have a legal standard called Contributory Negligence for split responsibility incidents, and in this one I'd give her about 70% of the responsibility.

Sorry Doc, but can't agree with you there. Without the shove, she may very well never have fallen over.  The cop shoved her pretty hard, therefore it's clearly 100% his fault. In face, rewatching the video, it's not even a fall. She's clearly thrown across the room into it; even a completely sober person would have had trouble staying upright with that much of an unexpected shove.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • AMD 26.6.2 driver brings FSR 4.1 support to RDNA 3 RX 7000 series graphics cards by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe A new driver is rolling out to Radeon graphics hardware owners, and alongside support for new games, AMD has just made its FSR 4.1 upscaling tech available to an entire generation of its products. Last month, AMD announced it is answering community requests to bring FSR 4.1 to past generations of its Radeon graphics cards. This would be starting with RDNA 3 RX 7000 products. Right on schedule, this is what's rolling out now with the AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.6.2 driver containing official support for over 300 games. Following this, AMD is planning to bring out RDNA 2 (RX 6000 series) support for FSR 4.1 sometime in early 2027. As for the games, this Adrenalin 26.6.2 driver is a recommended install for anyone jumping into Ubisoft's upcoming Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced remake or id Software's DOOM: The Dark Ages' Revelations expansion. The two fixed issues in this release are these: Intermittent application crash or driver timeout may be observed while playing RoadCraft on Radeon™ RX 7000 series products. Purple screen may be displayed when using an HP Reverb G2 headset with SteamVR on Radeon™ RX 6000 series graphics products. The known issues AMD is still working on are the following: Intermittent application crash or driver timeout may be observed while playing Battlefield 6 on AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. AMD is actively working on a resolution with the developer to be released as soon as possible. Texture flickering or corruption may appear while playing Battlefield 6 with AMD Record and Stream on some AMD graphics products. AMD FSR Upscaling and AMD FSR Frame Generation may show as inactive in AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition while playing Battlefield 6 when enabled on Radeon™ RX 9000 series graphics products. Failure to install may be observed while installing AI Bundle components in some regions with limited access to HuggingFace and GitHub. Model flickering or rendering failure may be observed in Maxon Cinema 4D and Blender on Radeon RX 7000 series and above graphics products. Users experiencing this issue are recommended to install AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.3.1. Intermittent application crash may be observed on some models while running Blender on Radeon RX 7000 and above graphics products. Users experiencing this issue are recommended to install AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.3.1. The newly released AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.6.2 driver is now available for download from the AMD Software app. Find the official changelog here.
    • How to Do More with Less: Future-Proofing Yourself in an AI-driven Economy —was $28 now FREE by Steven Parker Claim your complimentary copy (worth $28) of "How to Do More with Less: Future-Proofing Yourself in an AI-driven Economy" for free, before the offer ends on June 30. Description In today’s workplace, headlines about artificial intelligence can feel overwhelming. With headlines swinging between promises of utopia and warnings of mass unemployment, for most knowledge workers, the truth feels unclear. In this book, Sharon Gai cuts through the noise. Drawing from real-world examples and global insights, she explains how AI is reshaping the way we work—without hype or fearmongering. Instead of choosing between blind optimism or outright pessimism, she offers a practical, balanced perspective that helps readers make sense of the rapidly evolving AI landscape. You’ll learn how to: Reskill and future-proof your career in the face of AI disruption Identify which parts of your role can be automated, and which require human creativity and judgment Use proven frameworks to evaluate AI’s impact on your work and your organization Apply actionable tips and tools to boost productivity, make smarter decisions, and do more with less Gain clarity as a parent, leader, or professional navigating what this means for the next generation Whether you’re an employee anxious about your future, a parent concerned about your children’s opportunities, or a leader managing a lean team with tight budgets, this book provides the strategies and mindset you need to adapt so you can stop worrying and start preparing. How to download for free Please ensure you read the terms and conditions to claim this offer. Complete and verifiable information is required in order to receive this free offer. If you have previously made use of these offers, you will not need to re-register. Was $28, but is now FREE | Below free offer link expires on June 30. How to Do More with Less: Future-Proofing Yourself in an AI-driven Economy The below offers are also available for free in exchange for your (work) email: The Vibe Coding Playbook: Building Your Tech Business with AI ($35 Value) FREE - Expires 6/23 The Persuasion Engine: How Any Business Can Use AI-Powered Neuromarketing to Understand and Win Customers ($28 Value) FREE - Expires 6/24 How to Do More with Less: Future-Proofing Yourself in an AI-driven Economy ($28 Value) FREE - Expires 6/30 Cloud Security Fundamentals: Building the Foundations for Secure Cloud Platforms ($131.95 Value) FREE - Expires 7/1 The Complete Free AI Learning: Master ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini & More ($21 Value) FREE How to Build an AI Design Workflow with Gamma ($21 Value) FREE The Ultimate Linux Newbie Guide – Featured Free content Python Notes for Professionals – Featured Free content Learn Linux in 5 Days – Featured Free content Quick Reference Guide for Cybersecurity – Featured Free content We post these because we earn commission on each lead so as not to rely solely on advertising, which many of our readers block. It all helps toward paying staff reporters, servers and hosting costs. Other ways to support Neowin The above deal not doing it for you, but still want to help? Check out the links below. Check out our partner software in the Neowin Store Buy a T-shirt at Neowin's Threadsquad Subscribe to Neowin - for $14 a year, or $28 a year for an ad-free experience Disclosure: An account at Neowin Deals is required to participate in any deals powered by our affiliate, StackCommerce. For a full description of StackCommerce's privacy guidelines, go here. Neowin benefits from shared revenue of each sale made through the branded deals site.
    • Microsoft admits one of the most crucial Outlook features is currently broken by Sayan Sen Microsoft is making some decent progress when it comes to Windows 11. Recently we have confirmed reports of some rather useful improvements landing in the next version of the OS, 26H2, wherein GPU driver TDR crashes may finally be fixed, plus the company is also allowing users to disable web content on the Search. On the Outlook front though things have not been so rosy. Last month in May we reported several problems affecting basic functionalities on the app. These included a problem where documents would open blank or corrupt themselves. Following that, Quick Steps, a very useful feature, would no longer work correctly, and finally, Microsoft acknowledged a problem wherein images would fail to load up properly inside the email. Microsoft had resolved those bugs later and almost exactly a month after we reported on them, the company has now admitted a new similarly basic issue, this time on Macs. Users recently started noticing that Outlook would no longer display email threads properly as the original message itself was not displayed. An affected user Tsoumpas, C (ngmb) nicely described the problem in a forum post they made on Microsoft's site. They wrote: "Description of the issue: After updating Outlook for Mac [Version 16.110 (26061317)] on 18/6/2026, replying to any email no longer includes the original message in the reply window. Prior to the update, replies correctly contained the original email text below my response. Expected behavior: The original message should be included in the reply, as in previous Outlook versions and according to the configured reply settings. Actual behavior: The reply window contains only a blank composition area (or only my response), with none of the original email text included." Obviously this must be a highly frustrating for users as noted by several in that thread. The post, at the time of writing, has also been upvoted by more than 40 users indicating that is a fairly widespread bug. Thankfully Microsoft seems to have acknowledged the problem right around that time as it opened a new issue on its official website. In the support article, the company recommends switching to Outlook for Mac from the legacy app, where the problem appears to be happening.
    • PotPlayer 260622 by Razvan Serea PotPlayer is an extremely light-weight multimedia player for Windows. It feels like the KMPlayer, but is in active development. Supports almost every available video formats out there. PotPlayer contains internal codecs and there is no need to install codecs manually. Other key features include WebCam/Analog/Digital TV devices support, gapless video playback, DXVA, live broadcasting. Distinctive features of the player is a high quality playback, support for all modern video and audio formats and a built DXVA video codecs. A wide range of subtitles are supported and you are also able to capture audio, video, and screenshots. A comprehensive video and audio player, that also supports TV channels, subtitles and skins. Its been described on the Internet as The KMPlayer redux, and it pretty much is. Daum PotPlayer 260622 (1.7.22963) changelog: Removed Kakao TV Added pause function when navigating via the navigation bar Significantly improved internal stability Fixed an issue where colors appeared strange during RGB24 processing Improved playback for some HTTP streams Improved sync processing for the built-in audio renderer Fixed an issue where certain MP4 files behaved abnormally during playback Download: Daum PotPlayer (64-bit) | 54.7 MB (Freeware) Download: Daum PotPlayer (32-bit) | 61.1 MB View: Daum PotPlayer Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      522
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      199
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!