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

    • There is a default resolution setting in Settings > Display that can be changed with a click. You can also change the settings on a per-game basis. No CLI needed. Also, Steam has countless games that are not "[perpetual] alpha/beta games", so no need for the straw man. Plus you can use other stores as well. And console games (e.g. PS5) cost a fortune, which itself more than negates the price subsidy on the system, unless you plan on exclusively playing 1 or 2 games. It's true that you shouldn't buy a system that doesn't support the game(s) you want to play, but I think that's kinda obvious, and applies to every console as well as PC. I don't game in the living room and have no need of a Steam Machine, but there is a clear market segment that would find it useful.
    • RSS Guard 5.2.0 by Razvan Serea RSS Guard is a simple (yet powerful) feed reader. It is able to fetch the most known feed formats, including RSS/RDF and ATOM. It's free, it's open-source. RSS Guard currently supports Czech, Dutch, English, French, German, Italian. RSS Guard will never depend on other services - this includes online news aggregators like Feedly, The Old Reader and others. RSS Guard is developed on top of the Qt library and it supports these operating systems: Windows GNU/Linux OS/2 (eComStation) Mac OS X xBSD (possibly) Android (possibly) other platforms supported by Qt The core features of RSS Guard are: support for online feed synchronization via plugins, Tiny Tiny RSS (from RSS Guard 3.0.0). multiplatform, support for all feed formats, simplicity, import/export of feeds to/from OPML 2.0, downloader with own tab and support for up to 6 parallel downloads, message filter with regular expressions, feed metadata fetching including icons, simple Adblock functionality, customized popup notifications, Google-based auto-completion for internal web browser location bar, ability to cleanup internal message database with various options, enhanced feed auto-updating with separate time intervals, multiple data backend support, SQLite (in-memory DBs too), MySQL. is able to specify target database by its name (MySQL backend), “portable” mode support with clever auto-detection, feed categorization, drap-n-drop for feed list, automatic checking for updates, ability to discover existing feeds on websites, full support of podcasts (both RSS & ATOM), ability to backup/restore database or settings, fully-featured recycle bin, printing of messages and any web pages, can be fully controlled via keyboard, feed authentication (Digest-MD5, BASIC, NTLM-2), handles tons of messages & feeds, sweet look & feel, fully adjustable toolbars (changeable buttons and style), ability to check for updates on all platforms + self-updating on Windows, hideable main menu, toolbars and list headers, KFeanza-based default icon theme + ability to create your own icon themes, fully skinnable user interface + ability to create your own skins, “newspaper” view, plenty of skins, support for "feed://" URI scheme, ability to hide list of feeds/categories, open-source development model based on GNU GPL license, version 3, tabbed interface, integrated web browser with adjustable behavior + external browser support, internal web browser mouse gestures support, desktop integration via tray icon, localizations to some languages, Qt library is the only dependency, open-source development model and friendly author waiting for your feedback, no ads, no hidden costs. RSS Guard 5.2.0 changelog: Added: Feed auto-fetch can now also be delayed while Feral GameMode is active on Linux and startup auto-fetch is skipped when GameMode is already active. (#2265) WebEngine builds can now use RSS Guard generated proxy auto-config (PAC) rules so article/web browsing follows per-account and per-feed proxy settings more closely. (#2273) Generated PAC rules now also cover related subdomains and use Public Suffix List data, so feeds such as feeds.bbc.co.uk can also proxy resources from images.bbc.co.uk. (#2273) Standard feeds can now define extra proxy domains, useful when article images, stylesheets or other page resources are loaded from a CDN or another domain that should use the same feed proxy. (#2273) RSS Guard now asks for proxy credentials when a WebEngine page needs proxy authentication and can fill credentials from the current feed proxy when available. (#2273) Network settings again include an option to ignore all cookies, which clears stored cookies and prevents new cookies from being accepted. Standard RSS/ATOM feeds can now individually ignore cookies while downloading feed data. Stored cookies can now be deleted from the Tools menu. Custom skin colors can now override the feed list article count color separately from feed titles, including a separate highlighted color. (#2275) Settings dialog can now search across available settings and highlight matching controls. (#1754) Standard RSS/ATOM feeds can now optionally be reported as broken when they are valid but contain no articles. (#2039) Standard RSS/ATOM feeds can now override the application-wide feed connection timeout per feed. (#1023) Tray icon can now use a custom background color and unread-count text color, with an option to reuse the generated icon as the application icon. (#1973) Support for more benevolent parsing of Gemlog entries (#2295). Article list can now show when an article was received by RSS Guard. (#947) Feed deep discovery now actually scrapes all links found in the website and checks if they are feeds or not. This greatly enhances usability of the deep discovery mode and discovers many more feeds than before. (#2306) Search boxes now show a small dot when the feed or article list is hiding some items because of active filtering. (#873) Articles now have a shortcut-assignable action to open the homepage of the feed they belong to. (#2060) Fixed: Parallel feed updates no longer crash when multiple update results are processed at the same time. (64cf521) Links in WebEngine articles opened from feeds such as Kill the Newsletter now open correctly instead of being swallowed by the embedded page. (#2272) Relative article URLs resolution was kinda broken. (#2282) Clicking article URL did not work when the URL had "fragment" set. (#2293) The default proxy setting now uses Qt/system default proxy behavior instead of forcing no proxy. (e0263ad) WebEngine article loading now keeps the current feed context, so feed-specific proxy credentials remain available while the article page loads. (fdd0f00) Download: RSS Guard 5.2.0 (64-bit) | Portable | ~ 130.0 MB (Open Source) Link: RSS Guard Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • This is gonna separate the creeps from the rest of the crowd.
    • "Claude, is our CEO a compete and utter fool by wasting money on AI in this already worthless Teams chat?"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      DaviKar went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      462
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      110
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!