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

    • Motrix Next 3.9.6 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.6 changelog: New Features Clipboard management — App-owned copy actions no longer trigger the Add Task auto-detect popup. aria2 input compatibility — Multi-line aria2-style task input is supported for URLs with per-task options such as out=. BitTorrent IPv6 DHT — Added IPv6 DHT support and related configuration. File category URL patterns — File category rules can match URL patterns with validation and localized hints. Task status tags — Added clearer waiting and sharing states for task cards. Download event bridge — Added an aria2 WebSocket event bridge for faster download notifications. Improvements Improved task list transitions and preserved task state during tab switches. Kept RPC origin access enabled for local integrations. Restored AppImage stripping in release builds after beta validation. Added localized preference guidance across supported languages. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Segra 1.6.2 by Razvan Serea Segra is a free, open-source OBS-powered game recorder offering fast gameplay capture, instant clips, AI highlights, deep game integration, and seamless uploads—perfect for gamers, streamers, and content creators. Lightweight, fast, zero bloat. Segra key features: Automatic Game Recording: Begin capturing gameplay the moment your game launches, with zero manual setup. Instant Clipping: Save important moments instantly using a customizable hotkey—perfect for highlights, montages, or quick shares. Segra AI Highlights: Let Segra automatically detect kills, assists, deaths, and key events to generate polished highlight reels without manual editing. Gameplay Uploads: Upload recordings and clips directly to Segra.tv for fast sharing and cloud access. Deep Game Integration: Enjoy advanced game-data tracking across hundreds of supported titles, enabling smart highlight generation and stat-informed clipping. High-Performance Capture: Record up to 4K at 144 FPS using OBS-powered technology with minimal performance impact, supporting NVENC, AMD VCE, and custom quality controls. Segra Editor: Edit recordings easily with timeline controls, segment management, and event-based navigation to build the perfect clip. Customization Options: Adjust hotkeys, output formats, storage paths, codecs, capture quality, and performance settings for a tailored recording experience. Segra 1.6.2 changelog: UI: Improved the transition from the loading skeleton to the real content card. Security: Added Segra.dll code signing and automatic VirusTotal upload. Settings: Fixed the settings header to highlight Account when scrolled to the top. Recording: Updated OBSKit.NET to 1.4.1. Download: Segra 1.6.2 | 74.5 MB (Open Source) View: Segra Homepage | Github | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Hey Google, these are the Gemini features I want in 2026 by Aditya Tiwari Google Gemini has been around for over three years. The AI chatbot started its journey back in 2023 (as Bard) when ChatGPT was already a talk of the town. However, it quickly attracted criticism after misrepresenting facts about the James Webb Space Telescope. The search giant spent a year fine-tuning Bard before rebranding the chatbot and its underlying generative AI model to Gemini, drawing inspiration from NASA's first human spaceflight program. Note that Bard was initially powered by LaMDA and PaLM 2; Google has since added several new features and integrations to Gemini. That said, there is scope for improvement and a gap for new features. I have been using Gemini for a while now and have realized that the chatbot lacks several features, making it harder for me to research across topics. These are mostly function-over-form updates that can improve the overall experience. Delete individual messages from a conversation Image via DepositPhotos.com One good thing about Gemini is that it can maintain context throughout the conversation. But things might get chaotic when you want to ask a related question, but don't want it to be part of your conversation in the long run. You can't ask that related question in a fresh chat because Gemini will lose the active conversation context of what you're trying to research. If Google allowed you to delete individual question/answer pairs, you could simply ask about a sub-topic and remove it from the conversation to create a smooth flow of important stuff. Offline mode Image via DepositPhotos.com A big pain of using Gemini daily is that everything loads from the cloud. It takes time for your chats to appear, and you can't view your conversation history while offline. To get a better idea, you can open the Gemini app and see how it looks without an internet connection. While Gemini models run in the cloud, it wouldn't hurt if Google could store chats (at least the text part) on the device so we can refer to them when offline. Google can also offer a lightweight version of its AI model to help with basic drafting, summarization, and other tasks. It has the Gemini Nano model, which can perform on-device processing on Google Pixel, Samsung, and some other Android brands, but it's a system feature and not related to the cloud-based Gemini app. Make temporary chats permanent I can't thank Google enough for taking the time and effort to add incognito mode or temporary chat mode to the Gemini app. It lets you have conversations without worrying that the topics will end up in your chat history or used for model training (at least on paper). Google claims that it doesn't use your temporary chats to "personalize your Gemini experience or train Google’s AI models." However, the data is stored "up to 72 hours to respond to you and to process any feedback you choose to provide." That said, I often start researching something in a temporary chat, only to realize the chatbot's answer is good enough to refer to later. Sadly, Gemini doesn't have an option to make such temporary chats permanent. In other words, I won't be able to follow up on it if I close the temporary chat. I'm left with alternatives like copying the answers into notes or another app. My digital life will get a lot better if Gemini gets a button to make temporary chats permanent. Collapse answers for a cleaner view You're heavily invested in your research game and suddenly feel the need to go up in the chat to recall something. This is when the conversation thread starts to feel like an overwhelming, unending wall of questions and answers. What if Google added a way to collapse Q&A pairs in the Gemini chat thread? It would look quite clean and easy to navigate. You'll quickly get an overview of everything you have discussed with the chatbot. Add buttons to jump between messages Suggested mockup of the feature. This reminds me of a small but useful Gemini feature that Google could add to its chatbot: the ability to hop between prompts in a conversation. Just add simple up- and down-arrow buttons, similar to YouTube Shorts, so people can quickly scroll through the messages. A table of contents or Chat Overview It's hard to get a bird's-eye view of everything you have discussed with the chatbot during a lengthy conversation. This is where a table of contents, or Chat Overview, displayed at the top of the screen, possibly in a drop-down button, might come in handy. You'll be able to get an overview of the chat and jump between messages, serving as an alternative to the up/down arrow buttons. Temporary mode for Gemini Live Image: Google You can use Gemini Live to have real-time conversations with the chatbot, which feels like you're talking to someone in the same room. However, a downside is that Gemini Live doesn't work in Temporary Chat mode, so all your conversations end up in the chat history. Google should consider expanding the temporary chat mode to include Gemini Live. Default to a specific chat One thing that feels somewhat annoying to me is that Gemini always opens in a new chat, whether on web or mobile. Sometimes, you want to return to your last chat. Google can take cues from web browsers, which let you choose whether you want to go to a new tab or a specific web page(s). Gemini can also have options to default to a specific chat when reopened. That said, generative AI chatbots have endless possibilities given the vagueness of their work. You can mold them the way you want by attaching different connectors, adding custom instructions, and including source files. It remains to be seen what Google has in store for future updates and whether anything from this wishlist gets the green light. The search giant released a stream of new Gemini updates in recent months, including Gemini 3.5 Flash and Gemini Omni Spark, adding that it now has 13 products with more than a billion users each. What do you want to see in the Gemini app? Tell us in the comments.
    • Thank you for the post. Just a FYI that links to an outside site or promoting specific software is considered spamming here. Asking general questions is fine.
  • Recent Achievements

    • 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
    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      507
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      181
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      86
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!