• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Protester bled from his ear after being shoved by police — cops say he ‘tripped’

Recommended Posts

+primortal    18,161
18 minutes ago, techbeck said:

People stopped, possible national guard, soon after the 2 officers walked past.  And one person posted here that if you listened carefully, the cops called for medics.

I'm not denouncing the call for the medic.  In fact that the cop knocked down the guy so hard (that he started bleeding from the ear) a call for a medic was done and they didn't even taking a moment to assist the person that was knocked down. There were plenty of cops to cover just one cop till the medic arrived.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    7,372
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, primortal said:

I'm not denouncing the call for the medic.  In fact that the cop knocked down the guy so hard (that he started bleeding from the ear) a call for a medic was done and they didn't even taking a moment to assist the person that was knocked down. There were plenty of cops to cover just one cop till the medic arrived.

Literally right after the cops that pushed walked past the man, the tan officers (two of them) stopped to assist.  So he got assistance a few seconds later.  Yes, the 2 cops that pushed shouldnt have done it or should have stopped, but fact that the guy was assisted right away makes this a non issue IMO.  Not like he was left minutes for assistance.

 

Anyway, the guy is recovering and out of ICU/talking.  So looks like he will be fine.  Bet the police dept/city will see a lawsuit soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    7,372
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Human.Online said:

Lick those boots, make sure you get all up in the sole

Be insulting and rude all you want.  Fact that he got assistance soon after makes the assistance issue a non issue IMO.  A few seconds, litterly a few seconds, would have made a difference.

 

I also did not condone what the officers did, I never did, so not sure why you are harping on boot licking.  Officers should be held accountable.

Edited by techbeck
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+primortal    18,161
14 minutes ago, techbeck said:

So he got assistance a few seconds later.

 

It. Shouldn't. Have. Happened. In. The. First. Place.

 

Did you forget what this protesting is all about?  Let me remind you, unwarrented police brutality.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    7,372
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, primortal said:

It. Shouldn't. Have. Happened. In. The. First. Place.

 

Did you forget what this protesting is all about?  Let me remind you, unwarrented police brutality.

I agree it shouldn't have happened. And I stated several times that the police were in the wrong.  I am just talking about the time it took for the guy to get help. 

 

Also a lot of cops have a little bit of Medical Training but I doubt they're equipped to handle that type of injury specially a head injury like that.  Sos the cops have stopping made any difference?  Especially since two officers stopped seconds later to assist.

Edited by techbeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emn1ty    4,362
4 hours ago, primortal said:

So now you're playing semantics with what I say?  Be real, you know very well that every single cop there would individually stopping by the man and try to help.  That's an asinine statement.

The fact is, you don't actually know that or what the circumstances were behind why they did or did not stop outside of what you see in the video. You can't hear what they're saying to each other (the only words you hear are shouts). The fact we don't know everything they were saying or what communication was going on beyond calling for a medic is evidence enough neither of us have enough information to decide what should have been common sense/decency in that moment.

 

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Common-Sense

Quote

Tip: It's all about good communication. Keep your assumptions to a minimum when attempting to make a persuasive argument.

 

4 hours ago, primortal said:

Yes, but the cop didn't even look to see if a) the medic heard the call b) was coming to attend the man.  So, the cop could have stayed there till the medic arrived.  Common sense right?

Based on your perspective of the camera viewer which is highly obscured by other officers. What he could have done are many things, but what is common sense in an uncommon situation is highly debatable and hence why appealing to common sense is just a cop out. Common sense varies between people (and between circumstances). It's not an argument.

4 hours ago, primortal said:

But you were theorizing here, but called me out for doing the same?

I have only discussed what is visible and audible on the tape. I did not bring in any scenarios that did not occur in the video.

4 hours ago, primortal said:

The cops didn't stop at all and one cop prevented the other from stopping. As you yourself pointed out that medic where called.  Medics are cops correct?

Goalposts have been shifted to the argument of hair splitting. Really stretching now.

 

3 hours ago, primortal said:

No offense but you are being an armchair expert as well.  Neither of us know exactly what was going through the cops mind after forcibly knocking him down and him calling the medic and walking away.

Then stop acting like you do, the only people who made any arguments to this extent were those who assumed the officers didn't care, should of stopped, etc. People making up the motivations of the cops based on the video without any actual knowledge of their motivations. Projecting their anger into those people. There's not need for it, there's already enough to be angry about with their behavior (and subsequent lying on their report) that we don't need to invent new ones.

3 hours ago, primortal said:

What's being argued is the insensitiveness of the cop and in the context of unnecessary police brutality along with the police report cover-up.

Agreed, but that's not where people stopped. They made false claims, and upon those claims being proven false they invented other reasons to be mad instead. It's not my fault that when a lie is exposed the response is to create a red herring argument about how it wasn't good enough anyways to distract from the fact they were perpetuating a falsehood.

 

1 hour ago, Jim K said:

Seems people are wanting to give the cops a cookie for calling for a medic after they needlessly injured him. 

It's not about cookies, but I guess next time I'll just sit back and let people continue to perpetuate a lie. We all like the truth until it's not what we want to hear, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    7,372
Posted (edited)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/05/martin-gugino-pushed-ground-buffalo-police-known-peaceful-man/3160820001/

Bystanders who were at the scene said police called medical personnel, who showed up within minutes. 

 

So you have 2 national guards stop seconds later.  Medics were called right away and showed up in minutes.  While it was the moral thing for the cops to stop, tell me what a cop in full riot gear was going to do to help internal bleeding in the head?   They have nothing on them to tread these kinds of medical issues.  And during protests like this, there are medical personal on call for such issues.  Why they were called and were able to arrive quickly.

 

Talk about the cops stopping is not really being discussed or looked at other than a few commenting on social media.   Cops are going to be judged on the push (charged with 2nd degree assault) and not on whether or not they stopped since Gugino got prompt medical attention.

 

Again, since some do not get it, I am not condoning what the cops did.  I made a statement several times they were wrong.  And they are being charged and will have their day in court.  It is just my opinion that them stopping would have have made any difference with Gugino's condition since seconds later, he got assistance.  Then minutes later, the medical personal that could treat him showed up.

 

 

And good news is Gugino is doing better and hopefully can go home in a couple weeks.  From what I have read, sounds like a cool and collected guy.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waysidesc    846
3 minutes ago, techbeck said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/05/martin-gugino-pushed-ground-buffalo-police-known-peaceful-man/3160820001/

Bystanders who were at the scene said police called medical personnel, who showed up within minutes. 

 

So you have 2 national guards stop seconds later.  Medics were called right away and showed up in minutes.  While it was the moral thing for the cops to stop, tell me what a cop in full riot gear was going to do to help internal bleeding in the head?   They have nothing on them to tread these kinds of medical issues.  And during protests like this, there are medical personal on call for such issues.  Why they were called and were able to arrive quickly.

 

Talk about the cops stopping is not really being discussed or looked at other than a few commenting on social media.   Cops are going to be judged on the push (charged with 2nd degree assault) and not on whether or not they stopped since Gugino got prompt medical attention.

 

 

 

It does not change that it should not have occurred at all.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck    7,372
Just now, waysidesc said:

It does not change that it should not have occurred at all.

And I never said otherwise. 

 

Maybe I should update my signature to state that I do not support what was done so I can stop repeating myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim K    15,692
16 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

It's not about cookies, but I guess next time I'll just sit back and let people continue to perpetuate a lie. We all like the truth until it's not what we want to hear, eh?

Sorry, hadn't realized I quoted you.  Oh wait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+primortal    18,161
9 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

The fact is, you don't actually know that or what the circumstances were behind why they did or did not stop outside of what you see in the video. You can't hear what they're saying to each other (the only words you hear are shouts). The fact we don't know everything they were saying or what communication was going on beyond calling for a medic is evidence enough neither of us have enough information to decide what should have been common sense/decency in that moment.

Again, I'm not complaining about them calling the medic.  I'm pointing out the fact the cop could careless the damage he did by violently knocking the guy down. IMHO that is wrong.

 

11 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Based on your perspective of the camera viewer which is highly obscured by other officers. What he could have done are many things, but what is common sense in an uncommon situation is highly debatable and hence why appealing to common sense is just a cop out. Common sense varies between people (and between circumstances). It's not an argument.

 
 

How is it an uncommon situation?   Man walks up to a cop a few seconds later gets knocked on his ass, hard for no reason.  I agree common sense varies between people but here we are with you arguing with me that my common sense is wrong and yours is right.

 

From a different angle,

 

16 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Goalposts have been shifted to the argument of hair splitting. Really stretching now.

How is pointing out the facts and asking a question is moving the "goalpost" and resorting to splitting hairs?

 

18 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Then stop acting like you do, the only people who made any arguments to this extent were those who assumed the officers didn't care, should of stopped, etc. People making up the motivations of the cops based on the video without any actual knowledge of their motivations. Projecting their anger into those people. There's not need for it, there's already enough to be angry about with their behavior (and subsequent lying on their report) that we don't need to invent new ones.

 

Where did I make up motivations?  Did the cop stop to see if the guy he knocked down is ok or not?  Did one cop stop another cop from assisting or not?  All I'm pointing out is (the lack of) human decency.  If someone fell down next to you, would continue to walk away, or stop and see if that person is ok?

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emn1ty    4,362
3 hours ago, primortal said:

Again, I'm not complaining about them calling the medic.  I'm pointing out the fact the cop could careless the damage he did by violently knocking the guy down. IMHO that is wrong.

What happened to neither of us having enough information to know what was going through their heads? You're back to assuming you know the answer to things you cannot possibly know.

3 hours ago, primortal said:

How is it an uncommon situation?   Man walks up to a cop a few seconds later gets knocked on his ass, hard for no reason.  I agree common sense varies between people but here we are with you arguing with me that my common sense is wrong and yours is right.

I didn't realize mass protests (and riots) were an everyday backdrop to police work.

3 hours ago, primortal said:

How is pointing out the facts and asking a question is moving the "goalpost" and resorting to splitting hairs?

I may have misinterpreted, but I read it as if you were trying to define the two men who did stop to assist as not cops, therefore justifying the statement "the cops didn't stop". Which to me is splitting hairs. If that's not what you were implying then that's just my mistake.

3 hours ago, primortal said:

Where did I make up motivations?  Did the cop stop to see if the guy he knocked down is ok or not?  Did one cop stop another cop from assisting or not?  All I'm pointing out is (the lack of) human decency.  If someone fell down next to you, would continue to walk away, or stop and see if that person is ok?

A lack of human decency is itself an implication of motivation. You're saying they lack human decency, implying they don't care. Ignoring there could be a plethora of other reasons why they didn't stop (like someone else was there to handle it, or perhaps they didn't have the skills to help with the injury). No, you immediately jump to "they lack human decency" as the reason they didn't stop.

 

As for your example you might want to look up a phenomenon called "normalcy bias".

Quote

Normalcy bias, or normality bias, is a cognitive bias which leads people to disbelieve or minimize threat warnings.[1] Consequently, individuals underestimate the likelihood of a disaster, when it might affect them, and its potential adverse effects.[2] The normalcy bias causes many people to not adequately prepare for natural disasters, pandemics, and calamities caused by human error. About 70% of people reportedly display normalcy bias during a disaster.[3]

 

Normalcy bias has also been called analysis paralysis, the ostrich effect,[4] and by first responders, the negative panic.

 

The normalcy bias may be caused in part by the way the brain processes new data. Research suggests that even when the brain is calm, it takes 8–10 seconds to process new information. Stress slows the process, and when the brain cannot find an acceptable response to a situation, it fixates on a single and sometimes default solution that may or may not be correct. An evolutionary reason for this response could be that paralysis gives an animal a better chance of surviving an attack and predators are less likely to see prey that is not moving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias

Also the Bystander Effect

Quote

70 percent of the people alone called out or went to help the woman after they believed she had fallen and was hurt, but when paired with a stranger only 40 percent offered help.

It's funny how the majority of people are not likely to help in that situation you described when there are other people around. This points to the "common sense" and "human decency" often not mattering when it comes to real world results. Most of the time, with a crowd of people present, 60% of the people there won't do anything.

4 hours ago, Jim K said:

Sorry, hadn't realized I quoted you.  Oh wait...

Sorry, didn't realize passive aggressive jabs didn't warrant a response /s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim K    15,692
28 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Sorry, didn't realize passive aggressive jabs didn't warrant a response /s.

I wasn't talking about you ... it was a general comment after seeing medic being thrown around for four pages...that it shouldn't have happened in the first place. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
waysidesc    846
6 hours ago, techbeck said:

And I never said otherwise. 

 

Maybe I should update my signature to state that I do not support what was done so I can stop repeating myself.

No comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FloatingFatMan    20,915
9 hours ago, techbeck said:

Be insulting and rude all you want.  Fact that he got assistance soon after makes the assistance issue a non issue IMO.  A few seconds, litterly a few seconds, would have made a difference.

 

I also did not condone what the officers did, I never did, so not sure why you are harping on boot licking.  Officers should be held accountable.

If he'd died, would it still be a non issue?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Code Name: Lockdown    9,502
5 hours ago, waysidesc said:

Maybe I should update my signature to state that I do not support what was done so I can stop repeating myself.

Maybe you should stop posting things that read as if you did support it, stop making excuses for the officers, stop calling it a "non issue".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+primortal    18,161
13 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

What happened to neither of us having enough information to know what was going through their heads? You're back to assuming you know the answer to things you cannot possibly know

Ever hear of IMHO?  We're both debating this based on our opinions based on what we've seen in the video.  I'm a person that follows Occam's razor until proved otherwise.

 

13 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

I didn't realize mass protests (and riots) were an everyday backdrop to police work.

Look who's splitting hairs now 😄  At the time of the incident and what's been shown in videos there were no protester around when those group of cops went through.

 

13 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

A lack of human decency is itself an implication of motivation. You're saying they lack human decency, implying they don't care. Ignoring there could be a plethora of other reasons why they didn't stop (like someone else was there to handle it, or perhaps they didn't have the skills to help with the injury). No, you immediately jump to "they lack human decency" as the reason they didn't stop.

 
 

My god, are you a robot?  Have some feeling for a change.

 

14 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

As for your example you might want to look up a phenomenon called "normalcy bias". 

Sweet Jesus.  What's we're discussing has nothing to do with "normalcy bias".

Quote

Normalcy bias, or normality bias, is a cognitive bias which leads people to disbelieve or minimize threat warnings.[1] Consequently, individuals underestimate the likelihood of a disaster, when it might affect them, and its potential adverse effects.[2] The normalcy bias causes many people to not adequately prepare for natural disasters, pandemics, and calamities caused by human error. About 70% of people reportedly display normalcy bias during a disaster.[3]

 

The normalcy bias can manifest in response to warnings about disasters and actual catastrophes. Such disasters include pandemics, motor vehicle accidents, natural disasters like a tsunami, and war.

 

Normalcy bias has also been called analysis paralysis, the ostrich effect,[4] and by first responders, the negative panic.[5] The opposite of normalcy bias is overreaction, or worst-case scenario bias,[6][7] in which small deviations from normality are dealt with as signals of an impending catastrophe.

Does cop pushing down a man brutally qualify as "disbelieve or minimize threat warning" or "underestimate the likelihood of a disaster" or "not adequately prepare for natural disasters, pandemics, and calamites"?

 

14 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

It's funny how the majority of people are not likely to help in that situation you described when there are other people around. This points to the "common sense" and "human decency" often not mattering when it comes to real world results. Most of the time, with a crowd of people present, 60% of the people there won't do anything.

 

Then consider me part of the 40%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emn1ty    4,362
3 hours ago, primortal said:

Ever hear of IMHO?  We're both debating this based on our opinions based on what we've seen in the video.  I'm a person that follows Occam's razor until proved otherwise.

Then don't call it a fact if it's your opinion.

3 hours ago, primortal said:

Look who's splitting hairs now 😄  At the time of the incident and what's been shown in videos there were no protester around when those group of cops went through.

They're were several protestors, But I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying here. The context of everything going on there is surrounded by protests and riots. these police officers are going out knowing that they could be exposed to violence and mass protests. Not something they deal with every day, so the whole context of what they're doing is different.

 

These aren't just cops walking around on their typical rounds on the street with people they know because they're there everyday. They're in full riot gear, doing crowd control. Are you really going to argue that this is an everyday thing for them?

3 hours ago, primortal said:

My god, are you a robot?  Have some feeling for a change.

I think the difference here is that I don't let my emotional reactions control my judgment. You have every right to be outraged, but I prefer understanding over outrage. 

3 hours ago, primortal said:

Then consider me part of the 40%.

Yeah I'm sure 90% of people say that until they're actually in the situation. I like to consider myself also in the 40%, but what I think and what actually happens are two different things. I don't pretend to know how I would react in those situations because I'm not typically in them, which is the case for most people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+primortal    18,161
5 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Then don't call it a fact if it's your opinion.

Fair enough.

6 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

They're were several protestors, But I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying here. The context of everything going on there is surrounded by protests and riots. these police officers are going out knowing that they could be exposed to violence and mass protests. Not something they deal with every day, so the whole context of what they're doing is different.

 

I would think regardless, a cop should be able to handle a one-on-one situation vs. a bunch of people and act accordingly.

 

9 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

These aren't just cops walking around on their typical rounds on the street with people they know because they're there everyday. They're in full riot gear, doing crowd control. Are you really going to argue that this is an everyday thing for them?

 

A cop is a cop regardless what they are wearing and should be able to handle each situation differently, one would think.   And technically they weren't doing crowd control at the time of the altercation.

 

11 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

I think the difference here is that I don't let my emotional reactions control my judgment. You have every right to be outraged, but I prefer understanding over outrage. 

I can understand and be outraged at the same time.

 

11 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

Yeah I'm sure 90% of people say that until they're actually in the situation. I like to consider myself also in the 40%, but what I think and what actually happens are two different things. I don't pretend to know how I would react in those situations because I'm not typically in them, which is the case for most people.

 

You have a source to back up that 90% being it sounds like you're stating a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emn1ty    4,362
7 hours ago, primortal said:

I would think regardless, a cop should be able to handle a one-on-one situation vs. a bunch of people and act accordingly.

 

A cop is a cop regardless what they are wearing and should be able to handle each situation differently, one would think.   And technically they weren't doing crowd control at the time of the altercation.

I agree, they should have handled themselves better. But handling themselves poorly in that situation doesn't equate to lacking human decency. And from what I can tell, they were in formation to push back a perimeter. They all moved forward at the same time in a line with a command.

7 hours ago, primortal said:

I can understand and be outraged at the same time.

As can I, but when you're accusing me of having no emotions it seems like you're just trying to justify the outrage by attacking me for not being as outraged as you are.

7 hours ago, primortal said:

You have a source to back up that 90% being it sounds like you're stating a fact.

Quote

So what about these people who overheard the seizure and didn't help? Were they just indifferent? Follow up interviews at the end of the study suggested that they were in fact concerned. Most mentioned overhearing the seizure, many had trembling hands and were clearly shaken from the experience and several inquired as to whether the victim finally received help. This tells us that they were not indifferent or heartless; they were concerned but simply didn't feel responsible enough to do anything about it.

Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-social-thinker/200911/why-do-we-help-less-when-there-is-crowd

 

Not a 90% percent figure, but gets my point across. Most people want to help, but when around others they just don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,878
Posted (edited)

One of the first things taught in good  tactical firearms classes is to,

 

"Practice avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation."

 

This goes for cops and civilians. Sometimes you can't, such as if you're the victim of a blitz attack etc. This wasn't one of those.

 

Someone's forgotten or ignored this first principle and should be disciplined or fired & charged. Given the serious injury, leading to an ICU admission, I'd prefer the latter.

 

I'd also like to point out all the cops who didn't pile on or do something similar. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.