Police video shows disturbing response to teen assault, plus poll
posted at 2:17 pm on March 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Any of us who have parented teenagers know how frustrating they can be, and one has to imagine that police officers know that better than most. Most of the time, they react better than Deputy Paul Schene did in this video, after a 15-year-old girl responded to a demand that she remove her shoes by flipping one at Schene. He then charged into the cell and now faces criminal prosecution (via QandO):
The video shows Schene and Brunner as they escorted the girl into the holding cell. Schene had asked her to remove her basketball shoes, and, as she slipped out of her left shoe, she appeared to kick it at Schene.
Schene then lunged through the door and kicked her, striking either her stomach or upper thigh area, court documents say. He pushed her against a corner wall before flinging her to the floor by her hair. He then squatted down on her and made “two overhead strikes,” although it’s unclear where the blows landed.
The detective who reviewed the video said it appeared Schene and Brunner had the girl under control when Schene struck her. Schene, who is 6 feet 2 and weighs 195 pounds, did not explain his action to investigators, court documents say.
He and the girl exchanged words. Brunner said she was “real lippy” after being informed she was under arrest and called them “fat pigs.”
The Sheriff’s Office policy manual says deputies should use physical or deadly force only when “necessary to effect an arrest, to defend themselves or others from violence, or to otherwise accomplish police duties according to law.”
Normally, we give police a lot of leeway to control violent or obstructive arrestees, and for good reason. It’s dangerous to second-guess how an officer reacts in two ways. First, in many instances, we don’t get a chance to see the larger context, in which an officer may see a threat not depicted in later exploration of video clips. Second, it pressures law-enforcement personnel to act too passively in situations requiring greater control, leading to dangerous and even deadly incidents.
In this case, though, it’s difficult to see any context in which Schene could justify his actions. Presumably, the teen had already been searched for weapons and was in fairly firm custody at the jail. She committed an assault by flipping the shoe at Schene (and battery if she actually hit him), but she represented no threat at all, nor were there any threats in the vicinity of the secure detention facility. Even before he punched her in the head twice, Schene used an excessive level of force clearly intended for punitive action rather than to secure the girl.
The defense did not want the video released before the trial because it would “inflame public opinion”. I’d guess that would be the case, but the video is publicly owned by the Seattle taxpayers who paid for it. Would the police have released it if the video showed Schene properly reacting to a real threat? I’m betting yes.
What do Hot Air readers think? Did Schene overreact, and does he deserve prosecution?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 ... 7 Next »
She’s 15 so she’s not a woman.
She’s a car theif so she’s not a child.
Moron.
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Now you’re suggesting that maybe she was going to blow herself up?
Looks like you are grasping at straws trying to defend this man’s behavior. A bit pathetic.
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Big man that Deputy is.
Bet his wife has the bruises to prove it also.
Kini on March 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Please. You’re the one with a double standard. She’s a thief with a bad attitude. If it was a male you’d think it was okay, right?
SouthernGent on March 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
I bet she won’t get lippy with cops again. Her parents should have done that already.
devil dog on March 1, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Hmmm another advocate of child abuse posting on HA, this is getting worrying. What if this cop had decided instead to sexually assault this poor girl would that be o.k to…… aslong as she derserved it i suppose.
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
She’s both. And you should not call yourself a moron. Seek help
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
For some reason they thought she had something on her because they are searching her. I would guess that the strikes were to get her to move her hands back to where they could cuff her.
Is she any worse for the wear?
Did she lose her ability to hotwire cars?
Will she never be able to smart off again? Oh, noe!!1!!
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Over the line.
Johan Klaus on March 1, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Was there a hidden suicide belt in that video that I couldn’t see? Was there a concern that her shoes might be filled with C4?
Why stop with lippy little 15 year old girls? If cops started beating people up for arguing over a traffic ticket, I bet people would learn not to do it again.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Speaking of over-reacting! *rolls eyes*
SouthernGent on March 1, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Not for a second.
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:21 PM
What if he had pulled her eyes out? What if he had cut her hands off? What if what if what if?
She stle a car and was abusive to the cops. What treatment does she deserve, obamaboy?
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:22 PM
I wonder what the story would be like it the scene was in Gitmo. Front pages all over the world I bet.
Aristotle on March 1, 2009 at 3:22 PM
What’s worrying is people who think corporal punishment is against the law. It’s not.
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Both? A woman and a child? You mean like Barney Frank?
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:23 PM
You people who are sympathetic toward this dirtbag are totally wrong. (I’m trying to be polite.)
Did you watch the whole thing? AFTER they had her cuffed, he pulled her up to her feet by her hair!
And the other cop should be held responsible for not defending the girl from that maniac.
I drove school buses for 14 years–I know how trying kids like her can be. I have had worse done to me than what I saw in this video.
If I was the girl’s father, I’d definitely have “mano y mano” with this POS.
Again,if he wants to rumble, come see me.
davidk on March 1, 2009 at 3:23 PM
She deserves her time before a judge, not a beating in a cell by a policeman with substance abuse issues who behaved very unprofessionally
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM
It’s not o.k in any circumstance you lunatic, police officers aren’t allowed to assault people whether they be 15 year old girls or 40 year old men.
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Did she suffer any injuries other than a bruised attitude?
G. on March 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Oooo, sooo manly.
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:25 PM
That wasn’t a brutal attack, weenie. And yes, I believe punishment for misbehavior is more likely than not to prevent criminal acts by children. And you do realize you don’t have a clue what is and is not child abuse, whackjob. Hmmmm?
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 3:26 PM
I’d bet that she grew up without a father. Probably a bastard.
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Terrific!
Perfectly acceptable and righteous pummeling of a 15 year old.
Kini on March 1, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Really that’s disturbing, it should be against the law, no matter what happened in that video was not corporal punishment it was a violent assault and if the parents of a child ever did anything like that they are unfit parents who are deserving of a cell in the same prison this police officer will hopefully end up in.
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:30 PM
I pity you dude, i really do
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Absolutely a brutal attack. No child protective service in the nation would tolerate that behavior. The guy’s fist was clenched that was no slap. He is being rightfully prosecuted and the tape will send his ass to jail and hopefully the other man will go down as an accessory.
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
You’re wrong that’s why they have night sticks,pepper spray, tasers and guns. It’s how and when you use them thats important. Including busting some smart asses ass. Happens all the time.
G. on March 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
About a year ago the TalkLeft blog posted a video of an officer attempting to restrain a 15 year old girl. In that video, the officer used force, considerable force in putting the cuffs on the wildly struggling girl yet never raised a hand to her. And all the while he asked for her cooperation in a calm voice. That guy was a pro doing what he had to.
This guy isn’t. This foolish young lady would have had to have done something pretty serious prior to the start of the video to convince me she was enough of a threat to the officer to justify his actions. At a minimum he needs to be off the force.
Strick on March 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Naw. Just where we have law and order and criminals aren’t walking the streets because some flippin judge decided a murderer or child molester served his “sentence”.
And cops being feared? Is that a bad thing rather than have them be counselors?
“Oh. It’s too bad you killed this newlywed couple while you were drinking and driving. We’ll get you before a judge and get that fixed for you right away.”
vs.
“Do you realize what you’ve done?! You’re under arrest and you’ll be serving life.”
This little witch got what she deserved. It won’ matter in our politically correct society, but she got what she deserved none the less.
BowHuntingTexas on March 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
It always amazes me the way that conservatives will bend over backwards to defend *state* abuses like this.
She assaulted him the shoe yes, but the officer’s response was not proportional. I’ll be generous and say that everything that took place until she was on the ground was perfectly legit. Punching a subdued suspect is wrong. Punching a subdued 16-year-old girl suspect is f-ing low. No two ways about it. Picking a girl up and escorting her out by her hair when she’s in cuffs is also needless and just plain douchey.
Government abuse doesn’t always come in the form of a slick-talking politician or welfare. That video is another example.
We just paid that man to abuse a citizen (guilty or innocent). All of us should be outraged.
Trent1289 on March 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM
The cop could have shown much more restraint, but it’s easy for civilians to second guess the authorities (some people even make a comfortable living doing just that). And there is a mechanism for dealing with overeager cops. But from the looks of things, this girl has a pretty grim future ahead of her. For a teen to mouth off to a cop the way she does (yes, I do believe him when he says she was being “lippy”) shows a huge contempt for authority. Only our society would tolerate such people, and we are now entering a period in our history when irresponsible behavior is rewarded, empathetically analyzed, or dismissed.
This girl will end up in juvenile hall and as an adult will likely be in prison, or worse. This country is unraveling one confused teen at a time.
Just wait till the Left gets its hands on her. She’ll be dead by 20.
EMD on March 1, 2009 at 3:35 PM
How would you defend someone being bullied by someone twice her size? Wet your panties.
I don’t/will not abide fools and bullies.
davidk on March 1, 2009 at 3:35 PM
I am a conservative and I would send that man to jail in a heartbeat.
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:36 PM
She deserved to arrsted, plced in a holding cell, put before a judge, you know due process etc etc. She did not deserve to be assaoulted be a psychopath masquerading as a police officer.
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Exactly Kini,
I think spousal abuse is very common with cops.
It is just in their nature.
TheSitRep on March 1, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Precisely. And the law will be on her side. She will probably sue and collect, then she’ll have a nice little coupe of her own.
Bet that’ll piss you off even more, abuse advocates.
clnurnberg on March 1, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Were this an arrest with resistance and had not been searched this may have some justification. But the girl had been searched, and was in custody. There was no justification for the acts on that video.
I don’t think the officers biggest issue will be losing a job. The girl has a very damn good case for civil charges.
But it really shows how low the cops have gotten that an unarmed, loud mouth girl is such a threat.
Dr. Dog on March 1, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Are you kidding me…? She was asked to remove her shoes, she flips one and if you look at the video carefully she was actually in the process of removing the other shoe when the “officer” assaulted her! This guy is 6′2″ and weights 192 pounds. Is he so delicate that a shoe thrown in his direction is considered assault?
ujorge on March 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM
I always try to think of something good I can say about a person, and I’ve discovered one for you: you’re consistent.
MadisonConservative on March 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM
this is past its sell by date moving on
G. on March 1, 2009 at 3:44 PM
They have video without sound?
Really does not tell the whole story.
lexa on March 1, 2009 at 3:44 PM
Lenient sentencing has nothing to do with the police. That some criminals get too light a sentence does not give police an excuse to serve as judge, jury and executioner.
False choice. Criminals should fear arrest, but no one- including the accused- should have to fear getting violently abused because a cop felt disrespected or otherwise had a bad day.
Again- police are not and should not be judge and jury.
Please, enlighten us as to what and who else warrants a beating by the police. A cop tackling a lippy 15 year old girl by the hair and punching her in the head is clearly OK with you. Is 15 years old the cutoff? How about 13? 10? 5? And what behavior warrants a beating? An insult? A dirty look? Using the wrong tone of voice? Not jumping high enough when the cop says “jump”?
As I said before; some of you must really have a great deal of faith in government that you’re so eager to live in a police state.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa. What is “very common”? Are you saying most cops beat their wives? If so, you’re as over the line in your conclusions as the cop was over the line in that video.
MadisonConservative on March 1, 2009 at 3:46 PM
What’s to tell? Do you believe that there’s something she could have said to warrant such a beating?
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Daaaaaaayuuuummmm!!!
nickj116 on March 1, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Honestly….. what could she possibly have said to justify what happened to her, also there is nothing that this girl could have said that would satisfy the the legal test for a defense of provocation.
Equanim1ty found on March 1, 2009 at 3:53 PM
It appears he over-reacted, so he’s going to pay the price. Whether it’s jail time, the city eats a monetary settlement, he just gets fired or a combination of the 3.
You did make one point, officer’s cannot be passive when confronted with resistance. But it’s a fine line of just ignoring someone mouthing off..and nothing more. As opposed to someone who’s mouthing off and building up steam and courage to attack. You have to learn to see the difference.
Personal opinion: In this instance, he had a mouthy teenager (what’s new?). Missy then flips a shoe at him. Okay, deliberate in conjunction with the verbal abuse? or just pissed and kicking her shoe off…and she’s got one shoe left. Instant decision. NOW! ACT NOW! Is she escalating or just in a pissy mood?
When making presentations, I used to show a video of a guy with a shotgun being confronted by an officer with his gun drawn. The suspect complies with the officer’s orders and lowers the shotgun (it’s not pointed at the officer), as he does so, you can see another officer coming up behind the suspect. As the guy bends and lowers the shotgun to the ground with his left hand, he’s shot in the back by the officer behind him. The officer is yelling something but it’s covered by the bang of his gun going off. The suspect falls to the ground. Video stops. When asked, EVERYONE says the cop was wrong. We play the tape again in slow motion. Only this time, at the end, when it’s pointed out. EVERYONE now sees the suspect’s right hand disappear briefly behind his back, then reappears bringing up a revolver, at the same time you can hear the officer behind him yell “Guuuuuu…..bang”
As to releasing the tape. I don’t think it should have been done. IT’S EVIDENCE! If the cop is charged and goes to trial, believe it or not, he’s entitled to an unbiased jury. Prosecutor’s can’t wave the bloody clothing of crime victims at a jury as it might “inflame the passions”. So why does the press get a pass to show the video before a jury is even selected? Can you say “Change of venue, your Honor”……..translation: Extra taxpayer cost.
GarandFan on March 1, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Cops are civilians- they’re not military. And in a Democracy, they absolutely should be answerable to the citizens they are supposed to represent.
She took her parent’s car on a joy ride without permission, and lipped off to a cop (who may or may not have been rude and unproffessional before the incident). To deduce that is going to lead to a life of crime is quite a stretch.
How much respect for authority and the police will she have from now on? Probably not much.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Inappropriate. If you can’t handle bratty thugs calling you fat, don’t join the police department.
patriette on March 1, 2009 at 3:56 PM
What’s to tell? Do you believe that there’s something she could have said to warrant such a beating?
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 3:49 PM
I did not see him hitting her he could have been slapping the floor for all we know but anyway my point was why no sound with the video it would make things a bit clearer.
lexa on March 1, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Normally I say Do the Crime, Do the Time, Whatever she is or isnt, what she did clearly didnt rise to the level of a response like that. Goodbye Deputy, maybe someone with a more professional demeanor can now get a job.
Viper1 on March 1, 2009 at 3:56 PM
What if she had tried to kill you?
aengus on March 1, 2009 at 3:57 PM
Is there something you might hear on audio that would make this ok?
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009 at 3:57 PM
This cop was simply disciplining this little bitch (no doubt her first experience with it). I applaud. She doesn’t look any worse for wear.
Akzed on March 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM
I did not see him hitting her he could have been slapping the floor for all we know but anyway my point was why no sound with the video it would make things a bit clearer.
lexa on March 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM
And btw, all of you who say this is minor, or the deputy shouldn’t get in trouble, are morons.
This vid is sickening. There is NO EXCUSE for the deputy’s actions. She flicked her shoe at him, so he responded by kicking her, punching her in the face twice, slamming her head into the wall, yanking her down by her hair, and then punching her twice while she was on the ground.
Absolutely no excuse.
nickj116 on March 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Excessive.
Yes, be careful you don’t “disrespect” a police officer lest you get what you “deserve” – a good beat down.
Some truly disturbing attitudes being displayed here.
swash_plate on March 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM
It was of course, on a purely legal level wrong, but on a personal level the girl should have known better. I’m a white male and legally I should be able to walk the streets of Compton without incident, but we all know that’s not the case. While what he did was wrong, she should have known better, and now she does.
DFCtomm on March 1, 2009 at 4:00 PM
It’s a female child kicking a shoe and running her mouth, no need to throw her on the floor by her hair. The behavior of the policeman was way out of line and shows a lack of discernment and discipline that are required for a man of his authority.
leetpriest on March 1, 2009 at 4:00 PM
Sigh… no- I think we can deduce with about 100% confidence that he wasn’t just “slapping the floor”, even if we can’t see the blows land on the video.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM
I want you on my jury if the time ever comes
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM
Totally disproportionate. The cop lacks the judgment to wear a badge. His partner’s a pathetic excuse for an officer, too. The people supporting them should really consider whether they want hotheads riding around their communities pulling people over and knocking on doors with guns on their hips.
At one point this clown opts not to control her by her restrained arms, and chooses her hair instead to get her off the floor. He also struck her in the head twice while she was under physical control.
There are procedures. The laws this jerk swore to uphold already had plenty in store for this young lady, even without the battery charge they could easily have slapped on for the shoe flip. As it stands now she’ll get enough in settlement from the city to cover survivors’ benefits for a dozen gunned-down cops.
Idiot.
DrSteve on March 1, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Let me clarify, had this been a man weighing over 215 lbs, this behavior would not have been excessive in my opinion.
leetpriest on March 1, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Nothing shocks me anymore, so it doesn’t surprise me in the slightest that on a conservative website, many people defend the psychopathic actions of a state officer against a person who is innocent until proven guilty by a jury of her peers.
For those of us who haven’t let our reason become unhinged, it is obvious that the cop’s actions are wrong, and also illegal as hell:
1. It has been black letter law for centuries that insults are not adequate provocation for the use of force, especially by state actors.
2. Review the facts: she flips off her shoe in the direction of the officer, which touches him. He then proceeds to grab her head and slam it against the back wall, then pulls her back and slams her head again into the floor. Then his partner pins her down while the first officer smashes his hands into her head twice. Finally, after the beating, the girl is pulled to her feet by her hair and dragged away. She is immediately treated for her injuries by an on-site medical team, but did not go to a hospital.
3. Police officers are allowed the reasonable use of force to restrain suspects and protect themselves in the line of duty.
Clearly, there was no need for the action here. Closing the door would’ve been enough completely restrain the girl. Instead, Officer Psycho charges in, bashes her head against the wall, bashes her head against the floor, punches her in the head once, punches her in the head again, and then drags her from the room by her hair.
Those defending the police here are deluding themselves. The man had no excuse for beating her so brutally. Frankly, I think it’s amazing he didn’t kill her. Blows like that to the head have put people into concussions that they have never woken from.
What I’d like to know is why people are so extreme in defending this cop? This is a clear case of him attacking a helpless, restrained suspect with no legal adequate provocation (words don’t apply). What is the need to defend him so excessively, to the point where people are GLAD that the girl was attacked? What is wrong with you people? It makes me think that you’re defending things that would result in the whole house of cards crashing down unless everything is upheld. Is that it? Do you seriously think society will come crashing down, be given to liberal hippies, if people who are innocent until proven guilty are treated with humanity instead of brutality? Do you really think that? Or is it something else? What?
What is your philosophy: “Do unto other as you would have them do unto you”? Or “live by the sword, die by the sword.” Society won’t come crashing down if we afford people their rights and protect them from brutal thugs like this cop. This is a Judeo-Christian society, not a Pagan Roman one. Get with the times, people. This cop should go to jail. We’ll all be better off for it.
Sydney Carton on March 1, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Your evidence?
unclesmrgol on March 1, 2009 at 4:05 PM
It’s OK to kick a guy throw him down handcuff him and maybe hit him while hes down there, and then pull him up by his hair? Try to be consistent if it’s wrong to do a female like this then it’s equally wrong to treat a male in this manner.
DFCtomm on March 1, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Level of outrage from conservatives after NY cops murder an innocent black dude for reaching for his wallet? 0
Level of outrage from conservatives after cops beat up white girl? 3
I’ll give it to your side. I really thought the outrage for beating up this girl would be much higher. It seems you’ve gone beyond just liking seeing the cops murder/beat the ever living crap out of black dudes, you just enjoy seeing police engage in brutality against everyone and anyone. So, so sad.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM
So if the cops arrest someone weighing over 215 pounds and they lip off, he’s fair game then?
If a big guy had done something to physically threaten an officer- raised a fist, thrown a punch, etc- then sure. But talking back and kicking off his shoe in a manner that in no way posed a threat? No.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Not to parse words here but which democracy to you life in?
I’m currently living in a Republic.
BowHuntingTexas on March 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM
People on your side defend it too, don’t act like they don’t. Anyone who thinks that’s acceptable behavior by any police officer is insane. And that’s from a young combat veteran and ultra-conservative.
leetpriest on March 1, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Yay for splitting hairs!
Be it a democratic republic or democracy, the point equally stands and you know it.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Begone troll, not going to bother with your idiotic strawman race-baiting.
Hollowpoint on March 1, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Those of you arguing that the police officer response was justified should see this other video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDg_IFHEau0
It starts a few seconds before the one being shown in this post, with the two officers escorting the girl to the holding cell. It seems to me that she is very compliant and that the officers didn’t think she was a treat to their safety. And I repeat, she flips one shoe and appears to be in the process of removing the other one when she was attacked.
I’ve watched the video at least ten times and I don’t see that she is purposely behaving in a threatening manner.
ujorge on March 1, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Rules are rules; civilized people don’t break rules without an emergency or other extreme situation
Men don’t hit women.
If people break rules and aren’t punished, civilization suffers.
It has nothing to do with example, and nothing to do with ’she should have known better’.
Men don’t hit women in Compton; men don’t hit girls who should have known better
Janos Hunyadi on March 1, 2009 at 4:12 PM
The officer is behaving like a thug, not an employee of the city whose duty is to “protect and serve.” It doesn’t matter what she said, if anything, there is ZERO justification for his action. His idiotic reaction will cost the city tons of money and reinforce the belief many people have that cops are more often bad than good.
I hope he is punished to the full extent of the law. Jail time, fines, the works.
brogers on March 1, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Are you referring to the subway shooting of a black guy getting shot while struggling with 2 police officers trying to handcuff him? AP dutifully, posted that video here and there was plenty of outrage.
DFCtomm on March 1, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Please don’t recreate my comment without the specifics of the original, dipshit. I said:
If I’m a 185 lb police officer, and some Adult male 215 lb monster of a dude started popping lip at me, and kicked a shoe at me like that, you had best believe that I’m going to come put him back in his place, and of course he’ll fight back because he thinks he’s got the size advantage.
9 out of 10 times, man.
leetpriest on March 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Where did I say either the policeman or the girl was wrong or right? I want to know WHY there is no sound. Is it to protect the arrested or is it to protect the policemen. If it is legal to video someone in jail it should be legal to have the voice along with it.
I want you on my jury if the time ever comes
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009
If you are guilty and they can prove it you do not want me on your jury…. trust me
lexa on March 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM
You may have a point. Is there clear, up-close video documentation of such an incident? Also, did it happen in a jail cell, or a less constrained environment?
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM
I am a law and order guy who generally is pro low enforcement, but any man, policeman or not, who would jump a fifteen year old girl like that needs to be punished. He clearly cannot handle the stress of the job and has lost the plot. Time to go.
echosyst on March 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM
PS – Allowing excessive force by the state is *not* Conservative in fact it is the antithesis of that. Are there thousands of bogus claims of police brutality? Yes and most cops deserve the benefit of the doubt. Should we give a guy a pass who does this? No. The girl clearly was not a threat, the guy just lost it. If it was my daughter I would press charges for sure.
echosyst on March 1, 2009 at 4:19 PM
One of the best post I’ve read in this thread. I’m wondering how this guy got through their spyche-eval.
liquidflorian on March 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM
They’ve never been able to prove me guilty because someone on the jury always thought otherwise ;)
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM
You’re missing my point. The cop was wrong, and she will get a nice settlement check, but most of us realize that if you’re in jail and you give the cops a rough time, then you might “slip” while being subdued and get injured. I used the Compton example to show that while I should legally be able to walk through the place as a white person it’s not a smart move, and what she did wasn’t any smarter. It’s the reality on the ground vs. a “pie in the sky” hope for utopia.
DFCtomm on March 1, 2009 at 4:21 PM
If people misunderstood my first paragraph, let me make it clear that I’m a conservative. But being a conservative shouldn’t let you blindly defend a cop without using your reason. This cop was wrong, period.
Why the hard defense of this psycho? Seriously? What is it that you’re afraid of?
Sydney Carton on March 1, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Regardless of any extenuating circumstances that would take the edge off of the officer’s explosion, isn’t it obvious that in this, as in all other such spectacles, sentimentality will rule the day? The cop will catch hell (rightly so) while the crime of endangering other people’s lives by driving around in sleepless major city in the dark without headlights will go more or less by the wayside. I figure the most legitimate voices in this debate would be those officers who know the stress of the job and those people who’ve lost loved ones to willful vehicular stupidity. But for the moment I suspect judgment: the cop, for all I know, is both. Who knows.
Tobias on March 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM
They’ve never been able to prove me guilty because someone on the jury always thought otherwise ;)
DarkCurrent on March 1, 2009
Unfortunately people thinking with emotions is not a new thing.
lexa on March 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Based on what? You can barely discern what occurred by the tape. You have no idea whether the juvenile was treated and if she was, you do not have access to her medical records and have no idea whether she sustained any injuries besides the one to her ego. Even the court documents are vague as to if she were struck. And if she were, that does not necessarily mean it was illegal to do so. People think all the time police use of forces procedures are illegal and excessive but they are not.
I do not profess to be a police use of force expert. And judging by the comments here, including yours, neither are you and others.
Words may not be provocation but I see no where it is written that if you refuse a police officer’s order, they can not use force against you. They obviously wanted her shoes to search them and removes the shoe strings. They appear to be patting her down in the cell, so again, they appear to have some reason to suspect she is hiding something. Since there is no sound, you have no idea if she made some sort of threat to hurt herself, e.g., I have a razor blade and I’m going to slit my wrists.
You are another person with a bug up your butt about police officers to the point that you will deny them the rights of every other citizen. You and others falsely believe you are an expert in police procedures. You are not.
This is why many cops are found not guilty to the shock of the boneheads who convicted them without any evidence.
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 4:26 PM
The police should just say please…
Wade on March 1, 2009 at 4:29 PM
If she had picked up the shoe and tried to use it as a weapon, that is one thing.
But what she clearly did here was just show she had an attitude problem by having her arms crossed while slipping off her show and nonchalantly tossing it off her foot out the door.
And what Officer Schane did next was clearly fly clean off the handle with extreme prejudice and viciously attack the girl in what is a very obvious act of police brutality.
The only problem I am having with all of this is that unless this Officer Schane had a sudden attack of temporary amnesia, he had to know that everything happening in that cell was being recorded, as per standard operating procedure. So as to what the heck was going through this head to prompt what he did after having a shoe tossed at him is anyone’s conjecture.
But did Officer Schane overreact? I would say he overreacted in about the same manner Godzilla usually overreacts each time he stops by Tokyo for a visit.
Should Officer Schane should be prosecuted? I’d give that a big thumbs up.
Unless he can give a really really really good explanation as to what was actually happening when that video was being recorded.
pilamaye on March 1, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Not very “rugged”, are you?
Tomblvd on March 1, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Yes, we know, because you think we view everything through racial lenses and the fact is we do not. Every time you bring up “racism” from the right, it is incorrect, and I’m glad to see that you are finally coming around to realizing it.
However, as exhibited by this drivel, you have a long way to go. You just can’t stop using your same old race-card tactic even as you have already admitted that you would not have guessed our reaction to this case. But this same evidence has been around for a long, long time. Maybe, someday, you will be able to admit what you seem to be coming to realize here – that most conservative views of police power are centered around policy issues of the proper roles of police enforcement and not race issues of the participants, on either side?
progressoverpeace on March 1, 2009 at 4:29 PM
I don’t understand why anyone would defend this guy…
This is a lippy 15 year old brat, granted she needs to be taught some manners but our officers have a duty to carry out the law with honor and respect, even if they aren’t getting any. He should be fired pure and simple, he’s lost the ability to be objective and he let his feelings override his common sense.
As for the girl a night alone in a cell like that should do wonders for her attitude, in fact in cases like this I think there should be a mandatory 72 hour cooling off period where you stay in solitary while you take some time to re-think your position. I know that sounds cruel to some, but one of the problems in many cases like this is that she will get treated like a victim by her parents and her lawyers. A little mandatory cell time would help :)
Just my opinion…
-Paul-
Sprockett on March 1, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Over reaction, but not prosecutable. She assaulted him first by tossing shoes at him.
Tim Burton on March 1, 2009 at 4:32 PM
It’s irrelevant what you think. Corporeal punishment is not against the law.
And I pity you more. Apparently you do not live in the United States where we have laws and courts and don’t have to live under what you think the law should be. Thank God for that!
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Some of you seem to have a problem with the whole “punishment” thing. The police are there to arrest the criminal, the judge and jury are there to convict and punish.
All of these comments, “she got what was coming to her” seem to miss that basic point that most normal people learn in grade school.
Tomblvd on March 1, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Question is thought, could she have thrown both shoes at him before she was restrained like the journalist in Iraq. I personally don’t think she could have, because he was obviously well trained in the use of his shoes as a ranged weapon.
DFCtomm on March 1, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Ha! Try convincing people who haven’t read your nasty comments for months and months. By the way, I think you’re consistent, too. Consistently a jackass.
Blake on March 1, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Yeah, maybe kicking and pushing her was out of line. A good hard slap in the mouth would have been perfect though.
madne0 on March 1, 2009 at 4:35 PM
If you look in your rear-view mirror and concentrate really hard, I bet you can still make out self-parody. If you actually believe a tenth of what you spout off about hackery and slipshod argument, you’re a pathetic g*****n hypocrite.
DrSteve on March 1, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 ... 7 Next »