Video: Jackass cop arrests reporter for no reason
posted at 5:55 pm on April 24, 2009 by Allahpundit
To cleanse the palate, think of this as “the taser vid that wasn’t.” You know he wants to use the taser, you know he’s thinking of using the taser — but the reporter simply never gives him a pretext to do so. I’m almost disappointed: There’s no thread on HA so fun as when I post a clip of police misbehavior and a few commenters inevitably show up to defend the cop, no matter how horribly or moronically he’s acting.
I’m looking forward to finding out how this guy’s getting a bad rap. He was put on desk duty after the footage aired, you’ll be pleased to know.
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 5 6 7 Next »
Have I ever said cops DON’T make mistakes? No. In fact:
And YES I think cops should follow every letter of THE LAW.
I see no problem with this video; that said, I doubt we’ve seen all of it
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Or I would be suing the department for manhandling me for no good reason.
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 9:14 PM
I’m just trying to find the parameters of what you holster sniffers think is a “legal police order”. Since none of you would offer a description of what is within that definition and what is outside the pale, I offered up an extreme example of a police order.
I notice, however, that none of the holster sniffers said they’d refuse to give a cop head.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 9:15 PM
The reporter would be arrested in Kentucky as well:
If the police are working an accident scene and they tell you to move, it doesn’t matter what your excuse is or what you think your rights are. If you don’t move, you’re wrong. You can be arrested. That’s it and that’s all.
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 9:15 PM
+111
For no reason, Allah?
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 9:16 PM
I feel dirty even commenting in this thread, because it either puts me on the side of the folks yelling “holstersniffer!” or others who claim if you criticize a cop, you must be a dope-smoking hippie liberal who hates all cops.
You know what? I know bad teachers. I know bad librarians. I know bad hamburger-flippers. I know bad mechanics.
Why are cops immune? They’re people. And just like there’s plenty of bad teachers and bad mechanics, there’s plenty of bad cops.
Was the reporter a jerk? Maybe… we didn’t see all the video. But here’s what I saw: An accident scene, a reporter, a fellow with a camera, and lots of other folks hanging out.
I would think the reporter, unless he’s causing some obscene disturbance, would get a little slack for exercising a very basic constitutional right… reporting. Why are we charging at the reporter immediately, but not the other gawking slackers?
Personally, I like cameras, on both sides, and I’m disturbed to see so many posters who seem to think that being a reporter is somehow anti-American, when in reality their service is one of the basic pillars that keep our country afloat.
The last part, where the camera is wrenched away from the reporter and dropped to the ground kind of did it for me. It doesn’t look a whole lot like the rule of law is being enforced here, but instead someone having a bad day, and using a badge to enforce it.
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 9:19 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 9:15 PM
My mom had a saying, you may have the right of way, dead right. In this case, the cop has the right to arrest, to be sure. But he is dead right. It cost him and his department much more than it did this reporter.
With the camera rolling, you better make sure everything is done by the book. And when the camera isn’t rolling, you better do everything by the book.
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 9:19 PM
That cop seemed high stung. I assume he was a Democrat
Rob Taylor on April 24, 2009 at 9:19 PM
I never yelled. I typed it in a calm, moderated voice.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 9:21 PM
G’nite all. Gotta be up early (yeah… Saturday)
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 9:21 PM
The real debate is not whether the cop had the right to tell them to clear away or not. The crux of the debate is whether he acted unprofessionally in the course of telling them to leave. There were 20 ways of handling that situation, 19 of them did not involve him acting so briskly.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 9:21 PM
The government is a self declared monopoly on legal violence. Jackasses who get their rocks off abusing that monopoly can rot in hell.
It disturbs me to see freedom of the press crumbling in the Obama nation.
justfinethanks on April 24, 2009 at 9:22 PM
And in the case of teachers and police, they both work for a government-run monopoly and have even less incentive to do their jobs efficiently.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 9:24 PM
Of course he could have. But, please, drop never be rude and the customer is always right stuff. It’s a strawman. In the case, the customers were the other people on the road, the accident victims, and the other emergency crews, not this mischief maker.
Dusty on April 24, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Thanks for the info. i thought that was the case at least in NY. The cop did his job but he should have done it without the rage.
Greed on April 24, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Something else to consider:
Obama’s “Civilian Police Force” is on its way.
I don’t know about you, but I’m in favor of setting reasonable limits on police behavior prior to being arrested at the next TEA Party because I was told to go away.
The reporter was on the opposite side of the fence from the accident. I’m not sure he was causing anywhere near enough trouble to warrant the kind of response he received, even if he was being a snarky SOB.
Him now.
Maybe you later.
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 9:31 PM
I applaud this police officer and wish more would bust the media who think the laws don’t apply to them.
JeffinSac on April 24, 2009 at 9:32 PM
I never said the customer is always right, I just said that no matter how the customer acts, you are still required to act professionally. And yes, the people on the road were tax-payers, but then again, so are the reporter and camera-man. They are just as much of a tax-payer as anyone else. It is not necessary to act disdainfully towards one citizen to secure the rights of another.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 9:32 PM
What a jerk. Hopefully he’s fired ASAP.
therightwinger on April 24, 2009 at 9:37 PM
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 9:32 PM
I used to be in personnel and whatnot for a giant drug store chain, and would do recruiting and hiring and training over a number of states.
I can tell you that a $7.00/hr cashier who behaves like this wouldn’t have a job for long. You simply don’t lose control regardless of the circumstances. I’m curious that it’s so easy to accept from someone with a gun at their hip.
I’ll give him some leeway, though, as he’s been on the force for a long while… but it definitely raises an eyebrow.
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 9:38 PM
My thoughts exactly.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 9:41 PM
Fair enough. But with a thread that Allah titled “Jackass Cop arrest reporter for no reason,” I don’t think we ever had a real shot at having that debate. Most of the comments I’m seeing are of the “Moron Lube” variety equating a clearly lawful direction with the actions of the KGB and Gestapo. That’s just nonsense.
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 9:43 PM
I’m sure the 4 dead officers in Oakland made more than that even. Were they given a good price for not getting to see their children grow up?
joncoltonis on April 24, 2009 at 9:49 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 9:43 PM
Yeah, which is the reason I hesitated even coming in here.
I have no problem saying that most cops are good, decent people with a very, very difficult job that is extremely dangerous and requires them to perform it with one arm tied behind their backs.
But I abhor statism and tyranny, and I think that the arm of the law should be vigilant, but under control.
I become very worried when people with authority, and guns, feel that an order barked from them must be obeyed without hesitation, regardless of the circumstances.
Again, this reporter didn’t seem to be smashing little children over the heads with his microphone, or beating old ladies with the camera. He was just reporting. There was no better way to handle this?
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 9:51 PM
You may be right. But the thread title was intended to grab your attention and possibly to impel you to comment. It seems to have worked.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 9:52 PM
Several things are troublesome about this — First, the clip AP is showing misses the part where the officer is on the other side of the fence. In that clip (linked in the comments), the reporters have already started moving toward their vehicle while also explaining what they are wanting to do. When you look at the clips, there are cars in front of and behind the reporters’ vehicle. Seems to a reasonable person that getting those folks to move first would have made more sense. The accident was on the other side of the road, therefore there is no way the reporters were interfering with the actual accident scene. The other people in front of the reporters were closer to the accident and more likely to be interfering, yet the officer went after the reporters, why? The traffic on the non-accident side of the road is already being impeded by people who were stopped on both sides of the road. The reporters were walking back to their vehicle (yeah, the “talent” was being mouthy, but that shouldn’t be a crime) when the officer decided to escalate. Watch the clip closely, the officer takes the reporter, who is walking back toward the vehicles, from the back — i.e., they were complying, maybe not happily, but they were complying, the reporter actually had to run to catch up to the reporter — walking back toward his vehicle — in order to capture him.
I’m no fan of the MSM, but this scenario seems way over the top. Given what we are shown, and I will grant that this is only what the media has released, any reasonable person would look at this as unreasonable use of authority. Only the video clips playing in the minds of the officer’s defenders show just cause for the actions taken.
There were dozens of different ways for that officer to have handled the situation — he chose to use brute force.
Anyone who has read other posts from me knows that I am not a fan of the MSM. But it would take some pretty heavy editing around this clip to justify the officer’s actions.
AZfederalist on April 24, 2009 at 9:58 PM
It doesn’t matter that the judgment was peremptory; the decision is FINAL, damnit!
Allah has spoken: People who refuse to listen to arguments are EVIL – all of them.
And if you disagree with that opinion, then you are a jackbooted Nazi.
logis on April 24, 2009 at 9:58 PM
Just wait until you get a visit from the IRS. You will learn what government tyranny is really about then. They should be added to the “axis of evil” list that Bush made.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:00 PM
This is a ridiculous argument. Fishermen, lumberjacks, construction workers, drivers, farmers, pilots, even garbage men have higher fatality rates than police officers. They also make a fraction of what police make and the pensions (if any) aren’t even worth comparing.
If I am a contractor and the owner of the project complains to me about the work I’ve completed for him and I told him “The workers are risking their lives, just accept the shoddy, non-compliant work and stop complaining.” I would never work again in the same town.
brogers on April 24, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Excellent counter.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM
Not to be picky, but contractors are famous for doing shoddy incomplete work and yet people continue to hire them. My brother called around 10 different contractors to do some work in his yard and only one of them ever called him back. And even the one that did took weeks to do so and made excuses why he could not come out.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:15 PM
The reporters were creating a traffic hazard and an imminent danger. They refused the cops order to stop creating a hazard, and thought they could tell him his business because they’re “special” as members of the press.
I had a cop bang on my door one morning and order me out of my house on a moment’s notice. He practically grabbed my by the collar and hauled me out when I hesitated and wanted an explanation.
There was a gas leak in the building and my questioning him was keeping him from evacuating others.
These reporters were endangering innocent people caught in the traffic backup they were contributing to.
If one of their relatives was stuck there and got rear-ended as a result, the anti-authority types in this thread might have to do some re-thinking.
Dubya Bee on April 24, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Somehow I feel that whatever the reporter said that caused the cop to vault the median barrier wasn’t as respectful and filled with “Sir” as the part when he was obviously playing to the camera. It’s not like we haven’t seen “journalists” portraying themselves as victims before.
The cop lost it. He was also in the middle of a highly stressful situation where he was charged with ensuring the safety of everyone involved, including idiots who stop beside a multi-lane freeway filled with vehicles going 70 mph (and driven by people who may or may not be using cellphones.)
Too bad we can’t see the attitude displayed by the reporter when he was initially told to stop causing a hazard. Why do you suppose the cop jumped the barrier in the first place?
warbaby on April 24, 2009 at 10:24 PM
Or he could have pounded on your door and simply said, “Get out of the house, there is a gas leak.”
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:25 PM
When you call the Police you only have one force to choose from. If they do shoddy work who you gonna call next?
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 10:25 PM
A lawful order given by an officer in charge of an emergency scene is expected to be obeyed without hesitation. If that lawful order is disobeyed, the person who refuses can (in Kentucky) be arrested and charged with a Class B misdemeanor. The interpretation of the law is not to be decided on the side of the road, especially by the civilian being told to move it.
Should the officer have behaved in a more professional manner? Sure, but rudeness by a police officer isn’t a violation of your constitutional rights. Where so many posters, including Allah, are going off the rails is equating the two.
Rudeness is not something for the officer to be fired over either. Working traffic scenes is one of the most annoying things a patrol officer has to do. Between the rubberneckers and the looki- loos, the only thing any sane beat cop wants out of an accident scene is to get it cleared up and out of the road before somebody other idiot decides to run into the wreck he’s already working. It’s uncomfortable, dangerous, and people are stone cold ignorant when something disrupts their daily commute. They get so used to making their daily drives on auto- pilot that a certain percentage of them vapor lock when asked to follow alternate traffic directions.
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Along with the blind-obedience types.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Don’t have the police force work directly from a government agency. Hire them through a private agency that is bound to state law. Then if the tax-payers are unhappy with their service, they can simply hire a new agency that better serves the public good.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:37 PM
I missed your comment. I haven’t read a post from you in days and was worried about you. I still wonder whether I’m too odd or old to be posting here as much as I have, or at all. In the event we don’t exchange posts again, thank you for doing so before. I pray that at least any difficulties are minimized for you, and that all goes as well as possible for you and those whom you love. Take good care.
Loxodonta on April 24, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Dubya Bee on April 24, 2009 at 10:19 PM
I am a strong believer of parent rights…and that parents should be allowed to spank their kid…but where would you draw the line where the parent passes the line of maintaining discipline and order, and abuse?
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 10:27 PM
I agree, the officer shouldn’t be fired, he needs an obvious vacation. But as an officer of the law, he can violate a person’s constitutional rights with his rudeness….the debate in this case is, did he violate the reporter’s rights?
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 10:40 PM
The existing police force is not bound by state law?
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Yeah, I was just clarifying that the private agency would be also because I knew someone would inevitably say, “you mean would gamble away are security to some private agency that makes up their own rules?”
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Over the line…this officer needs to find another career.
AUINSC on April 24, 2009 at 10:48 PM
OK
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 10:48 PM
As were the cars and people in front of, and behind, the reporters’ vehicle. Seems he would have had them move first.
Or, he could have avoided all that time delay, probably encountered at every door he banged upon, by simply saying, “There’s a gas leak in the building, we need you to evacuate NOW!” Seems more reasonable than banging on the door saying, “I need you to get out of your house NOW!”. But then again, what do I know, I’m just a rocket scientist.
But those cars in front of, and behind them weren’t. I would suspect the reporters probably were a bit more experienced than most of the others who were similarly stopped.
Well, given that there were cars both in front of, and behind, the reporters’ vehicle, I would suspect that this couldn’t be laid solely at the reporters’ feet.
OBTW, in Texas (and in most states), if one is rear-ended, it is ALWAYS the fault of the person who hit the other from behind. The circumstances don’t matter, if you hit someone from behind, it’s YOUR fault. Even if the person in front of them did something stupid like came to a dead stop in the middle of a freeway to read a sign (as happened at DFW airport when some idiot stopped his car to read the arrival departure signs and somebody behind him hit him — the guy who hit him was judged at fault).
AZfederalist on April 24, 2009 at 10:51 PM
Coppage Freakoutage.
How’s that AP?
44Magnum on April 24, 2009 at 10:54 PM
You’re going to have to do a little more to support the relevance here. A peace officer trying to do his duty vs. child discipline? I think a cop should shoot a perp in certain cases. I think a parent shouldn’t.
All better now?
The cop has a constitutional duty to not be rude? Please.
Dubya Bee on April 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM
This is the law in PA also. However, some guy pulled out in front of me without looking and I rear-ended him. I had a witness that said it was his fault and I won the case.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 10:58 PM
I would shoot my own child in certain cases.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 11:01 PM
As long as we’re having fun… I’d shoot yours too.
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Yes, IIRC, the DFW Airport was sued by the idiot who stopped in the middle of the airport highway to read the huge signs and lost. The huge signs, which spanned the highway, were promptly removed.
By the way, I always give the benefit to the cop. ALWAYS.
SO go ahead and flame me.
In my long life I have only met one rogue cop out of all of them. There were plenty of times that cops may have shown the curt behavior (that some confuse with smart-ass attitude) but one should never so much as give a snide look to an officer when they are directing some command to you. You don’t know how difficult their job is and you do not know all the dynamics that are going on in the situation. Just respect them, respect their orders and follow directions. I don’t care who you are.
carbon_footprint on April 24, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Well, soon as I have some I’ll let you know. But in the mean time; Do you have any children?
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 11:10 PM
The thing about this too,,, what is this officer neglecting while he’s directing all this attention at a local news person?? Might there not be something more important for him to be doing????
JellyToast on April 24, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Dubya Bee on April 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM
The cop made an oath to uphold and protect the constitution, and to serve the public. Which means he has to be on guard constantly that he isn’t overstepping the borrowed authority given to him by the people, and enforce the law equally to all. So yes, dirt bags have gotten away with murder because cops violated the dirt bag’s constitutional rights with their rudeness. And lets face it…being rude, is minimizing this officer’s behavior…he ran up to a citizen in compliance of his order, and grabbed him from behind. There was no cause to do so…the citizen was in compliance, he was walking toward his vehicle.
My point with the parent…you were making the point we should obey cops no matter what…with your story about the gas leak. And so I was making the point that authority is great and all, but there is a line to what the person in authority can do, without it being considered abuse of power.
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Hmmm…another one of Allah’s “cops suck” threads.
There are around 7-800,000 law enforcement personel in the US. You never see a post about a cop saving someone’s life or when an officer is assaulted or killed but every time a cop lets someone get under their skin and over reacts, BAM!, there it is.
How about an article over how police officers are regularly assaulted and the charges get dropped because it is “a hazard of the job”?
I am not condoning what this officer did but neither am I condeming it. The video starts in the middle of the confrontation making it incomplete.
SnakeintheGrass on April 24, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Both the Officer and the Reporter could have prevented this from being an issue at all. The Officer could have been less aggressive with the Reporter, in the video I see cars parked behind and in front of the Reporters truck, why single out the Reporter. The Reporter could have left with out talking and gone straight to the Police Department and filed a complaint if he felt his rights were violated, trying to persuade a Policeman you have done nothing wrong that is huffing, puffing and shouting orders is not sensible.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 10:27 PM
I don’t really think the argument is about whether the officer should be diciplined for being rude. I think the question is really
#1. Was there a good reason for the officer to demand the reporter leave? What was the reporter doing that was any worse than the dozen or so other gawkers there, aside from having a camera? And really, shouldn’t we want a camera around for the occasional reporting in a free society? Why bust the reporter for being there and “causing a disturbance” or being a hazard when no one else seems to be getting bothered?
#2. Even if you think the reporter should have been forced to leave, is the officer’s reaction of jumping the barrier, running after the reporter, shoving him against the vehicle, handcuffing him and ultimately wrenching the cameraman’s camera to the ground warranted by what appears to be a non-threatening, if snarky, reaction by the reporter?
I’m not so sure I believe either.
And it’s not a constitutional duty not to be rude, it’s a duty not to overstep his authority, especially when that authority is backed up by a gun.
If you’ve got the power that the police have, you have to be extra-special careful not to abuse it.
It’s not about being rude. It’s about, in a free society, if the reporter really HAD to be told to leave and ultimately handcuffed for his behavior.
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 11:15 PM
The problem here is the same as the problem with all these types of videos. What is caught on video looks bad, but it isn’t the whole story.
I firmly believe there are cops who get drunk with power and throw their weight around. But there is too much missing here to say that this is one of them.
First, there was an accident. This looks to be either a bridge or a very narrow shoulder with a guard rail. The police are concerned with everything at this point: making sure victims are safe, calling in a fire engine and ambulance, documenting what has happened, moving the damaged cars out of the way, and getting traffic moving again. All compounded by a very bad spot with not much room for people to get by.
In the middle of this, you have a reporter interviewing people. Now, we know that a free press is vitally important, even if they’re just doing tabloid journalism. But to the police trying to handle the situation, they’re in the way.
Was the cop justified? It’s impossible to say without seeing the entire incident. Generally speaking, if a policeman at an accident scene tells you to move, MOVE. It’s one thing to argue whether they’re using the power of the badge and gun properly, but they have that power, and they will use it.
If you were in charge of this mess, and you told a reporter 7 times to get out of the way, and he was still talking back and telling you what he had a right to do, you just might get a little bothered yourself.
On the other hand, I can’t say the cop is justified just on the basis of this video either. I’ve seen enough of cops to know that the surest way to really tick them off is to argue with them. It might have been just enough to make the guy really lose his temper.
ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on April 24, 2009 at 11:15 PM
I was figuring that somebody from Texas would eventually go look up the law as I did for KY, but if they did, I missed it. Here it is from the Texas Penal code:
Now, I know what you’re thinking: What about the “legal privilege or authority” mentioned in the first sentence? Surely the reporter’s freedom of the press grants him legal privilege or, at least, provide him with a defense if he’s prosecuted?
Nope.
Was the reporter given an order by a peace officer prior to his arrest? Yes.
Was that order “manifestly unreasonable?” Not inconvenient. Not annoying. Not “plain old” unreasonable. “Manifestly” unreasonable I can’t imagine a world in which an order to move out of the immediate area of an accident scene would be considered “manifestly” unreasonable. I vote that such orders would generally be considered reasonable by most folks giving the numerous safety hazards presented.
Was that order promptly obeyed? Nope. The order had to be given multiple times and compliance was not willingly given.
So, it seems to me, that the law was broken. The defenses that could be presented as a justification to the reporter’s failure to comply with the officer’s lawful order weren’t met either. The arrest was lawful. The reporter’s rights were not violated.
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 11:16 PM
You waskawy wabbit
Yeah. Five. And two grandkids.
You’re a coward.
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 11:16 PM
I live in El Paso, and everyone is a Democrat! No, seriously, about 75 – 80% of the population are Democrats. The rest of us just kind of go through the motions when it comes to voting, because 50% of those Dems vote straight party, (too stupid to do otherwise), and so even the Republicans running for office run on the Dem ticket if they want to get elected. Because of this situation, we see idiots like this all the time. You think this guy is bad, you should see our City Council, County Commissioners, and School Boards!
Susanboo on April 24, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Another logical response
SnakeintheGrass on April 24, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Oh, and as for this
Careful, your bias is showing.
SnakeintheGrass on April 24, 2009 at 11:18 PM
And I meant that sincerely, SITG
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 11:18 PM
No! I refuse to believe that you, the judge, say there was once upon a time a bad cop! Never!
Sieg Heil!
yubley on April 24, 2009 at 11:19 PM
I live in Laredo, the ballots here for many offices don’t even have a Republican candidate.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I don’t see the reporters in this video doing a great deal of obstructing here. He’s on the side of the road reporting, which may not be entirely appropriate, but certainly doesn’t seem to be obstructing anything.
And it’s impossible to claim the reporters were obstructing anything if the dozens of cars in front of and behind the reporters’ vehicle aren’t obstructing as well.
I’ve got to think the reporter was singled out because, A) There was a camera present, and was taping something the officer thought was objectionable, and/or B) The reporter got an attitude over being told to leave.
Again, I’m having a hard time figuring out exactly why the reporter was singled out over all the other folks there. Was there some history between them we’re not being told?
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Don’t believe him, he is only trying to play mind games with you so he can kill your children.
NeverLiberal on April 24, 2009 at 11:28 PM
I feel your pain. If I wasn’t so proud that I live in the good old USA, and convinced it was the right thing to do, I wouldn’t even bother to vote. Sometimes I go to the polls and everyone but me is on the Democrat side of the room, (in big elections they split the voters to save time), now that I think about it, maybe they just hate Republicans so much that they have to show their contempt for us by segregating us from everyone else. Isn’t that discrimination?!!
Susanboo on April 24, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 11:16 PM
The one fact that you seem to forget, the reporter was walking away from the cop, in compliance, before being grabbed by the cop. If the reporter stood there arguing face to face, then I would agree, he is not in compliance of an order. But being sassy is not grounds to being arrested.
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Everyone involved in this scenario acted like a massive dick. So, it all balances out.
malan89 on April 24, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Exactly. There doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of middle ground going on this debate.
Maybe the reporter was being an ass. But he was moving toward the vehicle, when the officer had to run up to him and grab him because of his smart mouth. After that, the reporter is against the vehicle, and kind of melts, saying he’ll leave, but the officer doesn’t seem to have enough at that point, and essentially says, “Nah, you boys have pissed me off too much, you’re both going away now” and the handcuffing begins.
I hope we’re not at the point in this country where backtalk is enough to get you arrested.
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 11:39 PM
Read this partial transcript, then comment…
cop: Don’t push that trigger BOY
reporter: He can shoot if he wants to , He can shoot if he wants .
(officer charges the reporter)
cop: Do you want me to arrest you?
No I dont.
cop: Do you want me to arrest you? You get in your truck and you leave/ I’m telling you something, I’m giving you an order
cop: You know what?
I didn’t do anything
cop: do you want to get arrested
No, just let go, I’ll go. It’s fine, I’ll go.
cop: You know what, you’re not going.
I’m not resisting
cop: You’re not going
[later]
cameraman: I can get in the truck and pick him up
jerk cop: GO get in the truck before you go too
GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE TRUCK! GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE TRUCK!
I didn’t do anything
Look I’m not doing anything. Look I’m not doing anything sir
I haven’t done a thing. I’m just trying to leave sir
cameraman: let me get the microphone, excuse me sir
(jerk pushes reporter into fence)
Get Down! Get Down!
(charges the cameraman)
throws camera on the ground, pushes reporter into fence again
Put your hands behind your back!
Put your hands behind your back!
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:39 PM
To anyone trying to cite rules to justify this cops behavior, PLEASE cut the crap. Look at the timing of this video. Look at how fast it all happened.
Don’t try to sell me some crap about the reporter resisting or failing to comply. The damned cop was pinning him against the car. HE COULDN’T HAVE COMPLIED IF HE WANTED TO for crying out loud.
This is a BAD cop with a BAD attitude. If I were the reporter I would sue until that bastard was pisspoor broke. He stepped WAY over any protocol lines, there is not a single line of defense this ‘officer’ can draw upon.
So cut the shit people… maybe he had a bad day, but not all cops are good. This is proof of that.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:41 PM
This “mischief maker” was engaged in a constitutionally protected action that the founding fathers considered so important that it came first in the Bill of Rights.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM
The reporter in the piece that got arrested is very well thought of here in El Paso and does not have a reputation for being a hothead or a troublemaker. He is one of the few in the media that I even like.
No, what you see going on in the video is a lot of Mexican American machismo man stuff against, (dare I say it?), a caucasian male who questioned this cops authority. Never question a man of Mexican descent about his orders, especially if you are not a male of Mexican descent, you will be insulting his manhood! This would have been worse if the reporter had been a caucasian woman! This cop was just being a jerk because Mr. Hunt did not see it his way.
Susanboo on April 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 11:16 PM
The one fact that you seem to forget, the reporter was walking away from the cop, in compliance, before being grabbed by the cop. If the reporter stood there arguing face to face, then I would agree, he is not in compliance of an order. But being sassy is not grounds to being arrested.
Conservative Voice on April 24, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Ah, but the legal requirement listed in the link I posted above isn’t whether or not compliance is “ultimately” given. It’s whether or not the order is promptly obeyed. It clearly was not.
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM
WHY did the cop push the reporter against the fence and yell “GET DOWN”?
Why did the cop go back and push a non-resisting reporter into the fence a second time?
Why did he call the cameraman “boy”?
Because this particular cop is a Class A PRICK.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:42 PM
WHY did the cop push the reporter against the fence and yell “GET DOWN”?
Why did the cop go back and push a non-resisting reporter into the fence a second time?
Why did he call the cameraman “boy”?
Because this particular cop is a Class A PR1CK.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:43 PM
They don’t segregate on party lines here. I don’t think any one knows which way you are voting. I don’t vote straight party line any way. That would be impossible here. I will sometimes vote against the incumbent just in hope of getting rid of the “Patron”.
coldshot on April 24, 2009 at 11:43 PM
I applaud this
police officerreporter and wish more would bust themediapolice who think the laws don’t apply to them.There. Fixed it for ya.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Tell you what: Why don’t you go find a full transcript, then comment…
Dukeboy01 on April 24, 2009 at 11:46 PM
To the contrary. An experienced officer should know better. Most likely Ramirez’ behavior is reflective of the culture of his department. The only reason he’s even being investigated is because it’s on video. Had the news crew not gotten any video the cop’s superiors would have backed him up. The thin blue line and all that.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Show me exactly WHERE in this video that the reporter had any time to “promptly obey LOOK AT THE DAMNED VIDEO.
From the time said “Do you want me to arrest you?” this j@ckass had the reporter pinned against the truck and was holding him with his left hand by the reporters belt. The reporter WAS NOT GIVEN the chance to comply, despite telling the office TWICE that he was going to leave.
Stop defending this cop. Open your damned eyes. I’m sorry for swearing so much but this video gets my blood boiling. LOOK AT THE DAMNED FACTS REALTIME PEOPLE!!!
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Hey Duke Boy… I just typed that transcript straight from the video. Show me where I’m wrong, or stop sucking cop d1ck. Are you a police officer too? That’s the only reason anyone can defend such pisspoor behavior.
See my post above. If there’s something I’ve missed in the transcript, show me.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Who put the emphasis on boy? You, or was it in the link (I ask because you provided no link)
Ugly on April 24, 2009 at 11:49 PM
Jeff, what exactly did the reporter do that was wrong? He WAS leaving the scene. Poncherello got his thing all wadded up and let his machismo get the best of him. Maybe he can get a jury of his peers to give him 12 years in the slammer for violating policies, just like Ramos & Compean got.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:50 PM
I have nothing against anyone in law enforcement, and 99% of the time am on their side, and usually think the media are a big pain, but not in this situation. The cop was clearly being a butthead, and from what I can see, that is pretty much the consensus from everyone involved here in El Paso, where it happened. The reporter was not even charged and the cop is now sitting at a desk, where he can longer verbally or physically abuse innocent bystanders. (just a note, there were a lot of people standing around at this accident scene, as the freeway was shut down for hours, and this reporter was not in anyone’s way).
Susanboo on April 24, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Um, Ugly, did you watch the video at the top of this page? I just typed the words that were said. I put BOY in all caps because I think it was not appropriate or useful to say.
I think anytime you add “boy” to a command, you are instigating, you are taunting. If the cameraman was black we’d probably have an ACLU lawsuit by now.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Maybe El Paso PD needs to switch to decaf?
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:54 PM
I wonder if anyone can make a reasonable argument that this was a race-based reaction? If a white cop did this to a black or hispanic reporter you could bet your sweet patootie that Al Sharpton and Company would be calling for hate crime litigation.
cannonball on April 24, 2009 at 11:55 PM
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 11:47 PM
True enough, and I agree with you to a certain extent, but I’m not as hostile toward police as you seem to be.
I think that–what was it, 20 years on the force?–must have produced some good deeds as well, and probably often in brutal and dangerous situations.
If you’ve perhaps saved some lives by your actions, either directly or indirectly, over your long career, I’m not prepared to throw you to the wolves if this is simply a bad day, or even if you have a lot of bad days.
The question is, as you say, how often does this sort of blurring of the line happen with this officer, and how far does it go when the cameras aren’t around?
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Nah, just a statist who doesn’t understand or is afraid of liberty.
rokemronnie on April 24, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Susanboo on April 24, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Now that’s interesting….
12thMonkey on April 24, 2009 at 11:59 PM
It is done mostly during primaries, but the looks I get from the people manning the polls can just be creepy sometimes. I don’t vote straight party either, but in a primary I have to go to the Republican line so I can vote for my Presidential or Gubernatorial candidate, and then I cannot even vote for dogcatcher because all the candidates running are Democrats or at least registered as such, so they are not on my ballot. It is so screwy for anyone who is not going to vote straight party democrat!
Susanboo on April 25, 2009 at 12:00 AM
Or even worse, stop halfway in a traffic lane as vehicles go by at 70 mph. Oh, wait, those are the cops so I guess by definition they aren’t idiots because as far as you’re concerned whatever a cop does is safe and right.
rokemronnie on April 25, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Because he felt that the reporter disrespected his authority and cops’ egos can’t stand that.
rokemronnie on April 25, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Another thing…
I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I confess, but if I’m an officer about to snap on someone, I’m going to pull up and think things over a little if I have a camera in my face.
If I have a career in law enforcement, I don’t think there’s anything in all of God’s green earth that would get me to knock a camera out of a reporter’s hands.
A camera. That a reporter is holding. While I’m being FILMED.
Holy cats. The neurons just were not firing, were they?
12thMonkey on April 25, 2009 at 12:05 AM
I like being the race that doesn’t use that crutch.
coldshot on April 25, 2009 at 12:05 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »