Texas Cop Uses Stun Gun on 76-Year Old Man for Expired Registration
Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 4 months ago to Government
Oh my, another case of a poor misunderstood policeman just doing his job against the evil citizen.
And the beat (ing) goes on.
And the beat (ing) goes on.
Yes, there are practicalities in all confrontations initiated by police and yes, they are licensed to exert force including your death but that has to stop. And only we can stop it.
OK, Z & K you've almost got me convinced of the state of the police in the USA. But I was brought up to respect the police and expect proper treatment of myself by them. Just how prevalent is this kind of conduct?
More than is acceptable, but not as bad as the headlines make it look. At least in my opinion
I agree as to it being a problem, but have reservations about how large the problem really is.
Lets look at some numbers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...
This link's info is drawn from the 2012 Labor Dept stats, so likely under reported rather than over.
This lists 780,000 police officers.
Finding hard numbers on incidents from a "reputable" source is problematic .Following link is a CATO institute project
http://www.policemisconduct.net/2010-npm...
From January 2010 through December 2010 the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project recorded 4,861 unique reports of police misconduct that involved 6,613 sworn law enforcement officers and 6,826 alleged victims.
4,861 – Unique reports of police misconduct tracked
6,613 - Number of sworn law enforcement officers involved (354 were agency leaders such as chiefs or sheriffs)
6,826 - Number of alleged victims involved
247 – Number of fatalities associated with tracked reports
Interesting thing in this data....
#Victims > #Police involved -- 1.03 slightly over 1
#Vicims > #Incidents -- 1.4/incident
A-Hole rate of 0.8% given those admittedly rough numbers.
P.S. 2010 was the highest year for these incidents
That said, when being pulled over by a police officer in a vehicle, you should pull over to a safe location, turn the vehicle off and put your hands in plain view (typically on the steering wheel) until the police officer comes to the window and you have the first interaction. At that point, you can ask the officer what the problem is and begin to explain your perspective. After the officer has ascertained that you are not a physical threat, you can then ask to exit the vehicle if you believe that is necessary.
The problem in this scenario is that by charging out of the vehicle the officer is immediately put on guard as to a possible threatening situation. From the officer's perspective, he has a vehicle that is past registration - which could be a stolen vehicle or a license plate stolen from another vehicle. Most up to date law enforcement systems will provide the officer info on the vehicle model and color and info on the registered owner. It takes a couple of minutes for the officer to get that info, that's why after they pull you over they often don't immediately come to your window. If you get out and start moving towards the police car, that officer has no idea what is happening and they are going to assume the worst scenario - which seems to have been what happened here.
Is a 76 yr old man a likely threat? Maybe, maybe not, depends on whether he has a weapon and just what kind of shape he's in. Likely not, but if you're a young cop, are you going to bet the rest of your life on no threat?
The cop overreacted, clearly. But Vasquez could have handled the situation differently as well. The cop needs to be sanctioned, for sure, but I'm not going to jump on him as some sort of stormtrooper. He was relatively inexperienced, and likely startled by someone who got out and started moving towards him.
Too many great State and Sheriff officers have been killed by someone they've pulled over. Now police officeres are trained to expect the worst when someone does the unexpected.
That is all I can say because I was not there, and all I really know is what is shown on the video.
Are you a man? Are you a free man? Do you have any self esteem left in you? Do you live in a jail?
not see the same video I think. The man did get out of his car. There is no law stating you can 't. This put your hands on the wheel speak when spoken to nonsense is the kind of thinking that....well I 'm not going to even say it...protect yourselves people. Don 't submit to a roadside body cavity search EVER
To be clear, Mr. Vasquez did nothing, zero, zip, zilch, nada, not one single thing to deserve this beating. What Officer Robinson did is a felony, and he should be held accountable for that felony at least to the same degree that an average citizen would be. When I say "at least to the same degree", I mean that he could, and probably should, be punished more harshly because his crime was done under color of law. That makes this simple battery case an aggravated battery case as far as I am concerned with the aggravating circumstances being that A) Officer Robinson was armed with a deadly weapon and B) the attack was done under color of law giving Mr. Vasquez, or anyone else for that matter, no right to defend himself.
You simply cannot in good conscience assign one single iota of blame for this to Mr. Vasquez. It is all on Officer Robinson. There is no gray area here.
-- They have a tough job.
-- They put their lives on the line.
-- They are underpaid.
-- Always just comply with them, regardless of how wrong they are. If you do, nobody will get hurt.
-- Always show them respect, no matter what they do.
-- etc. etc. etc.
My personal favorite is the old truism that there are only a few bad cops and that we should never judge the cops in general by the well publicized actions of a few. In other words, no matter what happens, do NOT believe your own eyes and ears.
Bad cops CANNOT exist in a vacuum. They are surrounded by law enforcement all day every day, yet it is extremely rare that one cops unprofessional or even criminal actions will ever be acted upon by another cop. It just doesn't happen. The kinds of things that you and I would serve hard time for is considered routine and unworthy of note by these clowns. In cop culture, kicking ass and taking names is encouraged, nevermind how criminal those actions may be.
The way I see it, there are 3 kinds of cops.
Class 1 - The true bad apples who love nothing more than to use that badge to beat the crap out of people as often as possible. A subgroup of Class 1 would be the guys that get off knowing they can get away with all sorts of graft by virtue of a badge and gun. These guys make up a tiny percentage of the police force. For them, it is all about power. Some people are born to be Class 1s and some grow into over time. Either way, these guys are trouble on stilts.
Class 2 - This class makes up the overwhelming majority of the police force. These are the guys that we are supposed to not paint with the broad brush while we are discussing the cops in Class 1. The problem for me is that the guys in Class 1 can not exist within the departments in which they serve if the guys in Class 2 didn't always have their backs. While a Class 2 guy might not be on the take or unnecessarily violent, you can always count on him to A) look the other way, B) lie on the witness stand or on official reports, or C) at a very minimum remain silent when the Class 1 guys are doing their thing. Within cop culture, it is always an Us vs. Them thing, and no matter how egregious the action any cop does, a Class 2 guy will never stand up for an average citizen against another cop. Law enforcement simply does not apply to other cops, no matter what. Put another way, there just aren't enough Serpicos who will speak up from behind the Blue Wall.
Class 3 - The new guys. Most (not all) cops start out as bright eyed hero wannabes who just want to do good in the world. They do their training, then they become probationary officers for awhile as they hit the streets. Under veteran officers, they learn quickly that to survive as a cop, you always back up another cop. ALWAYS. These guys lose their cherry soon enough and quickly find themselves as either a Class 2 guy in the brotherhood or as a civilian doing something else with their lives. No matter how well meaning these guys are, they don't stay Class 3 for very long. They either accept cop culture and or they reject it within the first couple months in uniform.
Now, none of what I am saying here is backed up by any research whatsoever, but does anybody really deny the truth of it? Bad cops do not exist in a vacuum. They just don't. To me, that means you have a few criminals in uniform and a whole bunch of guys who will aid and abet the few at every turn.
What's worse is that the culture of supporting cops no matter what they do extends far beyond the ranks of the police. Every "tough on crime" legal eagle, superstar wannabe DA will stand up for the cops. Every politician will stand by the cops. Every judge will stand by the cops. Pretty much every time a cop finds himself in trouble, the system is rigged to get them out of trouble. In a cop's word vs. an average citizen accuser's word, the cop wins 100 times out of 100. Cops only lose when their actions/words are recorded. Absent video or audio, a cop always get the benefit of the doubt with plausible deniability.
Follow what happens from the dashcam footage in the story above. Then ask yourself a few questions. Was that officer right to initiate violence against that man? Forget that he is 76. I mean ANY man. Did the man do anything at all to deserve that attack? Will that officer be punished? How will he be punished? Restricted duty, suspension, additional training, criminal sanctions? My money says some weak administrative punishment and no criminal charge whatsoever. Further, the only reason he will get any punishment at all is that this dashcam video is embarassing to the PD. Without that, nothing at all would happen to this guy. My money says this cop gets a wrist slap and no criminal charge.
Now, tell me where I am wrong.
Yet every such act of heedless police brutality just feeds the public's antipathy, leading to ever more brutality, much as U.S. foreign policy of endless war breeds resisters we call terrorists.
It is worrisome that our society resorts to violence as the first step in any confrontation. That is how civilizations end.
Can reason reverse this self-destructive emotional poison? Can rational values be achieved on a seedbed of irrational destruction? Can resolution replace conflict, reparations replace revenge, rationality reverse insanity?
It is up to us to affirm and to continue infusing the culture with those rational and non-violent principles. People want to live, and to live free. Respect for the individual is key. Hold that focus in the face of encroaching madness. Don't let it go.
That's not showing my cop manhood respect. Think I'll get my old prison job stick out of my car trunk.
The good ole' days! That's when cops were really manly men!
Hey, you talkin' to me?
Whack! Whack! Whack!
I don't have to take that, ole' geezer!
Whack!
And let that be a lesson to ya.
I was once what you could call a prison cop, since our trainers liked to call corrections officers "the largest police force in Alabama."
Don't care to see a bully with a badge. I never was one. Did get into a few violent situations though. Almost got killed once.
Either way the cop should be fired, arrested for assault and put in jail for no less than 90 days.
You may not win, but at least a judge won't beat you up for arguing with them.
"Fascinating. This act of unjustified police brutality brings out all the worst in some of the commenters here. Just look at the extreme violence and nastiness proposed, the very same mentality as the cop's.
.".. No wonder cops worry for their own safety, knowing such attitudes exist among the populace. No wonder they view everyone as a potential enemy. And with U.S. policy of preemptive strikes against any number of countries for no good reason at all, the 'shoot first, sort out later' practice becomes legitimized.
"We're witnessing here the end of civilization as we knew it and the onset of total tyranny. Hello, Orwell's 1984. ..."
It will take an enormous feat of volitional consciousness and conscious volition to reverse this accelerating disintegration. With the majority swept along into more and more hostility, can we find 100 monkeys of rationality?
Either way the cop should be fired, arrested for assault and put in jail for no less than 90 days.
Civil Suit: Title 42 USC sec 1983 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4...
That being said, this officer clearly needs to be able to evaluate a suspect better. This isn't a 260-lb youngster who looked like he could play linebacker in the NFL. And its pretty clear by his attitude that he has a hair trigger - I'd advocate anger management counseling for him and mandate ride-a-longs for a year before sending him back out on his own.
2. If that cop can't evaluate the situation any better than this knuckledragging fool did, why would you want him on the police force at all? Are you suggesting that a 23 year old violent thug with no common sense is the kind of raw material that can be trained into being a good cop? Really?
3. If you or I did to Mr. Vasquez what Officer Robinson did, we'd be charged with aggravated battery and very likely serve some jail time. What Officer Robinson did is a crime, and by definition, that makes him a criminal. On what planet, is a good idea to do some mamby pamby anger management training and a few ride-a-longs before unleashing this terrorist back onto the community?
If Mr. Vasquez were a 260 lb youngster, Officer Robinson's actions would still be criminal. What freakin' difference does it make that he was a frail 76 year old man? Mr. Vasquez never did a single thing that warranted being tackled and tasered. Are you suggesting that it is OK to beat the crap out of every 260 lb dude for no justifiable reason because a cop is a pantywaist who is afraid of his own shadow? I'm sorry, but the stupidity of that comment really makes me angry. That you immediately start to divvy up blame onto both parties and advocate for some insignificant administrative punishment while leaving this thug in uniform is sickening to me. He should be fired immediately and charged with the crimes that he is obviously guilty of. He has no business with a gun and a badge. It is as simple as that.
2. First, refer to #1 above. Then re-read my comments where I suggest that this officer needs additional training before being returned to duty. I am not excusing him for his overreaction, but again, I can not place 100% responsibility on him, as it was Mr. Vasquez' actions that initiated the confrontation.
3. Then I advise you to offer your legal services to Mr. Vasquez and sue the police department. But the courts do NOT treat police officers acting in their official capacity the same as common citizens, so your argument there is a red herring. As for the rest of your viewpoint, you refuse to allow any of the blame for this situation to fall on the actions of Mr. Vasquez. I wish you well in arguing that as a litigator in a court of law.
"...actions would still be criminal".
You obviously do not understand either criminal or civil law. If you wanted to go after this officer for battery or aggravated battery, you are going to face the stout opposition of self-defense. You are also going to have to explain what necessitated your client to exit from the vehicle in the absence of a police directive to do so. As counsel, you are going to have to explain why your client didn't immediately obey a law enforcement directive to pull over. It will be the same if you attempt to charge the officer with excessive use of force. Let me know when you win your lawsuit and collect your payout.
Again, I think both parties in this matter hold partial blame for the incident and both should use it as a learning opportunity and move on. Mr. Vasquez will be more attentive to law enforcement requests, and the officer will gain valuable experience on how to deal with people.
Mr. Vasquez will be paid a lot of money by the city to settle his suit and that city's citizens will pay a lot more through their taxes to cover the settlement or increased insurance. The cop may get a slap on the wrist, but his buddies in the locker room will slap him on the back and tell him he did good. Then he'll continue on with his career there or find another job with another city. He might even move on to a Fed job where he can really screw with those evil 'Constitutionalists'.
I do have one question for you, though. You seem hell bent on blaming Mr. Vazquez for this beating by continually citing the fact that he stepped out of his car. My question is regarding exactly which part of the criminal code you think Mr. Vasquez violated by stepping out of his car? My contention is that while it may not necessarily be advisable, it is not against the law. Further, while he was out his car, he made no aggressive moves whatsoever toward Officer Robinson. You and Robbie have continually repeated that claim, but after viewing the video a dozen times or so, I never once saw anything remotely aggressive that Mr. Vasquez did. Perhaps you would like to cite the exact time within the video that proves that Mr. Vasquez needed to have his teeth kicked in because I would love to see this phantom aggressive move you keep talking about. Keep in mind that you saying it's true and it actually being true aren't necessarily the same thing. The actual facts matter more than the convenient ones that you have invented in your mind to be able to make this absurd argument of yours. Anybody with eyes, ears and a brain can see that you are wrong.
Also, I have to say that I haven't laughed so hard in the last few months as when I read this gem from you. "... you are going to face the stout opposition of self-defense." I swear that I can't tell whether you are a comedian, a talking head for one of the major political parties or just some starry eyed cop groupie/apologist when you say something that blatantly ridiculous. With that, you simply have no credibility here. You just can't say something that stupid and be taken seriously.
A couple of years ago I stopped my truck and horse trailer some distance away from a night-time police action on the road ahead. I did not exit my vehicle, nor did I move my truck to anywhere near the police. Eventually one of the cops, who had been holding a flashlight that I could occasionally see blinking, came back to my truck and asked why I had not obeyed his order to move forward. He said I could be arrested. "Why did you make me walk way back here?"
I had been assuming the road was closed, and that I would need to turn my rig. Instead it was a police roadblock checking vehicles for some unknown purpose. "Haven't you ever been through a roadblock before?" the cop asked. Well, I said that I had, but that was really incorrect. Before I was driving a car, and it was daylight. I didn't think to mention that to the cop.
Later I asked a cop elsewhere about what had happened, and learned that if I HAD tried to turn around I would at least have had my tires shot out. Don't know what I would have done with the horses if that had happened.
I'm not sure this is a case of anger management as much as it is youth and inexperience. The officer is 23.
I don't abide fools.
I do not and will not blindly obey.
I will not kneel. I will not bow.
I abhor bullies.
I maintain that I have the right to be left alone.
As to obey and let the court sort it out, that costs me money, time, and hassle--none of which I have an excess of to waste on some ignorant badge's wrong assumptions and actions.
I've also begun researching total video, audio, and GPS auto protection with automatic cloud storage. I even thought of a sticker for my rear window and driver's window with the comment, "Smile, you're on Youtube."
On another note regarding video/audio recording of the police, why is it that cops are so dead set on not wearing body mics and cams as part of their uniforms?
Does anyone doubt that if Officer Darren Wilson's account of what happened in Ferguson, MO, the day he shot Michael Brown were caught on video/audio that town would not have burned? I don't know if Officer Wilson's account is true or not, but I would love to be able to judge for myself without having to simply take his word for it. If Michael Brown really did the stuff that Officer Wilson said he did and it was recorded on video, that town would not have gone up in flames.
How about the shooting of Robert Crawford III? That was the guy toting around a BB gun in a WalMart. Police claim that they told him to drop the weapon, but the store surveillance video suggests they came in hard and immediately gunned him down on sight. I understand their aggressive stance with him, but I am not sold on the need to pull the trigger the nanosecond they saw him. It did not appear to me that there was ever any attempt to communicate with him at all. If they did try and he reacted badly, then let the chips fall where they fall, but in my heart of hearts, I don't think they ever gave him a chance.
Same thing with Tamir Rice. I understand the hard approach they took, although I think there were better ways of handling that situation than driving up within 10 feet of a suspect in possession of a gun and screaming for 2 seconds before gunning him down. Doing it the way that they did was absolutely guaranteed to get somebody killed that day be it the cop(s) or the dumbass kid with the pellet gun. The better way top have handled that call would have been by pulling up 50 yards away with and AR-15 and a bullhorn from behind the cover of the squad car, as there was no imminent threat at that time.
I wish, in both cases (Crawford III and Tamir Rice) that the squad car and/or the officers had video/audio recording devices to help corroborate the officer's stories in those cases. In Rice's case, I'd also like to know what the cops were talking about and doing in the 4 minutes when they left him there bleeding to death. The video from a distance proves that they certainly were not making any attempt to administer first aid to the 12 year old kid they just shot in the gut.
The only reason this case with Mr. Vasquez gets any attention at all is that is recorded for all to see on the dashcam video. Without that, Officer Robinson writes up a bogus report with a few choice falsehoods, and WHAMMO, Mr. Vasquez is convicted of assaulting an officer of the law, resisting arrest, and whatever other BS they could think of all the while making Robinson the department hero for the day. Further, the statistics mentioned by Technocracy in an earlier post get padded a little more.
Recording devices would weed out the trash from our police force more surely and accurately than an army of internal affairs cops who also wear the badge. Additionally, it would be a helluva lot cheaper to buy that tech than to continually pay out the kinds of settlements that Mr. Vasquez is sure to get. If cops know that their Blue Wall of silence has effectively been dismantled, then the bad cops would be gone and the supposed good cops who never had the balls or brains to rat out the bad ones could be real good cops again.
You know that moral high ground you think that you have? Well, you just lost it. Hope you're proud of yourself. It takes a real concerted effort to say something that dumb.
How about this for an idea. How about we give Officer Robinson some anger management classes and more training, as you suggested in another post, before we turn him loose on the public again? When he kills somebody the next time around, how are you going to feel about him then?
I am not overreacting at all. As far as I am concerned, Officer Robinson's badge does not provide him with any kind of shield when he breaks the same laws that you and I would go to jail for. The fact that you would excuse or somehow rationalize his behavior is actually scarier than what he did. Exactly how much tyranny are you willing to accept?