Police Takedown Outside Bayside Performance

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by xXSupa

Lol, Montague. I don't believe a word that comes out of that idiot's mouth.

why? feel free to PM

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by kr4l

Taking a wild guess he was the guy in the video on the side

So... came out to check the scene well after the actual takedown. Got it.

[GLOW]

dammit stupid PC erased my response...

Originally Posted by Soundy

So... came out to check the scene well after the actual takedown. Got it.

he was sitting on the side from the very start, you can see his leg on the block

coles notes of what I observed:
can't tell if cop told guy to get down or not, but he came in to do an entering throw, guy didn't have his hands up, he brought them up to brace for impact when cop came up on him.
1st knee was to roll him over
2nd was the actual knee to gut, can't tell how resistive/stiff guy was but could argue it was used for compliance (or argue it was unnecessary)
other knees like 1st are for compliance by putting their weight on him so he can't move/get up (knee control is used in martial arts)
what surprised me is he stretched out the arm to take out the slack for body/arm control (also martial arts) for the cuff

all this would be excessive IMO if he was only pulled over there with no interaction prior, but there was a story before this it seems. IMO techniques used are for body control/compliance without "harm" to the guy i.e. didn't need an ambulance-not trying to break anything, not using him as a punching bag (minus the 1 knee).

for what it's worth, the entering throw was done pretty softly. it's a common move in a few martial arts to unbalance someone and it can be done HARD. the cop's was just enough to put the guy on the ground like a shove to the ground vs getting him in the air and slamming him hard on the pavement.

could be the cold medication i'm currently on , but this doesn't seem like an unexpected reaction if the dude was being chased by the cops in a dangerous situation.

[bcrdukes]

That beating

[originalhypa]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

why? feel free to PM

Because #fuckthepolice?

Is it still cool to hate on authority figures?

[xXSupa]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

why? feel free to PM

There was a time period where my videos got a lot of exposure on the news. Montague basically released a statement saying how he's seen my videos, and doesn't believe they can ticket any of the other drivers because most of their actions are just "bad habits." You guys know that I upload videos for entertainment purposes, and I'm not trying to have tickets handed out for the most parts. However, he then threatened to give ME a ticket, saying that the one thing they can ticket for is "misuse of horn."

I honk a lot, I get that. But completely turning a blind eye on the other drivers and instead chooses to threaten me... That, I don't get. And plus, it just so happens that every time I honk, I upload a video of it because there's probably bad driving involved, making it look like I honk way more than I actually do.

I have nothing against cops, pretty neutral to say the least. There are good cops and bad cops, and although I don't really have that much experience dealing with cops, I've definitely seen a few of each.

[Geist]

In other news, Bayside sales up 30% !

[RabidRat]

Originally Posted by bananana

Well theres no point making assumptions about what happened previously. I just feel like a traffic violation is not enough to warrant throwing a relatively complaint guy on the ground, kicking him a few times, the knee to the back, throwing his helmet -- which probably needs replacement and kicking his phone after he is already in handcuffs. The law is designed to punish this guy, breaking his shit out of spite isn't supposed to be part of that punishment.

Those were exactly my problems with this: there was no justification for assaulting this person when they were in full compliance, and there was no justification for damaging property: the helmet is completely unusable now after being thrown. Probably the phone as well.

This police officer's shown criminal lack of judgement and probable psychological problems. For the safety of the public he should definitely be terminated, effectively immediately. And to think he's currently armed with a deadly weapon. Jesus.

[swiftshift]

Much force..
Seems brutal

[RabidRat]

Originally Posted by RabidRat

Those were exactly my problems with this: there was no justification for assaulting this person when they were in full compliance, and there was no justification for damaging property: the helmet is completely unusable now after being thrown. Probably the phone as well.

This police officer's shown criminal lack of judgement and probable psychological problems. For the safety of the public he should definitely be terminated, effectively immediately. And to think he's currently armed with a deadly weapon. Jesus.

I like how Sunfighter's hit the fail button on my post. Nice. Because society tells you it's uncool to ever take a negative stance against police actions? Come on man. This isn't blanket hate: there is such a thing as staying objective and evaluating these things on a case-by-case basis.

The police are given far too much authority not to set a high bar when it comes to them using their judgement. If there's no immediate threat to them or the public, there is no need for violent confrontation. Period. If the rider could possibly have been reaching for a knife or a gun, yes take him down. If he's just standing there just waiting to be arrested, then explain to me how a violent takedown was unavoidable. That should've been the last resort.

We don't need violent hot-heads on the police force. If they can't be cool and collected, they're no good to us. There are plenty of other folks who'd love to step up to this role: we should give someone else the opportunity.

[RabidRat]

Reading through some other posts in the thread, it's a little disturbing that it's like some of you are after blood.

We have a justice system responsible for penalizing people for their actions through due process. It's up to the courts to decide what to do with the rider, not the police. It's completely irrelevant to what happened in the video, whether he "deserved it". You can't just be beating people up in the streets, that's insane!

[DragonChi]

As much as I do think that guy deserved it for speeding through a park. No different then running around with a knife, both that and his bike are equally as deadly. You make a good point in regards to the police enforcing the law, and not being the judge.

However, we can both agree that he was non-compliant previously. How do you know he didn't throw his hands up in the air to get the cops close to pull a knife? Especially given the immediate information that he was evading police multiple times.

[RabidRat]

Originally Posted by DragonChi

As much as I do think that guy deserved it for speeding through a park. No different then running around with a knife, both that and his bike are equally as deadly. You make a good point in regards to the police enforcing the law, and not being the judge.

However, we can both agree that he was non-compliant previously. How do you know he didn't throw his hands up in the air to get the cops close to pull a knife? Especially given the immediate information that he was evading police multiple times.

Isn't rushing the guy even more dangerous? What if he pulled a knife as they came at him?

Tbh I think the best way would've been for the police to pull out their guns, keep their distance, tell him to slowly empty his pockets, then tell him to get on the ground and put his hands behind his back before putting handcuffs on him. Then no one gets hurt and we're not endangering the police officers' lives, which I do think is paramount. But the only way this works is for our police to remain calm and not squeeze off a couple rounds in a panic. Not sure that this particular police officer could've been trusted.

[DragonChi]

^ You'd think they'd have some sort of training like that. Having guns drawn is a serious step in escalation, I don't know which would have been worse.

That scenario reminds me of that World Star Hip Hop video in the NSFW thread where the cop shoots the undercover cop several times. Some officers shouldn't be police.

[Sunfighter]

Originally Posted by RabidRat

This police officer's shown criminal lack of judgement and probable psychological problems. For the safety of the public he should definitely be terminated, effectively immediately. And to think he's currently armed with a deadly weapon. Jesus.

The video captures a single moment in a single day of the career of this officer. Whether the moment genuinely reflects the nature (and ongoing behaviours) of that officer's career is unclear. Suggesting that the officer be terminated based on this clip then seems iniquitous.

if the actions are inappropriate (as determined by the VPD board, city and, if the individual retains a lawyer, the court) and are part of a bigger quilt of similar and equally inappropriate behaviours then certainly the officer should be exposed to the penalties inscribed within law to curtail such conduct.

Based on what I see here it's disingenuous to terminate the officer and doing so would leave a costly vacancy in the VPD ranks. If the appropriate step is to terminate (which I don't believe it is) that's for the VPD/city/courts to determine and the individual in the video is fully entitled to pursue his legal options and not for a second would I discourage him from doing so.

I'm certainly not a blind supporter of law enforcement but based on what i know of their daily experiences and some of the things that they are exposed to on a daily/weekly basis I am more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. That said - the individual in this video has every opportunity now to pursue his legal rights and I certainly hope that he does because the VPD board/city/courts will ultimately make clear whether the behaviours in the video are compliant.

[Traum]

The problem with police board reviews is, they are either conducted by the same police force, or if the case ends up being high profile, the PD in question will hire another supposedly reputable police big shot from a different PD, say the chief officer from a different municipality, to lead the investigation. At that point, you end up having someone from the police force conducting a review for another police force, and the public generally doesn't have very trust in that kind of process. The review will be considered as biased and preferential to the police.

Even when the court steps in, judges tend to side with the police more often, citing them as more "reputable" and "trust-worthy". Personally, I do not agree with this at all, and I view the police's side of the story as just exactly that -- a different side of the story that is not automatically more or less believable than the other.

For the benefit of the public and the police officers themselves, this is why I think wearable cameras (with audio) should become a standard issue item and that they get used when the officer is on duty. They still won't explain the rationale behind the action, and there is always room for people to exploit that loophole. But it will eliminate a major aspect of the guesswork.

[Sunfighter]

Originally Posted by Traum

For the benefit of the public and the police officers themselves, this is why I think wearable cameras (with audio) should become a standard issue item and that they get used when the officer is on duty. They still won't explain the rationale behind the action, and there is always room for people to exploit that loophole. But it will eliminate a major aspect of the guesswork.

This I completely and totally agree with. As you state, it's protection mechanism for the officers AND the public.

[Geist]

It is also unclear if the 'victim' had prior incidents that showed up as they were running his plates. I'm just profiling here, but someone who appears to be carrying 2-3 phones, and squidding on a bike doesn't exactly seem like your usual law abiding citizen. Perhaps at the point the officers response seemed reasonable at the time. I'm not condoning/condemning it, But I'm staying away from kneejerk reactions base on a video, with one view, and no audio.
Even as a audience to the spectacle, you have to remain objective and retain a broad perspective lest you have an ill informed mob mentality.
As far as I'm concerned it will just put the rest of us under the microscope aswell, certainly not the attention or scrutiny we need at the moment.

[DragonChi]

Originally Posted by Traum

The problem with police board reviews is, they are either conducted by the same police force, or if the case ends up being high profile, the PD in question will hire another supposedly reputable police big shot from a different PD, say the chief officer from a different municipality, to lead the investigation. At that point, you end up having someone from the police force conducting a review for another police force, and the public generally doesn't have very trust in that kind of process. The review will be considered as biased and preferential to the police.

Even when the court steps in, judges tend to side with the police more often, citing them as more "reputable" and "trust-worthy". Personally, I do not agree with this at all, and I view the police's side of the story as just exactly that -- a different side of the story that is not automatically more or less believable than the other.

For the benefit of the public and the police officers themselves, this is why I think wearable cameras (with audio) should become a standard issue item and that they get used when the officer is on duty. They still won't explain the rationale behind the action, and there is always room for people to exploit that loophole. But it will eliminate a major aspect of the guesswork.

In the Robert Dziekański case, they investigated with Queens Counsel, not another PD. In the US it might be different, as the only other place I've seen another police department used in an investigation is in a certain Netflix documentary.

Also relevant to the police body camera discussion:
Do Police Body Cameras Really Work? - IEEE Spectrum

tl;dr
They sometimes work, sometimes don't. They don't know why. Even if the officer wears a camera part of the time, it's shown to reduce complaints of excessive force by 90%.

[capt_slo]

Originally Posted by RabidRat

We don't need violent hot-heads on the police force. If they can't be cool and collected, they're no good to us.

This.


The takedown can be debated all day - many will believe it was warranted, many will not.

Chucking his helmet and the complete disrespect they showed to his personal property - after he was subdued - is bullshit. It was petty and reactionary because they couldn't control their own "fuck this piece of shit scumbag" impulse and adrenaline.

That kind of lack of self discipline can escalate into something quite nasty over time if unchecked.

[Dragon-88]

One comment I saw through facebook but cant find anymore was that there was one guy that saw the rider riding on Fraser, then poping into the side streets to later pop out and pass cars in the left turn lane, all while a unmarked cop was following. So obviously there was something going on.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Dragon-88

One comment I saw through facebook but cant find anymore was that there was one guy that saw the rider riding on Fraser, then poping into the side streets to later pop out and pass cars in the left turn lane, all while a unmarked cop was following. So obviously there was something going on.

That was the same comment made by the police officer that WASN'T there.

Take it for what it's worth.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by Soundy

You know this because you were there? You can hear what's being said?

Originally Posted by Bayside68

yes i was standing 20 feet away

HAHAHAHA

[GabAlmighty]

I have no mirrors on my banshee, and it's a 2 stroke... No way in fuck i'm gonna hear or see a siren unless i'm making a lane change.

On ya, I can legally ride my 2 stroke quad around town in Yellowknife

[DKaz]

The guy endangered kids. He got what he deserved.