Off Duty Cop Attempts to Arrest Man for Littering?

[spat]

No you don’t get it.
Not that you can just mail the ticket either
And here is the photo of Castillo body . Look where his hand is

https://deadstate.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/castile-.jpg

And here is the article of the court case:

Philando Castile’s “C-grip” was for his gun, not seat belt, expert testifies

A third account of where Philando Castile’s gun was found when officers removed his wounded body from his vehicle last summer was provided to the jury Wednesday.

www.twincities.com

If the officer had disarmed him, he would still be alive .

If he had disarmed the officer he would be too.

I bet he was in fear for his life when the officer reached for his weapon too. Philando's big mistake was not shooting first I guess.


There is no justification for that officers actions. None. The fact that you think there is means you probably shouldn't have a badge either.


Also, if you can mail a ticket for running a red light, you can mail a ticket for anything the driver would be allowed to drive away for.

There is no justification for risking everyone's life on the side of the road just so you can create a pretext for an otherwise impermissible search.

 

[Tisto]

Congratulations. You have proven, in my opinion anyway, that you are a bad cop.

I am SO thankful the State Police officer that responded when I called about hitting a deer was more like GOPerfect than you. Someone like you would probably have me arrested or shot for littering, hunting without a license, and carrying.
The nice officer showed professionalism, kindness, and understanding. I should have called the local HQ to compliment her behavior but I got caught up in trying to get the car fixed.

He illustrated that he was a bad cop a year ago when he got his panties in a knot about ammo cans in a car and the fishing expedition he was willing to justify through his "logic" that ammo cans more often than not contain ammunition.

I will tell you one thing TrueBeliever, your screen name fits you. You certainly seem to believe every bit of that spoon fed bullshit you've swallowed about Us vs Them / the Thin Blue Line and all the associated garbage. Get over yourself. You are no more special than anyone else, and the only reason you entered law enforcement is because you love the feeling of power. The only difference between you and kathy Hochul and her dreams of dictatorship is the fact that she does it with a microphone and a pen.

I'm glad I never get any closer to the Rotten Apple than I am right now. I wouldn't want to run into you. Bad cops are bad for the whole society.

 

[Tisto]

As far as the DETECTIVE that is the subject of this thread, I have to ask, how did he make it that far ? I find it highly improbable that all throughout his career he didn't have an issue that revealed this obvious God complex of his. Fucktards like him need to be rooted out at the first sign of trouble. He should have learned the phrase " Welcome to Wal Mart " years ago.

You want to know why the police don't get any respect anymore ? It's because of the actions of dillholes like him. They give the entire profession a bad name.


I've had many encounters with law enforcement. And during nearly every one of them, the cop KNEW there was AT LEAST one weapon in the vehicle. Most of the time, it was openly visible. Only the officers that had an issue where they felt the need to project their power ever made an issue out of it. Those that did are the ones that knew the least about the legality of what they were looking at.

 

[Truebeliever]

If he had disarmed the officer he would be too.

I bet he was in fear for his life when the officer reached for his weapon too. Philando's big mistake was not shooting first I guess.


There is no justification for that officers actions. None. The fact that you think there is means you probably shouldn't have a badge either.


Also, if you can mail a ticket for running a red light, you can mail a ticket for anything the driver would be allowed to drive away for.

There is no justification for risking everyone's life on the side of the road just so you can create a pretext for an otherwise impermissible search.

Actually, that’s what the officer believed he was doing. And it’s possible he was .
If the officer disarmed him, he would be alive today. Instead the officer , despite suspecting him of being the armed robber in the picture, said no problem if you don’t reach for it. Castillo hand was reaching in the direction of the gun when he was shot — that’s not even question

 

[Truebeliever]

He illustrated that he was a bad cop a year ago when he got his panties in a knot about ammo cans in a car and the fishing expedition he was willing to justify through his "logic" that ammo cans more often than not contain ammunition.

I will tell you one thing TrueBeliever, your screen name fits you. You certainly seem to believe every bit of that spoon fed bullshit you've swallowed about Us vs Them / the Thin Blue Line and all the associated garbage. Get over yourself. You are no more special than anyone else, and the only reason you entered law enforcement is because you love the feeling of power. The only difference between you and kathy Hochul and her dreams of dictatorship is the fact that she does it with a microphone and a pen.

I'm glad I never get any closer to the Rotten Apple than I am right now. I wouldn't want to run into you. Bad cops are bad for the whole society.

I was correct on that one. Ammo cans are reasonable suspicion at a minimum that there is ammo in them if not probable cause. And was there ammo inside?
I am discussing legalities here. It’s that simple . Yes ammo cans can be used for other things, but it’s still created probable cause there is ammo inside.
Instead of calling me a bad cop, maybe just thank me for explaining this legality to you. And then maybe you won’t carry ammo cans around in a car and give a legal reason for a search if you are prohibited by law from possessing ammo.
A lot of people here just don’t understand differences between “probable cause”, “reasonable suspicion “, and just “mere suspicion”, “beyond a reasonable doubt and “ in fact committed “. And clearly you are one of those people.
I am explaining police powers . If they should act on those powers and show discretion is a different question.
Do you understand how low of standard probable cause is ? It’s a 51% chance the person did it or the evidence is there.
Reasonable suspicion is simply being able to articulate why you suspected something .
You guys seem to get that confused with the other two: “ beyond a reasonable doubt” and “ in fact committed”.
If I was the “ bad cop”, I would not be explaining this to you and let you get yourself in trouble.

 

[Truebeliever]

I get the hint that a lot of cops treat everyone without a badge as a suspect for something.

I also get the hint that if "officer safety" was a valid concern, then traffic stops would be eliminated for anything short of a felony.

Just mail the owner a ticket for anything else.

Since traffic stops are the single most dangerous thing cops do, and they haven't eliminated them despite it being cheap and easy, then "officer safety" is just an excuse, and one that shouldn't be tolerated.

And traffic stops and stops for the small stuff is how major criminals get caught. And officer safety is a balance of that and doing enforcement.

 

[GOPerfect]

You are completely wrong. If the officer has detained someone on probable cause of any infraction or reasonable suspicion of a crime , they can disarm thst person . Heck, they can even put that person in handcuffs .. And it’s completely constitutional.
The constitution protects against “ unreasonable searches and seizures”. SCOTUS has ruled that what I stated above is reasonable while that person is being legally detained.

The question/statement was about traffic stops. Simple traffic infractions. Not a person under arrest. A traffic ticket. I also stated that if the simple traffic violation grew into something more, I would proceed in a different manner.

Just because you can disarm a citizen at a traffic stop, does not mean you need to.

 

[kev74]

Being that a— hole is often a point of view.
Watch this CCW person ( assuming he has one) tell his war story and ask should he face 20 years in jail. Or honestly serious jail time for his actions — it’s all in your point of view


If you don’t feel for this guy, you don’t have a daughter -lol
And most of you would do half of what he did ATLEAST

That guy is a fucking retard. He admitted to breaking into two different wrong homes, assault and battery, property distruction, attempting to conceal his misdeeds (wipe everything down), and involved 2 other people including his son in his moronic adventure.

Thinking any of his actions have any redeeming quality is telling of your character.

 

[GOPerfect]

As far as the DETECTIVE that is the subject of this thread, I have to ask, how did he make it that far ? I find it highly improbable that all throughout his career he didn't have an issue that revealed this obvious God complex of his. Fucktards like him need to be rooted out at the first sign of trouble. He should have learned the phrase " Welcome to Wal Mart " years ago.

You want to know why the police don't get any respect anymore ? It's because of the actions of dillholes like him. They give the entire profession a bad name.


I've had many encounters with law enforcement. And during nearly every one of them, the cop KNEW there was AT LEAST one weapon in the vehicle. Most of the time, it was openly visible. Only the officers that had an issue where they felt the need to project their power ever made an issue out of it. Those that did are the ones that knew the least about the legality of what they were looking at.

The female officer hints a few times on her body cam that the Detective is garbage and has created serious issues in the past.

 

[Truebeliever]

The question/statement was about traffic stops. Simple traffic infractions. Not a person under arrest. A traffic ticket. I also stated that if the simple traffic violation grew into something more, I would proceed in a different manner.

Just because you can disarm a citizen at a traffic stop, does not mean you need to.

Correct. Absolutely. But we are talking the legalities and not how the officer should use his discretion . If someone told me they are a CCW ( ie armed) on a simple traffic stop, it’s not a big deal. But legally I could have disarmed them during the stop. And I probably would have if I was the cop in the Castillo incident because there was more.
I am explaining what is legal for the officer to do. We had a piece of s—- that would write nuns and church goers tickets. What he did was legal but everyone else thought it was wrong .

 

[OwnTheRide]

Nearly 700k LEO's in the country. So in order to label just 1% of them as idiots, there would need to be 7k videos pointed them out.

Well, no. Only some very small percentage of people record encounters. Let's say 1%. So, if there are 700k LEOs, and 1% are bad, and 1% of people are recording encounters, then you would only need 70 videos to imply that 1% of LEOs are said idiots.

YouTube certainly has more than 70 videos of bad LEOs. Heck, I suspect they probably have more than 7000. Suggesting this problem is much larger than anyone wants to actually admit.

p.s. Excellent choice - Redbreast is my favorite whiskey!

 

[Truebeliever]

Well, no. Only some very small percentage of people record encounters. Let's say 1%. So, if there are 700k LEOs, and 1% are bad, and 1% of people are recording encounters, then you would only need 70 videos to imply that 1% of LEOs are said idiots.

YouTube certainly has more than 70 videos of bad LEOs. Heck, I suspect they probably have more than 7000. Suggesting this problem is much larger than anyone wants to actually admit.

p.s. Excellent choice - Redbreast is my favorite whiskey!

Again, most of those videos are edited and often the commentator doesn’t know the law as well as they pretend to— like the audit the audit channel is often wrong. They make a lot of false accusations and often misapply the law.
And your math doesn’t compute to reality either. 7000 videos can have the same officers involved and the officer was often right. There are millions of police/public interactions every year.

 

[OwnTheRide]

They make a lot of false accusations and often misapply the law.

As do the LEOs in the videos. The difference is, when an LEO does it, someone else loses their freedom.

We have both seen countless egregious examples of LEOs behaving badly. It is in no way at all appropriate to pretend this isn't a widespread issue.

 

[Truebeliever]

As do the LEOs in the videos. The difference is, when an LEO does it, someone else loses their freedom.

We have both seen countless egregious examples of LEOs behaving badly. It is in no way at all appropriate to pretend this isn't a widespread issue.

The vast majority ( approximately 90%) are proven to be unfounded ( ie BS). This includes video , either by the complainant, dash cam or body cam. This includes cop hating all civilian review boards .

 

[GOPerfect]

I love watching these YouTube Frauditors. They all get their education from other Frauds on YouTube. Many times, they are just wrong. Plain and simple.

They think they are doing great things. The go to the Post Office to buy a One cent stamp, they all do the same thing.

The all scream, "Name and Badge number" like as if they are pulling amazing information. Many departments have no policy stating this needs to be done, but the Frauditors think it is a really important thing. All of their comments are identical to others.

They quote laws, but many have no idea what these laws mean. Most of the people are just little specks. Meaningless little people. But....

The Police officers that engage them just to act all billybadass are bigger fools for even engaging with them. When they are out and about, I ignore them. When I was working the Bills detail during football season, they would all come out in force. Filming us while we perform the most basic of jobs, like directing traffic. Pretty pitiful life, spending hours filming guys like me waving my hands around moving people and vehicles.

If the Police would stop engaging with these turds, they would run out of content and go away. To many officers seem to have a hard on to engage, they cannot seem to let their ego stay where it belongs and they get jammed up.

 

[GOPerfect]

I love watching these YouTube Frauditors. They all get their education from other Frauds on YouTube. Many times, they are just wrong. Plain and simple.

They think they are doing great things. The go to the Post Office to buy a One cent stamp, they all do the same thing.

The all scream, "Name and Badge number" like as if they are pulling amazing information. Many departments have no policy stating this needs to be done, but the Frauditors think it is a really important thing. All of their comments are identical to others.

They quote laws, but many have no idea what these laws mean. Most of the people are just little specks. Meaningless little people. But....

The Police officers that engage them just to act all billybadass are bigger fools for even engaging with them. When they are out and about, I ignore them. When I was working the Bills detail during football season, they would all come out in force. Filming us while we perform the most basic of jobs, like directing traffic. Pretty pitiful life, spending hours filming guys like me waving my hands around moving people and vehicles.

If the Police would stop engaging with these turds, they would run out of content and go away. To many officers seem to have a hard on to engage, they cannot seem to let their ego stay where it belongs and they get jammed up.

The following video is an example of what I typed....



This cop has issues. Serious issues. Not excuse for his behavior. The Frauditors, I find them to be nasty, rude little specks in this video. Did not break the law, not really good behavior in public. These people hide behind their cameras and none would have speak to another person the way they do without their cameras.

 

[Truebeliever]

As do the LEOs in the videos. The difference is, when an LEO does it, someone else loses their freedom.

We have both seen countless egregious examples of LEOs behaving badly. It is in no way at all appropriate to pretend this isn't a widespread issue.

Not really if you compare the videos where the officer was actually wrong as opposed to what the video person claims— they often lie more often than not, especially those “ auditors” as to what happened or to what is the law. But compare those videos to the number of interactions police have . Then compare what the offense was — wow, he cursed at someone—to what the other person was or wasn’t doing . It’s not widespread real issues.

 

[Truebeliever]

The following video is an example of what I typed....



This cop has issues. Serious issues. Not excuse for his behavior. The Frauditors, I find them to be nasty, rude little specks in this video. Did not break the law, not really good behavior in public. These people hide behind their cameras and none would have speak to another person the way they do without their cameras.

Let’s start with this BS.
Attempted to he had them on a traffic stop. He initialed a “ stop”— pulling him over also refers to a stop— “ he called that people were making threats “— a crime . It’s reasonable suspicion of a crime . And words like “ uncontrollable rage”. He moved the suspect from a running car..
Damage to the trunk? They do not have to identify other officers may have been at the scene. And since the car was driven on a public street, he could get the tag ( read the plate) off the car.
The video shows two Dicks ( not the officers) . The “auditors “ were flat out wrong. And if the cops wanted to take it to the next level they could have. Remember they did not see the video that they claim exonerates them from the threats .
All they had to do was talk to the 911 caller, they had refused to talk and tell their side, and that’s enough to make the arrest .
And if this lackluster’s example of an out of control cop— then we are all lucky . Go ask an old timer what they would have done- old timer as in 1950s, 1960s, or 1970’s police officer or deputy.
A good example of what I was talking about. They created the situation, escalated, and the cop was only wrong when he smacked the phone. Other than that, they could be detained to conduct the investigation of a possible crime and even use physical force to control them — oh, you didn’t know that huh? Go look up Terry v Ohio and what was done.
The 911 call with a complaint present gives them reasonable suspicion for a crime.

 

[GOPerfect]

Let’s start with this BS.
Attempted to he had them on a traffic stop. He initialed a “ stop”— pulling him over also refers to a stop— “ he called that people were making threats “— a crime . It’s reasonable suspicion of a crime . And words like “ uncontrollable rage”. He moved the suspect from a running car..
Damage to the trunk? They do not have to identify other officers may have been at the scene. And since the car was driven on a public street, he could get the tag ( read the plate) off the car.
The video shows two Dicks ( not the officers) . The “auditors “ were flat out wrong. And if the cops wanted to take it to the next level they could have. Remember they did not see the video that they claim exonerates them from the threats .
All they had to do was talk to the 911 caller, they had refused to talk and tell their side, and that’s enough to make the arrest .
And if this lackluster’s example of an out of control cop— then we are all lucky . Go ask an old timer what they would have done- old timer as in 1950s, 1960s, or 1970’s police officer or deputy.
A good example of what I was talking about. They created the situation, escalated, and the cop was only wrong when he smacked the phone. Other than that, they could be detained to conduct the investigation of a possible crime and even use physical force to control them — oh, you didn’t know that huh? Go look up Terry v Ohio and what was done.
The 911 call with a complaint present gives them reasonable suspicion for a crime.

Either you did not read what I wrote, or you do not understand what I wrote. I am not defending the fools behind the camera. I can vilify those types of people all day long.

My point in the video that I posted, was that this cop was completely out of control of his emotions. Period.

As for what cops did in the 50's, the 60's or 70's has no bearing on what is being discussed.

Back to these Frauditors, of course they created the entire incident. They did nothing wrong though, they are assholes, little vermin; but nothing unlawful. This is my point of all of this. These YouTube assholes create situations knowing the Police are going to arrive. Thousands upon thousands of examples on social media. These cops fall for it all the time. They enter the situation and they are controlled by the camera men. So many of these officers fall prey to the whims of the cameramen.

Funny how you think the actions of this asshole cop are okay. From the start of this incident, he handled himself wrong, he is a direct representation of his department and he failed. He attacked a citizen. Period. He did not use force to make an arrest; he attacked a person in a parking lot.

You speak as if I an ignorant and clueless. Should maybe slow down that roll. I have been in LE for more than 15 years. I have multiple academy's and two different degrees. I am well versed in the law. You mention Terry V Ohio, awesome court ruling. This is not in play in this video. The cop did not perform a Terry search, all he did was attack the man. They could have detained the men, absolutely, they could have done many things. Maybe this officer should have followed the law instead of attacking an innocent man.

I imagine that this detective knew he was in the wrong, he retired with only 17 years on the job. So far, no other agency has picked him up. I wonder why?

 

[Truebeliever]

Either you did not read what I wrote, or you do not understand what I wrote. I am not defending the fools behind the camera. I can vilify those types of people all day long.

My point in the video that I posted, was that this cop was completely out of control of his emotions. Period.

As for what cops did in the 50's, the 60's or 70's has no bearing on what is being discussed.

Back to these Frauditors, of course they created the entire incident. They did nothing wrong though, they are assholes, little vermin; but nothing unlawful. This is my point of all of this. These YouTube assholes create situations knowing the Police are going to arrive. Thousands upon thousands of examples on social media. These cops fall for it all the time. They enter the situation and they are controlled by the camera men. So many of these officers fall prey to the whims of the cameramen.

Funny how you think the actions of this asshole cop are okay. From the start of this incident, he handled himself wrong, he is a direct representation of his department and he failed. He attacked a citizen. Period. He did not use force to make an arrest; he attacked a person in a parking lot.

You speak as if I an ignorant and clueless. Should maybe slow down that roll. I have been in LE for more than 15 years. I have multiple academy's and two different degrees. I am well versed in the law. You mention Terry V Ohio, awesome court ruling. This is not in play in this video. The cop did not perform a Terry search, all he did was attack the man. They could have detained the men, absolutely, they could have done many things. Maybe this officer should have followed the law instead of attacking an innocent man.

I imagine that this detective knew he was in the wrong, he retired with only 17 years on the job. So far, no other agency has picked him up. I wonder why?

I will say two academies and multiple degrees is not why I respect you opinion. I have that and more. It’s the experience I respect. But I don’t know your actual experience. I have dealt with a lot of educated people in certain areas of so called law enforcement who didn’t know squat. I am specifically referring to some parole and probation officers and whole lot of ASAs who I have to educate when I say this.
And as I said, he was wrong to smack the phone. But so the less experienced and educated here understands what he could have done and how the video is giving people the wrong idea. He could have handcuffed them at the scene while he went to talk to the other person. Then base ALL of decisions on what the other person said since they didn’t take the chance to tell their side of the story . Remember he didn’t see the video— and either did we. There are possible two reasons they didn’t show the interaction with the 911 caller. They did make threats ( you have to wonder how it hot that far), they were afraid of getting sued by the 911, or both.

 

[Clancy]

From what I understand, the little girl dropped a bag of candy. The homeowner came out and said something about picking up the bag, the mother did so and they were going on their way. Hardly what I would call littering, nor something I would consider an arrestable offense.

 

[GOPerfect]

I will say two academies and multiple degrees is not why I respect you opinion. I have that and more. It’s the experience I respect. But I don’t know your actual experience. I have dealt with a lot of educated people in certain areas of so called law enforcement who didn’t know squat. I am specifically referring to some parole and probation officers and whole lot of ASAs who I have to educate when I say this.
And as I said, he was wrong to smack the phone. But so the less experienced and educated here understands what he could have done and how the video is giving people the wrong idea. He could have handcuffed them at the scene while he went to talk to the other person. Then base ALL of decisions on what the other person said since they didn’t take the chance to tell their side of the story . Remember he didn’t see the video— and either did we. There are possible two reasons they didn’t show the interaction with the 911 caller. They did make threats ( you have to wonder how it hot that far), they were afraid of getting sued by the 911, or both.

It is not what he could have done legally, it is about his unlawful actions. It is about the crimes that he committed.

Simple. This is not about what the assholes with the cameras did, it is what the officer did. The idiots with the cameras, I have no use for them or their kind, none at all. They do what they do and they tread very close to the line nearly all of the time, this is all about the way that officers react to these situations.

I am glad this mental case cop has left the job. He may not have done enough to warrant serious charges or jail time, but it did warrant him leaving the job. I have no use for these officers that cannot control themselves. None. I researched this guy after this incident went public.

He has more than 25 complaints for violence throughout his less than 20 years on the job. He had been suspended multiple times in the past; both paid and unpaid. He had to go through remedial training on a couple of occasions and was demoted once in the past. Again, I have no use for his kind.

This may seem like a small number of complaints. It is not though, he is a cop in a small city. A city of less than 5000 residents. We as a society, we do not need officers like this.

 

[GOPerfect]

From what I understand, the little girl dropped a bag of candy. The homeowner came out and said something about picking up the bag, the mother did so and they were going on their way. Hardly what I would call littering, nor something I would consider an arrestable offense.

And, as per State and County law, you are correct. I posted the law up a few threads. Nothing arrestable about it.

 

[Truebeliever]

From what I understand, the little girl dropped a bag of candy. The homeowner came out and said something about picking up the bag, the mother did so and they were going on their way. Hardly what I would call littering, nor something I would consider an arrestable offense.

Technically, it can be. Any ticket/summons written against an individual is an arrest-able offense. It is frown upon but completely legal and is often done does not have or will not present identification.

 

[Clancy]

Technically, it can be. Any ticket/summons written against an individual is an arrest-able offense. It is frown upon but completely legal and is often done does not have or will not present identification.

So a child, unknowingly dropping a bag of candy, even after a parent pick it up, is an arrestable offense. Interesting, sad, and a remarkable indictment of our legal system and law enforcement. My 89 year of father was a victim of a violent home invasion last summer, and got his jaw broken. The 4 scumbags who did it all were released without bail. All 4 have never showed up to court and as of yet have not been found.

 

[Truebeliever]

It is not what he could have done legally, it is about his unlawful actions. It is about the crimes that he committed.

Simple. This is not about what the assholes with the cameras did, it is what the officer did. The idiots with the cameras, I have no use for them or their kind, none at all. They do what they do and they tread very close to the line nearly all of the time, this is all about the way that officers react to these situations.

I am glad this mental case cop has left the job. He may not have done enough to warrant serious charges or jail time, but it did warrant him leaving the job. I have no use for these officers that cannot control themselves. None. I researched this guy after this incident went public.

He has more than 25 complaints for violence throughout his less than 20 years on the job. He had been suspended multiple times in the past; both paid and unpaid. He had to go through remedial training on a couple of occasions and was demoted once in the past. Again, I have no use for his kind.

This may seem like a small number of complaints. It is not though, he is a cop in a small city. A city of less than 5000 residents. We as a society, we do not need officers like this.

Sure, but we have to judge each complaint separately.

And, as per State and County law, you are correct. I posted the law up a few threads. Nothing arrestable about it.

Actually I posted the local law. And it does not have I went back and picked it up “ out” as the state law has. It says the judge can make that the punishment in the local law but how to they get before the judge ? They either get arrested or a ticket— it’s the officer’s choice ( legally, I don’t know their department regs on it) .
And in that same section of the law , it says that if there is a conflict between it and state law, the more severe law is to be used.

 

[Truebeliever]

So a child, unknowingly dropping a bag of candy, even after a parent pick it up, is an arrestable offense. Interesting, sad, and a remarkable indictment of our legal system and law enforcement. My 89 year of father was a victim of a violent home invasion last summer, and got his jaw broken. The 4 scumbags who did it all were released without bail. All 4 have never showed up to court and as of yet have not been found.

Not the child , the officer believed the parent did it when he approached. A child can not be written a summons or arrested if below a certain age

 

[byron]

Title 39 Criminal Offenses > Chapter 14 Offenses Against Property > Part 5 Litter Control > 39-14-502. Offense of littering.
(a) A person commits littering who: (1) Knowingly places, drops or throws litter on any public or private property without permission and does not immediately remove it; ...

 

[RedBreast21]

Again, most of those videos are edited and often the commentator doesn’t know the law as well as they pretend to— like the audit the audit channel is often wrong. They make a lot of false accusations and often misapply the law.
And your math doesn’t compute to reality either. 7000 videos can have the same officers involved and the officer was often right. There are millions of police/public interactions every year.

What is it you think my reply says? I can't for the life of me figure out your response gripe. Who would ever take my "7k officers" to mean the same one officer or that there are actually 7k videos? My math is fine, except upon actually looking at the data now there are about 670K officers in the U.S.

 

[Truebeliever]

What is it you think my reply says? I can't for the life of me figure out your response gripe. Who would ever take my "7k officers" to mean the same one officer or that there are actually 7k videos? My math is fine, except upon actually looking at the data now there are about 670K officers in the U.S.

That’s not what I said. I said some can be the same officer. Also the level of “ wrongness” is also in question on a lot of these “7,000” videos . Highly edited. Even the lackluster video above blows it out of proportion, is highly misleading and edited.
The detective was not going to be charged if any crime and retired on his own. And if that incident happened between two non LEO, there also would be no charges. It never rose to that level dispute Lackluster’s commentary. And when he was suspended, it was WITH PAY. Do you know what that means, don’t you?
Now @GOPerfect said he had 20 something complaints. He thinks that is unusual for a small department. Not really unusual for an active cop who made detective sergeant even in small department. I just asked around. It’s far from unusual especially if they worked Narco at any point in their careers .