Comments on Cop in the Hood: Use of Force, eh?

confidential reliable informant. sometimes they a...

2009-10-31T17:23:01.018-04:00

confidential reliable informant. sometimes they are just called CI's in places where the policemen aren't too particular about how reliable the informant is.

What's "CRI"?

2009-10-31T12:24:05.650-04:00

What's "CRI"?

Do they always make it so obvious who the CRI was?...

2009-10-31T08:16:56.540-04:00

Do they always make it so obvious who the CRI was?

Holster before you approach.

2009-10-30T14:08:10.332-04:00

Holster before you approach.

I agree that there was no excessive force here, bu...

2009-10-30T04:41:25.773-04:00

I agree that there was no excessive force here, but that the officers' tactics were off. In my opinion, it's generally a bad idea to be within grabbing distance of a suspect if you are pointing a gun at him.

It varies some by jurisdiction, but pointing your ...

2009-10-27T18:04:37.359-04:00

It varies some by jurisdiction, but pointing your gun at somebody is not considered "use of force." Nor is going hands on. At least not in Baltimore.

And the rest was just making an arrest.

I would not have written on that.

You don't write a description of how you pu...

2009-10-27T17:57:42.509-04:00
You don't write a description of how you put cuffs on a guy.

If if involves pointing my gun at a guy and kicking him, I sure do.

Very good point, sergeant. I actually had not wat...

2009-10-27T16:30:49.233-04:00
Very good point, sergeant.
I actually had not watched it to the end. Figuring it was over after the cuffs were on.

I think my biggest problem is that Mr. Brown Jacke...

2009-10-27T13:38:36.333-04:00
I think my biggest problem is that Mr. Brown Jacket wasn't searched after cuffing. Both officers turned their backs on a suspect that had been held at gunpoint a few seconds before.

Without seeing it, I'll tell what that part of...

2009-10-27T12:05:02.916-04:00
Without seeing it, I'll tell what that part of the report say: "Suspects were arrested and transported to Central Booking."

You don't write a description of how you put cuffs on a guy.

As with the recent SF skateboarder video, my compl...

2009-10-27T11:59:33.066-04:00
As with the recent SF skateboarder video, my compliments to whatever company made the camera. Those are some nice, crisp, clear images.

It really helps you judge the amount of force. I think in this case, the clarity of the images works to the LEO's advantage, although maybe not if his police report departs too much from what is shown in the vid. I think in this case he wrote the report before the vid went up on YouTube. That is potentially an opportunity for the perp to stick it to him, not for force, but for dishonesty. could be impeachment city for Tom Skerritt!

LOL. Those Canadian LEO's need to come to the ...

2009-10-27T11:10:00.065-04:00
LOL. Those Canadian LEO's need to come to the States to get trained on excessive use of force! That was pretty mild. We treat our skateboarders worse than that!

As Anon says, this seems like bad tactics to me, but I'm not a LEO, so what do i know.

I don't have any major problems with the use o...

2009-10-26T15:06:07.781-04:00
I don't have any major problems with the use of force. Couple of minor issues:

(i) walking on the back of the suspects calves is bad tactics. Not excessive force, but bad tactics. If the officer fell off the man's calves, i would hope that would NOT be grounds for assault on an officer charge.

(ii) The LEO should have given a clear verbal command, specifically about putting his cheek on the ground, and a chance to comply with the clear and specific verbal command before going foot on head. If the officer had just said "git onna groun" and then went foot on head for "imperfect" ompliance with that command, then that is excessive because it would not have been understood that a cheek needed to be on the pavement. Cheek on the pavement is borderline excessive even without shoe leather enforcement. If it REALLY was neccessary to have his cheek on the pavement, then there should be a burden on the officer to make that super-duper-extra-clear before going to the old headkick. Cheek on the pavement should be a disfavored technique. It is simply not as important as still, visible hands and still, visible legs. Cheek-on-pavement smacks of being a non-officer-safety punitive measure. In this case, the LEO might (or might not) have been sufficiently clear and patient about the cheek touching the pavement requirement. best case = cleared. Worst case = 3 days no pay.