# To Protect and Serve?



## Sukerkin (Oct 1, 2008)

I stumbled across this whilst looking into the effects of Tazers and any legal issues that involve their use.

This has nothing to do with Tazers but I was so shocked (definitely no pun intended) by what I saw in this news artlcle that I had to post it up here for wider comment and opinion.

I preface this with an apology to the decent examples of officers we have here at MT as such events just make their job harder.

The behaviour here is so far off the scale of what I deem acceptable by supposed law enforcement that I, for once, hope that the victim successfully sues and that all officers involved in this incident do at least a little time where they belong.  Of course, they most likely won't but they surely deserve to.  If this was my missus ... well, angry words are of no help here but I'm sure the video will speak for itself:


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 1, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> I stumbled across this whilst looking into the effects of Tazers and any legal issues that involve their use.
> 
> This has nothing to do with Tazers but I was so shocked (definitely no pun intended) by what I saw in this news artlcle that I had to post it up here for wider comment and opinion.
> 
> ...


 I'd comment but youtube seems to be experiencing technical difficulties......give me specifics and i'll find the video elsewhere.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 1, 2008)

Hmm.  The link works fine for me.

I was reluctant to use the 'embed' link as I don't know if "Law Enforcement" is one of the age 'capped' forums.

Try here:

http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=82447


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 1, 2008)

And the eventual outcome is even more dubious:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PF6_Q-6cvw&feature=related

Tonight I am very glad that I do not live in America where such things are allowed to happen and then swept under the carpet.

Boy, do the British police look good in comparison.

Again, I know full well that the good officers here at MT are likely to have professional comments in support of their fellows seemingly acting within policy.  However, imagine your wife going through this and imagine how you would feel.

My point in this is not necessarily castigation of those involved but of a law enforcement system that inherently treats generally decent people that fall under it's claws as the most vile of criminals.  Police clearly need some latitiude of action if they are to perform their duties but they also need to have some sense.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 1, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Hmm.  The link works fine for me.
> 
> I was reluctant to use the 'embed' link as I don't know if "Law Enforcement" is one of the age 'capped' forums.
> 
> ...


 I don't see the issue the way you do.....she's intoxicated, belligerent, and when you're booked in to the jail you cooperate with dressing out like an adult or like a little kid.

Also, this gals story is bogus about how this all started.....she's intoxicated, got in a fight, provided false ID to police, became belligerent with them, became belligerent with jail staff, made suicidal statements.......alcohol is a helluva drug......people who can't hold theirs shouldn't drink.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 1, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> And the eventual outcome is even more dubious:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PF6_Q-6cvw&feature=related
> 
> ...


 Okay, now you're getting silly.....no body swept this under the rug!

It went to a grand jury......a CIVILIAN grand jury that cleared the deputies with more facts than you or I have!

Here's a hint.....don't confuse cherry picked media versions with being the WHOLE story.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 1, 2008)

As I implied, I believe we have different cultural expectations of what the police will do under certain circumstances.  

If you're happy with that sort of thing going on, then I'm not going to to criticise you for it within your own cultural context.

Perhaps you have access to more details about the case then the emotive video's I found?  From what I saw and heard, the ameliorating details you mention are not present; indeed, it was stated that footage was withheld, which makes for suspicion rather than understanding.

EDIT:  Yes, you're right, "Swept under the carpet" was not the right phrase to use.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 1, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> As I implied, I believe we have different cultural expectations of what the police will do under certain circumstances.
> 
> If you're happy with that sort of thing going on, then I'm not going to to criticise you for it within your own cultural context.
> 
> ...


 There is plenty of details present you aren't seeing simply because you don't deal with these type situations 100 times a week....I do.....for example they don't admit she is drunk, but she is obviously so.....here version is a self-serving version of what happened.

Everyone that is brought in to jail is not treated like this...most are cooperative and treated accordingly......her combative behavior created this situation....she had a choice of easy or hard......she chose hard.......I know you don't have experience controlling violent, belligerent and intoxicated individuals for a living, but that is what she was.......and once she was incarcerated, she follows the jail rules....because being in jail is not a voluntary only activity.

Moreover, jail staff doesn't have the option of saying 'Oh, well, you don't want to be here and cooperate, so......I guess you don't have to!'.....they are obligated to enforce good order and discipline by force if necessary.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 1, 2008)

I understand how these situations look.....often bad.....but many times that doesn't mean 'wrong'.......lawful force in the real world is rarely pretty.....it's often ugly an chaotic.

As to the issue of American society and such things, the perception is that we are worse than most.....but ironically that perception is built on the reality that we are the most transparent society on the planet!


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 1, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> I don't see the issue the way you do.....she's intoxicated, belligerent, and when you're booked in to the jail you cooperate with dressing out like an adult or like a little kid.
> 
> Also, this gals story is bogus about how this all started.....she's intoxicated, got in a fight, provided false ID to police, became belligerent with them, became belligerent with jail staff, made suicidal statements.......alcohol is a helluva drug......people who can't hold theirs shouldn't drink.


Sarge, I'm sorry but NOWHERE in the article or video is there an indication that the woman was under the influence. Surely that would've come out somewhere and reported by LEO's involved. 

There is admitted violation of policy that males were involved in a female strip search. Surely those two female officers in the video were capable of handling that woman and possibly even a third if the woman was "not being cooperative". 
But either way the treatment is outrageous it's deplorable and horrendous. It is an abuse of power(s) and hopefully will be taken care of accordingly. 

You should know that I too have a respect for the LEOs on this forum and where I live and for the rest of the nation. But that old cliche' of "good cop - bad cop" certainly holds true. There are bad cops out there just are bad people/citizens. Not too long ago a deeply respected county sheriff in my area was arrested on money laundering, extortion, misappropriation of funds, and assorted larceny... roughly over 20 counts. He'd been doing it for years... so there's no such thing as all cops are good. Thankfully at least in my personal experience they've all been good as far as the ones I've encountered... thus far. 

There will be more to this story and as the newscast stated more video. Final judgement should be reserved until the full story is known.


----------



## Archangel M (Oct 1, 2008)

http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=433316&r=0&Category=15&subCategoryID=0



> His in-cruiser video system wasn't activated. What we know of the incident comes from Gurlea's description of the arrest in a written report and testimony from witnesses at Steffey's criminal trial on charges of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.





> *Steffey appeared to be highly intoxicated, Gurlea said. Other witnesses said she had been drinking, and at trial she admitted to having five beers over the course of several hours that day in addition to her prescription anti-depressant medication*. Steffey also said at trial that her cousin knocked her unconscious, suggesting that a concussion might have influenced her behavior.





> The nurse asked Steffey if she ever had thought about harming herself.
> 
> "Sure, I have," Steffey responded, according to an audio recording enhanced for clarity by the state but still difficult to hear.
> 
> ...





> Jail policy mandated that a prisoner's clothes and personal belongings be removed as part of suicide precautions. Generally, an inmate got a quilted, tear-resistant "precaution suit," unless the medical or mental-health staff decided against the suit and left the inmate naked.
> 
> Most willingly take off their clothes, Swanson said.
> 
> ...





> Four days after her arrest, Steffey filed a complaint against Gurlea, saying he used excessive force.
> 
> According to a report by Sgt. Ron Perdue, he interviewed Steffey and she admitted to being highly intoxicated and resisting arrest. Perdue also talked to Gurlea and declared Steffey's complaint unfounded.





> "It is certainly not for this agency to determine whether or not there are civil violations involved in the matter at hand," she wrote. "However, it can not be emphasized enough that whatever else transpired, *this incident can not be accurately or appropriately categorized as a strip-search*."
> 
> State law allows strip-searches, but only in certain situations and requires those performing the search be the same sex as the suspect.
> 
> As for the use of male deputies to restrain Steffey as female deputies removed her clothing, Palmer wrote "... the safety of an inmate and/or other inmates and jail staff clearly supersedes all concessions to modesty, especially in the medical area of corrections."




Take a look at the videos on this site too..they are illuminating.


----------



## Brian King (Oct 1, 2008)

*MA-Caver wrote:*


> There is admitted violation of policy that males were involved in a female strip search.


 
I didnt catch that I heard in the video that it was a suicide prevention with in my opinion by what I can hear and see, a violent uncooperative irrational subject which is a very different matter and very dangerous for both the police and the suicidal subject.

*Sukerkin wrote:*



> As I implied, I believe we have different cultural expectations of what the police will do under certain circumstances.
> 
> If you're happy with that sort of thing going on, then I'm not going to to criticise you for it within your own cultural context.


 
As ugly as the situation is (and there have been uglier) and as much as the conflicts effect all who are involved I give thanks to God every time I hear about or see this type of situation. Our ugly is out in the open and able to viewed by all involved, our police forces are some of the best trained in the world and try to deal with these situations in the most professional manner as able, and our citizens while often cooperative are also often not so. We have always been a nation of resisters (as I do not have to remind you LOL) and it almost goes with out saying that almost all give thought to resistance. Authority is often rejected out of hand by even the meekest amongst us. Sure it makes ugly video, makes the policing careers much more unpleasant, and makes the politicians uneasy but it is that instinct that has made America the super power that it is. Stubborn pride, the will to fight even when the odds are against victory and the enjoyment of fighting at the drop of a hat and the willingness to drop that hat are virtues admired over here. Luckily most of our citizens also have some common sense and a willingness to get along for the most part especially when dealing with the police and the judicial system and are able to control the urge to resist. Yup sir, I am satisfied and happy to live where I do and with my fellow citizens both the law enforcers and the law breakers.

Warmest regards
Brian King


----------



## kyosa (Oct 1, 2008)

I'm not fully aware of all the facts in this case but I do know this; if you are suicidal or give the impression or state that you are suicidal jail staff will do everything in their power to make sure you do not commit suicide in their jail.  If someone states they are suicidal or tries to commit suicide and the jail staff does nothing they get they're butts sued in a big way.  Typically this includes strip searching you and placing you in a suicide smock and a "suicide proof cell."

  I am unsure of the time frame of this event and not sure if this jail had suicide smocks-but currently most jails in the united states will strip search even non-sentenced individuals if they indicate they are suicidal.  Currently most jails change them out into a suicide smock or at least offer them a suicide smock which is clothing that they cant use to hang themselves with.  If they refuse to strip their cloths off or change out into the suicide smock what do you think the jail staff are going to do?  Ok we will leave you with your cloths which you can hang yourself with and if we missed anything in the pat search oh well have a nice day and hopefully you dont kill yourself and your family doesn't sue us for everything they can cause our job was to keep you alive until you got released from custody and we didn't keep you alive?  It's a no win situation for the jail staff and a win-win situation for the damn lawyers which helped create this mess in the first place.

BTW what do you have if you have 100 lawyers burried up to their necks in sand?  Not enough sand!  Sorry no offence to the lawyers I have actually med (edited met sorry typo has been a long day)  2 lawyers who were decent, almost human beings!


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 2, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> There is admitted violation of policy that males were involved in a female strip search. Surely those two female officers in the video were capable of handling that woman and possibly even a third if the woman was "not being cooperative".
> But either way the treatment is outrageous it's deplorable and horrendous. It is an abuse of power(s) and hopefully will be taken care of accordingly.


I recall this entire incident being brought up previously; I'm not sure if it was here or in a law enforcement forum.  I don't recall anything about the actions violating policy.  Simple reality: The correctional officers or deputies have tasks they must accomplish.  Generally, a strip search will be conducted by members of the same sex whenever possible -- but it doesn't have to be.  There are procedures and processes for conducting a strip search without a member of the same sex.  It's quite clear that the woman was not cooperating; all she had to do was cooperate until such a time as she could file a complaint.  As Sun Tzu wrote, it's all about knowing when to fight and when not to fight.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> Sarge, I'm sorry but NOWHERE in the article or video is there an indication that the woman was under the influence. Surely that would've come out somewhere and reported by LEO's involved.
> 
> There is admitted violation of policy that males were involved in a female strip search. Surely those two female officers in the video were capable of handling that woman and possibly even a third if the woman was "not being cooperative".
> But either way the treatment is outrageous it's deplorable and horrendous. It is an abuse of power(s) and hopefully will be taken care of accordingly.
> ...


 First of all, it wasn't a strip search.....the Grand Jury concluded that it was exactly what the staff claimed it was......she had made suicidal statements, and per Jail rules suicidal inmates are stripped of personal clothing and placed in isolation to prevent them from harming themselves.

And the evidence of her intoxication was quite well documented.

She created this incident herself......according to the report and trial cited by Archangel (which I wasn't aware of, I was just going off the same information you had....and rightly in my case) the officer and others at the scene viewed her as intoxicated and impaired.....she admitted drinking at least 5 beers, while simultaneously taking anti-depressants.......which are actually depressants of the same category as alcohol......and INTENSIFY alcohols effects, turning those 5 beers into the equivalent of 10 or 15 or 20.......anti-depressants taken on top of alcohol vastly intensify the effects of alcohol........she was a threat to herself and others, as evidenced by the fact that she got in to a fight, then when reporting it to the police, she convinces THEM that she needs to be taken in to protective custody.

Further, all the kicking and screaming that looked so bad in the video.....is REALLY evidence supporting their claim that she was belligerent, intoxicated and uncooperative.

The final story IS known.....the Civilian Grand Jury declared it perfectly righteous with no charges to follow.

This was a woman who, through here own actions, was chemically impaired, belligerent, violent and uncooperative.....she made suicidal statements, and decided she wanted to physically fight jail staff's REASONABLE attempts to protect her from herself......male staff was involved because 2 FEMALE JAILERS was NOT ENOUGH!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

kyosa said:


> I'm not fully aware of all the facts in this case but I do know this; if you are suicidal or give the impression or state that you are suicidal jail staff will do everything in their power to make sure you do not commit suicide in their jail.  If someone states they are suicidal or tries to commit suicide and the jail staff does nothing they get they're butts sued in a big way.  Typically this includes strip searching you and placing you in a suicide smock and a "suicide proof cell."
> 
> I am unsure of the time frame of this event and not sure if this jail had suicide smocks-but currently most jails in the united states will strip search even non-sentenced individuals if they indicate they are suicidal.  Currently most jails change them out into a suicide smock or at least offer them a suicide smock which is clothing that they cant use to hang themselves with.  If they refuse to strip their cloths off or change out into the suicide smock what do you think the jail staff are going to do?  Ok we will leave you with your cloths which you can hang yourself with and if we missed anything in the pat search oh well have a nice day and hopefully you dont kill yourself and your family doesn't sue us for everything they can cause our job was to keep you alive until you got released from custody and we didn't keep you alive?  It's a no win situation for the jail staff and a win-win situation for the damn lawyers which helped create this mess in the first place.
> 
> BTW what do you have if you have 100 lawyers burried up to their necks in sand?  Not enough sand!  Sorry no offence to the lawyers I have actually med (edited met sorry typo has been a long day)  2 lawyers who were decent, almost human beings!



EXACTLY!  And when that combative suicidal subject is a female, you still have to perform those actions with the staff you have....not what you should have in a perfect world.  If you have to secure that person and take their clothes, and you lack the female staff to do it, it STILL has to be done.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

This woman's argument is that she was 'embarrassed and humiliated'........the embarrassment and humiliation was brought on by her own careless and irresponsible use of mind-altering chemicals that forced the police to take her in to protective custody......and then forced them to put her on SUICIDE WATCH........then forced them to fight her in to the isolation cell!

She created this situation, she chose to use mind-altering controlled substances for recreational use, and she chose to throw a world-class temper tantrum at the jail that forced the staff to dress her out like a LITTLE CHILD THROWING A FIT!  If she wanted to be treated like an adult, she should have acted like one.

If I had a dime for every Mrs. Steffey i've met on a Friday or Saturday night cooked to the gills and as belligerent as a rabid wolverine......she'll scratch, claw, bite, call you everything but a human being, and then on her makeup, do her hair just right, and come in Monday morning to tell the Chief and the City Counsil how you abused her when you arrested her for DWI for parking her car through the front door of one the local Convenience Store because she was way too drunk and high on Xanex to drive!  

She's usually the wife of some local businessman or politician who believes she should be above the law because of who she married.

I remember arresting a gal just like this once for assaulting a local clerk at a motel.......she was some big-wig administrator in the state school system at the state capitol.....a fact she kept reminding me of to no end while explain how she would have my job, interlaced amongst the other profanity and threats.



Believe Ms. Steffey?  No, I don't believe her a bit.....and I know EXACTLY what was really going on that was only partially captured by those snippets of video that we saw......and it ain't what she said.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Oct 2, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=433316&r=0&Category=15&subCategoryID=0



The video was hard to watch and I initially took it at face value. The above linked article was quite enlightening though. Thanks for posting it.


----------



## Archangel M (Oct 2, 2008)

Jade Tigress said:


> The video was hard to watch and I initially took it at face value. The above linked article was quite enlightening though. Thanks for posting it.


 
Nobody seems interested in video #1 in my link which gives a better picture of the subjects demeanor on the way into the station. The one that makes the LEO's look like the bad guys is what everybody seems to want to believe without seeing the whole picture. SgtMacs last post is dead on about these "poor abused houswives" the media likes to trot out.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Aye, the extra information does make a world of difference in terms of interpretation.  

I still am of the opinion that I would be appalled if my missus was put through such treatment but it does put a less tainted light on the officers to learn that Mrs. Steffey's behaviour was warped by five beers, anti-depressants and a concussion.  

Even reasonable, ordinary people can behave very unreasonably at times and the original news reports I saw did not make clear at all the things that have been brought up above.  The most salient being that thoughts of self-harm were expressed quite directly.

I can understand officers not wanting to end up with a suicide victim on their hands and can see how things would escalate from there.

It doesn't make it right in my eyes, even now in the light of day when I've slept and therefore not so apt to respond as emotionally as I am at three in the morning.  But, as I said before, I live in a different country, under different laws, so I can't really judge; especially if the citizenry who do live in that cultural context are not unduly disturbed by such actions.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Aye, the extra information does make a world of difference in terms of interpretation.
> 
> I still am of the opinion that I would be appalled if my missus was put through such treatment but it does put a less tainted light on the officers to learn that Mrs. Steffey's behaviour was warped by five beers, anti-depressants and a concussion.
> 
> ...


 
I can guarantee that British detention centers do not allow those who are incarcerated to behave in any manner they wish.

Hope Steffey would have ended up tossed in an iso-cell against her will the same in London as in Canton.

I think your view that Britain's jails and prisons are some kind of fairy land are a bit naive......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/25/law.ukcrime
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4182683.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4098867.stm


The difference is that the United States is the most transparent society on the planet.....EVERYONE knows our dirty laundary, and the ironic result of that transparency is the assumption that because we are so transparent, we are worse than everyone else, while the reality is that we are more TRANSPARENT than everyone else.

So it doesn't seem to be some difference in 'laws' but your preceptions of Britain versus America......perhaps you should investigate British transparency on the matter.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Aye but neither have I heard of cases where several officers forcibly stripped a woman who was handcuffed (tho' as you alluded to above, it may just be that I haven't heard).  

The institutional attitudes and the national characters seem very different.  Tho' they are converging, the way's in which the people and the officials of our two countries behave are not the same.  Which is probably why I was so shocked when I first saw the news clips last night.  

I should have know better really than react so strongly to 'news' from an American 'Video Tabloid' station, where ratings and sensationalism are more important than facts.  I'm too used to the BBC where the news is the News, not an extension of entertainment (tho' even that is changing for the worse these days ... must be getting old ).

Still, altho' I'm a little embarassed to have expressed myself so strongly last night, I'm glad that I posted up the thread as I have learned quite a bit more about my fellows here at MT and how the Law Enforcement system 'ticks' for the ordinary person.

My thanks.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Aye but neither have I heard of cases where several officers forcibly stripped a woman who was handcuffed (tho' as you alluded to above, it may just be that I haven't heard).
> 
> The institutional attitudes and the national characters seem very different. Tho' they are converging, the way's in which the people and the officials of our two countries behave are not the same. Which is probably why I was so shocked when I first saw the news clips last night.
> 
> ...


 
Don't be embarrassed....you're an intelligent poster and your posts are well thought out. I enjoy them even when on rare occassions I respectfully disagree with your conclusions.......but polite debate is what makes life interesting!


But you hit on something profound....the nature of American sensationalist media tends to cast America in a bad light......if there is one thing we seem to enjoy in America, it's controversy.......and the rest of the world sits back watching American media coverage like we watch 'special episodes' of Jerry Springer.

Watching the BBC is like taking a step back to US news from the the distant past.......it's sober and.....dignified?

In the US media outlets milk 'Police Corruption' stories regardless of their merits.....all they care about is the allegation......it sells papers.  You'll see the allegation written on the front page.......if something comes along to destroy their story, like video they didn't know about that skews it away from their alleged victim.......you'll see it buried on page 8!

In fact usually US media only has the attention span to milk the allegation.......it doesn't follow the story for the months of investigation, and only shows up again if any cops get charged.......if they get declared innocent of any wrong-doing it's unlikely to be followed up on......unless there is a racial element to stoke the fires of!


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Likewise, good sir :rei:.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 2, 2008)

Here's a problem with discussing police use of force, and this holds just as true for martial artists without police experience as the lay public.....we tend to view physical confrontations between citizen and citizen as who is a physical threat to whom, who has the power to do what, and what is reasonable to defend yourself and escape....

But when discussing law enforcement that's not the complete picture......because an LEO or Corrections Officers job isn't only to avoid attack, it is often times to control subjects, to bring them in to compliance, to physically make them do something if necessary.

We see a 110 pound woman, and we say 'Ahhh....she wouldn't be that big of a threat to me.....this makes no sense'......but someone who says that hasn't tried to physically control a combative 110 pound woman, one who's clawing, kicking, biting, spitting.......it's not simply a matter of preventing her from hurting you, you are also required to physically control her and put her in an isolation cell to prevent her from harming herself.......how does one do that without doing what these corrections officers did?

It's obvious that she had no intention of cooperating with those CO's.......it's obvious she had made overt statements of harming herself......it's obvious she was physically combative.......and the force used did not physically harm her.

The whole 'I felt like I was raped without penetration'......that's merely for jury consumption......that's attorney recommended language for maximum impact.




So here's the roll playing scenario for anyone who disagrees with what was done.........you are a Corrections Officer on duty when this woman is brought in to your cell.......your policy says what must be done when someone is making suicidal statements and is a threat to themselves or others......she IS NOT going to cooperate with your attempts to do it the easy way.......and you have ONLY the jail staff that you have.....i.e. no calling out to quick hire some more female staff.



So......lets spitball it......how would some of you folks have handled this situation differently.


----------



## Brian King (Oct 2, 2008)

> "Aye but neither have I heard of cases where several officers forcibly stripped a woman who was handcuffed"


 
That would be an interesting trick it would seem like the cuffs would impede. Are you allowed to cut off the clothing and leave the subject restrained?

Brian


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Oct 2, 2008)

I think you will find like in almost all honorable professions the world over that there are a high percentage of very, very good people doing tough jobs.  There is also that small percentage who often skirt the lines and make everyone's job tougher.  American law enforcement from a standard of professionalism is very, very good and matches up well with almost all industrialized countries.  Though each and every industrialized country will have bumps and bruises along the way as someone forgets a procedure or someone violates a procedure or code of conduct.  This type of behavior does happen *everywhere*.  We must be vigilante to stop it and help the people in charge to take care of it.  Therefore everyone in any society benefits. 

When it comes to this type of behavior *the good officer's* do make up for it in spades by dealing with all the crap that comes there way day in and day out that nobody else wants to deal with.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Brian said:


> That would be an interesting trick it would seem like the cuffs would impede. Are you allowed to cut off the clothing and leave the subject restrained?
> 
> Brian


 
It must've been my tired eyes playing tricks on me watching those small vids last night as it was my impression that Mrs. Steffey hands were still cuffed.  More likely to have been that the officers were restraining her as it does seem a little difficult otherwise on reflection.


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 2, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Here's a problem with discussing police use of force, and this holds just as true for martial artists without police experience as the lay public.....we tend to view physical confrontations between citizen and citizen as who is a physical threat to whom, who has the power to do what, and what is reasonable to defend yourself and escape....
> 
> But when discussing law enforcement that's not the complete picture......because an LEO or Corrections Officers job isn't only to avoid attack, it is often times to control subjects, to bring them in to compliance, to physically make them do something if necessary.
> 
> ...


I once arrested this little, 5 ft 6 in, 110 lbs or so guy.  I cuffed him without a problem; it took 4 of us to carry and drag him out of the garden-style apartment, up the stairs and out to my cruiser.  Sounds easy...  unless you've been there.

The best analogy I've come up with is to ask parents who've struggled to get a 3 year old dressed or into a car seat...  Ain't nearly as easy as you'd think!


----------



## Archangel M (Oct 2, 2008)

Not to be too hard on ya Sukerkin, you are one of the most level headed, respectful posters here and I look forward to your contributions, but I must respectfuly say that I dont think you really know whats probably going on in your own countries correctional institutions at the moment. Not to repeat whats already been said here, but the reason stuff like this LOOKS so bad is because our society is so transparent. Our Freedom Of Information Act allows for this transparency. 

Most martial artists here dont realize the huge diference there is between "fighting" someone vs. forcing someone to comply in a custodial situation. The officers here were videotaping what they were doing to document that they were following proceedure and its been turned against them. The fact that they prepared their approach like this leads me to believe that they exhausted all other options available to them and had "Asked for compliance...explained the options to her....confirmed that she wasnt going to comply...then acted" (bit of verbal judo training there).


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Oct 2, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> I once arrested this little, 5 ft 6 in, 110 lbs or so guy.  I cuffed him without a problem; it took 4 of us to carry and drag him out of the garden-style apartment, up the stairs and out to my cruiser.  Sounds easy...  unless you've been there.
> 
> The best analogy I've come up with is to ask parents who've struggled to get a 3 year old dressed or into a car seat...  Ain't nearly as easy as you'd think!



There is pure truth in those words on both ends.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

I just want to thank the members here, professional and otherwise, for their input into this.  What has come out of my OP has been much better than I hoped, particularly as I was filled with late night 'righteous indignation' at what I had just seen and truly did not think things through.

Yes, I was tired (it was the early hours again for me), yes I was in pain (I'm off work with a kidney infection (not fun)) but you would have thought that I would have been clear headed enough to realise that if someone is filming something in an official capacity they're not going to be doing something heinously illegal.

I reacted with my emotions, not my head .  

In a minor defence of myself, you chaps really need to get a handle on what passes for television journalism in your country.  Those clips that I first saw and responded to were really misleading.  That wasn't news reporting; it was sensationalism and it was guaranteed to promote ill-feeling towards the police force.  

Given that policing can only occur effectively with the consent of the general population, such reporting is not helpful.  Excesses need to uncovered and dealt with most certainly but turning the police into the 'enemy' helps noone.  If I, briefly, 'assisted' in that, my apologies.


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 2, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> I just want to thank the members here, professional and otherwise, for their input into this. What has come out of my OP has been much better than I hoped, particularly as I was filled with late night 'righteous indignation' at what I had just seen and truly did not think things through.
> 
> Yes, I was tired (it was the early hours again for me), yes I was in pain (I'm off work with a kidney infection (not fun)) but you would have thought that I would have been clear headed enough to realise that if someone is filming something in an official capacity they're not going to be doing something heinously illegal.


You'd think that... but it does happen.  More often than you'd believe!  Both professionals and idiot crooks... and some who got hired but are really idiot crooks, too.

One significant danger in US law enforcement is the Us-vs-Them mentality that develops, especially in light of the "clientelle" we deal with.  Nobody calls the cops to show off their kid's straight As or how nicely the family gets along.  There's also a lot stuff about police work -- just like marriage, parenthood, medical practice, and many other things -- that you just aren't likely to get until you've been there.  And -- like medicine and parenthood -- everyone's an armchair expert.





> I reacted with my emotions, not my head .
> 
> In a minor defence of myself, you chaps really need to get a handle on what passes for television journalism in your country. Those clips that I first saw and responded to were really misleading. That wasn't news reporting; it was sensationalism and it was guaranteed to promote ill-feeling towards the police force.


Currently, there's not a lot of journalism at all in the US, in my opinion...  Too many reporters are anything but objective.  But that's a topic worthy of its own thread!





> Given that policing can only occur effectively with the consent of the general population, such reporting is not helpful. Excesses need to uncovered and dealt with most certainly but turning the police into the 'enemy' helps noone. If I, briefly, 'assisted' in that, my apologies.


 
This sentence reflects strongly Sir Robert Peel's thinking about policing.  And there is a large amount of truth to it.  However, despite our common heritage, there are significant differences culturally between the US and the UK.  There are things that you accept which no "American" would stand for -- and things we tolerate that you would be up in arms over.  Fortunately, there's room in this world for both!


----------



## Archangel M (Oct 2, 2008)

No problem Sukerkin. This whole thing is a case study in whats wrong with our American media IMO.

As an aside, my brother-in-law has relatives in Spain. When they came over to visit this year his male cousin stated that he was "afraid" of American police. I can only assume that this fear is based on these sensationalized incidents. Its kind of disturbing. 

Question. Do all the "wildest police chases", "wildest police shootouts" etc. programs that are all over US networks air "over there"?


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Aye, we see programs of that ilk aired over here in the UK. 

Mostly it's on Satellite rather than the terrestial channels but these days a large proportion of the population has access to Satellite so that means that many of us get to see such things.

It's interesting how perceptions can vary around the world and with information access.  From what I've heard about Spanish police, it's a bit of a surprise that *Angel*'s cousin felt so strongly adverse to American officers.  Spain's not been all that long out of the fascist shadow and their policing reflects that.  

For myself, I admit that until I got onto the Net, my ideas of America police were unflattering in the extreme.  It's only since I've gotten to 'talk' to the likes of you fellows that I've begun to get a better impression of trained people trying to do an impossible job under ludicrous circumstances.

Before then, well, the 'hick redneck' sheriff out of the Roger Moore Bond movie was pretty much what my idea of 'rural' Law Enforcement was.   Combined with rule breaking, graft taking, scumbag officers who were no better than the criminals, which was what the movies fed the world, no wonder low opinions abound.


----------



## Archangel M (Oct 2, 2008)

Thing to remember is that America is a HUGE place. Policing in a small 2 officer rural town IS different from metro NYPD and all the shades of difference in between. The way my Town is policed is vastly different than the way the adjoining Metro area is. We dont have national policing (or the European equivalent) with homogenous training/staffing/operations or standards here. Remember in the grand scheme of history we are still closer to the frontier/colonial era than our ancient European ancestors with their thousands of years of history and traditions. There ARE major differences in the way we do things here. Some may be seen as better or worse depending on your viewpoint. Hell..even within the last 30 years there has been MAJOR change in American policing in terms or training and professionalism. Ask any oldtimer in American law enforcement. In the 1960's-70's your viewpoint was closer to the mark than you may know (on a place by place basis). Some areas still have their problems (New Orleans has struggled in recent years), but by and large US LE is a MUCH more professional organization than any time in its history. 

For some reason Europeans "seem" (from my vantage point) to accept that things are different between say Germany and Spain, but New York and California are seen as being identical even though they are geographically (and dare I say culturally) much farther apart.


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 2, 2008)

Excellent comments all through there, especially that last which is a very good point indeed, *Angel*.  I confess that to some extent I fall into the same trap of mis-thinking too.

I can distinguish the gulf between rural and urban policing but being so used to a homogenous legal system it still fazes me a little that *laws* and procedures can vary quite markedly from State to State.


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 2, 2008)

Excellent point, Archangel.  Even in the area I work, every agency has its own unique culture and relationship to the people in its community.  And handles its cases in its own way...  In fact, that's one of the biggest challenges that the regional task force I'm on faces.  It can be incredibly frustrating trying to get different agencies to get along...


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 4, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> I once arrested this little, 5 ft 6 in, 110 lbs or so guy.  I cuffed him without a problem; it took 4 of us to carry and drag him out of the garden-style apartment, up the stairs and out to my cruiser.  Sounds easy...  unless you've been there.
> 
> The best analogy I've come up with is to ask parents who've struggled to get a 3 year old dressed or into a car seat...  Ain't nearly as easy as you'd think!


 Yeah, i've got a 2 year old who occasionally goes on a kicking a screaming fit when it's time to get him in a car seat....especially when we've been to the park and he doesn't think it's time to leave.....took me 5 minutes one day!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 4, 2008)

Archangel M said:


> Not to be too hard on ya Sukerkin, you are one of the most level headed, respectful posters here and I look forward to your contributions, but I must respectfuly say that I dont think you really know whats probably going on in your own countries correctional institutions at the moment. Not to repeat whats already been said here, but the reason stuff like this LOOKS so bad is because our society is so transparent. Our Freedom Of Information Act allows for this transparency.
> 
> Most martial artists here dont realize the huge diference there is between "fighting" someone vs. forcing someone to comply in a custodial situation. The officers here were videotaping what they were doing to document that they were following proceedure and its been turned against them. The fact that they prepared their approach like this leads me to believe that they exhausted all other options available to them and had "Asked for compliance...explained the options to her....confirmed that she wasnt going to comply...then acted" (bit of verbal judo training there).


That appears to be exactly the case....what we have here is a woman high on mind-altering substances who was obviously a threat to herself and others, and that started long before the police got involved....as evidenced by the fact that she'd already gotten in a fight earlier with a family member (and i'm betting it was her behavior then that precipitated that violent exchange)....she had no intention, in her altered state, of cooperating whatsoever with any of this process.....


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 4, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> I just want to thank the members here, professional and otherwise, for their input into this.  What has come out of my OP has been much better than I hoped, particularly as I was filled with late night 'righteous indignation' at what I had just seen and truly did not think things through.
> 
> Yes, I was tired (it was the early hours again for me), yes I was in pain (I'm off work with a kidney infection (not fun)) but you would have thought that I would have been clear headed enough to realise that if someone is filming something in an official capacity they're not going to be doing something heinously illegal.
> 
> ...


 Welcome to the media we deal with every day......objective truth takes a far distant second to ratings!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 4, 2008)

jks9199 said:


> This sentence reflects strongly Sir Robert Peel's thinking about policing.  And there is a large amount of truth to it.  However, despite our common heritage, there are significant differences culturally between the US and the UK.  There are things that you accept which no "American" would stand for -- and things we tolerate that you would be up in arms over.  Fortunately, there's room in this world for both!


 That is a profoundly true statement....on the one hand, knowing that we are an inherently violent society, or as D.H. Lawrence said 



> "The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer.  It has never yet melted." -D.H. Lawrence



Knowing that, we understand that any police that police such a free society must be of the sort that share that sort of soul...having the ability to meet violence with better violence.....we accept that as the British society wouldn't.

Conversely part of that hard, isolate and stoic character is a rugged individualism....we can accept the violence, but we would never accept some aspect of British society....for example, most Americans find the notion of surveillance cameras spaced around the cities as repugnant to our sense of individual liberty.  
*
*


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 4, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Excellent comments all through there, especially that last which is a very good point indeed, *Angel*.  I confess that to some extent I fall into the same trap of mis-thinking too.
> 
> I can distinguish the gulf between rural and urban policing but being so used to a homogenous legal system it still fazes me a little that *laws* and procedures can vary quite markedly from State to State.


 While we have a federal constitution that all state laws are subordinate to, we have, what in practice are 50 almost separate countries, each with their own Constitutions and laws.

Further, laws as a practical matter are enforced largely on the local and state level.


----------



## MA-Caver (Oct 4, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> While we have a federal constitution that all state laws are subordinate to, we have, what in practice are 50 almost separate countries, each with their own Constitutions and laws.
> 
> Further, laws as a practical matter are enforced largely on the local and state level.


 50 separate countries?? Umm... if that were the case then we'd all need passports... or is that what our drivers licenses are in effect?


----------



## Sukerkin (Oct 4, 2008)

, I think it's a reasonable enough analogy for the point *Caver*. 

It's certainly the 'mental map' which I first thought of when trying to get across to myself the difference between a County in England and a State in America.  Very much akin to how the countries in the European Union function really (we don't need passports to travel between them (mind you, I might have to check to see if that is still true)).


----------



## jks9199 (Oct 4, 2008)

It's important to note that we are the United *States* of America.  A careful reading of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, along with the Articles of Confederation, will lead to the realization that the Founding Fathers did, in many ways, view each state as an almost independent nation, joining with the others only enough to facilitate certain key principles.  The growth and power of the Federal government really began with the Civil War, and expanded greatly during the 20th Century.  Think about it; in the 1790s you had 13 colonies, loosely joined by historical ties to England, in an era where communication between each state took days or weeks... if not months.  A fundamental issue in the American Revolution was too much control imposed by the national government.  It's no big surprise, therefore, that our system places much of the power at the state level.

Essentially, an underlying principle of the early US govermental formula was that the government that had the most influence on the person was the one that they had the most influence over -- subject to some common limitations and boundaries on any government.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Oct 5, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> 50 separate countries?? Umm... if that were the case then we'd all need passports... or is that what our drivers licenses are in effect?


 You don't have a United States drivers license now do you?

The notion of a single country is more or less a concept that has only become universal post-civil war....prior to that many folks considered themselves citizens of their states first.

Each state is still considered a seperate soverignty from the federal government.....each has an executive, judicial and legislative branch, each has to the power to make it's own laws, enforce it's own laws and judge it's own laws.


----------

