# Oklahoma cop pulls ambulance over; puts EMT in chokehold while patient lingers



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2009)

*Oklahoma cop pulls ambulance over; puts EMT in chokehold while patient lingers*



> An Oklahoma State Trooper pulled over an ambulance on its way to the hospital Sunday, resulting in the police officer placing a chokehold on a paramedic as a patient lingered in the back.





> At one point in the hospital, the trooper told the paramedic that he was so enraged about the perceived flipping off gesture that he considered pulling his gun out and using deadly force, according to the paramedics transport report.



[yt]KluItc365hU[/yt]

Interesting.


----------



## Sukerkin (May 28, 2009)

Hmmm.  

Anyone want to hazzard a guess at what this clearly criminal paramedic did that justified this?  

Or were they all actors in yet another feeble attempt to discredit the police?

I know that you have a huge country and trying to 'watch the watchmen' is a monumental task but isn't it about time a serious attempt was made to try to curb the seemingly endless stream of abuses of power?  

After all, we only get to hear about the ones that got caught on film.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2009)

Supposedly, he refused to yield to the cop, who then wanted to shoot him for making an obscene gesture.

It sounds like in Oklahoma, medical personnel must yield to law enforcement, and deadly force is acceptable when someone flips you off.

Oklahoma doesn't sound too smart at the moment.


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 28, 2009)

Is there no end to the insanity? 

Common sense is indeed extinct. I don't even know what to say at this point. As a nation, we have lost our collective minds. I wonder if there's any hope for us any more.


----------



## Archangel M (May 28, 2009)

If there was something worth arresting the "Bus Driver" for, you just follow the ambulance to the hospital and deal with it after the transport...unless the actions are such a danger to the public that you have to deal with it immediately, which does not seem to be the case here.


----------



## Archangel M (May 28, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Hmmm.
> 
> Anyone want to hazzard a guess at what this clearly criminal paramedic did that justified this?
> 
> ...



Agreed...like this one...

[yt]HECMVdl-9SQ[/yt]


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 28, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Agreed...like this one...
> 
> [yt]HECMVdl-9SQ[/yt]


 
W-T-F!

I have no civilian LE experience but I was a Military Cop...this is ridiculous. That guy posed no threat and this cop's actions are inexcusable. There was no threat here...

...this stuff makes me tired.


----------



## Archangel M (May 28, 2009)

Hmmm..over 836,787 American LEO's. Give each one say 5 citizen contacts a day..thats 4,183,935 citizen contacts daily. Factor in the cops who shouldnt be cops and the cops who did something stupid and how many cases like this do you think you get percentage wise?

While abuse of power by the police is no laughing matter and each case should be dealt with...lets not go overboard with the sweeping generalizations. Making judgments about ALL American cops based on YouTube videos and internet threads is as fair as my pigeonholing all Englishmen based on my impressions from watching their behavior at soccer games....


----------



## SensibleManiac (May 28, 2009)

All I know is that if that were my father or loved one in that ambulance (patient) there would be a serious lawsuit going on.


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 28, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Hmmm..over 836,787 American LEO's. Give each one say 5 citizen contacts a day..thats 4,183,935 citizen contacts daily. Factor in the cops who shouldnt be cops and the cops who did something stupid and how many cases like this do you think you get percentage wise?
> 
> While abuse of power by the police is no laughing matter and each case should be dealt with...lets not go overboard with the sweeping generalizations. Making judgments about ALL American cops based on YouTube videos and internet threads is as fair as my pigeonholing all Englishmen based on my impressions from watching their behavior at soccer games....


 
Agreed, but that does not excuse this particular incidence. 

Too bad it wasn't that sorry pig's mother in the ambulance. :angry:


----------



## Flea (May 28, 2009)

I'm sure I already know the answer to this but just in case, would someone please set me straight?

Police _do_ have to take occasional psychological evaluations.   Right?


----------



## Empty Hands (May 28, 2009)

I don't think we're getting the full story.  Why was the 2nd paramedic, the big black guy, placed under arrest?  Why did they apparently then let him go (I couldn't tell for sure) after saying he was under arrest?

Actually, considering how this could have gone, I was almost relieved.  Considering that the guy started struggling after he was told he was under arrest, I was expecting a major beatdown.  It looks like that was thankfully avoided.  He may be facing charges anyway.  While tempers were flaring on both sides, and the reason for the pull-over may have been wrong, I'm glad to see it was resolved without violence.


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 28, 2009)

Empty Hands said:


> I don't think we're getting the full story. Why was the 2nd paramedic, the big black guy, placed under arrest? Why did they apparently then let him go (I couldn't tell for sure) after saying he was under arrest?
> 
> Actually, considering how this could have gone, I was almost relieved. Considering that the guy started struggling after he was told he was under arrest, I was expecting a major beatdown. It looks like that was thankfully avoided. He may be facing charges anyway. While tempers were flaring on both sides, and the reason for the pull-over may have been wrong, I'm glad to see it was resolved without violence.


 
Grabbing a man by the throat isn't violent? 

Aw heck... what's a life compared to a cop's ego anyway?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2009)

*Folks,
  Don't turn this into a copbash fest.*


----------



## Archangel M (May 28, 2009)

Side issue: Not that it changes the facts, or the "right or wrongness" of this event, but how do we know what the condition of the person in the Ambulance was to be making assumptions about risk to life?

And the "pig" thing is uncalled for IMO...


----------



## celtic_crippler (May 28, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Side issue: Not that it changes the facts, or the "right or wrongness" of this event, but how do we know what the condition of the person in the Ambulance was to be making assumptions about risk to life?
> 
> And the "pig" thing is uncalled for IMO...


 
You're right. I was wrong. 

Thanks for helping put it back into perspective.


----------



## Carol (May 28, 2009)

This is a story done by the same blogger that is bashing Massachusetts for for their attempts to outlaw erotic photos of seniors or people with disabilities that have been declared mentally incompetent.  

The last line of his blog sneers at the rep sponsoring the bill, stating "Next, she'll want to outlaw Viagra."

I have no sympathy or support for predators of this lot.  But this blogger apparently does.  He also has many other entries that show LEOs in a bad light.

Its very difficult for me to take this guy as a reliable source. If the story is as bad as he wants us to believe, then that was a terrible event.  But I'm not convinced it is.  Add the points that Empty Hands was making...I'm simply not convinced there isn't more to this story than meets the eye.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2009)

The blogger does have a beef with cops who violate peoples rights, and is involved in an ongoing case himself.  But he does cite outside sources.

the paramedic&#8217;s transport incident report:
caught on video 

Plus the local news station
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=10427244


----------



## Carol (May 28, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> The blogger does have a beef with cops who violate peoples rights, and is involved in an ongoing case himself.  But he does cite outside sources.
> 
> the paramedics transport incident report:
> caught on video
> ...



Thanks so much.  I missed the links


----------



## MJS (May 28, 2009)

So, according to the report, the ambulance did pull to the side, giving the cop room to pass.  If there was that much of an issue, perhaps the officer could have followed up on this afterwards.  A plate number or number on the ambulance would have given him enough info. to follow up on this later.  

So much yelling going on, it was hard to hear what was being said, but, the medic was choked only after the cop grabbed his arm, which in turn, the medic pushed him away.  What were the grounds for an arrest or detaining the medic?  What was the reason for the choke?

We don't know the condition of the person in the ambulance, so I'm not commenting on that.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2009)

Here's my question....I have to yield to both vehicles.

when it's a cop vs an ambulance, who has right of way?


----------



## jks9199 (May 29, 2009)

Flea said:


> I'm sure I already know the answer to this but just in case, would someone please set me straight?
> 
> Police _do_ have to take occasional psychological evaluations.   Right?


Not as a rule, in most agencies.  In fact, there's not even a statutory requirement for any specific sort of psychological evaluation in my state.

Officers that show signs of serious psychological distress may be sent for evaluation, subject to the general orders of the department.


----------



## jks9199 (May 29, 2009)

Depends on state law -- but there's no firm rule in Virginia.  Personally, I'm probably going to yield to the ambulance at an intersection, or go around them (I can drive faster than that bus... and have different rules on red lights) if I'm behind them.  If in doubt - the one more likely to be en route to save a life wins.


----------



## Archangel M (May 29, 2009)

"Police Officers" come in many varities; Village, Town, City, Metro, County, State. 

As different as one cop can be another, so can one Cities force can be different from anothers... so can the culture between a Town Cop and a State Trooper. North from South. East Coast to West Coast.

Point out how MY department was wrong all you wish, give me something to discuss that I could DO something about but dont expect me or my department to feel some sort of responsibility for the actions of an officer hundreds of miles away....the most I can do is give my impression based on my personal experience. 

I dont know where else to go on these threads...


----------



## tellner (May 29, 2009)

Even if the guy had flipped off the cop - and I'd be willing to bet a month's pay that it was "testilied" after the fact or was a mistake on the officer's part - that does not justify deadly force. Choking someone is deadly force. If an armed man is choking you and threatening to shoot you that is most certainly a "terroristic threat" under the older meaning of the law.

Failure to yield is not a capital offense. It does not represent an "immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or serious bodily injury to an innocent". The ambulance driver wasn't a fleeing violent felon showing "callous and gross disregard for human life" (I think that was the wording from _Tennessee vs. Gardner_). And since there was an uninvolved patient who was being kept from emergency medical care by this little cluster-**** the officer was showing callous and gross disregard for the lives of innocent people.

Maybe he had a bad day.
Maybe the ambulance driver reminded him of his mean third grade teacher.
Maybe he really did get the Highway Salute.
Or maybe he just had a bad case of arrogance and wanted to prove that his was a couple inches longer.

It doesn't matter.

A sane man would have gone to the hospital and resolved the matter there once the patient had been admitted. A reasonable man would have taken down the ambulance number or license number, called the company and looked up the paramedic at some convenient time in the future.

Officer Friendly was not acting in a sane or reasonable manner. If even half of this is true he used deadly force and the threat of further force in a situation where it was not warranted. 

If you or I pulled crap like that we'd be up on charges. He should be held to at least the same standard.


----------



## Archangel M (May 29, 2009)

SensibleManiac said:


> All I know is that if that were my father or loved one in that ambulance (patient) there would be a serious lawsuit going on.


 
That would depend on what your damages were. Not knowing the condition of the patient..if she made it to the destination with no injury or worsening of condition I would say that the medic would be the more likely one to win a suit.


----------



## Sukerkin (May 29, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Hmmm..over 836,787 American LEO's. Give each one say 5 citizen contacts a day..thats 4,183,935 citizen contacts daily. Factor in the cops who shouldnt be cops and the cops who did something stupid and how many cases like this do you think you get percentage wise?
> 
> While abuse of power by the police is no laughing matter and each case should be dealt with...lets not go overboard with the sweeping generalizations. Making judgments about ALL American cops based on YouTube videos and internet threads is as fair as my pigeonholing all Englishmen based on my impressions from watching their behavior at soccer games....


 
I'm assuming that this was somewhat directed to me, *Angel*?  I quite agree with your second paragraph and whilst posting was thinking along identical lines to your first.


----------



## punisher73 (May 29, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> "Police Officers" come in many varities; Village, Town, City, Metro, County, State.
> 
> As different as one cop can be another, so can one Cities force can be different from anothers... so can the culture between a Town Cop and a State Trooper. North from South. East Coast to West Coast.
> 
> ...


 
Agreed, where are the millions of videos of police helping people or de-escalating a potentially violent situation or putting themselves in harm's way.  

What he did was wrong and could have been handled MUCH differently.  But, I get tired of all the videos posted on how the police mess up all the time.

During one of my talks with some kids going into Law Enforcement I told them all the following statement.

"You will carry the sins of all officers on your badge".  People will see YOUR badge and judge it the same as all their experiences WITH a badge.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 29, 2009)

I don't find videos of officers doing good unfortunately, but I do try to post the news articles when I find them to balance things as I can.


----------



## Flea (May 29, 2009)

jks9199 said:


> Not as a rule, in most agencies.  In fact, there's not even a statutory requirement for any specific sort of psychological evaluation in my state.
> 
> Officers that show signs of serious psychological distress may be sent for evaluation, subject to the general orders of the department.



Jks,  I find that distressing.  It's not as if it's hard to sail through those exams regardless of your state of mind.  But given that fact that people are handed a position of authority and _expected_ to carry weapons throughout the day as a job requirement, at least some token effort should be made to ensure clarity of mind.  If only for PR reasons.

Punisher, your comment on "the sins of all officers" reminds me of a conversation I got into as a teenager.  I was on the subway at 14 when a city cop sat down next to me.  I didn't engage him in conversation, but he was chatty and went on about how he loved his job ... "and the best part is that when someone gives me crap I can sling it right back at them.  Before I became a cop if someone hit me I'd get in trouble if I hit them back.  But not any more!"  It was my first interaction with a police officer and my skin crawled.  I didn't say a word (I was afraid to!) and that quote has stuck with me ever since.


----------



## Flea (May 29, 2009)

A neutral suggestion ... perhaps this thread should be moved to the LEO forum?


----------



## jim777 (May 29, 2009)

This is why I love big city cops; they see so much and just have so much experience that they seem to always do the right thing. Tough to shock; they've seen worse that whatever it is you're doing. You might get a "summons or a sermon", but you almost never get both. I never have an issue with city cops....now, when I'm driving cross country, or I'm otherwise hundreds of miles from a city, that's when I get apprehensive. You never know what kind of power trip you're going to find in the local sheriff's office in the middle of nowhere.


----------



## Tez3 (May 29, 2009)

The British police shown in the video clip in an earlier post on here have been suspended and face criminal and disciplinary charges.


----------



## jks9199 (May 29, 2009)

Flea said:


> Jks,  I find that distressing.  It's not as if it's hard to sail through those exams regardless of your state of mind.  But given that fact that people are handed a position of authority and _expected_ to carry weapons throughout the day as a job requirement, at least some token effort should be made to ensure clarity of mind.  If only for PR reasons.
> 
> Punisher, your comment on "the sins of all officers" reminds me of a conversation I got into as a teenager.  I was on the subway at 14 when a city cop sat down next to me.  I didn't engage him in conversation, but he was chatty and went on about how he loved his job ... "and the best part is that when someone gives me crap I can sling it right back at them.  Before I became a cop if someone hit me I'd get in trouble if I hit them back.  But not any more!"  It was my first interaction with a police officer and my skin crawled.  I didn't say a word (I was afraid to!) and that quote has stuck with me ever since.


Many agencies do choose to do some form of psych assessment -- but the format varies widely from a pure pencil & paper "integrity test" to the MMPI or pure talk assessment.

I don't have documentation available off the top of my head -- but I think that their hard to actually show that these tests do more than weed out the worst candidates.  A good, thorough background investigation is generally at least as effective, especially when coupled with a good field training program.  Often, you just plain don't have a clue how a person will behave when they get the badge and are on their own until you get them there.

(FYI -- Virginia's minimum qualifications are HERE for most officers.)


----------



## howard (May 29, 2009)

jks9199 said:


> (FYI -- Virginia's minimum qualifications are HERE for most officers.)



jks9199,

Virginia's requirements seem pretty basic and uncontroversial... other than the requirement that officers be US citizens, do you know why they would have included the waiver? I mean, I can understand why it would make sense to allow a non-citizen (say, a permanent resident, aka "green card holder") to become an officer, but why would they ever want to waive any of the other requirements?

Are you aware of any examples of any of the requirements being waived?

Thanks.


----------



## jks9199 (May 29, 2009)

howard said:


> jks9199,
> 
> Virginia's requirements seem pretty basic and uncontroversial... other than the requirement that officers be US citizens, do you know why they would have included the waiver? I mean, I can understand why it would make sense to allow a non-citizen (say, a permanent resident, aka "green card holder") to become an officer, but why would they ever want to waive any of the other requirements?
> 
> ...


I don't know if they've been waived; the option is there kind of as an "in case of" or perhaps to grandfather officers who were already sworn and working when the law was passed.  But, for example, it might be reasonable to waive the physical for a soldier being hired straight from deployment who couldn't go to the approved docs for some reason, maybe.  Or someone who doesn't have a GED but clearly has the appropriate education and intelligence...  

Don't know, I don't write laws and don't have any birds or stars on my shoulders!  Waivers are headaches well above my paygrade!


----------



## Empty Hands (May 29, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:


> Grabbing a man by the throat isn't violent?



Good point.  I was just trying to convey that I expected strikes and major damage inflicted, and it looked like that didn't happen, despite flaring tempers.  I'm not trying to say anyone was particularly justified.  As others have said, the arrest/ticket/dispute/whatever should have taken place at the hospital.


----------



## Archangel M (May 29, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> The British police shown in the video clip in an earlier post on here have been suspended and face criminal and disciplinary charges.



And we dont know what the end result of many of the situations discussed here recently....I just don't like the "This is solely an American phenomena" some of these threads take at times.


----------



## Archangel M (May 29, 2009)

I had to take a bank of psych tests and then speak to a shrink before hiring. 

And they still hired me..so take that as you will.


----------



## Archangel M (May 29, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I don't find videos of officers doing good unfortunately, but I do try to post the news articles when I find them to balance things as I can.



Nobody wants to tape a cop doing what he is supposed to be doing....

And many people dont seem to care to watch them when they do anyways.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 29, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Nobody wants to tape a cop doing what he is supposed to be doing....
> 
> And many people dont seem to care to watch them when they do anyways.


I considered taking a shot of a US Border Patrol cop in his green n white SUV the other day. He was just hangin out, enjoying the sunny day. Would have made a hell of a nice shot. I decided I wasn't too interested in the potential confrontation, discussion, debate, and possible abuse, considering just how many BP cases I'm seeing as of late. Sorry, just don't trust them to act rational.  I've got a better opinion of my local cops, and state patrol.


----------



## Archangel M (May 30, 2009)

This is just my anecdotal..personal opinon..take with a grain of salt view. 

Ive always thought that a "local cop"..i.e. Town, City etc. has a bit more vested interest in his/her behavior than some Fed, State or County agencies. Not that Troopers are any less professional as a whole than anybody else in LE, but when a cop constantly patrols the same area..meeting and seeing the same people day in and day out...well I think it results in a different dynamic from officers who work interstates and wide open areas where you may deal with a person never to meet them again.

I also think that many cops are distrustful of picture takers because more of them seem to be looking for pictures to belittle or "catch" cops "goofing off" than they are for innocent reasons. If that BP officer just "hanging out" on a nice sunny day had some web page griping about cops feature his photo...well that can sour ya after a while.


----------



## Carol (May 30, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> This is just my anecdotal..personal opinon..take with a grain of salt view.
> 
> Ive always thought that a "local cop"..i.e. Town, City etc. has a bit more vested interest in his/her behavior than some Fed, State or County agencies. Not that Troopers are any less professional as a whole than anybody else in LE, but when a cop constantly patrols the same area..meeting and seeing the same people day in and day out...well I think it results in a different dynamic from officers who work interstates and wide open areas where you may deal with a person never to meet them again.



That was how community policing began, yes?  It wasn't with a desk in the corner of a shopping center, it was with officers walking the beat, getting to know an area, and being a part of that area.


----------



## Tez3 (May 30, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> And we dont know what the end result of many of the situations discussed here recently....I just don't like the "This is solely an American phenomena" some of these threads take at times.


 
Thats true, there's certain groups I think in all countries that are anti police and jump on the inevitable incidents where bad policing has occurred and bad policing will occur of course as police officers are human with all the failings everyone has. The test of a country's police and justice system though is how the incident is treated. As far as I've seen in the States as well as here, the police officers involved in such incidents are usually disciplined if found guilty when _all the facts have been presented. _
The problem of course is whether all the facts have been presented! We have been given one side of the story here, we can't judge unless all sides have been heard, the police officer, the patient,witnesses etc and that will probably not happen as there's no investment for the media to actually be fair, more mileage in sensationalism.

Anyone who's job it is to take eye witness statements will tell you that ten people can witness an incident and you will get ten different versions, they don't lie they just see things differntly, add to that a wish to put police in a bad light, a media hungry for headlines and there you go.


And the percentage of bad policing to good policing? Very low I think!


----------



## jarrod (Jun 1, 2009)

i wonder how that would have played out if they EMTs were white.  i grew up in kansas, not everyone in the midwest is exactly enlightened when it comes to racial equality.

jf


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jun 13, 2009)

*Oklahoma cops refuse to release dashcam video of chokehold incident*

*June 13th, 2009*



> Oklahoma State Police refuse to release the dashcam video that would prove whether or not a paramedic slammed the &#8220;door in a hostile manner&#8221; after being pulled over, leaving the officer no choice but to strangle him. Witnesses believe Officer Daniel Martin was showing off for his wife - who happened to be in the passenger seat of his squad car - when he pulled the ambulance over for failing to yield last month.





> Martin claims the paramedics not only failed to yield for him but they also flipped him off. He also claims he was en route to an emergency at the time but it appears he was only picking up his wife.
> The paramedics who were transporting a patient to the hospital, claim that Martin told them he was considering using deadly force against them.



More



> *         Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper cites gesture in report on scuffle
> Details emerge in Okfuskee County ambulance incident             *
> 
> 
> ...



http://newsok.com/oklahoma-highway-patrol-trooper-cites-gesture-in-report-on-scuffle/article/3374472


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jun 13, 2009)

Video is now available. Looks bad for the cop.
http://www.examiner.com/x-6121-Okla...releases-video-of-trooper-attack-on-paramedic



> Let me walk it down for you. An ambulance, with Maurice White acting as supervisor and paramedic, is taking an elderly woman, who had collapsed, to the hospital for treatment. Her worried family follows.
> 
> 
> Trooper Daniel Martin, who was responding to a stolen car report, came up behind the ambulance on a two-lane country road. In Oklahoma, those shoulders are notoriously tricky for even a car to pull off onto. But there's another factor involved.
> ...


----------



## Sukerkin (Jun 13, 2009)

I can't really say anything beyond what we've touched on before in similar threads about poor judgement and misuse of authority .


----------



## Carol (Jun 13, 2009)

The DA has said that no charges will be filed against the LEO or the paramedic.

However, the internal investigation appears to be ongoing.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2009)

*Oklahoma EMT sues lying cop*


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 27, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> *Oklahoma EMT sues lying cop*


 
Definatley justified from what I've seen. 

I heard this morning that the officer was attending anger management classes...LOL. Shouldn't that be part of thier basic training? 

Anyway, choking someone is not a valid apprehension technique the last time I checked. 

I'm with the EMT on this one...I just hate that it's tax payer dollars that will be paid out in the long run. Yeah, I know most cops have liability policies through the department...but who pays for that?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2009)

As a sidebar, before I left on my road trip I had the pleasure of sharing a bank line with 1 of Buffalo's finest. Nice gal. So I asked her, "who has the right of way?".  She didn't know but said she'd check with her superior, but she assumed it was the ambulance.   Most of the folks I've talked to locally think it's the medical emergency ranks higher than the police call.  But none were 100% certain.  I'd be very interested in knowing an actual verifiable rule.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 27, 2009)

Bob, I don't think you'll find an actual rule.  They're both "emergency vehicles operating under emergency conditions."  I suppose you could argue that the follow the normal right of way rules between themselves... but it's just not likely to be a situation that comes up very often!  My personal opinion would be to determine based on circumstances.  If I know rescue is responding to stage at the scene I'm headed to... I'll probably go first, and they'll probably let me.  If I think they're probably transporting a patient... they win.  

Worst case... a cruiser can generally pass around an ambulance!  Much better pickup, and more likely to drive faster anyway!


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jul 27, 2009)

celtic_crippler said:


> Definatley justified from what I've seen.
> 
> I heard this morning that the officer was attending anger management classes...LOL. Shouldn't that be part of thier basic training?
> 
> ...


 
Choking, no.  Carotid Restraint which would result in the unconciousness of a suspect, yes. 

And the tax payers won't necessarily pay.  The department will not be held liable if they can show that what the officer did is grossly outside of his policy and the training that he received.


----------



## kaizasosei (Jul 28, 2009)

If they be all speeding with lights on, how come they have the time to engage in such stupidity?  Man, what did he say he was a 'State Trooper'-seemed to me to be a dumb and embarassing man with a serious power complex-how come such ******* act all tough all the time?  I bet even their kids know that they are *********** losers-probably get his *** handed to him by his kid one day. Man, once she hits 13, she'll probably bust his head in with a maglite. 

Wow, what a self-rightious abuse of power.  Clearly a very disturbed person.  Just glad for his sake that he ran into such intelligent and tollerant people that were able to handle his unjust and discriminative attitude.  It seems like that in that officers mind, a leo is something above normal civilians.  Very very wrong.  Police must also understand that people do act up and are stupid sometimes, but that is not a reason to beat them or to engage on that level.  Normal civilians also have conflicts and fights, and when they do, they don't have the ability to declare ablolute right to kick your *** and expect that you follow the orders of someone that can be described as an ******* or a dick, that's also scared ******** of himself among other hallucinations.

Oh well so it is, should follow my own advice and 'let it go', right










j


----------



## arnisador (Jul 28, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Choking, no.  Carotid Restraint



...is technically a strangle, not a choke. But a _restraint_? Isn't that just PR, because "strangling" a suspect sounds bad?


----------



## Andrew Green (Jul 28, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> The DA has said that no charges will be filed against the LEO or the paramedic.
> 
> However, the internal investigation appears to be ongoing.



I think this is what really annoys people.

Being a cop is a job, mostly filled by good people.  But the bad ones seem to get away with it far too often, even when there is no doubt that they are in the wrong.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jul 29, 2009)

arnisador said:


> ...is technically a strangle, not a choke. But a _restraint_? Isn't that just PR, because "strangling" a suspect sounds bad?


 
Not at all.  On a basic level, a strangle is defined as cutting of the air supply.  On a dictionary level, it is an attempt to *kill* the straglee.  None of these is happening with a carotid restraint hold.

This type of hold is designed to temporarily *lessen* (not completely stop) the flow of oxygen to the brain to render someone *temporarily*  unconscious by reducing the flow of oxygenated blood through the carotid arteries in the neck.  When taught in law enforcement circles, there is great care to make sure that an officer does not begin to crush the windpipe, thereby causing death or possible permanent injury, by proper placement of the arm around the neck.

And, it's purpose is to *restrain *the individual from resisting, in this case by rendering them unconscious.  When physically confronting someone, often the only other option would be to beat them into submission.

So there is no PR involved.


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 29, 2009)

Andrew Green said:


> I think this is what really annoys people.
> 
> Being a cop is a job, mostly filled by good people. But the bad ones seem to get away with it far too often, even when there is no doubt that they are in the wrong.


 
Well..the DA had his chance and declined.

The problem is that the media writes "internal investigation" and leaves it at that giving the impression that the cop gets a slap on the wrist and is back to work. HERE cops get lengthly suspensions where they either have to burn up all their accumulated time to survive...get suspended with NO money or get fired. It's not in my depts interests to air our dirty laundry and nobody ever seems interested in calling to find out what the investigation resulted in.

That doesnt even include all te guys we discipline or fire for things that never even make it to the media.

Plenty of cops get what they deserve when they do wrong..what I see is a lot of "non-le" making assumptions based on "dirty-cop" television shows, movies and "cop-bashing" websites. There also seems to be this tendency for some people to think that any and all disciplinary issues with an officer should result in termination.


----------



## jks9199 (Jul 29, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Well..the DA had his chance and declined.
> 
> The problem is that the media writes "internal investigation" and leaves it at that giving the impression that the cop gets a slap on the wrist and is back to work. HERE cops get lengthly suspensions where they either have to burn up all their accumulated time to survive...get suspended with NO money or get fired. It's not in my depts interests to air our dirty laundry and nobody ever seems interested in calling to find out what the investigation resulted in.
> 
> ...


In my agency, if you're suspended -- you can't burn leave. You can't buy back your leave. You're suspended as a punishment. And it's generally served at the department's convenience, not yours, meaning they try to set it up so that you can't serve your suspension and stretch your weekend. 

Suspended with pay during an investigation can be even worse... On a disciplinary suspension, you're kind of a free man. You're suspended; they can't make you work or call you in. But suspended with pay? They can actually make you accountable for your time, and even require you to come into the office to meet with the investigators at any reasonable time... 

Something else about internal discipline is that it's not often publicly announced. You may not know that the guy who wasn't prosecuted was suspended for 30 days (could you lose a month of work?), nor do you know if he quit in return for admitting what he did and not being prosecuted...


----------



## blackxpress (Jul 31, 2009)

Assuming the video tells the whole story (a tenuous assumption at best), and that was my mom in the ambulance, those troopers would have been so busy arresting me for assaulting a police officer they wouldn't have had time to worry about the EMTs.   

Regardless of whether this is a true story, one thing's for sure.  We live in a police state.  Every time I hear the politicians promising to put more police officers on the street I get a real bad case of the willies.  

The prison-industrial complex is in full effect in the U.S.A.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Aug 2, 2009)

blackxpress said:


> Assuming the video tells the whole story (a tenuous assumption at best), and that was my mom in the ambulance, those troopers would have been so busy arresting me for assaulting a police officer they wouldn't have had time to worry about the EMTs.
> 
> Regardless of whether this is a true story, one thing's for sure. We live in a police state. Every time I hear the politicians promising to put more police officers on the street I get a real bad case of the willies.
> 
> The prison-industrial complex is in full effect in the U.S.A.


 
Even though I'm replying to this, I'm sure that you won't get it.  After all, since we live in a police state, they surely have monitored your activity, including this message, and have scooped you up already.  

This is not a police state by any stretch of the imagination.  If it were, this cop would not risk losing his job at all.  In fact, he might be given a medal for his actions in such a "police state".


----------



## Bruno@MT (Aug 3, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> There also seems to be this tendency for some people to think that any and all disciplinary issues with an officer should result in termination.



Not 'any and all' I think it would depend on the issue at hand. However, someone with anger management issues who already lost it once (this incident) should probably no longer be placed in stress situations with legal authority.


----------



## blackxpress (Aug 3, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Even though I'm replying to this, I'm sure that you won't get it.  After all, since we live in a police state, they surely have monitored your activity, including this message, and have scooped you up already.
> 
> This is not a police state by any stretch of the imagination.  If it were, this cop would not risk losing his job at all.  In fact, he might be given a medal for his actions in such a "police state".



Whatever.  "Police State" is not an entirely objective term.  My comments may have been a little over the top but I do believe we're at least headed in that direction.  Here's an excerpt from a very interesting Wiki article on the subject:



> Examples of police state-like attributes
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you interested you can read the whole article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state


----------



## Empty Hands (Aug 3, 2009)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> After all, since we live in a police state, they surely have monitored your activity, including this message, and have scooped you up already.



He won't be scooped up...but the message is being monitored.  Not by a person reading it, but by a system flagging certain keywords for further review.



5-0 Kenpo said:


> This is not a police state by any stretch of the imagination.



It all depends on how you make your definitions.  The US has more of its people in prison than any other country on the planet.  Your property can be confiscated without going before a judge, and without a trial.  You can be detained and searched for making jokes or saying certain words.  Paramilitary style police raids are being used more and more often to serve simple warrants.  There is extensive surveillance and monitoring of our communications, without judicial review.  The Supreme Court ruled a while back that you can be detained for refusing to show identification to the police, even if you are not in a vehicle.  And so forth.

I agree that we are a long way from the classic police state - we tend to be more subtle if nothing else.  There are many troubling trends in place though.


----------



## kaizasosei (Aug 3, 2009)

I don't really think that the officer is a really evil person.  I felt angered by the attitude displayed in the video, but really it's simply quite childish.  Not something really so nasty i guess. 
Just another example of how easy it is to loose one's cool at certain moments.  I do think though that when you become a police officer, one must suppress certain natural insticts of revenge or quite meaningless engagements.  An officer is not a niceness police, not a ghost hunter or a phychologist really.  Why not simply flash a signal in some way.  Even a look from the police makes people nervous, why should one need more than that.  
  Also holding up an ambulance for some petty issues is also really uncool, i guess anyone would understand that.  

Sometimes one can do stupid things...one time when i was still younger, i was in some joint and i felt like one guy was staring at me the whole time.  I think i was really dumb and not very perceptive when i bluntly and somewhat aggressively asked him what the hec he was looking at...turns out, i was standing right under a tv.  The guy was speechless and i felt like an *** when i noticed

j


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Aug 4, 2009)

blackxpress said:


> Whatever. "Police State" is not an entirely objective term. My comments may have been a little over the top but I do believe we're at least headed in that direction. Here's an excerpt from a very interesting Wiki article on the subject:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

I actually agree that we are headed in that direction.  But I think that to use this situation as an example of that is to place your position in the realm of rhetoric.

Sorry, but I believe in a serious discussion (if any internet discussion can be considered serious) we have to have a common language and definition of terms, as EH said.  



> Empty Hands:
> 
> Paramilitary style police raids are being used more and more often to serve simple warrants.


 
No disrespect, but you are incorrect.  Having worked in a police department, and with several SWAT teams from different agencies (both large and small)  you may be surprised at the restrictions that are placed on the use of SWAT teams to conduct various operations.


----------

