Lawful use of force or excessive?

He is lucky all the people around him were more interested in taking pictures and video's, or he would have been in a world of hurt. Also, am I wrong, or was he having problems taking control of the situation?
 
He needed back-up.

If he couldn't physically control the suspect he should have used some sort of less lethal like OC IMO. As far as "taking control of the situation" thats easier said than done for those who haven't tried it. I did notice the officers lack of strong verbal commands though. I'm thinking he was fairly new and way in over his head.
 
One caveat: I don't know the circumstance prior to the video starting; I'm presuming it was a lawful arrest. The use of force, against both women, was justified. It's clear the first woman, in black, was resisting an arrest. Her cousin, in the pink, interfered, and got struck.

Personally... I don't like the officer's use of force. It wasn't enough, and it wasn't done in an effective manner. He spent something like two minutes trying to hold the one woman's wrists, and meanwhile, he was attacked by another party. At that point, the ideal or textbook response is to escalate the level of force. He probably should have at least been going for OC or a baton, and very easily could have justified escalating towards lethal force; there were too many people in that crowd that could have easily turned on him.

I also have to wonder where his backup was -- because he should have called for them early in the event.
 
Here is the article the video was apparently lifted from. One warning; it gave me a little bit of a fit trying to bounce from the article to a page not found.

It seems that the officer made a jaywalking stop. The girl in black ignored his commands to stop, and began walking away. He physically escorted her back, and she became resistive, as shown in the video. The girl in pink attempted to intervene, grabbing the officer's arm, and he punched her. She was eventually taken into custody for obstruction or a similar charge. I'd have added assault on an officer, and attempted aiding an escape by force, myself.

I'd say this is a great example of how a seemingly minor incident can escalate quickly, and why officers have to be prepared for that escalation (or de-escalation, if a previously resistive or combative subject ceases to resist).
 
Kindof seemed like the officer was sortof getting off on the proximity involved in the encounter. The use of force i think was not appropriate or necessary or actually extrememly counterproductive to the profession.
Taking control of the situation, definite FAIL
As a police officer, i would think you don't 'pick your battles, nevertheless you sure as hell are free to go about things in different ways, some good, some not so.
Police are human and can be overwhelmed especially if lacking experience or braincells.
It's like..Don't mess with the oger! Keep a healthy distance from the cage.
Quite bold or foolish to physically stand up to police but people do what people do..reason or madness?
 
From a civilian standpoint, I don't think he used proper force. In fact, I think he was too restrained: The confrontation took too long and he was fighting with multiple opponents, with more potential combatants in the mix. IMO, again, as a Civilian, THAT is what Tazers and OC are made for... The woman in pink is lucky she only got a sock to the face, and should have been charged with Assault, as far as Im concerned.
 
Psst...hey Cryo, police officer was recorded in a 2 party consent state (Washington). Shh! Don't tell anyone. ;)
 
That officer needs some training ASAP...on numerous fronts. Someone in that area PLEASE find him and offer him some training. He was very lucky he was not in a more aggressive situation...IMHO....he would have been hurt or killed.

As to his use of force....I did not see any, all he did was play wrist grab with her and could have paid a terrible price if things had gone differently.

If it was me....she was resisting arrest and not complying with commands....SO....the first woman would have hit the ground so hard her momma would have said ouch, and after she was secured, her stupid a$$ cousin would have followed soon after.

Things like this make me crazy!!!!

I can't believe the academy training sends officers out this ill-prepared in hand to hand controling and locking techniques....honestly....it sickens me. I have given many police seminars and they have learned more from me in a 3 hour intensive on locks and control techniques than they had in the academy! Absolutely! EFFIN! Rediculous!

Rant over.

Michael
 
He needed back-up.

If he couldn't physically control the suspect he should have used some sort of less lethal like OC IMO. As far as "taking control of the situation" thats easier said than done for those who haven't tried it. I did notice the officers lack of strong verbal commands though. I'm thinking he was fairly new and way in over his head.
Really!!!! Were we looking at the same video?
Re: Lawful use of force or excessive? I saw the potential for a disaster.
I will agree, fairly new, and way in over his head.
 
This is one of those videos that is a no win situation for cops. With a slight edit by the newsmedia it would look very bad.

As to the use of force. He didn't use the appropriate level of force from the start. When the first woman was resisting he should have done was he was trained to do (assuming that they use PPCT or something similiar) use a knee strike as a distraction and then takedown.

BUT, Once he takes the woman down (either to the ground or the hood of the car) he is left vulnerable to the other people in the crowd.

As to the second lady, she WAY upped the level of response. She created a multiple opponent situation that had to be dealth with IMMEDIATELY. The officer had no way of knowing what her intent was, only that she put hands on him and was trying to stop him from effecting a legal arrest.
 
First and foremost, as soon as people started resisting, he should've called for backup, new or seasoned officer. IMO, its better to air in the side of caution, rather than trying to deal with something like this, especially with a large group forming.

As Arch said, he was using alot of verbal commands, which, had he not hit her, would probably have been his saving grace.

As for the hit....IMO, in a situation like that, I do not feel that the hit was proper. Now, if 5 other people suddenly joined in and started beating him, then yeah, he's outnumbered, and in that case, if he started swinging back, then I see no issues with that. That actually happened to one of our plain clothes narc. dets. one day. Started chasing the guy, the guy stopped and started throwing punches.

As far as this goes though, I think the OC would've been the better choice. Blast them both with a shot of it, and I'm sure their 'fire' would've been put out. :)

As always, this video was only started when the officer was attempting to detain/arrest the first girl. I would have loved to have physically seen what happened earlier. I'm sure, had we seen that, we'd have seen this girl acting just as much of an *** as she was when being arrested.

And as punisher said, why keep playing around with her standing? Take her down. The downside, as said, is he's more vulnerable. Then again, by the looks of the growing crowd, he was rapidly getting placed in a bad position. Call for backup. I"m assuming he called out his location to dispatch, so even if he wasn't able to use his radio, hit the panic button. Again, assuming the radio has one, which I believe they all do. At least help would've been on the way.
 
I'd have maced her or used the taser. The punch was justified, but I guarantee he'll be sued over it and get 12 jerks on the jury who will totally overlook the circumstances and hang him out to dry.
 
First and foremost, as soon as people started resisting, he should've called for backup, new or seasoned officer. IMO, its better to air in the side of caution, rather than trying to deal with something like this, especially with a large group forming.

As Arch said, he was using alot of verbal commands, which, had he not hit her, would probably have been his saving grace.

As for the hit....IMO, in a situation like that, I do not feel that the hit was proper. Now, if 5 other people suddenly joined in and started beating him, then yeah, he's outnumbered, and in that case, if he started swinging back, then I see no issues with that. That actually happened to one of our plain clothes narc. dets. one day. Started chasing the guy, the guy stopped and started throwing punches.

As far as this goes though, I think the OC would've been the better choice. Blast them both with a shot of it, and I'm sure their 'fire' would've been put out. :)

As always, this video was only started when the officer was attempting to detain/arrest the first girl. I would have loved to have physically seen what happened earlier. I'm sure, had we seen that, we'd have seen this girl acting just as much of an *** as she was when being arrested.

And as punisher said, why keep playing around with her standing? Take her down. The downside, as said, is he's more vulnerable. Then again, by the looks of the growing crowd, he was rapidly getting placed in a bad position. Call for backup. I"m assuming he called out his location to dispatch, so even if he wasn't able to use his radio, hit the panic button. Again, assuming the radio has one, which I believe they all do. At least help would've been on the way.
At the time when he punched the woman in pink, OC wasn't a really available option. His hands were tied up, and you have to have at least one hand free enough to deploy the OC (or anything else). The strike was absolutely justifiable -- and he stopped when she backed out of the fight. The strike drove her back, and got her off of him. However, as I said, he didn't escalate in dealing with the original offender.

It's actually kind of simple. An officer is empowered to use sufficient force to obtain his lawful goal; the girl in question refused verbal commands, and began to pull away and try to escape his control. He did have grounds to involuntarily detain her to investigate the traffic infraction, so he had grounds to use the force necessary to do so. He begins to escalate to stronger holds, and got locked in a game of tug o' war over her wrists. I can think of a lot of reasons why he might not have escalated, ranging from just didn't think of it through "she's a girl" or questioned his own authority to use more force and was afraid of liability. Especially when the second woman joined in -- he could have backed off, and presented a higher level of force, and called for back up.
 
I'd have maced her or used the taser. The punch was justified, but I guarantee he'll be sued over it and get 12 jerks on the jury who will totally overlook the circumstances and hang him out to dry.
He'd face the same suit over the Taser or pepper spray. He needed to deal with her RIGHT then; his hands were his most available and direct option. I can really make a case from the video that he could have felt she was going for his gun...
 
Sure enough this is going to be turned into "The Cop punched a girl because she was JAYWALKING!" UHHH...no. Thats the typical attempt to turn the bad behavior of these girls around on the cop. He had every legal right to stop them. How they behaved from that point on is on THEM!
 
Last edited:
[yt]E9w9AfptGGQ[/yt]

Let's see what you all think?





Most people don't know there are a lot of politics in police work, and if the guy was right or wrong really doesn't matter. If the higher ups decide it looks bad for the department he'll lose his job and have a hard time getting a new one.
 
Seattle Urban League CEO James Kelly says the punch was an overreaction that brought to mind a video taken April 17 of two Seattle officers kicking a Hispanic suspect.

Of course...so now we have to be worried about "bringing to mind" other incidents??

Kudos to that Police Chief!
 
At the time when he punched the woman in pink, OC wasn't a really available option. His hands were tied up, and you have to have at least one hand free enough to deploy the OC (or anything else). The strike was absolutely justifiable -- and he stopped when she backed out of the fight. The strike drove her back, and got her off of him. However, as I said, he didn't escalate in dealing with the original offender.

It's actually kind of simple. An officer is empowered to use sufficient force to obtain his lawful goal; the girl in question refused verbal commands, and began to pull away and try to escape his control. He did have grounds to involuntarily detain her to investigate the traffic infraction, so he had grounds to use the force necessary to do so. He begins to escalate to stronger holds, and got locked in a game of tug o' war over her wrists. I can think of a lot of reasons why he might not have escalated, ranging from just didn't think of it through "she's a girl" or questioned his own authority to use more force and was afraid of liability. Especially when the second woman joined in -- he could have backed off, and presented a higher level of force, and called for back up.

Points taken. Could you clarify something you said for me? I had mentioned the use of OC. In this reply to me, you said that you need at least 1 hand free for that, but in your first post, you said:

He probably should have at least been going for OC or a baton

It looked to me, that there was more than one opportunity, the first one being right after he hit the girl in the pink, to grab his OC.

Of course, I'm also interested in knowing the PDs use of force policy. I think that would shed some light on this as well.

In closing, I think its safe to say that you, and the other fellow LEOs on the forum, all, or should all hopefully know, that I'm certainly not anti-LEO. :) By all means, if he was justified in doing that, go for it. :) I just figured that since he had other options available to him, at the time, that he'd go for those first, before doing what he did. I'd just hate to see him get jammed up, thats all.
 
Back
Top