Video Showing Houston Cops Beating Teen Finally Released

[Bob Hubbard]

February 3, 2011 @ 10:44AM
Video Showing Houston Cops Beating Teen Finally Released

Federal judge, district attorney, police chief and city mayor tried to block its release

Four officers have been criminally charged in the incident that took place last March in which a teen named Chad Holley was struck by a police car during a foot pursuit after he was burglarizing a home with three others

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/13_undercover&id=7936228
http://www.pixiq.com/article/video-showing-houston-cops-beating-teen-finally-released

ok, I can understand the clipping. Don't necessarily agree with it, but, there may be things happening just prior that aren't clear.

But, to me, this looks like a bunch of angry *** hats, pounding on a kid, getting their licks in, long after and need to 'stun' or 'immobilize'.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Twelve officers were disciplined in the wake of the Holley case, but many have been given their jobs back against the city's will.


Mayor Annise Parker: "I was shocked and disgusted when I first viewed this tape. My feelings haven't changed. This is not acceptable in Houston. The City of Houston has fully supported the district attorney's desire to keep this video from being released prior to trial because we did not want to do anything that could jeopardize the prosecution of the police officers involved. We vigorously sought termination of the officers and continue to fight to keep them from ever again working at the Houston Police Department. Whoever provided the video to Channel 13 is in violation of a federal court order and should be prosecuted. It is unfortunate and irresponsible that Channel 13 has chosen to air the material at this time."

 

[shesulsa]

A question for the officers on the board:

Usually, we can't see what happened immediately prior to the force used by officers. In this case, we can only see the young man running and surrendering.

If a suspect is running from an extremely violent scenario in another location, does it matter that they give up cooperatively like this, or does the potential for the suspect to turn violent again warrant such a use of force?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

A question for the officers on the board:

Usually, we can't see what happened immediately prior to the force used by officers. In this case, we can only see the young man running and surrendering.

If a suspect is running from an extremely violent scenario in another location, does it matter that they give up cooperatively like this, or does the potential for the suspect to turn violent again warrant such a use of force?

Even given the video, I have little way of knowing what was happening at the moment that the suspect was being arrested. I am not defending the police; just noting that I don't know what I don't know.

I saw the man go down, I saw him spread-eagle himself and put his hands behind his head. That does not mean he cooperated; we can't tell if he resisted having his hands put behind his back to be handcuffed, or if he was moving about in a struggle with the officer(s) who landed on him. Generally, if the police tackle someone and try to bend their arm back to apply hand irons and they resist, the officer applies force until they stop resisting; this can look quite brutal. And you can't tell unless you're kneeling on the guy if he is resisting or not, really.

However, I would agree that this looks very bad, no matter what it was.

And no, it doesn't matter what he was running from; apprehension is apprehension. It's not like the police are authorized to kick the suspect in the head a few times if he did something heinous instead of some lesser offense; they are only authorized to use that force reasonably necessary to secure his apprehension, with the additional modifier that under some circumstances they can use deadly force to prevent the escape (and in some cases not). This was clearly not a prevention of escape issue, though.

Cops, like everyone else, get angry and frustrated. Cops are not allowed to take it out in the form of violence; even on the bad guys. It sucks that bad guys get the same protections innocent people do until you consider that even if they caught the guy right in the act, by law he is presumed innocent until proven guilty; our police are not supposed to be punishers, only enforcers of the law. It may be that they decided to get their licks in on a kid who ran from them and made them mad. It happens. If that's what happened, it's wrong. The cops who did it know that if that's what they indeed did.

I think I'll hold off on the outrage until the courts have decided what happened. But that is not to say that an outrage did not occur.

 

[jks9199]

A question for the officers on the board:

Usually, we can't see what happened immediately prior to the force used by officers. In this case, we can only see the young man running and surrendering.

If a suspect is running from an extremely violent scenario in another location, does it matter that they give up cooperatively like this, or does the potential for the suspect to turn violent again warrant such a use of force?

Bill addressed some of the points I'll make again. Forgive the duplication.

First, let's look at the video. I don't know exactly what led to it, and I haven't spent my web fu on finding the full accounts, but it's pretty clear it was a pursuit accompanied by bailouts of the occupants. As the video starts, you see Holley running toward the camera, and a cruiser pull in. Holley and cruiser collide; from what I can see on this video, I think the officer was probably trying to cut his flight off, and he ran into the cruiser as much as the cruiser hit him.

As officers close in on him Holley goes down. The resolution on my screen was insufficient for me to know how much he was really cooperating -- but even had he been completely limp, I would have treated him as a potentially violent subject. I'd have to wonder if he was simply trying to lull me in; he's already tried to run twice! What does he have hidden on his person? Is there a knife or gun? So he would be taken into custody (ideally!) at gun point, with tactics appropriate to those potential threats. That might include distracting strikes. Also, we cannot tell what he's doing. You can resist quite strongly without making a lot of apparent struggles simply by holding your arms in, for example.

That does not excuse all of the actions of the officers. From what I can see -- it's hard to defend. It looks terrible, putting it mildly. But I won't second guess them too heavily from this video only. (And I do understand the reluctance of the court, prosecutors, and police to release the video. They're going to have a hell of a time finding an untainted jury pool now.)

At the end of a chase, emotions are high. Officers are operating under all the effects of adrenal stress. The challenge of the job is to ramp it up or down as appropriate to the situation and the events and it certainly appears that there is room to question whether these officers did so. And they'll have to justify their actions in court.

 

[MA-Caver]

I will agree with Bill on his post but I'm still outraged either way. The kid threw himself down on the ground and spread himself out and put his hands on his head and laid there waiting. He knew very well what was going to happen and responded after tripping over the hood of the cop car. He knew he was busted.
Now given that there is still a bit of tension going on. One would imagine that normally a cop would given that situation a prone suspect with his hands on his head reach for the wrist (after applying the first cuff ) and bring it back behind the suspect's back that he may feel a bit of resistance (yes that could be construed as resisting arrest) and more torque may be needed to twist the arm back where it needs to go.
Kicking the guy repeatedly on the head and then kneeling down to punch him 5 times then stomping on his leg and then getting kicked from behind all this while still prone on the ground? I dunno, I really don't know... you got 4-5 officers there around him and they're already applying physical force.
Did the kid (or his accomplices) brandish a weapon at the cops before they dispersed?

What is also bad is that the video was blocked for a prolonged period of time. It's evidence sure but it's already been looked over by the powers that be. It was given to the activist who in turn gave it to the news station. Now they want to sue the news station? No sue the activist because the news station is going to do what they're going to do with any type of video of this nature.

This is going to cause a mell of a hess in the coming months for one of the nation's already violent cities. Granted I can understand the resistance of showing this video to the public for just that particular reason. But it needs to be shown irregardless. In the heat of the moment a lot of people can end up doing the wrong thing, even cops. Yet cops receive a lot more training in dealing with high stress situations than the average Joe.

There is probably wrong on all sides of this particular issue. Hopefully it'll get sorted out.

Hopefully there won't be a riotous situation like there was with Rodney King.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I think telling is that 12 cops were disciplined, that the mayor stated they wanted them out of police work, and that these 4 are facing charges. It's my understanding that most of these situations don't get that big or far. I could be wrong.

 

[Bruno@MT]

This ties in to the discussion we had last week, about reasons why people might want to take it out on cops etc. Things like this, that involve only a handful of officers, will get a lot of people riled up against cops in general.

 

[Tez3]

This ties in to the discussion we had last week, about reasons why people might want to take it out on cops etc. Things like this, that involve only a handful of officers, will get a lot of people riled up against cops in general.

It also scares a lot of vulnerable people who don't always understand everything.

 

[Archangel M]

This ties in to the discussion we had last week, about reasons why people might want to take it out on cops etc. Things like this, that involve only a handful of officers, will get a lot of people riled up against cops in general.

Not that I entirely disagree with this, or that I approve of what I see here (if it is really as bad as it looks, and if there are criminal charges being laid it probably is). BUT this sentiment that the "average joe" will hate cops because of seeing this just doesn't always hold water with me. In my experience I have met a number of "average joes" that would say that a guy like this "got what he deserved"...again, I don't agree with that, but I see/hear that quite a bit. It would seem to me that criminals who flee from the police and the people/family members who support them are likely the ones most "riled up" when they see this. I have never been chased, tackled and cuffed after a car chase so I wouldn't be too scared myself. I think that corruption, general rudeness on routine contacts like car stops, and cops caught stealing/taking sexual favors/stealing dope etc. Get people more riled up than a bunch of cops "lumping up" a guy after a chase....as unprofessional and illegal as THAT is.

I don't know if my point is entirely clear. Please don't misconstrue this as a defense of their behavior.

 

[Sukerkin]

With the respect due to those wearing 'the badge', kicking people in the head is not "lumping" someone up.

Giving someone a couple of raps for being an {expletive deleted} during an arrest is one thing but, of all people, those of us here on this site know that blows to the head are a roll-of-the-dice with regard to the severity of the damage they do.

A copper kicking someone in the noggin repeatedly and then doing the same from what we shall politely term 'the other end' beggars belief.

 

[shesulsa]

Well, wrong is wrong no matter who's wrong and you'll find me at least somewhat contented when the convict who killed the prison guard gets the death sentence just as I become somewhat contented when bad cops get fired.

I just have to ask about contain and control techniques - this just looks so unprofessional. I admit that we don't know all of what he just ran from (I, too, have not performed my web-fu on this matter), but it's hard to watch this and not ask, where is all the LTL technology? why are we not holding someone who *simply* *must* be incredibly dangerous (right?) at bay with a firearm or three and carefully approaching someone who may have a gun, weapon, needle or other danger on his person? These would seem not only safer for the perp but safer for the officers, perhaps.

Caveat: I am not a cop and don't have to deal with this **** everyday.

Just playing devil's advocate - I think it's important to explore things like this, guys.

 

[sgtmac_46]

A question for the officers on the board:

Usually, we can't see what happened immediately prior to the force used by officers. In this case, we can only see the young man running and surrendering.

If a suspect is running from an extremely violent scenario in another location, does it matter that they give up cooperatively like this, or does the potential for the suspect to turn violent again warrant such a use of force?

Reminds of the Chris Rock video...

'Remember......if the police have to chase you, they're bringing an *** kicking with them!'

 

[Carol]

The mayor was originally calling for a prosecution of the guy who released the video...uhhhhh...so the trial could stay in Harris County? Really?

How'd that song by George Strait go again...something about oceanfront property in Arizona...

 

[sgtmac_46]

Well, wrong is wrong no matter who's wrong and you'll find me at least somewhat contented when the convict who killed the prison guard gets the death sentence just as I become somewhat contented when bad cops get fired.

I just have to ask about contain and control techniques - this just looks so unprofessional. I admit that we don't know all of what he just ran from (I, too, have not performed my web-fu on this matter), but it's hard to watch this and not ask, where is all the LTL technology? why are we not holding someone who *simply* *must* be incredibly dangerous (right?) at bay with a firearm or three and carefully approaching someone who may have a gun, weapon, needle or other danger on his person? These would seem not only safer for the perp but safer for the officers, perhaps.

Caveat: I am not a cop and don't have to deal with this **** everyday.

Just playing devil's advocate - I think it's important to explore things like this, guys.

Truth be told, I saw perhaps two officers who engaged in what could be considered 'excessive force'......specifically the kicks to the head/face area.

The rest was perfectly acceptable.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Funny thing about 'police brutality'........it all depends on where you're standing. If you're the suspect, you think it's all brutality........and if it was your house that just got burglarized, you're probably cheering the police on!

Personally, I think there is a price that comes with resisting arrest.......this probably went overboard, but there are certain unwritten rules to how these things go......give up and don't make the police chase you/fight you and this doesn't happen. Fight or run and you risk this kind of thing happening, right, wrong or indifferent.

It's really human nature.........the natural result of chasing a fleeing subject is a high dump of adrenaline that manifests as aggression.......when you get caught, at BEST, assuming you have the MOST restrained cops on the planet, you're going to get manhandled fairly roughly........and if they aren't the most restrained cops on the planet, you're going to get kicked in the face.

I hope nobody remotely takes that as a justification........just an explanation of the reality of what we're discussing.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, it is indeed understandable, I don't think that that is a point that any of us would argue against. That Chris Rock quote that Mac reminded us of is a simple homilie to bear in mind if you're a bad guy .

Sadly, all too many things that we do as human beings fall into this category i.e. we understand how they come to happen but it is not good that they do.

 

[Archangel M]

Funny thing about 'police brutality'........it all depends on where you're standing. If you're the suspect, you think it's all brutality........and if it was your house that just got burglarized, you're probably cheering the police on!

Personally, I think there is a price that comes with resisting arrest.......this probably went overboard, but there are certain unwritten rules to how these things go......give up and don't make the police chase you/fight you and this doesn't happen. Fight or run and you risk this kind of thing happening, right, wrong or indifferent.

It's really human nature.........the natural result of chasing a fleeing subject is a high dump of adrenaline that manifests as aggression.......when you get caught, at BEST, assuming you have the MOST restrained cops on the planet, you're going to get manhandled fairly roughly........and if they aren't the most restrained cops on the planet, you're going to get kicked in the face.

I hope nobody remotely takes that as a justification........just an explanation of the reality of what we're discussing.

This concept (you run from the cops and they bring an *** kicking with them) is one of the points that I actually agree with Lt Col Grossman with in "On Killing". According to Grossman people may have an instinct, similar to some predators, to attack once a target has turned its back. Not that this excuses this behavior...as the Sgt says, there were other cops there who were not doing wrong. But I think it's an interesting insight on how situations like this seem to happen.

As the Sgt said, don't misconstrue what we LEO's may be saying here as justification, excuses or defenses for brutality. I have been involved in the suspension and termination of officers over stuff like this. We don't make excuses. However it's a far different experience when you have actually been a person involved in a foot chase and fight with a criminal than it is to be a person judging the situation from your computer monitor.

 

[sgtmac_46]

The irony is that in order to be the kind of person that is willing to chase a possibly armed burglary suspect through back alleys and streets, one needs to be an aggressive and driven 'type A' sort of personality.......of course such people aren't always as restrained as we perhaps believe they should be when they catch the burglar.

On the other hand, we do have to ensure that our behavior as enforcers don't cross a moral, ethical and legal boundary set in a free society.

So the tight-rope becomes walking the line between appropriately aggressive in the pursuit of criminals, and becoming overly aggressive........