No, he doesn't. He saw suspicious behavior and reacted to it. Just because some dick (the OP) wasn't actually committing a crime doesn't excuse the dick's behavior.
But that doesn't matter. I'm not arguing for whether or not the officer should have taken action or not. I'm arguing that he used excessive force, namely by punching him in the face, which was unnecessary. Even if the OP were committing some non-violent crime, that still doesn't excuse the officer for punching him in the face.
[quote name='Washu' timestamp='1298058101' post='4776044']
No, he doesn't. He saw suspicious behavior and reacted to it. Just because some dick (the OP) wasn't actually committing a crime doesn't excuse the dick's behavior.
But that doesn't matter. I'm not arguing for whether or not the officer should have taken action or not. I'm arguing that he used excessive force, namely by punching him in the face, which was unnecessary. Even if the OP were committing some non-violent crime, that still doesn't excuse the officer for punching him in the face.
[/quote]
We get a one sided story , from someone who wanted an adrenaline rush, sounds most likely to me the first one to get hurt was the cop who prolly got the door slammed right into his face, i'd say past that a SINGLE punch to get in a position of controlling him isn't excessive force.
Excessive force is 5 guys beating up a geek till he can't move. A single guy, trying to hold another single guy, who just physically prevented him to go throught a door, maybe hurting him in the process, and only punching him once, not even that hard (said he didn't even bleed) isn't excessive force.
only punching him once, not even that hard (said he didn't even bleed) isn't excessive force.
He punched me quite hard on the side of the cheekbone and jaw,[/quote]
You can punch someone pretty hard without them bleeding at all.
But yes, I digress we are getting a one sided story. I still don't see why he shouldn't file a formal complaint so the department can take investigative/disciplinary action if it is called for.
You missed the 4th option: Man up and admit that I am at fault here.
Every one of your options makes it clear that you are only interested in painting yourself as the victim, even though you, by your own admission, both initiated and then escalated this scenario. The fact that you would even consider pressing any kind of action is disgusting. And he even called to apologize when it's clear even from your own telling of the story you were the one responsible for this going down, which was a grade A class act on his part.
Let break this down:
You hide something in your pocket and act suspicious with the intention of forcing him to take notice of you. He does. whether you heard him ask you to stop or not, you know you are being pursued, and that persual is YOUR FAULT. You intended it to happen, or you wouldn't have run.
At this point, you could stop, turn around, and tell the guy, "I'm sorry officier, I'm just a stupid kid trying to get a rise out of you". And he'd search you, he'd have to, it's his job. Then you'd be let go. But you don't. You escalate, choose to keep running.
Then you try to escape into your house. At this point, what is the cop thinking? For all he knows, your buddies are in there. They might have guns. Is it a safe house? Sure, you know you're harmless, but he doesn't. As far as he knows, he could be dead in the next few minutes if he chooses to continue the chase. But what's he to do? It's his job.
He catches you. He punches you. And he's completely justified in doing so. What would you have him do, try the peaceful route, just say "please stop running?". Oh wait, you had that chance. You didn't take it. You forced him to either subdue you the violent way, or else not do his duty as a cop.
He searched you, he didn't believe you were clean at first. Well no crap, I wouldn't have either. No sane person would.
[quote name='Washu' timestamp='1298058101' post='4776044']
No, he doesn't. He saw suspicious behavior and reacted to it. Just because some dick (the OP) wasn't actually committing a crime doesn't excuse the dick's behavior.
But that doesn't matter. I'm not arguing for whether or not the officer should have taken action or not. I'm arguing that he used excessive force, namely by punching him in the face, which was unnecessary. Even if the OP were committing some non-violent crime, that still doesn't excuse the officer for punching him in the face.
[/quote]
What was described is no where near excessive force. The fleeing (and resisting) suspect was subdued by way of a single blow followed by a tackle. Strikes to the face are, as I understand, usually frowned upon where they can be avoided in favor of other disabling strikes, but still fall within the domain of acceptable force.
(Other disabling strikes being ones to joints and nerve clusters, which are usually far more painful, and carry a slightly greater risk of permanent disability, but rarely bleed and leave more 'socially acceptable' marks. A man with a broken nose puts up far less of a fight, and is unlikely to require a cane or wheelchair for the rest of his life. He'll just bitch about it more.)
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.
The force used wasn't excessive -- consider yourself lucky that a punch in the head and a twisted arm is all you got. The guy was just trying to do his job -- there are guys who frankly don't belong on any police force, adrenaline is high for them too, you know, and I'm sure it takes a fair amount of restraint to stop yourself from beating the daylights out of anyone you've had to give chase to. He doesn't sound to be a "bad cop", or certainly not anything approaching as bad as they come, anyhow -- pursuing action may cause him to be suspended or even fired. The question is, does he seem to you like a bad enough dude that, potentially, his career is worth you proving a point and mending your bruised ego?
I've been pulled over -- guns drawn -- once, having done nothing *myself* to deserve it (whilst unwittingly fitting a certain profile). They've got to take proper precaution and action -- in my case: approach guns drawn, in yours: disable a fleeing suspect immediately. My little brother is a sheriff's deputy, things go from find to bad to worse in seconds, and they have to make these decisions almost instinctively. This didn't sound like a case where available information was willfully ignored, just misinterpreted in the heat of the moment.
You got a cool story out of it, so just let it go.
What was described is no where near excessive force. The fleeing (and resisting) suspect was subdued by way of a single blow followed by a tackle. Strikes to the face are, as I understand, usually frowned upon where they can be avoided in favor of other disabling strikes, but still fall within the domain of acceptable force.
Well we'll have to agree to disagree. I only said he should press charges if he got injured and had to pay medical expenses. There's no reason not to file a complaint in this situation though.
If the cop apologized that night and took actions that were more in line with innocent until proven guilty instead of guilty until proven innocent, then fine, but the dude punched him in the face and then proceeded to be a dick.
If the cop apologized that night and took actions that were more in line with innocent until proven guilty instead of guilty until proven innocent, then fine, but the dude punched him in the face and then proceeded to be a dick.
Innocent until proven guilty has absolutely NOTHING to do with law enforcement officers when they're apprehending and/or arresting a suspect. That is for your COURT CASE when they are attempting to CONVICT you of a crime. Nowhere else. It's like trying to claim freedom of speech on an internet website. It doesn't apply there, as it isn't relevant.
In time the project grows, the ignorance of its devs it shows, with many a convoluted function, it plunges into deep compunction, the price of failure is high, Washu's mirth is nigh.
[quote name='Luckless' timestamp='1298064681' post='4776080']
What was described is no where near excessive force. The fleeing (and resisting) suspect was subdued by way of a single blow followed by a tackle. Strikes to the face are, as I understand, usually frowned upon where they can be avoided in favor of other disabling strikes, but still fall within the domain of acceptable force.
Well we'll have to agree to disagree. I only said he should press charges if he got injured and had to pay medical expenses. There's no reason not to file a complaint in this situation though.
If the cop apologized that night and took actions that were more in line with innocent until proven guilty instead of guilty until proven innocent, then fine, but the dude punched him in the face and then proceeded to be a dick.
[/quote]
So, just how would you suggest he word his complaint?
"I am here to complain about this officer who was doing his job, and swiftly and successfully subdued a fleeing suspicious suspect in a manner that conforms to fairly standard procedure across the country."?
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.
