Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/36456147#36456147

It seems a lot of these are coming forward nowadays, and a recent case in Maryland has the university up in arms.

Does anyone have an additional information on this? They originally charged the students with assault on police but those were dropped shortly afterwards.

They're here to protect and serve......


right?

EDIT:

Here is a better video from cnn

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/13/maryland.police.beating/?hpt=T1

That'll teach fat-people to skip and frolic about.

Edit: I counted, after his tubby body goes limp, the two cops beat him (at least) 11 more times with their nightsticks.

Originally posted by Liberator
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/36456147#36456147

It seems a lot of these are coming forward nowadays, and a recent case in Maryland has the university up in arms.

Does anyone have an additional information on this? They originally charged the students with assault on police but those were dropped shortly afterwards.

They're here to protect and serve......


right?

EDIT:

Here is a better video from cnn

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/13/maryland.police.beating/?hpt=T1




I laughed out loud when they started beating him. Not because I found an innocent man getting beaten, funny, but because of how absurd and illegal this was...and also because he was skipping around like an idiot, just like I would be. hahaha What was even funnier: falsified reports. I sure hope they clean house, quick fast and in a hurry. I also hope criminal charges are filed and 3 police get fines and community service, just like any other criminal.



Originally posted by Robtard
That'll teach fat-people to skip and frolic about.


I refreshed the page and saw your post. How dare you beat me to it.

Just fines and community service?

They should get sent to jail just as you or I would, if we charged a skipping fat-kid; slammed him into a wall; knocked him unconscious and then proceeded to stomp his rotund motionless body.

They should also be kicked from the force and barred from ever joining again.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I also hope criminal charges are filed and 3 police get fines and community service, just like any other criminal.

though, we will be lucky if they are suspended without pay

Originally posted by inimalist
though, we will be lucky if they are suspended without pay

Agreed, too bad be wasn't black, then the hammer would fall on at least one of the officers. Not saying this to be racist, but it's just the truth.

For some logic that escapes by ability to comprehend:

-Beating someone = bad

-Beating someone and saying a racial slur = bad X2

Just don't understand that, when in the end, both 'people' were beaten the same.

sigh.... i am sure happy for camcorders and video phones.. you would think cops would start realizing this sh#@ when they are thinking of doing this sh#@ in large group gatherings...

also what the police did is more then just assault and battery it is assault and battery with a deadly weapon with the intend to do harm or bodily injury..

a year in the slammer would be the least i would expect not adding other charges like falsifying police report also the other cops not doing anything should also be reprimanded or fired for allowing that Sh#$.. the minute one honest police officer looks the other way for the actions of a dirty police officer is the minute he too is a dirty officer.

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed, too bad be wasn't black, then the hammer would fall on at least one of the officers. Not saying this to be racist, but it's just the truth.

For some logic that escapes by ability to comprehend:

-Beating someone = bad

-Beating someone and saying a racial slur = bad X2

Just don't understand that, when in the end, both 'people' were beaten the same.

fair enough, but there are legitimate concerns about a raciallized and aggressive police force that aren't there from a normally just aggressive police, are there not?

no skipping in the hallway!!!

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
sigh.... i am sure happy for camcorders and video phones.. you would think cops would start realizing this sh#@ when they are thinking of doing this sh#@ in large group gatherings...

also what the police did is more then just assault and battery it is assault and battery with a deadly weapon with the intend to do harm or bodily injury..

a year in the slammer would be the least i would expect not adding other charges like falsifying police report also the other cops not doing anything should also be reprimanded or fired for allowing that Sh#$.. the minute one honest police officer looks the other way for the actions of a dirty police officer is the minute he too is a dirty officer.

agreed. Not only did they assault with weapons with the intention of harm, but they did also falisfy reports. I will be watching this very case very closely, it makes you wonder whos side these ***** are on.

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed, too bad be wasn't black, then the hammer would fall on at least one of the officers. Not saying this to be racist, but it's just the truth.
Not really.

W/e happened to that cop who shot the black guy in handcuffs?

What did the student say to the police? There could have been a good reason, depending upon what was said. Like if he had said "I have a bomb, and I'm going to kill everyone". That would have lead to this kind of response. I'm not saying that is what he said, but we don't know. We should not assume that the police are at fault until both sides are told.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What did the student say to the police? There could have been a good reason, depending upon what was said. Like if he had said "I have a bomb, and I'm going to kill everyone". That would have lead to this kind of response. I'm not saying that is what he said, but we don't know. We should not assume that the police are at fault until both sides are told. read the police report if the student had said that i am sure the police would have put it in their report,... now stop giving the cops and their lawyers ideas.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
read the police report if the student had said that i am sure the police would have put it in their report,... now stop giving the cops and their lawyers ideas.

What I read was that no one knows what the student said. That means that the reporter doesn't not know what the student said. That does not mean that someone else does not know. So, you tell me what he said...

Originally posted by Mindset
Not really.

W/e happened to that cop who shot the black guy in handcuffs?

Not sure, last I heard the trial was still pending. So?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What did the student say to the police? There could have been a good reason, depending upon what was said. Like if he had said "I have a bomb, and I'm going to kill everyone". That would have lead to this kind of response. I'm not saying that is what he said, but we don't know. We should not assume that the police are at fault until both sides are told.

"I have a bomb" would certainly be probable cause for stopping the individual physically and searching their person.

I'm glad its either "cops are right" or "cops are wrong", not that beating a person for no given reaon, when one is trained to physically subdue people in better ways, is a bad thing and probably counter-productive to a terrorist attack anyways (beating really doesn't prevent exploding).

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What did the student say to the police? There could have been a good reason, depending upon what was said. Like if he had said "I have a bomb, and I'm going to kill everyone". That would have lead to this kind of response. I'm not saying that is what he said, but we don't know. We should not assume that the police are at fault until both sides are told.

Police are claiming he did something he clearly didn't do.

Originally posted by inimalist
"I have a bomb" would certainly be probable cause for stopping the individual physically and searching their person.

I'm glad its either "cops are right" or "cops are wrong", not that beating a person for no given reaon, when one is trained to physically subdue people in better ways, is a bad thing and probably counter-productive to a terrorist attack anyways (beating really doesn't prevent exploding).

But it will teach them a lesson before the bomb goes off.

"This is police brutality pure and simple," said Griffiths, who plans to file a civil lawsuit against police on McKenna's behalf.

Griffiths says the beating is only half the story. This is the sworn statement of charges against McKenna by the police alleges assault on a police officer and disorderly conduct. It claims McKenna "struck those officers and their horses causing minor injuries," and that McKenna was "kicked by the horses and sustained minor injuries."

The video does not support either of the police claims.

McKenna suffered a head wound requiring multiple staples. The injuries to his body match the pattern of the police batons -- not horses hooves

http://www.news8.net/news/stories/0410/724880.html

Originally posted by Robtard
Police are claiming he did something he clearly didn't do.

What was that? I didn't have time to read all of the article (I skimmed it).

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
"This is police brutality pure and simple," said Griffiths, who plans to file a civil lawsuit against police on McKenna's behalf.

Griffiths says the beating is only half the story. This is the sworn statement of charges against McKenna by the police alleges assault on a police officer and disorderly conduct. It claims McKenna "struck those officers and their horses causing minor injuries," and that McKenna was "kicked by the horses and sustained minor injuries."

The video does not support either of the police claims.

McKenna suffered a head wound requiring multiple staples. The injuries to his body match the pattern of the police batons -- not horses hooves

http://www.news8.net/news/stories/0410/724880.html

I'm sure glad you are not a judge.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What was that? I didn't have time to read all of the article (I skimmed it).

"Authorities arrested Donat and McKenna on suspicion of assaulting an officer and disorderly conduct. Documents filed by police allege that the two were causing a disturbance and that they struck mounted officers and their horses, causing minor injuries, when authorities intervened.

"Arrested 1 and Arrested 2 were both kicked by the horses and sustained minor injuries," the charging documents said."

The video shows none of that. Shows the guy skipping along, then stopping in front of police officers, then backing up away from the officers when he sees them, then getting attacked.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm sure glad you are not a judge.

The police claimed that he assaulted them, but if you watch the video this is obviously not the case in the least bit.

He was just drunk and celebrating a recent win in basketball, while I have heard (from a close friend) that the two teams that played are a big rivarly that is why there was such a big police presence there. However, being drunk and celebrating is not a cause for getting the piss kicked out of you by a bunch of pricks with badges.

Originally posted by Liberator
The police claimed that he assaulted them, but if you watch the video this is obviously not the case in the least bit.

He was just drunk and celebrating a recent win in basketball, while I have heard (from a close friend) that the two teams that played are a big rivarly that is why there was such a big police presence there. However, being drunk and celebrating is not a cause for getting the piss kicked out of you by a bunch of pricks with badges.

Perhaps, but do you know that you have seen all of the video? If these police abused this student wrongfully, then they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and made an example of. But I do not go off and say that the police are wrong based on a video.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What was that? I didn't have time to read all of the article (I skimmed it).

They're saying McKenna (the fat kid) struck the officers, stuck the horse and his injuries were he result of the horse's hooves.

The video clearly shows he not only never attacked, but was walking slowly back and neither horse kicked him.

the extent of the assault is wrong and one can make a clear assumption of a video.. what they did isnt even close to how law enforcement are trained to subdue a suspect.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Perhaps, but do you know that you have seen all of the video? If these police abused this student wrongfully, then they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and made an example of. But I do not go off and say that the police are wrong based on a video.

If a video that clearly shows something isn't proof enough for you, what is? The testimonies of officers that are clearly already lying about the incident?

some one needs a nightstick to the dome and knock some common sense into them...

conspiracy all lie!! the video was clearly edited and fabricated with actors..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
some one needs a nightstick to the dome and knock some common sense into them...

conspiracy all lie!! the video was clearly edited and fabricated with actors..

That is a possibility, however, very unlikely. There is the possibility that the person who videotaped the event started after the initial encounter took place.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is a possibility, however, very unlikely. There is the possibility that the person who videotaped the event started after the initial encounter took place.

I take it you haven't watched the video then. You might want to do that, before commenting.

Originally posted by Robtard
I take it you haven't watched the video?

I did earlier, at home. My point is that we don't know. It really comes down to what you want to believe.

So, you have proof of some kind? The video dosn't show everything that happened, because video's can never tell everything. That video is only one point of view at a certan time.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I did earlier, at home. My point is that we don't know. It really comes down to what you want to believe.

They're you're insane or being willfully ignorant.

We see the fat-kid skipping down the street before the attack, we see him stop when he gets close to the first horse, we see him move back (ie not attack as claimed) when the first and second horse come at him, we him him being charged by riot-cops, slammed into a wall, go limp and we see him being beaten while he's out cold.

i use to tell myself if i ever get attacked again by pigs i would go limp and pretend to pass out and then have seizures but, now i think to cops it wouldnt matter if i was unconscious or not... and i might not have to fake seizures since they will actually be induced by them.

One of the officers have been suspended.


From my perspective....

The mounted cop did the right thing by blocking his path and making him stop (pretty obvious the student learn that by backing away) It only takes ONE idiot to lead a bunch to start a riot. The police in horse did the right thing. In past experiences with sports victory celebrations; riots always break out when civil disobidence errupts.

However, the other officers made an error by tackling him and clubbed the guy. There really was no need to do that...sure, you set an example but just pushing him away would have been sufficient. Cop on the horse did right...the others did not have to tackle him and beat him.

Originally posted by Robtard
They're you're insane or being willfully ignorant.

We see the fat-kid skipping down the street before the attack, we see him stop when he gets close to the first horse, we see him move back (ie not attack as claimed) when the first and second horse come at him, we him him being charged by riot-cops, slammed into a wall, go limp and we see him being beaten while he's out cold.

And you do no understand what I am saying: You can only see what is on the tape: You cannot see what happened before: you cannot see what happened after: you cannot hear what was said: you cannot see what was going on from any other view. No can you understand how you do not have enough information to know what happened? If not then "They're you're insane or being willfully ignorant" one.

Or the officer couldn't have been on the sidewalk and let him continue skipping on down the road. There's always that.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just fines and community service?


That's usually what people get on their first minor criminal offense...in most municipalities, especially ones where the defendants are "upstanding citizens in the community", are white, and the judge is white. I'm not sure about you, but I would fall under that category.

Originally posted by Robtard
They should get sent to jail just as you or I would, if we charged a skipping fat-kid; slammed him into a wall; knocked him unconscious and then proceeded to stomp his rotund motionless body.

That's not what would happen in the same exact case, though. We wouldn't go to jail because we weren't caught in the act. The video surfaced almost a month later.

Believe it or not, I actually thought my comments through, before posting them.

Originally posted by Robtard
They should also be kicked from the force and barred from ever joining again.

Agreed.

so lets say the guy did hit and push an officer off camera he then turned around and started skipping like nothing happen... then he stopped shouted i have a bomb!!! at which point they block his exit and tackle him..

tell me you dont see the police using excessive force once he is on the ground as criminal or against police training in subduing a suspect?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
And you do no understand what I am saying: You can only see what is no the tape: You cannot see what happened before: you cannot see what happened after: you cannot hear what was said: you cannot see what was going on from any other view. No can you understand how you do not have enough information to know what happened? If not then "They're you're insane or being willfully ignorant" one.

The police aren't claiming he did something before, which caused this.

What happened after he was beaten? Not sure how that's relevant to him being beaten supposedly because he "attacked the officer and horse'?

Another view will show what you think? We clearly see his hands as he backs up; they never made an attack, which is what the police claim set off him being tackles, knocked-out and beaten.

We have a video clearly showing that the police statement on the incident is a lie. Call me insane and ignorant, but I tend to be distrustful of people once they lie.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
sigh.... i am sure happy for camcorders and video phones.. you would think cops would start realizing this sh#@ when they are thinking of doing this sh#@ in large group gatherings...

also what the police did is more then just assault and battery it is assault and battery with a deadly weapon with the intend to do harm or bodily injury..


FYI, you can post "shit."

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
a year in the slammer would be the least i would expect not adding other charges like falsifying police report also the other cops not doing anything should also be reprimanded or fired for allowing that Sh#$.. the minute one honest police officer looks the other way for the actions of a dirty police officer is the minute he too is a dirty officer.

I agree.

Also, this is why I would like Chillmeistergen to come back: he made a good point by saying that cops that do illegal things should have stiffer punishments due to their positions as being law enforcement: they more than know better and they should be held to a higher standard.

If he's KOed there's no need to keep beating him after, if I had been one of them I woulda stopped them right and been like 'Ohhh, guys come on....he's had enough.'

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's usually what people get on their first minor criminal offense...in most municipalities, especially ones where the defendants are "upstanding citizens in the community", are white, and the judge is white. I'm not sure about you, but I would fall under that category.

That's not what would happen in the same exact case, though. We wouldn't go to jail because we weren't caught in the act. The video surfaced almost a month later.


Don't think assaulting someone with a deadly weapon is a minor offense.

If you or I beat someone like that with a baton, there would be ample proof, in bruises for the prosecution.

Originally posted by Robtard
Don't think assaulting someone with a deadly weapon is a minor offense.

If you or I beat someone like that with a baton, there would be ample proof, in bruises for the prosecution.

Yeah, it's a minor offense that would most likely net you 0 jail time, fines, and community service. You may even have to take an anger management course. Dead serious. This assumes, of course, you have a clean record. If you had a record, you might face jail time.





Also, someone needs to edit the video. Right after the beat down is done, the annoucer dude needs to say, "FLAWLESS VICTORY!" as the text comes on the screen.

"minor offense"?

assault is an automatic felony/federal crime.

the only reason they may get off without jail time is because theyre in maryland. in many other states though, jail time would be unavoidable. in Connecticut assault would net you 5 years minimum.

Originally posted by dadudemon

Also, someone needs to edit the video. Right after the beat down is done, the annoucer dude needs to say, "FLAWLESS VICTORY!" as the text comes on the screen.

Better yet, while he's being beaten, should say "Ultra Combo."

when i got my military police and base security training we were taught how to use batons and reasonable level of force.. most importantly they stressed DON'T HIT PPL IN THE HEAD WITH BATONS!!! hit them in the meaty areas to avoid serious harm.. like the thigh back of the leg to get them on the ground... or in the arm bicep area or stomach... not the ribs or neck or spine or any area like that..

once they are down to apply grapple techniques and use ur weight to keep them down as you apply them with your baton like an arm lock.. if you need to choke them dont cut off the wind pipe you might crush it but just the side of the neck area and keep watch of the suspect until he starts to weaken.. know when to release it so not to cause permanent damage. all this is done so you can place handcuffs and put them under control...

part of our training was to fight multiple ppl while also having things like OC in our face and apply our techniques without injuring each other...

i have not yet met anyone who can honestly say they were trained to just start randomly wailing on ppl as standard police training like those douche bags were on camera.

That video put me off my dinner. It's horrible to see that sort of thing... A fat guy skipping... disgusting.

lol

Originally posted by Robtard
Not sure, last I heard the trial was still pending. So? Probably got the key to the city.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm sure glad you are not a judge. is my no nonsense self righteous indignation military sense of discipline and justice throw Mjonlir hammer at ppl too much for you?

You're too much man for him to handle.

"ooh but, its not their fault. their parents abused them as kids maybe not sexually but emotionally that is why they are so violent and became cops.. they only lost control once who knows why. they should be given a second chance"...
kisses
let me tell you one thing: life isnt butterflies and rainbows you dont get a free pass just b/c ur a cop who happen to think its okay to abuse ur authority and power and lie and turn victims into criminals.

some ppl need to keep their wishful self indulgent hippie thinking outside of the court system of laws and learn to apply it equally across the board.

http://www.entertonement.com/clips/mktnjcsfhw--Learn-to-pull-the-triggerWesley-Snipes-Blade-

Batons have replaced handguns and K9s as a police officer's best friend. (Except in the case of Oscar Grant)

I don't understand why three officers would all join in on a random beating at once. The civilian didn't attack anyone or do anything other than skip and act drunk. These type of policemen make my stomach churn.
I wish the law was harder on police. It's just not equality. If I did that, I'd be in prison for a long time. What makes them so special? If anything, they should be even more harshly punished than a civilian for abusing their power.

they had probably just finished the left4dead2 campaign and were like "BOOMER!!!"

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
"minor offense"?

assault is an automatic felony/federal crime.

No it's not.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
the only reason they may get off without jail time is because theyre in maryland. in many other states though, jail time would be unavoidable. in Connecticut assault would net you 5 years minimum.

No it wouldn't.

unfortunatly, I have to agree with DDM, people with no records are given a lot of leeway.

I know this is Canada, but a friend of my was the victim of a home invasion (one of the guys hit him in the face with a loaded gun), and afaik, because it was the guys first offense, he isn't looking at any serious jail time. I admit, I could have this totally wrong, but last I talked to him, it didn't appear that the guy was going away.

Originally posted by inimalist
unfortunatly, I have to agree with DDM, people with no records are given a lot of leeway.

I know this is Canada, but a friend of my was the victim of a home invasion (one of the guys hit him in the face with a loaded gun), and afaik, because it was the guys first offense, he isn't looking at any serious jail time. I admit, I could have this totally wrong, but last I talked to him, it didn't appear that the guy was going away.

Yeah but these are coppers, people who are meant to be 'defending the law'.

They should be tried harder than the average person because of the 'responsability' given to them by the State. Fined, imprisoned, and fired.

Originally posted by inimalist
unfortunatly, I have to agree with DDM, people with no records are given a lot of leeway.

I know this is Canada, but a friend of my was the victim of a home invasion (one of the guys hit him in the face with a loaded gun), and afaik, because it was the guys first offense, he isn't looking at any serious jail time. I admit, I could have this totally wrong, but last I talked to him, it didn't appear that the guy was going away.

Yeah, that's assault with a deadly weapon, qualifies as aggravated assault and falls under aggravated battery, and that is definitely a felony, here in the US. You would face Jail time in the US, in that particular scenario.


However, a police officer going way overboard with his baton when he or she was in charge of riot control after a game that can have drunken mayhem, the worse that will happen is a loss of job.


Change the police officers over to regular citizens, and it would be a minor form of aggrivated assault because of...ding ding ding, mens rea, and actus rea.

What were the officer's motivation? No idea what words took place, but he was skipping like an idiot right towards the police. Worst case scenario, the happy fat guy 'aggravated' the situation, slightly, and earned himself excessive force from police officers, with no felony, or crime comitted from either party.


The gentleman can and SHOULD bring up a civil suit for tort battery case.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, that's assault with a deadly weapon, qualifies as aggravated assault and falls under aggravated battery, and that is definitely a felony, here in the US. You would face Jail time in the US, in that particular scenario.

we have way harder gun laws too, like a no strikes system, so I might be remembering it wrong (like, the sentencing, not the actual crime), or they might not have found the gun on him...

Originally posted by dadudemon
The gentleman can and SHOULD bring up a civil suit for tort battery case.

well, if we want to get into the realm of "shoulds":

The police SHOULD never be allowed to be officers again
They SHOULD face some sort of legal reprimant
and they SHOULD face harsher penalties and higher expectations than the normal public

Originally posted by Liberator
Yeah but these are coppers, people who are meant to be 'defending the law'.

indeed, thus they will get a slap on the wrist

Originally posted by inimalist
well, if we want to get into the realm of "shoulds":

The police SHOULD never be allowed to be officers again
They SHOULD face some sort of legal reprimant
and they SHOULD face harsher penalties and higher expectations than the normal public


Agreed, on all accounts.

Originally posted by inimalist
indeed, thus they will get a slap on the wrist Police look out for their own. I haven't watched the vid (doesn't play, meh, anyone got a youtube link?), I don't know the details, but when a cop is in a situation like this, whether or not they are in the wrong, their superiors will do almost anything to make it look like they are NOT in the wrong.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No it's not.



No it wouldn't.

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Assault-Deadly-Weapon.htm

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Assault-Deadly-Weapon.htm

So, you're amending what you said earlier? It doesn't work that way. You can't retroactively make a statement.

You said "assault". That's it.

ha. i knew you were going to say that.

i made the mistake of giving you too much credit, actually.

Originally posted by Robtard
Don't think assaulting someone with a deadly weapon is a minor offense.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, it's a minor offense that would most likely net you 0 jail time

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
"minor offense"?

assault is an automatic felony/federal crime.

the only reason they may get off without jail time is because theyre in maryland. in many other states though, jail time would be unavoidable. in Connecticut assault would net you 5 years minimum.

*shrug* i made the error of assuming that you knew the context. ah well. ill know better next time.

this may look goofy but this is how cops are suppose to attack and use batons..

QLZK817LOn0

(Taken from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/13/maryland-police-brutality_n_535639.html)

"According to the Washington Post, only one of the three officers in the footage has been identified. He has been suspended, and the county police chief said the other two officials will receive the same treatment once they have been identified."

So thats that, all they are doing is suspending them. Thats utter bollocks.

in all fairness, the fat guy himself should press charges... its kind of dumb to expect to the force to willing put their own personnel in the frying pan.

Wait, I was right, assault with a deadly weapon is a more than just a "minor offense"?

yeah, you are. its a felony.

Ha, DDM you idiot.

Originally posted by Robtard
Just fines and community service?


Originally posted by dadudemon
That's usually what people get on their first minor criminal offense...in most municipalities, especially ones where the defendants are "upstanding citizens in the community", are white, and the judge is white.


Originally posted by Robtard
Don't think assaulting someone with a deadly weapon is a minor offense.

If you or I beat someone like that with a baton, there would be ample proof, in bruises for the prosecution.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, it's a minor offense that would most likely net you 0 jail time, fines, and community service. You may even have to take an anger management course. Dead serious. This assumes, of course, you have a clean record. If you had a record, you might face jail time.


Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
"minor offense"?

assault is an automatic felony/federal crime.

No trying to wiggle your way out of it. Assault is not a felony. Aggravated assault is. Agravated battery being even more correct. The latter can be punished with, get this, only a fine. You can also get community service AND be ordered to anger management.


Let's be honest and stop trying to save face by pretending that a word game can even be played. You were wrong, I pointed it out. You should have moved on. You also didn't understand the complete context of the conversation before interjecting your comment.




Robtard, do you honestly think they will get a felony charge? Best case scenario, it will be a minor offense.........


Now that we are full circle...


Ms. Marvel will put me on ignore again, Robtard will continue to give away free movies.

blah blah blah, typical ddm ass covering.

im sure the real plot twist is that youre not even being serious, you're just trying to make a meme! and you fooled us all!

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
blah blah blah, typical ddm ass covering.

Odd, cause that's exactly what you did, not me.

Here, I'll make it easier:

Assault is not a felony.


What the officers did will not be considered assault with a deadly weapon.

Even if they DO get a charge for assault with a deadly weapon, AKA, a felony, they will not serve any jail time.


In other words, you were wrong in more than one way.



In fact, I'll make it even easier than that:

You're wrong. You didn't understand the conversation. You used incorrect words and came to the wrong conclusion.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
im sure the real plot twist is that youre not even being serious, you're just trying to make a meme! and you fooled us all!

Yeah, I'm serious. No amount of you trying to save your pride and troll will change that you were wrong. You can't be anymore obviously wrong than you are, so you troll. Why?

blah blah blah

i could allow myself to be drawn into a long pointless game with you, but why bother? its obvious to everyone what my post was referring to, and its obvious to everyone that youre reaching and arguing pointless semantics.

so you go ahead and make an ass out of yourself we'll just sit here and watch.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
blah blah blah

i could allow myself to be drawn into a long pointless game with you, but why bother? its obvious to everyone what my post was referring to, and its obvious to everyone that youre reaching and arguing pointless semantics.

The ol' "YOU KNEW WHAT I MEANT!" argument?

Obvious obvious, bla bla bla. You were wrong. Still are. No amount of back pedaling will change that.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
so you go ahead and make an ass out of yourself we'll just sit here and watch.

T-that's my line.

thats it; jump through the hoop!

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
thats it; jump through the hoop!


Wait, so you're a sock?

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
im sure the real plot twist is that youre not even being serious, you're just trying to make a meme! and you fooled us all!

meme?

Originally posted by dadudemon

Robtard, do you honestly think they will get a felony charge? Best case scenario, it will be a minor offense.........


I was/am under the impression that if I attack and beat someone with say a baseball bat (or deadly weapon, assault with), I would get a felony charge and I would serve jail time, even if it's my first offense.

you would get a felony charge.

attacking someone with almost any type of object is considered assault with a deadly object.

jail time is relative to the state though. different states have different sentences for it.

Okay, so we all agree first ddm made a mistake then Ms. Marvel made a mistake...good stuff.

i dont like how bipartisan you are. >\

Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, so we all agree first ddm made a mistake then Ms. Marvel made a mistake and Robtard didn't, as typical....good stuff.

Agreed

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i dont like how bipartisan you are. >\

that sounds hot

i was trying to sound smart.

it always backfires

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
i was trying to sound smart.

it always backfires

the curse of being a woman, no?

Originally posted by inimalist
the curse of being a woman, no?

No, that's menstruation, the pain of child birth and being subservient to man. As per thy Lord God.

Originally posted by Robtard
I was/am under the impression that if I attack and beat someone with say a baseball bat (or deadly weapon, assault with), I would get a felony charge and I would serve jail time, even if it's my first offense.

Maybe. But, criminality has to be proven. We can speculate on what the police' justifications will be. In fact, that's where the this discussion should be going to.

If no criminality can be proven (the most probable outcome), there is still a case of civil action.

Now were are going from criminal to tort.


Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
you would get a felony charge.

Maybe in another sceanrio, yes. But, the scenario I suggested was putting us in the same situation but removing our "officer" title.

Put us in the same situation, and we would still get a minor offense charge which would result in community service and or a fine, as for as the criminal justice side of things are concerned.

This assumes, of course, that you have a clean record.

If you don't, you MIGHT get jail time. Worst case scenario, you MIGHT get an aggravated battery charge, get jail time, and/or get fined.

Only if you got mouthy/uppity with the judge, or acted shady, could I see a good citizen getting slapped with the felony charge on this. My lawyer does criminal defense cases (as well as divorce and adoptions) and many times, his clients get off of aggravated battery felony charges and it gets downgraded to something minor (with fines). That's usually the case for first time offenders, BTW, unless you were trying to kill them with a car, knife or something. (Then, you get an attempted murder charge!) I hear that "anger management" is something being thrown out there, these days.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
attacking someone with almost any type of object is considered assault with a deadly object.

Assault with a deadly weapn is charged when the object used could be, reasonbly, used to kill someone. No contact actually has to occur for the charge to be given. In criminal court, mens reus has to be "proven" by the prosecutor along with actus reus. (In other words, you have to be indicted, first (reasonable proof of actus reus), then the criminal trial can seek to further solidfy a mens rea and actus reus. Both are required to convict of a felony, if it will go that far.




On top of this, it is the interpretation of the events that will decide if the felony charge will be brought up. Not all situations are equal. Aggravated assault may be desired, but the actus reus does not always constitute the charge.

In the video, the young man is scene skipping along right at the police officers. It could easily be argued that he was threatening them and had words and the police interpretted it as such. At that point, then only fault of the police would be taking it too far with the beat down but just a few seconds. They'd be written up, keep their jobs, and pay. bla bla bla, the end. Instead, they had to be idiots, file false police reports, and exasterbate the situation for themselves. Now, they are really looking at losing their jobs.





Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, so we all agree first ddm made a mistake then Ms. Marvel made a mistake...good stuff.

No. I never made a mistake in what I was doing. Robtard asked a question which would be out of context with the situation being discussed, I brought it back in by stating reality: it will still end up as a minor offense. No back pedaling on my part required.


Edit - Lulz it's spelled "reus" not rea.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Maybe. But, criminality has to be proven. We can speculate on what the police' justifications will be. In fact, that's where the this discussion should be going to.

If no criminality can be proven (the most probable outcome), there is still a case of civil action.

Now were are going from criminal to tort.




Maybe in another sceanrio, yes. But, the scenario I suggested was putting us in the same situation but removing our "officer" title.

Put us in the same situation, and we would still get a minor offense charge which would result in community service and or a fine, as for as the criminal justice side of things are concerned.

This assumes, of course, that you have a clean record.

If you don't, you MIGHT get jail time. Worst case scenario, you MIGHT get an aggravated battery charge, get jail time, and/or get fined.

Only if you got mouthy/uppity with the judge, or acted shady, could I see a good citizen getting slapped with the felony charge on this. My lawyer does criminal defense cases (as well as divorce and adoptions) and many times, his clients get off of aggravated battery felony charges and it gets downgraded to something minor (with fines). That's usually the case for first time offenders, BTW, unless you were trying to kill them with a car, knife or something. (Then, you get an attempted murder charge!) I hear that "anger management" is something being thrown out there, these days.



Assault with a deadly weapn is charged when the object used could be, reasonbly, used to kill someone. No contact actually has to occur for the charge to be given. In criminal court, mens rea has to be "proven" by the prosecutor along with actus rea. (In other words, you have to be indicted, first (reasonable proof of actus rea), then the criminal trial can seek to further solidfy a mens rea and actus rea. Both are required to convict of a felony, if it will go that far.




On top of this, it is the interpretation of the events that will decide if the felony charge will be brought up. Not all situations are equal. Aggravated assault may be desired, but the actus rea does not always constitute the charge.

In the video, the young man is scene skipping along right at the police officers. It could easily be argued that he was threatening them and had words and the police interpretted it as such. At that point, then only fault of the police would be taking it too far with the beat down but just a few seconds. They'd be written up, keep their jobs, and pay. bla bla bla, the end. Instead, they had to be idiots, file false police reports, and exasterbate the situation for themselves. Now, they are really looking at losing their jobs.







No. I never made a mistake in what I was doing. Robtard asked a question which would be out of context with the situation being discussed, I brought it back in by stating reality: it will still end up as a minor offense. No back pedaling on my part required.

my posts in this thread really have nothing to do with the actual scenario that involves the police. it only has to do with the actual definition and implications of assault with a deadly weapon. the police possibly getting charged, or not, is inconsequential to my point. if the police are convicted of assault with a deadly weapon then it will count as a felony and depending on the state they might go to jail, because conviction of assault is a felony, not a minor offense, and in certain states there is a mimum jail sentence for being convicted of it. thats it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Edit - Lulz it's spelled "reus" not rea.

nitpicking latin spelling?

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
my posts in this thread really have nothing to do with the actual scenario that involves the police. it only has to do with the actual definition and implications of assault with a deadly weapon. the police possibly getting charged, or not, is inconsequential to my point. if the police are convicted of assault with a deadly weapon then it will count as a felony and depending on the state they might go to jail, because conviction of assault is a felony, not a minor offense.

So you took some posts out of context and off topic. No problem. I do that all the time. I apologize if my responses back were too harsh.



And, if you want to take it down that path, even IF they get a felony charge conviction of Aggravted Battery and Assault with a Deadly Weapon, they will probably still only get fines and/or community service.






Originally posted by inimalist
nitpicking latin spelling?

LOL, yup. I misspelled, not anyone else. I was nitpicking myself ... and actually laughing at how stupid it was that I made that mistake.

Originally posted by dadudemon


No. I never made a mistake in what I was doing. Robtard asked a question which would be out of context with the situation being discussed, I brought it back in by stating reality: it will still end up as a minor offense. No back pedaling on my part required.



Yeah, no. What I said.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, no. What I said.

No, what I said. Go back and reread my "multiple quoted posts."

You can also read elsewhere in the thread where I DO mention the felony portion, well before Ms. Marvel made the replies today.

In this instance, Ms. Marvel is correct that context needs to be considered to understand where the other is coming from.

Originally posted by dadudemon
LOL, yup. I misspelled, not anyone else. I was nitpicking myself ... and actually laughing at how stupid it was that I made that mistake.

pfft, you think I can be bothered to go all the way back and read that one post to see if I was being accurate in my critical comment

HA!

this is the internet baby!

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Police look out for their own. I haven't watched the vid (doesn't play, meh, anyone got a youtube link?), I don't know the details, but when a cop is in a situation like this, whether or not they are in the wrong, their superiors will do almost anything to make it look like they are NOT in the wrong.

its human nature to circle the wagon, unfortunatly

in the end, it probably hurts the reputation of the good cops more than it helps the police to keep the info quiet, and it certainly looks like they have little interest in accountability

Originally posted by inimalist
pfft, you think I can be bothered to go all the way back and read that one post to see if I was being accurate in my critical comment

HA!

this is the internet baby!


Indeed. I wouldn't expect anyone to read that dry, boring, post, except for Robtard and Ms. Marvel, if they were interested.

But, yeah, nitpicking spelling is lame.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, what I said. Go back and reread my "multiple quoted posts."

You can also read elsewhere in the thread where I DO mention the felony portion, well before Ms. Marvel made the replies today.

In this instance, Ms. Marvel is correct that context needs to be considered to understand where the other is coming from.

Nah, you both made the same mistake by not specifying the context change you made from the post you were quoting. Ms. Marvel made the mistake of using unclear language, on the other hand though she was under the impression that the topic was clear on account of you replying directly to what Robtard said.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, you both made the same mistake by not specifying the context change you made from the post you were quoting.

Incorrect. Context was defined between Robtard and I. Robtard got off track (not that that is a bad thing, he was just curious), I brought it back.


Originally posted by Bardock42
Ms. Marvel made the mistake of using unclear language, on the other hand though she was under the impression that the topic was clear on account of you replying directly to what Robtard said.

Incorrect.

She simply used the wrong legal terms. It doesn't matter what Ms. Marvel meant: it was wrong and I responded as such.


No context was even required because, no matter the context, Aggravated Assault* had not been stated as of yet. That's the felony charge. Assault is a completely different charge. If you tried to pass off "implied context" with legal terms, you'd end up in a pile of legal problems that could even lead to your own prosecution. Very very bad. Guess what my point was by replying to her post with a very simple "this is incorrect" type posts? To illustrate why simply calling it assault is incorrect.



*If you want to go down the path that a Assault with a Deadly Weapon charge also qualfies as Aggravated Assault, fine. We'll talk about that.

Yeah, so you both made mistakes. It's okay, no biggie, just be clearer in your posts in the future, both of you.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, so you both made mistakes. It's okay, no biggie, just be clearer in your posts in the future, both of you.

Thinking about it, you could just be giving me a hard time. hmm

Specifically, what was I wrong about?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Thinking about it, you could just be giving me a hard time. hmm

Specifically, what was I wrong about?

You made a mistake by not clarifying that you were "bringing the topic back" you replied in a way that made it seem to everyone that you were talking about assault with a deadly weapon. That inaccuracy got Blax to reply in the first place trying to "set you straight", though making "her" own mistakes in turn.


Also, your face!

Suspension is normal for most or any crime that is being reviewed by the police department.

the problem really is if the police will hold any of them accountable, unless this remains in the media more then likely they will try to sweep it away.

and ppl being ignorant and lazy wont contest it if they say they were following police training since i have heard that b4 and it is not true. all you would need is some police or military instructors to explain the procedure of how to properly arrest ppl with batons maybe show some training video and ppl can see it is not standard procedure and it violates procedures instead.

The victim should really go to the police station and press criminal charges against his attackers, like assault and battery with a weapon, false imprisonment or false arrest. these are not petty crimes they are out right felonies and the police department cant squirm out of them either and if they tried he should report them to the FBI to get a full impartial investigation.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You made a mistake by not clarifying that you were "bringing the topic back" you replied in a way that made it seem to everyone that you were talking about assault with a deadly weapon. That inaccuracy got Blax to reply in the first place trying to "set you straight", though making "her" own mistakes in turn.


Also, your face!

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel


See, you're going to have to show us your butt-hole, that way we can verify you're really a female. Proceed.

why does everyone think im blax >__>

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
why does everyone think im blax >__>

I included that for dadudemon.


I just think you are fat and ugly and that's why you don't post pics.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You made a mistake by not clarifying that you were "bringing the topic back" you replied in a way that made it seem to everyone that you were talking about assault with a deadly weapon. That inaccuracy got Blax to reply in the first place trying to "set you straight", though making "her" own mistakes in turn.


Also, your face!

I thought that's what you meant.


This is why I disagree:

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not what would happen in the same exact case, though. We wouldn't go to jail because we weren't caught in the act. The video surfaced almost a month later.


See, you just had to read one paragraph down to "see what I did there." That's on the second page, no less.


Originally posted by Bardock42


That could be true.....but what if she is an Ebony goddess? Then you'd be pwned and feel bad.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I thought that's what you meant.


This is why I disagree:




See, you just had to read one paragraph down to "see what I did there." That's on the second page, no less.




That could be true.....but what if she is an Ebony goddess? Then you'd be pwned and feel bad.

That really doesn't matter, I am not denying that you talked about the case before I am saying that you made a mistake by replying to Robtard in a way that suggest that you thought assault with a deadly weapon would be a minor offense, which caused Marvel to even reply in the first place.

Nah, I'd survive.

Originally posted by Robtard
See, you're going to have to show us your butt-hole, that way we can verify you're really a female. Proceed.

Here's the point where this thread got interesting. l too am waiting to see the brown-eye.

hmm

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
hmm

I take that as you are at least considering it. Good "girl".

ill do it for money

I got a couple pesos and one Chuck E. Cheese tolken. Just PM me them pics anytime.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
ill do it for money

$10.00, proceed. You know I'm good for it.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
ill do it for money

Ha, I would actually take you up on that
























and sell the pictures for way more profit than I would give you personally...

I think we should just pool our monies. So for we got :

20 pesos+1 Chuck E. Cheese Tolken+$10

All for the sake of one stinky hole.

Originally posted by inimalist
and sell the pictures for way more profit than I would give you personally...

I think you might greatly be overestimating the value of an ******* pic online.

hmmm.... you guys need to ante up more. hmm cheapskates.

i gotta pay for college! D=

Originally posted by Robtard
I think you might greatly be overestimating the value of an ******* pic online.

it can be sold more than once though

but i do see your point

Originally posted by inimalist
it can be sold more than once though

but i do see your point

Who in the world pays for a picture of an *******?

Maybe the one person that hasn't heard of google.

its the internet, people fell for the nigerian prince scam

its no coincidence of the rise of police brutality, they deliberatly hire thugs because thugs are needed in the new world order. they need to keep you scum in order, and in fear of them

Originally posted by inimalist
its the internet, people fell for the nigerian prince scam

Nigerian Prince Scammers are hard working professionals, don't you ****ing knock them uhuh

Originally posted by Bardock42
That really doesn't matter, I am not denying that you talked about the case before I am saying that you made a mistake by replying to Robtard in a way that suggest that you thought assault with a deadly weapon would be a minor offense, which caused Marvel to even reply in the first place.

Ahh. I see. So you WERE joking. Gotcha.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Ahh. I see. So you WERE joking. Gotcha.

Ironic.

It's ****ing stupid how these pigs get less of a sentence than the rest of us.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nigerian Prince Scammers are hard working professionals, don't you ****ing knock them uhuh

hey, so are amature pornographers

we're all trying to earn a living here

Abuse in the most severe form.

Originally posted by inimalist
hey, so are amature pornographers

we're all trying to earn a living here

Lol. So amateur pornographers are hard working professionals?


Didn't think that one through, did you?

Originally posted by Deano
its no coincidence of the rise of police brutality, they deliberatly hire thugs because thugs are needed in the new world order. they need to keep you scum in order, and in fear of them

There's likely not a rise, it's just caught more often with the advent of portable cameras, cellphones etc.

When is this New World Order getting here? I've been waiting for years now.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's likely not a rise, it's just caught more often with the advent of portable cameras, cellphones etc.

When is this New World Order getting here? I've been waiting for years now.




Ding ding ding. Right answer. Give that man a prize.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's likely not a rise, it's just caught more often with the advent of portable cameras, cellphones etc.

When is this New World Order getting here? I've been waiting for years now.

Ya, I miss the good old days: when if you complained about being beaten by the cops, they just beat you until you stopped.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Lol. So amateur pornographers are hard working professionals?


Didn't think that one through, did you?

LOL

wow, apparently i did not

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Ya, I miss the good old days: when if you complained about being beaten by the cops, they just beat you until you stopped.

Or they anally rape you with a toilet plunger handle. Happened.

Originally posted by Robtard
Or they anally rape you with a toilet plunger handle. Happened.

The good old days. Now, people just complain.

Not me though....Oooo. LOL

Hands are nice.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Not me though....Oooo. LOL

Hands are nice.

Peggy (I always imagined your name was Peggy), I love you more today than yesterday.

If U say so.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The good old days. Now, people just complain.


I still remember the good old days. Unfortunately it was everyone without means to defend themselves.

The good old days have come again.

I read was that none knows what the student said. It means that the reporter doesn't not know what the student said. That does not mean that someone else does not know. So, you tell me what he said...

Alisa, am I to assume you think it is okay to beat a handcuffed prisoner who is in no way resisting because of something he said?