Detroit cop sucker punches drunk at Casino.....suelarity ensues

[jba]

Here's a video from Freep.com that shows the entire episode.


http://www.freep.com/article/2011092...text|FRONTPAGE

Drunk is a big guy. Looks to me that he had his left hand with fist in officers face. Seems normal reaction for officer in this situation would be to push fast away or defend oneself by stricking back at the drunk.
I don't see anywhere that officer lost control of himself. It may look like it was over reaction because most people don't get threatened on their jobs freqently. The lengthly video after the drunk was in custody [[escort to jail) tells it all. No retaliations, calm cool behavior).
As far as the report goes....The guy had his fist in his face and was saying something. Seems to me with that gesture, his words were probably threatening. How would you write it up.
Does the officer have to wait to he hit before he defends himself?
The whole thing was a bad situation but it looks like everyone is to quick to judge. The first vedeo was clearly edited...and most people including myself felt the offiocer was wrong. Thanks for posting the second one. I now believe the officer was right.
The waitress ought to be talked to for declining to prosecute. Her fellow working ought to be pissed...I guess she is saying it is ok to get drunk and touch the waitresses?

[SWMAP]

The city usually settles for less than $10,000 in most police cases [[every aggrieved person wants to sue you know & most meritless but would take up time & money so the City tries to settle) and the lawyer gets a third. I continue puzzled. What constitutional issues here to merit a trial in Federal Court? The plaintiff will have to have some big proofs.

[Goose]

you people trying to defend the police action by saying he raised his hand to the cop are missing the point....

IF THIS WERE THE CASE, AND THE OFFICER WAS THREATENED BY IT, WHY DIDN'T THE REPORT JUST SIMPLY SAY SO... if the report matched what happened then you could defend the officers actions somewhat, although the arm raise to me didn't seem threatening at all.... THEY BEEFED UP THE REPORT TO SAY THE GUY LUNGED AT THE COP MULTIPLE TIMES...

the report so bogusly misrepresents what actually happened that its is all but clear they are covering up a beatdown.... to me, they may as well have planted a knife in the guys hand and put that in the report too, thats how mismatched the report vs. what happened are

and sure thiings can get confused in the heat of the moment, but from the looks of the video, the partner wasn't frantic and really only became involved after the guy was on the ground and being cuffed, it wasn't a scuffle where fists were being thrown, it was a cold-cock knock out with an additional punch thrown after the guy is going down.... then while they are cuffing him, the guy gets a few more kidney jabs in....

this was a drunk beligerant fool who should have been either cuffed at the table and arrested if he was a threat.... too bad there wasn't audio with the tape, im sure the drunk is yelling every derogatory four letter word at the cop, but thats no excuse.....

[davewindsor]

yup, it wasn't the punch.... it was the lie about the punch...

I agree with that too. I think the punch was justified. The lying by the officer is the only thing I have an issue with. The cop also has a gun and being so close there's also an issue that the suspect could have reached for it and jeapordized the safety of the patrons of the casino. Just google "suspect grabs officer's gun holster". It's a real concern.

But, why blatantly lie about the punch? It's obvious that the scene would be recorded in a casino. If the officer said, we asked the suspect to leave the premises with us peacefully. He initially complied. While escorting the suspect outside, the suspect turned around and got right up in my face in a threatening manner and became verbally abusive. The suspect raised his hand in a threatening manner. The officer was concerned that the suspect in his confrontational state and proximity may reach for the officer's gun holster while being distracted by the raised hand and his verbal abuse. The officer swung at the suspect to avoid an unsafe situation for the officer and the casino patrons.

The think an explanation like that would be reasonable for the force that was used.

Instead, the officer lied and should be reprimanded.

[GOAT]

When this guy was being escorted out, I assume he was already being placed under arest. At that point, the discussion is over, there is no explaining left to do. Instead of going peacefully, he turned on the officers. As for the report, I can't speak for what the officer said in his own words. Consider this though, these cameras are not Hollywood quality. More than one person above has mentioned choppiness, leading them to believe the tape may have been edited. More likely, its simply the cameras, and everything on camera may not happen as quickly as real life due to the frame rate. Him turning on the officers could have been more of a quick spin at them. The finger pointing could have happened at a speed where it was mistaken for an attempted punch. I can't say for sure. What I can say, is when this guy was struck, he was still in the officer's face with what appears to be a clinched right fist, raised and ready to throw. Then, once on the ground, it is again obvious that the guy is not knocked out, but in fact moving around, and even visibly pulling away from the officer in an attempt to prevent from being handcuffed. So why did his attorney lie and say his client was knocked out?

Well that didn't take you long Sport to become a typical cop who will "defend" his own. Walk in line right?

You know as well as I do that this is pure bullshit. The cop is wrong regardless of what the guy said, how he behaved with or without a clenched fist. The fact remains that he didn't try to physically assault the officer.

A judge will laugh this out of court as did your brother-in-blue's own prosecutor.

Imo, this is just another cop taking atters into his own hands. If he can't take teh job then fucking quit! I'm so fucking tireds of hearing how cops have it so rough. Yes they do! But the question why if it is so tough and horrible then why do it? Every cop knows what they are getting into when they are hired, so why the big surprise??

So I'll say it again. If they can't hack the criminal element, the loud-mouths, the punks, then quit and find another line of work. This man's rights were violated and the cop, the city should be penalized for it.

[UpTown]

Well, they put Officer Dudal on restricted duty, and the other officer, Officer Ortiz looks to be in some real hot water over his overactive imagination:

From today's Freep:

A Detroit police officer accused of assaulting a man at the MGM Grand Detroit casino has been placed on restricted duty as the department investigates, Police Chief Ralph Godbee Jr. announced Tuesday.

The department also will submit its findings to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office for review.

Livonia resident Patrick Poisson filed a federal lawsuit against the city Monday, claiming he was punched in the face, head and ribs by Officer Arthur Dudal at the MGM casino on July 30. Court records show the casino's security called police when Poisson, accused of inappropriately touching a waitress, refused to leave.

Godbee said all use of force by officers is required to be investigated to determine whether it was justified and in accordance with department policy.

"I have ordered that the involved officer be placed on administrative restricted duty, no-gun status pending the outcome of the investigation," Godbee said in his statement. "Appropriate department action will be taken at the conclusion of the investigation."

Dudal could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

The lawsuit also names Officer Jose Ortiz, who is accused of misrepresenting events when he filed a request seeking charges against Poisson. The charges against Poisson were dropped.

On Tuesday, Ortiz was named in another lawsuit in Wayne County Circuit Court -- this one accusing him of submitting a warrant request to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office that contained "false and fabricated information" in seeking rape charges against William Horton.

According to the lawsuit, the Prosecutor's Office issued a criminal complaint charging Horton with rape and kidnapping, and he was jailed in January. Two months later, DNA evidence proved he was innocent, the lawsuit says.

Efforts to reach Ortiz were unsuccessful.

http://www.freep.com/article/2011092...text|FRONTPAGE

[bartock]

How much will the City pay out in a case like this...usually? $400K? $700K?

Remove a zero and cut the number in half.

[majohnson]

1.
There is a difference between assault and battery.
Battery involves touching that causes harm or offense.
Assault is causing the victim to fear a touching.

2.
The drunk established himself as someone likely to commit battery.
The drunk committed battery against the woman by touching her in a way that was likely to offend.

3.
The police were aware of the drunk's likelihood to commit battery.
To prevent future acts of battery they attempted to remove him from the casino.

4.
The drunk then committed assault against the police officer.
The assault was causing the officer to fear a touching by the drunk raising his hand to the officer's face. The fear was especially justified because the person has just committed battery.

5.
The police force was justified.
A bystanding officer is justified in using non-deadly force when he sees a citizen or another officer being assaulted. An officer is justified in using non-deadly force to end an assault against him.
The drunk was committing assault against the officer and the officer was justified in using non-deadly force to protect himself.

6.
The intentional falsification of police documents by police should be addressed.
The falsification however is a separate issue from determining whether the police used unjustifiable force against the drunk.

[Goose]

1.
There is a difference between assault and battery.
Battery involves touching that causes harm or offense.
Assault is causing the victim to fear a touching.

2.
The drunk established himself as someone likely to commit battery.
The drunk committed battery against the woman by touching her in a way that was likely to offend.

3.
The police were aware of the drunk's likelihood to commit battery.
To prevent future acts of battery they attempted to remove him from the casino.

4.
The drunk then committed assault against the police officer.
The assault was causing the officer to fear a touching by the drunk raising his hand to the officer's face. The fear was especially justified because the person has just committed battery.

5.
The police force was justified.
A bystanding officer is justified in using non-deadly force when he sees a citizen or another officer being assaulted. An officer is justified in using non-deadly force to end an assault against him.
The drunk was committing assault against the officer and the officer was justified in using non-deadly force to protect himself.

6.
The intentional falsification of police documents by police should be addressed.
The falsification however is a separate issue from determining whether the police used unjustifiable force against the drunk.

do you understand the lies in the report? something legitimate didn't happen, that why they HAD TO LIE IN THE REPORT....

trying to justify it after the evident lies in the report is naive

according to you, something completly justified and legitimate happened, and then at the last minute, for some reason, despite having justification, they just decided to lie in the report... all other actions were warranted, but they felt compelled somehow to make crap up to put in the report....

please......

[Downriviera]

In the old days this guy would have got beaten up by the cops and we wouldn't even know about it. Of course, the streets were safer back then. Now its open season on cocktail waitresses at the casinos.

[bobby wobby]

I agree ,maybe the cop shouldn't have punched him,But if I was on the jury,that scum-bag wouldn't get a penny.

[DetroitIrishK]

1.
There is a difference between assault and battery.
Battery involves touching that causes harm or offense.
Assault is causing the victim to fear a touching.

2.
The drunk established himself as someone likely to commit battery.
The drunk committed battery against the woman by touching her in a way that was likely to offend.

3.
The police were aware of the drunk's likelihood to commit battery.
To prevent future acts of battery they attempted to remove him from the casino.

4.
The drunk then committed assault against the police officer.
The assault was causing the officer to fear a touching by the drunk raising his hand to the officer's face. The fear was especially justified because the person has just committed battery.

5.
The police force was justified.
A bystanding officer is justified in using non-deadly force when he sees a citizen or another officer being assaulted. An officer is justified in using non-deadly force to end an assault against him.
The drunk was committing assault against the officer and the officer was justified in using non-deadly force to protect himself.

6.
The intentional falsification of police documents by police should be addressed.
The falsification however is a separate issue from determining whether the police used unjustifiable force against the drunk.

A couple of things I can't help but respond on here.

1) The "battery" by Poisson on the waitress is unfounded. It was reported that he touched her inappropriately, but by reports there was no evidence to this fact.

2) Assault is an imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact. We are talking about a trained officer, larger in size, and surely in a better state of mind. It is extremely hard to prove that in the same situation, a reasonable person in the officers position would be in any imminent danger of a harmful or offensive contact, let alone actually subjectively be in fear of a harmful or offensive contact. The "assault" justification here to me has no merit.

3) Police officers should use force only to the extent that the perp. of a potential crime is subdued. The video tape provides evidence that there was no threatening motion by Poisson, and even if there was it would not justify a haymaker to the fact. The officer then continued to throw fists into his ribs and side when he was clearly unable to move or resist.

[Gannon]

The video in the Freep starts with the supposed drunk patting the offending officer on his shoulder. Agreeable. Friendly. The other officer says "let's go." There are obviously words between the two, but at all times the officer could have eased up the energy of this encounter. He chose to escalate it, because that is his training. Response is designed to subdue whenever any form of resistance is perceived.

That is the core of the problem. When looking for a fight, any action is seen as a challenge. Add adrenaline...all bets are off. I remember asking the Bloomfield Hills cops after a high-speed chase I led a few years ago how they kept from beating up everyone who runs from them.

The mistake is the training. It assumes an officer's good humor is intact, but that gets whittled away with each day on the street. Witness our Sport here. I'm not sure his humor has survived these past couple of years.

I'm sure Officer Dudal needs some help with his, too. Their resiliency is deficient, and that eventually costs the city money.

Need some cheers here...

[DetroitPole]

In the old days this guy would have got beaten up by the cops and we wouldn't even know about it. Of course, the streets were safer back then. Now its open season on cocktail waitresses at the casinos.

My advice to the pervert:
Life hands you a few bloody noses. Get over it, fat boy. Some people have actually been victims of police brutality. That's not what I would call that.

I dated a girl who was a waitress in the city; worked late hours. I always worried for her safety.

So here is the formula:
Get drunk, molest a waitress, provoke the police, get subdued, instant $$$$$$$$$

No wonder criminals in this country are so brazen and have nothing to fear.

[eno]

What evidence is there that Mr. Poisson was drunk? What evidence is there that Mr. Poisson touched an employee of the casino inappropriately? The employee declined to testify. That charge against Mr. Poisson could be part of the same fabrication as the cop's statement about being attacked by Mr. Poisson.

[SWMAP]

Well, one piece in the chain is that Casino security called the cops and pointed Poisson out and asked to have him formally removed because he would not leave. Back one link: someone called casino Security and pointed Poisson out.

There is no evidence he was drunk. His defenders on this Board believe he was drunk and so his movements weren't very threatening. They made the assumption that he wasn't cold sober and refusing a request to leave private property.

[swingline]

After watching Officer Dudal's quick trigger on the sucker punch in this encounter, it seems almost certain that he has beaten the shit out of plenty other civilians/perps who lip off to him. It probably won't take long for his complaint history to come out, nor for emboldened additional plaintiffs.

[Bobl]

When a cop tells you to leave the scene, leave the scene
































When asked to leave private property, leave. If you choose to have a confrontation with officers first, expect unpleasant circumstances.
Did the cop over react? Possible, but if the guy had simply gone away when asked, there would be no story or impending court procedures.
He should have just left, and certainly should not have waved his hand in the officer's face.
I learned at a young age that one should not piss off a cop!

[SWMAP]

i looked up this case. Poisson is alledging a violation of the American Civil Right Act. trust me, this will go nowhere. he is no Rosa Parks. The city may negotiate with his lawyer and give him the standard settlement prize - which used to be about $7000 - not sure what it is now. Everyone will sign off. The city will not be found guilty and neither will he. The officers can't be sued personally.

Swingline - every cop doing his job makes enemies. Lots of people feel aggrieved just about their lives and thay take it out on medical personel, cops, etc. Twenty complaints that went nowhere would not sway my opinion. You shouldn't jump to so many conclusions. Maybe the cop had the mixed martial arts training that Poisson's lawyer has and advocates. Maybe he's been in a fight or two in his life. So what? Poisson would not leave private property. He put up a fuss. Maybe they hit him in leiu of arresting him so there would be more room in the jail that night for the real criminals.

[bartock]

i looked up this case. Poisson is alledging a violation of the American Civil Right Act. trust me, this will go nowhere. he is no Rosa Parks. The city may negotiate with his lawyer and give him the standard settlement prize - which used to be about $7000 - not sure what it is now. Everyone will sign off. The city will not be found guilty and neither will he. The officers can't be sued personally.

Swingline - every cop doing his job makes enemies. Lots of people feel aggrieved just about their lives and thay take it out on medical personel, cops, etc. Twenty complaints that went nowhere would not sway my opinion. You shouldn't jump to so many conclusions. Maybe the cop had the mixed martial arts training that Poisson's lawyer has and advocates. Maybe he's been in a fight or two in his life. So what? Poisson would not leave private property. He put up a fuss. Maybe they hit him in leiu of arresting him so there would be more room in the jail that night for the real criminals.

It will be more than $7,000. It is an uncapped exposure and this lawyer will make the focus of the case the cops and not his client [[the "greater good" approach). The video alone presents questions of fact so this case should make it to a jury. There are minimal damages, however, unless this guy lost his job or something else we don't know because of it.

The case will settle for $50-100K and Mueller is benefitting from the publicity. My arguably-educated guess on it, anyway.

[SWMAP]

we'll never know the amount of the settlement, of course. But I still hold that they will settle and never go to trial. And it won't overall be worth his time. He wouldn't leave, he made trouble, a cop slugged him and he got hurt. What violation of his civil rights occured? And remember that the lawyer is trying this in the media. That's a giveawy to a pretty weak case or a venal lawyer.

[Ray1936]

Just makes me so bloomin' glad to be long retired and away from that stuff. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I do find it curious that the DPD apparently has police officers assigned to the casinos on the inside. Every joint in Las Vegas uses a security staff who would handle all such incidents. The bad guys are taken to a security office and the local PD is then called to take over the matter. But NO police officers in Las Vegas are assigned inside casinos [[except during special events, when their salaries are paid by the casinos.....WWF and stuff like that.)

[Buy American]

Just makes me so bloomin' glad to be long retired and away from that stuff. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I do find it curious that the DPD apparently has police officers assigned to the casinos on the inside. Every joint in Las Vegas uses a security staff who would handle all such incidents. The bad guys are taken to a security office and the local PD is then called to take over the matter. But NO police officers in Las Vegas are assigned inside casinos [[except during special events, when their salaries are paid by the casinos.....WWF and stuff like that.)

Ray, if I'm not mistakened, DPD are allowed to moonlight, in uniform, after their shift or before. I wonder if these two were doing just that? However, I think the security in the casino called the DPD and these two officers were dispatched to the scene.

[313rd]

Ray, I was thinking the same....What they are saying is that MGM security couldn't escort the guy out? There are plenty of Security and Bouncers at the Clubs at the Casinos. I find it odd, that they couldn't do anything.

I'm sure every weekend there is a drunk getting escorted out of a Casino, Bar, Restaurant that we don't hear about that includes brute strength [[possibly punches)

[swingline]

we'll never know the amount of the settlement, of course. But I still hold that they will settle and never go to trial. And it won't overall be worth his time. He wouldn't leave, he made trouble, a cop slugged him and he got hurt. What violation of his civil rights occured? And remember that the lawyer is trying this in the media. That's a giveawy to a pretty weak case or a venal lawyer.

SW, you make it sound as if the Michigan Penal Code does not apply to members of law enforcement. Well, it does apply. Officer Dudal committed a crime and he can be held civilly liable for it regardless of any criminal charge. Just because he's a cop doesn't mean he can punch out people and ask questions later. He's got no special status.

Mr. Poisson is a huge asshole, no disputing that, but one doesn't lose protection of Michigan and federal civil and criminal law just because they're an asshole. The video does not show Mr. Poisson physically threatening Officer Dudal or anyone else. And even the fabricated incident reports fail to include any kind of allegation that Mr. Poisson verbally threatened either of the officers. Accordingly, the officer had no legal right to strike Mr. Poisson.

It seems that plenty of folks think that Mr. Poisson "deserved" to get clocked because he is an asshole. Well, our judicial system is going to overlook his character flaw and will very likely conclude that he "deserves" to be compensated because he was the victim of what the lawyers call a constitutional or civil tort.