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

[Jimaz]

This thread's title needs a hyphen. It reads like a drunk got punched by a cop sucker.

[SWMAP]

swingline, I looked up the filing, as I said. The plaintiff is not claiming that his constitutional rights were violated. He is making a claim under the Civil Liberties Act of 1964 - which is pretty much dedicated to eliminating racial discrimination and discrimination against women. I don't see this as a constitutional tort action:

This about torts:

"The Constitution ordinarily places only negative restrictions on government and does not require affirmative acts to assist individuals. The statutory vehicle for most constitutional tort litigation, 42 U.S.C. section 1983, echoes this constitutional principle. It extends liability to "[e]very person who ... [under color of state law] subjects, or causes to be subjected, any ... person" to the deprivation of federal rights, and makes no provision for a duty on governmental defendants to stop others from harming the plaintiff."

I just can't see which of his federal rights were violated here. he was asked to leave and he would not. They threw him out and fractured his nose [[he says) when he wouldn't cooperate. What is the constitutional argument?

[Meddle]

DONT DISRESPECT THE BADGE.

Especially when you're wearing it.

[Ray1936]

Ut, oh. That video is going viral. Just saw it on my local 12:00 noon news here in Las Vegas.

[[Footnote: I nearly choked when our local anchor bimbo, after showing the clip, said "I didn't know they had any casinos in Detroit." But I forgive her, she's a looker.......)

[swingline]

swingline, I looked up the filing, as I said. The plaintiff is not claiming that his constitutional rights were violated. He is making a claim under the Civil Liberties Act of 1964 - which is pretty much dedicated to eliminating racial discrimination and discrimination against women. I don't see this as a constitutional tort action:

This about torts:

"The Constitution ordinarily places only negative restrictions on government and does not require affirmative acts to assist individuals. The statutory vehicle for most constitutional tort litigation, 42 U.S.C. section 1983, echoes this constitutional principle. It extends liability to "[e]very person who ... [under color of state law] subjects, or causes to be subjected, any ... person" to the deprivation of federal rights, and makes no provision for a duty on governmental defendants to stop others from harming the plaintiff."

I just can't see which of his federal rights were violated here. he was asked to leave and he would not. They threw him out and fractured his nose [[he says) when he wouldn't cooperate. What is the constitutional argument?

SW, the constitutional argument is made in almost all police misconduct cases. As we all used to learn in high school, the 4th amendment to the US Constitution protects all of us from unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by the government. The law treats a police officer's sucker punch delivered to an unthreatening civilian as an unreasonable seizure. Section 1983 transforms Officer Dudal's effort to teach Mr. Poisson how to show some respect to the badge into a violation of federal law.

[swingline]

And the cases keep coming. http://www.detnews.com/article/20110...M-Grand-Casino The Feiger firm is on this one. We'll get the video pretty soon. If it's as bad as the last one . . . well, then, no problem really. The taxpayers can just keep writing checks while the police officer/public servants continue teaching lessons to our citizens. Respect the badge.

[UpTown]

And the cases keep coming. http://www.detnews.com/article/20110...M-Grand-Casino The Feiger firm is on this one. We'll get the video pretty soon. If it's as bad as the last one . . . well, then, no problem really. The taxpayers can just keep writing checks while the police officer/public servants continue teaching lessons to our citizens. Respect the badge.

If they release the video from this incident, and it's close to this description....woo boy.
From the Detroit News article:

"The Moncrief case involves an incident Jan 29 at the casino, which also was captured by a surveillance camera.
Moncrief, 34, who had rented a room at the casino hotel with his girlfriend, was waiting in the hotel lobby for a cab.
The officers approached them and ordered him to go back to his room, according to the lawsuit.
They told him to go outside and use another entrance to get to his room. Moncrief wanted to use the lobby entrance instead because it was cold, but the officers pushed him outside, according to the lawsuit.
"As DaJuan was speaking to the Defendants, one of the Defendants crept behind him and put him in a choke hold," Marko wrote. "At no time did DaJuan pose a threat to anyone, let alone Defendants; his hands were up held up in plain view in a non-threatening and open manner.
"DaJuan was smashed to the ground by Defendants, who were still choking him," the lawyer continued. "While DaJuan was being choked out, defendant police officers viciously and maliciously beat DaJuan with a billy club, breaking his ribs and causing severe injuries."
Moncrief was taken to jail. He complained of breathing problems but did not receive medical attention, according to the lawsuit.
Following the incident, Moncrief was charged with four separate crimes, according to the lawsuit. The charges were later dropped.
Besides the broken ribs, Moncrief suffered nerve damage, vision problems, including a busted blood vessel and blurry vision, neck problems, scarring and persistent headaches, according to the lawsuit."


From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110929/...#ixzz1ZM0ouFu0

[Scottathew]

"suelarity ensues"

This still makes me laugh each time I see it.

[ferntruth]

I've watched this video, over and over, and am really baffled by the responses I've read thus far. I'm going to break this incident down, piece by piece from the beginning, then offer an alternate scenario.

First, this guy committed 4th degree criminal sexual conduct, no denying that. The waitress stated such, the security attempted to remove the guy because of it, and surely, if the cameras are everywhere in the casino, it too was captured on tape.

After this drunk refused to leave, DPD was called. Initially, it seems the guy agreed to leave. Yet while walking out, he then turns on the officers, gets in their face, and points a finger in the one officers face. What happens next is what justifies the use of force. Unless you guys are watching a different video, it seems the guy from Livonia is holding a clinched right fist in the air.

As officers, we don't have to be shot before we can use deadly force to stop a threat. Nor do we have to wait for a drunk with a clinched fist in our face to strike us before we can strike them. Is the concensus here that officers are to be subjected to violence and injury PRIOR to being able to use force on somebody who committed a crime?

After being struck, the guy fell to the ground, knocked out according to his lawyer. I find this funny, considering the guy continues to squirm upon hitting the ground, and then begins resisting the officer, trying to prevent him from handcuffing him. Thus, the officer delivers a couple strikes to him, in an effort to get him cuffed. Is the concensus here that the officer should have continued to struggle with the guy on the ground, risking injury to the officer and his partner, and even possibly allowing the suspect the opportunity to get away?

After the guy is finally cuffed, that's it, he gets escorted away and is off to jail. Yet as is all too common in the city, the victim decides not to press charges. I ask, why not? For all we know, maybe this guy is a high roller at the casino, and maybe somebody convinced her NOT to press charges. Either way, those charges were dropped, as were the other charges, even though the guy is visibly trying to get his right arm free to prevent him from being handcuffed.

Nothing these officers did falls out of line with what is allowed. The guy was drunk, uncooperative, and then turned on the officers, and appears to have raised a fist. This guy now thinks he won the lotto.

Now, let's reverse the roll here. Instead of Detroit, let's move this to Livonia. Instead of a white guy, we'll make him a black guy. Now, this guy gets drunk and decides to play grab ass with the waitress serving him drinks. The bouncers get involved, and he tells them "Fuck off, I'm not leaving" or something to that effect. How do you think Livonia PD would handle a guy that turns on them, raises a fist, and then continues to struggle with them on the ground? If not the exact same outcome, the alternative is the guy getting tazered multiple times. Also, even without the victim, this case could have, and should have been prosecuted. There is undoubtedly video of the offense taking place, and just because the victim doesn't wish to testify doesn't mean there wouldn't be enough proof to possibly convict.

Why do Detroiters tolerate this? Some guy can come into Detroit, get drunk, commit sexual conduct on a person, refuse to leave, confront the officers, raise a fist, and then the outcome gets him a day in court to try and get a payout? As an officer and a citizen of Detroit, I am sickened by this.

The casino should have banned this guy for life. By not doing so, it shows that their patrons are allowed to fondle waitresses without consequences. The chief should release a statement, reviewing the video, and stand behind these officers, explaining why the outcome was justified.This guy wants their jobs? Is he serious? He does realize that he got off scott free for the crime he committed, right?

This is a fine example of so many things. For one, it is one more example of why we should have tazers. This guy would have been dropped, cuffed, and there would be no discussion. Secondly, depending upon the outcome, this could prove to be another fine example of why there are disgruntled officers on the job, moral overall tends to be low, and why this department continues to lose officers to suburban departments and the federal government. We lost our first classmate a few months ago to border patrol, and as it stands, we look to loose several more to federal positions in the coming months and years. Why? Because people realize that it just isn't worth the headaches. By 10 years, I figure over 1/2-3/4 of my classmates will have gone on to MUCH greener pastures.

Now I ask, how would you have dealt with this situation? If you have a better way, then by all means, head on down to 17825 Sherwood and sign up. People are always quick to be critical, but almost always unwilling to step up, put their lives on the line in an attempt to do a better job.

I'm sorry, were you drafted to be a police officer? No one forced YOU to take the job - in fact, its been my experience that most of the morons who carry a badge and a gun should not be doing so. Based on your comments, I think you belong in that category as well.
YOU chose to do what you do for a lving. If you have a problem with it, find another job.

Either way, you don't get to arbitrarily strike someone....and people wonder why some [[including me) have absolutely no respect for cops.

[Detroitej72]

in fact, its been my experience that most of the morons who carry a badge and a gun should not be doing so..

Nice generalization and slamming of a noble profession. A few bad apples don't spoil the whole bushel.

[Meddle]

The taxpayers can just keep writing checks while ...

Instead of buying or fixing fire trucks and buses or repairing roads and streetlights.

[stromberg2]

Folks, there is nothing wrong with Supersport. It's just his opinion. From what I understand, he's a very noble guy.

Stromberg2

[corktownyuppie]

Nice generalization and slamming of a noble profession. A few bad apples don't spoil the whole bushel.

Agreed. My experience with DPD has been very good. Maybe I've always lived in good parts of town or been lucky, but I have no complaints. When I was 16, I came home and the alarm at the house was going off. I called the police, they were there within 10 minutes, and they walked through entire house with me to make sure it was safe. This was on Outer Drive in the early 1990s.

Then there was the whole fiasco with LAX. So the two times I've ever had any real interaction with DPD, they've been very good. Obviously, this isn't a representative sample, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Now, keeping that in mind, and with full respect to Superstar, I have a hard time justifying the amount of force used to subdue this guy. My buddy is on the border patrol, and another one is an ICE agent. They both agree. It was excessive.

I'm smart enough to know that I don't know everything. There were events that led up to that video that deserve to be known. I know for me, I thought the whole McDonald's "spill coffee in my lap, make me a millionaire" thing was preposterous...until I learned that the coffee was so hot that it burned through her pants, her skin, and all the way to the bone. And that there were multiple documented warnings given to this franchise about their hot beverage safety. Kinda changes things a little, right?

I think the force was excessive. And I think the cops involve have a right to a full, un-tampered investigation. And I think that no matter what these guys did, it should have no relevance to how we look at DPD or police as a whole. We've already got the feds overseeing the complaints from the early 2000s, and -- although the pace has been unacceptable -- they are doing the things necessary to improve compliance.

How about we reserve judgment and see how this all plays out before jumping to conclusions.

[Gistok]

I'm sorry, were you drafted to be a police officer? No one forced YOU to take the job - in fact, its been my experience that most of the morons who carry a badge and a gun should not be doing so. Based on your comments, I think you belong in that category as well.
YOU chose to do what you do for a lving. If you have a problem with it, find another job.

Either way, you don't get to arbitrarily strike someone....and people wonder why some [[including me) have absolutely no respect for cops.

Fern... not one of your better posts [[of which there are many)...

Even I [[who detest border patrol folks at the tunnel/bridge) don't label everyone in one profession with the same disdain... there are good and bad...

[Vox]

Fern... not one of your better posts [[of which there are many)...

Even I [[who detest border patrol folks at the tunnel/bridge) don't label everyone in one profession with the same disdain... there are good and bad...

I'm shaking my fist in anger.... oh... nevermind.