Grosse Pointe Park police investigating video of suspect beating

**aj3647** · January-14-15, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by Lowell

Needs repeating. No matter what that person allegedly did [innocent until tried and found guilty] or how big of a slimeball he may indeed be proven to be, the law only and nothing or no one else can issue punishment after a suspect is manacled and subdued.

Did you even bother watching the video? He was not "manacled and subdued" as they were punching and kicking him. They were attempting to handcuff him at that point. The physical force was employed as part of that process. Until those cuffs are secured and until that gun is secured, he's a deadly threat. And yes, the police are allowed to use physical force to include body blows to effect an arrest if the subject is employing active resistance, and especially if that subject is carrying a gun. It's hardly a "punishment."

Here's the use of force continuum:

http://i.imgur.com/S1dUFiS.jpg?1

Police officers ARE ALLOWED to both punch and kick a subject if the subject employs active resistance against the officer. That's a legally-acceptable use of force that is taught in every police academy in America. Also look at the special circumstances list too, which incluse "closeless of a weapon" [[like say a handgun tucked into the subject's waistband) and "special knowledge" [[like knowing the guy just stuck a gun in a woman's face and carjacked her).

**Dan Wesson** · January-14-15, 09:01 AM

It weren't much of an ass whupping. I got worse from the Hamtramck Cops back when i was young, dumb and full of...

Alcohol

**Lowell** · January-14-15, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by aj3647

Did you even bother watching the video? He was not "manacled and subdued" as they were punching and kicking him. They were attempting to handcuff him at that point. The physical force was employed as part of that process. Until those cuffs are secured and until that gun is secured, he's a deadly threat. And yes, the police are allowed to use physical force to include body blows to effect an arrest if the subject is employing active resistance, and especially if that subject is carrying a gun. It's hardly a "punishment."

I did. I watched it several times. I clearly understand that use of physical force employed while securing and cuffing the suspect appears justifiable -- the punches and kicks.

But after that, unless there is some clear act that would endanger a law enforcement officer or indeed anybody, any abuse is not legal. That is when the knee in the back furthering blows, albeit lesser, and the Jesus cursing occurred.

As I also added I truly hope there was justification for what occurred after he was manacled. At the time he is still a suspect. I don't want the police to get in trouble and I don't want videos like this to inflame hatred toward them that would endanger them and and enrich the perp with some legal settlement.

An unrelated mystery is why, since he was reported to be reaching for his gun, he was not disarmed immediately. It is four minutes later when the firearm was discovered. My assumption is that they considered him secured enough but then weighs agains what happened when he was.

**Honky Tonk** · January-14-15, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by Lowell

I did. I watched it several times. I clearly understand that use of physical force employed while securing and cuffing the suspect appears justifiable -- the punches and kicks.

But after that, unless there is some clear act that would endanger a law enforcement officer or indeed anybody, any abuse is not legal. That is when the knee in the back furthering blows, albeit lesser, and the Jesus cursing occurred.

As I also added I truly hope there was justification for what occurred after he was manacled. At the time he is still a suspect. I don't want the police to get in trouble and I don't want videos like this to inflame hatred toward them that would endanger them and and enrich the perp with some legal settlement.

An unrelated mystery is why, since he was reported to be reaching for his gun, he was not disarmed immediately. It is four minutes later when the firearm was discovered. My assumption is that they considered him secured enough but then weighs agains what happened when he was.

He was a suspect up until the time the Police found a concealed weapon, [[even though it wasn't an automatic, just a .38) and "needles" on him. [[I'll give him the benefit of a doubt that he's a diabetic) Just out of curiosity, what would you have done in their instance?

**jackie5275** · January-14-15, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

"needles" on him. [[I'll give him the benefit of a doubt that he's a diabetic)

HT, I think you're being generous. Out on the street like that, I would consider a needle of any kind just as much of a weapon as a gun.

**iheartthed** · January-14-15, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

He was a suspect up until the time the Police found a concealed weapon, [[even though it wasn't an automatic, just a .38) and "needles" on him. [[I'll give him the benefit of a doubt that he's a diabetic) Just out of curiosity, what would you have done in their instance?

He could have had a CCW permit.

**jackie5275** · January-14-15, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

He could have had a CCW permit.

Doubtful, but that really doesn't matter. Whether he had it legally or not, the presence of the gun is the threat.

**iheartthed** · January-14-15, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by jackie5275

Doubtful, but that really doesn't matter. Whether he had it legally or not, the presence of the gun is the threat.

That doesn't make sense. That would mean that cops can beat the shit out of anyone with a CCW who gets pulled over for a traffic stop.

**jackie5275** · January-14-15, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

That doesn't make sense. That would mean that cops can beat the shit out of anyone with a CCW who gets pulled over for a traffic stop.

I'm talking about in this specific incident.

**Honky Tonk** · January-14-15, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

He could have had a CCW permit.

If he didn't have a "CCW" or a CPL, he'll have a CCW now.

**aj3647** · January-15-15, 02:08 AM

Originally Posted by Lowell

But after that, unless there is some clear act that would endanger a law enforcement officer or indeed anybody, any abuse is not legal. That is when the knee in the back furthering blows, albeit lesser, and the Jesus cursing occurred.

Oh no, the Jesus cursing! How DARE that officer use foul langauge! Fire him immediately and give this carjacker a six figure civil judgement for having his innocent virgin ears inundated with the officer's mean language! If you want to critique the level of force used, fine, but to bitch about the cop "cursing?"

As for the legality, I guess it depends on your definiton of "abuse." Was this man harmed in any way? If a cop puts his knee in your back to keep you on the ground after you carjacked someone at gunpoint and led the officers on a quarter mile foot chase [[which indicates that not only are you a flight risk, but also a threat to the community), is that "abuse?" Do you think Kym Worthy is going to indict? I don't.

**animatedmartian** · January-15-15, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by aj3647

Oh no, the Jesus cursing! How DARE that officer use foul langauge! Fire him immediately and give this carjacker a six figure civil judgement for having his innocent virgin ears inundated with the officer's mean language! If you want to critique the level of force used, fine, but to bitch about the cop "cursing?"

It was the criminal who was doing the jesus cursing. It's the cop who got upset about it.

**Danny** · January-14-15, 10:42 AM

Cops beat up folks all the time, especially black folks. It's a every day trend in this so-called free country. What you folks going to do? protest! It's not going to work.

Folks when the police stop for something, obey their direct protocol. Don't go out in the streets looking like Trayvon Martin, Eric Brown and Eric Garner.

Don't go out into the streets looking like a criminal. Cops love to hunt them down to keep them busy and earn big bonuses and promotions.

**nain rouge** · January-15-15, 01:40 PM

People rally against police misconduct, but what I think they're really mad about is the drug war, private prisons, and the erosion of our civil liberties. These incidents are just the proverbial smoking gun protesters need to get people fired up.

**rb336** · January-15-15, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by nain rouge

People rally against police misconduct, but what I think they're really mad about is the drug war, private prisons, and the erosion of our civil liberties. These incidents are just the proverbial smoking gun protesters need to get people fired up.

I think it is more that police misconduct is the visible aspect of the increased militarization of our penal system. Most people who rally against police misconduct probably don't think that much about the for profit jail system, etc.