Grosse Pointe Park police investigating video of suspect beating

[oo7plyr]

From the Detroit News:
The Grosse Pointe Park Police Department is investigating a video that captured the beating of a handcuffed suspect by officers from a multijurisdictional task force, according to Detroit and Grosse Pointe Park police.
The video — which appears to have been shot by a woman on Monday and posted on Facebook — shows two officers beating a man whose hands are cuffed behind him as he lies face down in the snow. At about the 23-second mark of the 9-minute-and-30-second video, one officer swings at the man seven times while the other officer delivers two kicks.
At the 23-second mark, the suspect calls upon Jesus, which upsets one of the officers. An officer then kneels on his back.
"What did you say?" asked the officer.
"Jesus? You're calling Jesus? You [[expletive)! Don't you dare. Don't you [[expletive) dare!"
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...pect/21689193/

[Gpwrangler]

According to the report, he had a gun in his waistband.

[Honky Tonk]

According to the report, he had a gun in his waistband.

Before or after he was cuffed, then beaten?

[Novack]

Before or after he was cuffed, then beaten?

It looks like before, because he is saying "Give me your F$%#$^$ arm", also if you put the fact he has a hand gun in his waist ban then that changes the context of the story quite a bit.

I am sure they will figure it out

[animatedmartian]

It looks like before, because he is saying "Give me your F$%#$^$ arm", also if you put the fact he has a hand gun in his waist ban then that changes the context of the story quite a bit.

I am sure they will figure it out

If the suspect was reaching for his gun, then yes. The video starts pretty much in the process of whenever the scuffle was going on and you can hear the clicks of the cuffs which happens after the cops stop punching and kicking the suspect. That seems legal.

However, the cop cuffing the suspect did give him a one time hit after the cuffs were on him while the other cop kneed the suspect in the back and giving a little slap with the back of his hand after the suspect moaned out "Jesus". A few seconds later, the cuffing cop calls him a bitch for trying to outrun him or whatever, but the camera gets a little shaky and it seems like the cop gave him another slap across the face. It's not necessarily a beating, but not exactly professional conduct either. At most that would just be a very minor offense on the cops but not worth anyone getting upset over unless they already have a bias against cops.

The cuffing cop also asked the suspect "Where is the pistol?" and presumably the suspect didn't respond. The gun isn't recovered off the suspect until a few minutes later.

[jolla]

...and it seems like the cop gave him another slap across the face. It's not necessarily a beating, but not exactly professional conduct either. At most that would just be a very minor offense on the cops but not worth anyone getting upset over unless they already have a bias against cops.

Excuse me? I'd be very upset if I were slapped across the face. What if that were your mom; would it still be not worth getting upset over?

[animatedmartian]

As one of the cops said in the video, "You got a justified ass whooping."

[swingline]

Non-story here. The video clearly shows that the suspect was NOT handcuffed while the officer was hitting him. He was not voluntarily complying with the officer's demand to produce his free hand/arm for handcuffing. That's resisting arrest. A few hours before, the vehicle he was caught riding in had been involved in an armed carjacking. Police conduct here seems mostly appropriate under the circumstances. Is the arresting officer supposed to politely request a fleeing and resisting armed carjacking suspect to please pretty please allow me to handcuff you?

The filmmaker/narrator injects all kinds of false information. The actual video shows that there was no pistol whipping. The video also shows that he was not handcuffed while the officer was striking him and demanding that he produce his free arm.

[Towne Cluber]

The biased narration isn't surprising, given that the witness states on camera that "she can't stand [[the police)"...in addition to her inaccurate description of events taking place right in front of her. Therefore, she lacks credibility.

[Gpwrangler]

Before or after he was cuffed, then beaten?

I simply quoted what I read in the article. But I would guess he had it when he stole that car at gunpoint, and still had it on him when he was arrested.

[mtburb]

I just watched parts of that video and guess what?

Despite the quality, I found out that the suspect was black and that white officers were beating him, though a cop that responded there but didn't even attack him was black as well.

I have a strong sense that with the way the officers attacked him...I wouldn't be surprised if there's widespread media coverage-and unfortunately, initially-peaceful protests turning violent resulting from just this video alone.

I can't believe this at all.

[Gpwrangler]

I just watched parts of that video and guess what?

Despite the quality, I found out that the suspect was black and that white officers were beating him, though a cop that responded there but didn't even attack him was black as well.

I have a strong sense that with the way the officers attacked him...I wouldn't be surprised if there's widespread media coverage-and unfortunately, initially-peaceful protests turning violent resulting from just this video alone.

I can't believe this at all.

Facts don't matter. So what if he was a carjacker and had a gun.

Sounds like a lot of people are hoping for violence. I hope they don't get their wish.

I think it's time to pull the "task force" out of Detroit and let the criminals have at it.

[TKshreve]

Facts don't matter. So what if he was a carjacker and had a gun.

Sounds like a lot of people are hoping for violence. I hope they don't get their wish.

I think it's time to pull the "task force" out of Detroit and let the criminals have at it.

TY GPwrangler. It comes as no surprise that the narrator is without hesitation dead against the cops. The type of biased, knee jerk assertions that undermine our culture. What we have here is first hand evidence of the growing trend against police officers. Perhaps law enforcement should dip out of areas where their services are not respected or appreciated. It would be great to see the reaction.

[Chicago48]

The narrator said there was a black cop.
I don't think there's anything there. The narrator added her commentary.

[Goose]

i've seen this linked in some news articles saying it happened IN Grosse Pointe Park.... don't think so

[Gpwrangler]

i've seen this linked in some news articles saying it happened IN Grosse Pointe Park.... don't think so

quote from one story I read:

"Grosse Pointe Park's chief said the suspect is an admitted carjacker who threatened to shoot a woman and her child while stealing their car. The task force was tracking the car, and the armed suspect running from police and resisting arrest resulted in this rough takedown."

Highland Park and Grosse Pointe officer was mentioned in story, plus another [[DPD?)

Happened in Detroit.

[DTWflyer]

Good job at getting a ARMED criminal off the streets. We need more of that around here.

You break the law you derserve to deal with the consequences.

I'd love to do that to the jerks that have broken into my car, stolen my property, mugged me, and pulled a gun on my buddies.

[animatedmartian]

Good job at getting a ARMED criminal off the streets. We need more of that around here.

You break the law you derserve to deal with the consequences.

I'd love to do that to the jerks that have broken into my car, stolen my property, mugged me, and pulled a gun on my buddies.

Yes, legal consequences. Not physical. Once the criminal is in handcuffs, anything you do to physically harm him afterwards is brutality and abuse of authority. Dude could have gone after your whole family, but the only person who has any power in what happens to him when he's caught is the judge. Use of force is only permitted when trying to catch the guy or to get him to cooperate if he's resisting arrest. It may not be as satisfying as immediate retaliation, but just because some people lack human decency doesn't mean we all need to lack decency. If cops don't know when to restrain force, what's to stop them from using that force on you?

[Gpwrangler]

snipped ...what's to stop them from using that force on you?

Ummm because when I was pulled over for a missing license plate I was polite and kept my hands in view and complied with instructions and didn't run my mouth.

[artds]

Personally, I'm more offended that the guy carjacked a woman and her daughter at gunpoint. But then again, I'm not a useless lowlife drain on society. Perhaps if I was, I'd feel differently about the video.

[Lowell]

Yes, legal consequences. Not physical. Once the criminal is in handcuffs, anything you do to physically harm him afterwards is brutality and abuse of authority. Dude could have gone after your whole family, but the only person who has any power in what happens to him when he's caught is the judge.

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.

I am picking up a sense of glee of the bad guy getting comeuppance but what if, just what if, that was the wrong guy? That's why we, under our rule of law, arrest, try and convict - and then and only then issue punishment.

And this isn't about law enforcement officers who we all know are in great danger, underpaid, under great stress and under appreciated. I hope there is something we are not seeing that justifies what went on there, for their sake.

The big lesson the world is learning is that everyone has a video camera. One must assume he or she is being videoed in a sensational situation, often from several view points.

[Wesley Mouch]

[/COLOR]
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.

I am picking up a sense of glee of the bad guy getting comeuppance but what if, just what if, that was the wrong guy? That's why we, under our rule of law, arrest, try and convict - and then and only then issue punishment.

And this isn't about law enforcement officers who we all know are in great danger, underpaid, under great stress and under appreciated. I hope there is something we are not seeing that justifies what went on there, for their sake.

...

The law also allows appropriate force to be use to those who resist arrest. I haven't seen the video, but if some threatens a woman and her child, I don't expect 'would you please set your gun down, sir'.

I am constantly amazed by people who are so critical of every step taken by police, and have little criticism for criminals. Sure, its possible it was the wrong guy. But his actions -- resisting arrest with cops demanding to see a gun -- suggest that he could have avoided all physical confrontation by lying down with his hands out and asking to be frisked.

While I'm at it, I'm amazed too by all the second-guessing of the police in Paris. Seems we're quite eager to ask the cops to stop brutal, religiously-inspired murders. But car-jacking with gun... Lowell says give them a break. Not once in your post did you mention what the suspect was alleged to have done, or that he was resisting arrest. It is not necessary to prove his guilt to expect him to comply with the law during an arrest. And the law demands that you cooperate with police when you are being arrested or stopped for reasonable questioning. The video shows someone resisting arrest, Lowell. The required action by cops is to arrest the suspect -- to protect the public. You are right that its not the cops job to judge. It however is 100% the cops job to stop a suspected criminal with necessary means to protect our vulnerable citizens.

Seeking bad police behavior may be good fun for some, but it is destructive to neighborhood and could seriously harm Detroit. Our neighborhoods deserve good law enforcement. It needs cops that take their job seriously and properly protect. And when they don't, they should be held accountable. But let's not encourage cops to avoid arrests -- or Detroit may stay Bronx 1978 rather than become NYC 2013. [[And it hasn't been near nearly long enough to know the results of DiBlasio's anti-blue rhetoric and neutering of cops. Changes in neighborhood safety take years.)

Pardon the rant... but I can't handle people who seek out police errors with such diligence, while ignoring the impact of criminals and resisting arrest.

[noise]

I am constantly amazed by people who are so critical of every step taken by police, and have little criticism for criminals.

For the record, this doesn't exist.

Some things don't need to be stated as they take away from the relevant issue. In most of these cases, the issue is police conduct. A criminal doing wrong is obvious and doesn't change the issue or provide the police with a free pass to do wrong, as well, despite objections from some posters here. Criticizing police behavior does not mean condoning criminal behavior.

[aj3647]

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]

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