McKinney, TX

[Bigfoot]

Try as I may, I'd like to stay out of this. Found a video here, that is very telling about the mind set of children today. This a 13 year old girl. She is present at the incident, visible in the video as someone that is pushed by the officer. Her comment is, "I was trying to help her". It's not her place to help a suspect. She should have distanced herself from the incident, not became an active player. I'm still willing to stay out of the was the officer right or wrong debate. I will say a difficult job gets bumped up a few levels, when bystanders join in the struggle.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/ ... /28728549/

 

[greybeard]

Try as I may, I'd like to stay out of this. Found a video here, that is very telling about the mind set of children today. This a 13 year old girl. She is present at the incident, visible in the video as someone that is pushed by the officer. Her comment is, "I was trying to help her". It's not her place to help a suspect. She should have distanced herself from the incident, not became an active player. I'm still willing to stay out of the was the officer right or wrong debate. I will say a difficult job gets bumped up a few levels, when bystanders join in the struggle.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/ ... /28728549/

key words being "13 year old girl".

 

[bball]

Within his rights to forcefully restrain her? I didn't dispute that, but I do find it interesting that you refer to her 1st amendment rights as being 'mouthy'. She has every right to say anything she wants to--when she wants to, just as you and I do, and there's not a court or judge in the land that will dispute that.

GB I always find it almost laughable that you guys throw out the right to free speech but stop just short of the part about this freedom comes with certain responsibilities...... being responsible for what you say as well as any consequences that might result from said speech. Or do you simply not agree with that part??

Dead on TB.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Try as I may, I'd like to stay out of this. Found a video here, that is very telling about the mind set of children today. This a 13 year old girl. She is present at the incident, visible in the video as someone that is pushed by the officer. Her comment is, "I was trying to help her". It's not her place to help a suspect. She should have distanced herself from the incident, not became an active player. I'm still willing to stay out of the was the officer right or wrong debate. I will say a difficult job gets bumped up a few levels, when bystanders join in the struggle.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/ ... /28728549/

key words being "13 year old girl".

Age is irrelevant when you engage in criminal activities.
You want to dance have to pay the fiddler.
She knew she wasn't supposed to be there.
Again after caught breaking the law if she had left as instructed by the officer then no incident.
The part you are missing is she broke the law and escalated the incident along with the others.
IMO the blame lays squarely with her. Had she not have been where she wasn't supposed to be no problem.
Trespass is trespass and carries penalties.

 

[bball]

Try as I may, I'd like to stay out of this. Found a video here, that is very telling about the mind set of children today. This a 13 year old girl. She is present at the incident, visible in the video as someone that is pushed by the officer. Her comment is, "I was trying to help her". It's not her place to help a suspect. She should have distanced herself from the incident, not became an active player. I'm still willing to stay out of the was the officer right or wrong debate. I will say a difficult job gets bumped up a few levels, when bystanders join in the struggle.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/ ... /28728549/

key words being "13 year old girl".

Age is irrelevant when you engage in criminal activities.
You want to dance have to pay the fiddler.
She knew she wasn't supposed to be there.
Again after caught breaking the law if she had left as instructed by the officer then no incident.
The part you are missing is she broke the law and escalated the incident along with the others.
IMO the blame lays squarely with her. Had she not have been where she wasn't supposed to be no problem.
Trespass is trespass and carries penalties.

Holy cow CB! You mean actually consider holding a perpetrator accountable?? There's a novel thought. It will never catch on though, just easier to crucify the guy risking his life day in and out, pulling down a whopping $38,000, and actually doing his job..can't wait to see how these types of things impact the future workforce of LE..it will do the same to them that bogus lawsuits have done to American born physicians..

 

[greybeard]

Within his rights to forcefully restrain her? I didn't dispute that, but I do find it interesting that you refer to her 1st amendment rights as being 'mouthy'. She has every right to say anything she wants to--when she wants to, just as you and I do, and there's not a court or judge in the land that will dispute that.

GB I always find it almost laughable that you guys throw out the right to free speech but stop just short of the part about this freedom comes with certain responsibilities...... being responsible for what you say as well as any consequences that might result from said speech. Or do you simply not agree with that part??

Dead on TB.

1. The constitution's 1st amendment doesn't restrict what you, I or she can say--it's sole purpose is to restrict what congress (and thru power sharing clause) what the lower level govts and their employees cannot restrict. Responsibilities? No. Consequences--definitely.
Agree with it? I clearly stated it on pg 2.

Within his rights to forcefully restrain her? I didn't dispute that, but I do find it interesting that you refer to her 1st amendment rights as being 'mouthy'. She has every right to say anything she wants to--when she wants to, just as you and I do, and there's not a court or judge in the land that will dispute that. If you are in favor of throwing out the constitution, well, there's not much I can say about that. He certainly exercised his own 1st amendment rights that day. The juvenile got thrown to the ground for her efforts and he lost his job for his. Some people are so preoccupied with whether the "can" do and say things, they never stop to consider whether they should do or say them.

They both reaped what they had sown. He by running his mouth and cursing the public he swore to serve and protect, and she by running her mouth. They both exercised their right, but both paid a price.

 

[greybeard]

Try as I may, I'd like to stay out of this. Found a video here, that is very telling about the mind set of children today. This a 13 year old girl. She is present at the incident, visible in the video as someone that is pushed by the officer. Her comment is, "I was trying to help her". It's not her place to help a suspect. She should have distanced herself from the incident, not became an active player. I'm still willing to stay out of the was the officer right or wrong debate. I will say a difficult job gets bumped up a few levels, when bystanders join in the struggle.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/ ... /28728549/

key words being "13 year old girl".

Age is irrelevant when you engage in criminal activities.
You want to dance have to pay the fiddler.
She knew she wasn't supposed to be there.
Again after caught breaking the law if she had left as instructed by the officer then no incident.
The part you are missing is she broke the law and escalated the incident along with the others.
IMO the blame lays squarely with her. Had she not have been where she wasn't supposed to be no problem.
Trespass is trespass and carries penalties.

Was she charged with trespass?
Court date set?
Verdict?
Afforded her right to a trial by judge or jury as provided by our constitution?
Or--Was she in a public area? (The link TB provided says she was in a public area)

 

[bball]

Gb, first amendment freedom of speech doesn't permit you to say whatever you like when you like, your personal freedom isn't more important than the overall safety of the public.. example yelling fire, berating a LEO while conducting investigation or executing duties to maintain or restore the peace, just to name a few. And technically, he 'resigned' on his own accord so far as we know. Self inflicted consequence or administration pressure? Who knows. If he in fact did resign on his own accord, speaks to his character. He made some mistakes and owned his behavior and imposed his own consequence. That honestly doesn't happen often nowadays. I have enjoyed discussing this with you.

 

[Caustic Burno]

The news I heard said they were trespassing and if so they should go directly to jail do not pass go.
If she had been mine I would of stomped a mud hole in her butt deep enough to loose a Chevy.
When the officer told her to leave real simple leave not the right way to fight this battle.
Even if she wasn't trespassing she should have left when instructed by LEO and let her parents handle the situation.
Shows Pisspoor up bringing IMO.

 

[hurleyjd]

Before the police was called a white woman got into an argument with a black woman. Insults from the white woman and the end results was the white woman slapped the black woman and then the police was called.

 

[slick4591]

Those verbal commands are a tool and are much better used than physical force, even if they are offensive to some. Unless you want the cops to put powder puffs on their asses don't take that tool away from them, even if you think it's unprofessional. No one that wasn't there knows how that officer performed prior to the video. The video is 7 minutes of a half hour event.

 

[greybeard]

Gb, first amendment freedom of speech doesn't permit you to say whatever you like when you like, your personal freedom isn't more important than the overall safety of the public.. example yelling fire, berating a LEO while conducting investigation or executing duties to maintain or restore the peace, just to name a few. And technically, he 'resigned' on his own accord so far as we know. Self inflicted consequence or administration pressure? Who knows. If he in fact did resign on his own accord, speaks to his character. He made some mistakes and owned his behavior and imposed his own consequence. That honestly doesn't happen often nowadays. I have enjoyed discussing this with you.

I agree there are some limitations on free speech, but not because of the constitution. They are placed there by the judiciary. High on the list of speech that doesn't get 1st Amendment protection?
Speech Harmful to Children.
Speech Harmful to Children
Speech that is otherwise fully protected by the First Amendment may be
restricted in order to protect children. This is because the Court has "recognized that
there is a compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being
of minors."85 However, any restriction must be accomplished "'by narrowly drawn
regulations without unnecessarily interfering with First Amendment freedoms.' It
is not enough to show that the government's ends are compelling; the means must be
carefully tailored to achieved those ends."86

I have never read of any case where berating police in person or in print was NOT protected speech "providing" the speech did not fall under the incitement to riot arena. SCOTUS has even confirmed flipping the bird at police is protected speech (I wouldn't recommend doing it)

 

[greybeard]

Those verbal commands are a tool and are much better used than physical force, even if they are offensive to some. Unless you want the cops to put powder puffs on their asses don't take that tool away from them, even if you think it's unprofessional. No one that wasn't there knows how that officer performed prior to the video. The video is 7 minutes of a half hour event.

I suspect the Police Chief knows and he yesterday, defined the officer's reactions and actions as "indefensible".

 

[bball]

Gb, first amendment freedom of speech doesn't permit you to say whatever you like when you like, your personal freedom isn't more important than the overall safety of the public.. example yelling fire, berating a LEO while conducting investigation or executing duties to maintain or restore the peace, just to name a few. And technically, he 'resigned' on his own accord so far as we know. Self inflicted consequence or administration pressure? Who knows. If he in fact did resign on his own accord, speaks to his character. He made some mistakes and owned his behavior and imposed his own consequence. That honestly doesn't happen often nowadays. I have enjoyed discussing this with you.

I agree there are some limitations on free speech, but not because of the constitution. They are placed there by the judiciary. High on the list of speech that doesn't get 1st Amendment protection?
Speech Harmful to Children.
Speech Harmful to Children
Speech that is otherwise fully protected by the First Amendment may be
restricted in order to protect children. This is because the Court has "recognized that
there is a compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being
of minors."85 However, any restriction must be accomplished "'by narrowly drawn
regulations without unnecessarily interfering with First Amendment freedoms.' It
is not enough to show that the government's ends are compelling; the means must be
carefully tailored to achieved those ends."86

I have never read of any case where berating police in person or in print was NOT protected speech "providing" the speech did not fall under the incitement to riot arena. SCOTUS has even confirmed flipping the bird at police is protected speech (I wouldn't recommend doing it)

I think we agree here. Berating an officer while performing duties typically leads to a charge of obstruction of justice or interfering with police investigation. You can say what you like, but you're most likely going to suffer. Better be worth it. So in the instance, the LEO is well within his statutory rights to detain the individual. Because of her need to execute her first am right, poor decision, on her part. The irony was she had lots to say until she was sitting on her bottom, then it seems she could only cry for momma.

 

[slick4591]

Those verbal commands are a tool and are much better used than physical force, even if they are offensive to some. Unless you want the cops to put powder puffs on their asses don't take that tool away from them, even if you think it's unprofessional. No one that wasn't there knows how that officer performed prior to the video. The video is 7 minutes of a half hour event.

I suspect the Police Chief knows and he yesterday, defined the officer's reactions and actions as "indefensible".

What else would you expect him to say when the officer made it easy for him? Chief is a really new hire and he has all those activist in town. Not condemning him, but the circumstances were right for him to choose those words. I don't agree with him, but I'm not in his shoes.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Appears here they were looking for trouble from jump street.
Started out breaking rules and went on to breaking laws.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/201 ... bdivision/

 

[greybeard]

Gb, first amendment freedom of speech doesn't permit you to say whatever you like when you like, your personal freedom isn't more important than the overall safety of the public.. example yelling fire, berating a LEO while conducting investigation or executing duties to maintain or restore the peace, just to name a few. And technically, he 'resigned' on his own accord so far as we know. Self inflicted consequence or administration pressure? Who knows. If he in fact did resign on his own accord, speaks to his character. He made some mistakes and owned his behavior and imposed his own consequence. That honestly doesn't happen often nowadays. I have enjoyed discussing this with you.

I agree there are some limitations on free speech, but not because of the constitution. They are placed there by the judiciary. High on the list of speech that doesn't get 1st Amendment protection?
Speech Harmful to Children.
Speech Harmful to Children
Speech that is otherwise fully protected by the First Amendment may be
restricted in order to protect children. This is because the Court has "recognized that
there is a compelling interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being
of minors."85 However, any restriction must be accomplished "'by narrowly drawn
regulations without unnecessarily interfering with First Amendment freedoms.' It
is not enough to show that the government's ends are compelling; the means must be
carefully tailored to achieved those ends."86

I have never read of any case where berating police in person or in print was NOT protected speech "providing" the speech did not fall under the incitement to riot arena. SCOTUS has even confirmed flipping the bird at police is protected speech (I wouldn't recommend doing it)

I think we agree here. Berating an officer while performing duties typically leads to a charge of obstruction of justice or interfering with police investigation. You can say what you like, but you're most likely going to suffer. Better be worth it. So in the instance, the LEO is well within his statutory rights to detain the individual. Because of her need to execute her first am right, poor decision, on her part. The irony was she had lots to say until she was sitting on her bottom, then it seems she could only cry for momma.

It's a common occurance in any stresssful situation--crying for one's mother.
I've seen more than one grown man softly cry for his momma while taking his last breath as he bled to death.
I thought about my own mother while I was washing the blood from one of them out of my helo floor and down the back ramp.

As I said, the officer can do whatever he wants, as can whoever he is dealing with, but more often than not, people tend to place more credence on whether they CAN do something while totally disregarding whether they SHOULD do it.

The girl was not arrested or charged with anything--the one person (male) that was arrested had all charges against him dropped after examination of the videos showed he was shoved close to the officer by someone else. The officer is now un-employed, will probably never again work in law enforcement, and will likely be sued. Speaking on the officer's behalf, his attorney said he had let his emotions get the best of him and control his actions and he apologizes for those actions.
How'd all that work out for him?

I saw 2 news segments earlier, from former McKinney police officers critiquing the officer's actions and speech--neither had good things to say about him or his actions/words. I'll see if I can find the links later.

 

[greybeard]

Those verbal commands are a tool and are much better used than physical force, even if they are offensive to some. Unless you want the cops to put powder puffs on their asses don't take that tool away from them, even if you think it's unprofessional. No one that wasn't there knows how that officer performed prior to the video. The video is 7 minutes of a half hour event.

I suspect the Police Chief knows and he yesterday, defined the officer's reactions and actions as "indefensible".

What else would you expect him to say when the officer made it easy for him? Chief is a really new hire and he has all those activist in town. Not condemning him, but the circumstances were right for him to choose those words. I don't agree with him, but I'm not in his shoes.

I've seen 3 different long time police chief and County Sheriff's interviews from different parts of the country today say they agreed with him 100%.

 

[bball]

WOW! You really want to compare this disrespectful, immature juveniles behavior to men serving their country and dying in that service? HARDLY the same type of stress. Lets give her the Congressional Medal of Honor while we are at it. I simply made the observation, that in one instance, she is piping off at the LEO, and in the next instance seated on her bottom crying for her mother. No where near the same level of stress as the men you witnessed make the ultimate sacrifice. I served my country just like you. I have witnessed men die and its NEVER beautiful or poetic. I still deal with death on a regular basis. Shame on you for even comparing the two.
You have 'won' this pecker measuring contest. Now go ahead and shake it and put it away.

 

[greybeard]

No comparison, just making the observation that it is very common for people of all ages to think of their mother in times of extreme stress--it's a natural thing, and for a juvenile, even more natural. Everything is relative--for her, this was probably the most stressful thing she had ever encountered, no matter if it was her fault she was in the situation or not.