Ustwo

You would think the NOPD would know to beat them IN the police stations in the room where the camera doesn't 'work', not on the street. That alone is bad police work.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Charlatan

While I agree we are missing the start of this event I don't think calling this "Sensationalistic journalism at it's best" is remotely fair.

The video I saw, had no voice over, no music (well Journey in the background doesn't count ) ... it was raw unedited footage.

That's about as objective as one can get.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Uncle Pony

It's not objective. They started it from the point of the beat-down and have portrayed it as such in the media. I'm curious to know what happened in the 20-60 seconds before the point they decided to show the world.

Mojo_PeiPei

If the journalist was trying to get into the fray, or getting in the way of the cops and their "arrest" the officer was more then justified in his techniques for dealing with the guy.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Uncle Pony

Charging him, bending him backwards over a car, jabbing him in the stomach, and cussing at him aren't justified. That's not proper crowd control.

Charlatan

From what I could see, the officer asked the journalist and others to move on or back away. The journalist, still a good distance from the fracas, flashed his credentials. The cop then when ape-shit on him. Not justified.


IF they have the footage they should show it. I didn't get the impression they had it. Rather, they came on the scene and started rolling.

As I said, it would be better if they had the footage. However, it doesn't change the fact that what we see is what happened. There is little that is subjective about the actual footage we've seen (ie no voice over, editing, lighting, etc. giving additional context or information).

The only way this could get more "objective" would be to have better audio.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

docbungle

To hell with what happened the previous 20 seconds. There is nothing this 65 yeard old man could have done to warrant this beatdown. There is no evidence, other than the statements of these overbearing "policemen" that the man did anything at all. They're claimimg he swung at them? Ok, where's a witness that will back that up? A witness who's not one of those four cops. There were plenty of people watching, including the press!

I can't believe all the people standing up for these cops!

If it turns out to be true that this man hasn't drank in how ever many years, then these cops are full of bu-lo-nee.

__________________
Bad Luck City

mrklixx

Watch it again. He was walking toward the confrontation, and looked to be less than 10 feet from it. And what exactly was flashing his "credentials" supposed to accomplish?




Again, if one views the entire clip, one can see that it is edited. There's a jump cut after the horse backs up, and another one right before Officer Fatty Smith comes barging in. And then it jumps straight to another person being arrested (again with no footage of what led up to the arrest), and then yet another police incident that gets cut off. So it seems pretty obvious that they weren't there to film the Journey cover band, and just "happened" upon this "brutal mutilation".

__________________
This post is content. If you don't like it then you are not content. Or perhaps just incontinent.

This is not a link - Do not click here

I hate animated avatars.

Charlatan

I never said he wasn't walking forward. What I said was he was still a good distance away and his actions we not warranted. Listening to what I can hear, it sounds like Mr. Angry Pants can't keep his temper under control and doesn't like it when people report his bad actions.





You are correct there are a few edits. I guess they are exhibiting a liberal bias and Mr. Angry Pants really should have kicked that yellow journalists ass...

1) what we saw, regardless of the edits, was brutality.
2) I have no issue with four officers taking down a suspect in that manner. I do have an issue with the multiple punches to the head. Unjustified.
3) Mr. Angry Pants needs to get his shit under control or sit at a desk. That is no way to treat *anyone* from the public. There are better ways to do crowd control.

I see nothing untowards in the piece, even with the edits. As it stands it is a Rorschach test. You see what you want to see.

Some see this headline: 64 year old gets beat by police. Report witnessing the event is roughed up.

Others see: Ignorant, criminal black man gives some of our boys a rough time and gets what he deserves! Member of the Yellow Press sticks his nose where it doesn't belong and gets his ass whooped!

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Uncle Pony

What we may be seeing is the police following their Force Continuum (Department policy on Use of Force). It's hard to say due to there being so many edits to the film. The officers may be perfectly justified in their use of force.


Nice Straw Man argument. "Either you see this like the rest of us sensible people or you're an ignorant racist redneck."

Dungeon_Shade

You know, I am terrified that our country is going to shit, and the bird flu epidemic crisis that is about to show up is scaring the hell out of me. I am agnostic, but this is sounding like shit out of Revelations. I'll see you all in the next world, if it exists!

__________________
"If you can hear this whispering you are dying."- Pink Floyd

shakran

He wasn't in the way. It's a public area, and the cops have no right to tell us to leave it. The cops NEVER, EVER have the right to tell us not to take pictures of something that's happening in public.



Agreed. I never flash my creds when the cops tell me to leave. My journalist credentials don't give me any more rights than those of you who are not journalists. If you wanted to grab a home video camera and start shooting right next to me, you have that right. You do not need to work for a media outlet in order to be allowed to take pictures in public.



No, it hasn't been edited. That's raw tape. See, unlike most people with home video cameras, we generally stop recording when we know the video's gonna be crap. In the first cut, his camera moves about 15 or so feet. He didn't miss much of the action so he obviously ran there. He hit stop when he ran over there because he knew the video wouldn't be useable anyway. It's called editing in the camera, and it's to make the editor's job a lot easier for him. He's not hiding anything.




What are you suggesting, that they set up the whole thing for fun? How'd they get NOPD in on it?

Seems to me that with all the mistakes the media makes, you'd have enough fodder to go after us without attacking a non-issue.

Charlatan

Yes, I agree. Smashing a mans face into a wall is great policy...

Nice to see my message was clear.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

ziadel

I see a lot of disturbing things in this thread, and its gotten huge, so I'll just make some blanket statements.

The problem, IMO, is not so much these cops, it's law enforcements elitist attitude. Everyone is saying, well, the cop told him to go away and he did'nt. A badge does not give an officer carte blanche to issue orders, though many seem to think it does. Police officers are becoming a whole seperate class of society that is not being held up to the same rules and restrictions that the rest of us plebs are. That is bad. Very bad. That's revolution bad, because there will eventually be a terrific backlash. So if you like your way of life the way it is now, call em as you see em, and put the rules back in play on those who consdier themselves above them.



Now, CNN is reporting that the suspect was not issued any sort of sobriety test at all and the officers involved are out on bond.

Draw your own conclusions. But if the conclusion that you come to is that a lot of rights were violated, and a man was brutalized, think about what would be happening now if that camera crew was not there. And also consider, that for every one documented example, we have 1,000 others undocumented. Mebbe more.

__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

Uncle Pony

More talk about the revolution that's coming. There isn't going to be one. Never. The best you can hope for is some disorganized, sporatic rioting in the streets, but that'll be quelled.

Why shouldn't they be? They have the same rights all all the other people accused of a crime.

Are you just making this up? I'd like to see stats to back that statement up.

ziadel

I feel a backlash is inevitable, you don't, theres no need to argue about that.

I did'nt say they should not be out on bail, but if this was nothing they would not have been arrested. Like it or not, cops are not subject to the same rules we are. Something has to be very very wrong for public administrative action or criminal charges against one. When was the last time you ever heard of a cop getting a DUI? Think it never happens. The case of the speeding NJ cops in virginia lends weight to my argument IMO.


And I asked you to consider that for every one there was 1,000, I did'nt say it was fact. But marketing types hold this point of view, and it doesn't seem very far fetched to me. But the point is, you don't know one way or the other do you? That I don't is not acceptable to me.


You also ignored the most immediately obvious aspect of my argument.

__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

Uncle Pony

You stated it as if it were fact. You even base your statement on "marketing types" that hold this point of view. Surely you have proof to back that up, otherwise it falls under the logical fallacy of Appeal to Annymous Authority. You're just repeating rumor as fact.

Which was?
- Law enforcement has an elitist attitude that will eventually lead to revolution. I addressed that.
- Just because someone's a cop it doesn't give him the right to assault a reporter. I addressed that point earlier in the thread. I agree with you.
- The cops are out on bond. I addressed that too.
- Your claim that police brutality is an undocumented incident with a 1,000:1 ratio. I also addressed that.

Which only leaves us with this:
They would've probably gotten away with it.

ziadel

your missing the rift forming between the citizens of this country and their 'protectors' saying, 'there won't be a revolution because of that' and continuing on is not adressing the issue.

__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

Uncle Pony

The rift is forming in the extreme wings of the political ideologists. I haven't seen anyone outright condone police brutality yet. I have seen a bit of violence against police advocated though.

ziadel

It's happening in society, this is not a cooked up issue.

They don't have to, complacency is good enough.

Karma does not strike me in any way as a concept that is beyond anyones comprehension.

__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

Uncle Pony

Only by political extremists. The extremists are the only ones who ever advocate and predict a revolution. Leftist Marxist types and right wing white supremists seem to be the two most common. Thankfully they are both in the minority.

Complacency in what? The cops were charged with a crime and will have to defend themselves in court. That is anything but complacency, and until you are able to source your 1,000:1 ratio argument with facts you have no real argument here.

Karma? You're bringing Karma in as a defense?

ziadel

Yes, I'm complaining that the rampant abuse of power by the state is responsible for a black man being abused, so I'm either a socialist, or a racist. right. And I dont appreciate you eluding to me being either a nazi or a communist.


It all comes back to that backlash that you don't think will ever happen.

__________________
Ron Paul '08
Vote for Freedom
Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

Mojo_PeiPei

This wasn't a case of state sanctioned abuse. This was an instance of one cop going totally nutbar and illegally ape shit on some guy, and 3 other officers doing mostly text book manuvers.

If for some reason no remedy is found for the situation, then you can start looking at a larger "state" type issue.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Uncle Pony

The officers were arrested and charged and will stand trial to defend their actions. I would have to see more evidence that police brutality is a common thing and is rampant. It was discovered and it was dealt with.

I wasn't alluding to anything. I said they were the two most common types. Certainly there are other types (anarchists for example), but I stand by my statement that only the political extremists are the ones who cry for revolution.

mrklixx

First of all, If you consider that journalist got an "ass kicking", then you have lived a very sheltered life. Second, that smart-ass "liberal" comment is so far off base it's really not funny. Third, I do believe this was filmed with bias because of the supposedly "raw" footage that was on the tape afterward, which addresses this question:

I think they were trolling for it, and hit the jackpot, because with the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality combined with the "all NO cops are corrupt" mentality, sprinkled with a little thing called, oh a hurricane, I think they saw Bourbon Street as a goldmine. I could find no statements of what they were actually there to cover, and if anyone can find out provable evidence of what this other "mystery story" was then I will gladly withdraw that comment.


You're right. (up until the smart-ass straw man bit).

I think that personal definitions has a lot to do with it. Regardless of the dictionary definition, "brutal" means something far worse that this to me, and calling every other thing "brutal" simply dilutes the word into meaninglessness.

I agree with the poster(s) that say our society is in trouble. Not because of some agitated cops in a troubled region that overreacted to a situation. But because incontextual "sound bytes" and "video bytes" are used to whip people into a crucifying frenzy. That, compounded with the pseudo psychic inducing powers of the internet, is bringing about the painful death of objectivity.

__________________
This post is content. If you don't like it then you are not content. Or perhaps just incontinent.

This is not a link - Do not click here

I hate animated avatars.

Charlatan

News Flash: Objectivity never existed.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

shakran

I've already explained the raw to you. Reread the explanation.




And so what if they were? I'll tell you something, if I got a tip that cops were beating the crap out of the citizens of my town, you can BET my camera would be down there that night looking for it. Police abuse, which translates to governmental abuse, of the general public is wrong, it's illegal, and it's the media's responsibility to expose it. This doesn't fall under the "if it bleeds it leads" concept, which by the way I have no trouble telling you that many TV stations buy into. Those stations go out and cover every traffic accident as though it's the biggest story of the day.

There's a very good reason to expose police brutality, and that's exactly what this news crew did.

docbungle

I believe that's ridiculous. People are on Bourbon street with cameras recording all kinds of crap every day of the year. And now, especially with the hightened focus after the huricane, of course there are going to be people with video cameras. How has this turned into a conspiracy? lol. What a sad state of affairs.

__________________
Bad Luck City

mrklixx

Good. Admitting that that the clip is not objective is half the battle.

__________________
This post is content. If you don't like it then you are not content. Or perhaps just incontinent.

This is not a link - Do not click here

I hate animated avatars.

filtherton

Half of what battle? The battle to exonerate obviously abusive police officers? The clip is objective. It is factual information recorded by means of a video camera. Observations and interpretations are never completely objective. Data is always objective.

mrklixx

Who said anything about exonerating anybody(see my comment about the psychic inducing powers of the internet)? It's half the battle to having an open minded discussion rather than knee-jerk diatribes. And according to Charlatan the clip is not objective because objectivity does not exist.

__________________
This post is content. If you don't like it then you are not content. Or perhaps just incontinent.

This is not a link - Do not click here

I hate animated avatars.

filtherton

Objectivity does not exist when the sources are human. I highly doubt that charlatan was arguing against the existence of an objective reality, and even if he was, that discussion is a little beyond the scope of this one, perhaps worthy of another thread. He was actually specifically referring to your opinion that the internet was Were you referring to objectivity as it exists absolutely or were you referring to it in the context of interpersonal communication?

I think the line that most people are taking is that the contents of the video, regardless of who shot it, seem to point only towards the conclusion that the police officers involved are piece of shit douchebags.

Charlatan

As I stated in my earliest post... this film is as close to "objective" as you are going to get. True Objectivity will never exist as long as there is some form of human mediation (as Filtherton points out, this goes beyond the scope of this thread).

I feel the subjectivity mrklixx and others believe this film has is inconsequential when faced with the simple facts. We saw a police office repeatedly punch a 64 year old man's head. We also saw a police officer loose his temper and threaten a citizen by stander. We saw other things but these are the two key elements that have people upset.

As far as I'm concerned. The two events were uncalled for and represent a lack of control on the part of these two officers. This not how officers who are supposed to server and protect should behave. Disciplinary actions should be taken.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

vermin

I watched the video three times and read all the posts in this thread up 'till here.

My thoughts:

You can stop mentioning the age of the man who resisted arrest. It's irrelevant. It took three cops to get him restrained, he's hardly "feeble".

Edit: Section in yellow was negated by watching the video a fourth time (see two posts down).

I saw violence on that tape but nothing I would call brutality. They weren't hitting him over and over again with clubs, they weren't tasering him multiple times, they were restraining him.

The part where it looks like the cop is punching him in the head: it looks to me like they were trying to get the guy to get put his arms behind his back so they can handcuff him.

There is some dispute as to whether this guy was publicly intoxicated or hadn't had a drink in 25 years. Irrelevant. He did something to draw law enforcement attention upon himself and didn't comply with orders. He needed to be restrained, he was restrained.

The fat bastard who assaulted the reporter should get the same punishment as any citizen who grabs lapells and yells. A slap on the wrist and a small fine. It was wrong to go so apeshit on the reporter, but the reporter wasn't really damaged.

Talk of citizens being at war with law enforcement, right-wing and left-wing extremists, revolutions, totalitarian states, etc. is all drama-queen bullshit. Fantasy-world premises (cop punishments = citizen punishments x 10) are ridiculous since we live in reality, not idealist la-la land. The only people at war with law enforcement are people attempting to do whatever they want regardless of what the law allows (and the over-zealous fuzz).

__________________
If puns were sausages, this would be the wurst.

sailor

Everyone, go watch the CNN one. It's much better, and shows the aftermath--the man laying on the street in a bloody mess. After seeing that, I can't for the life of me see how anyone could say that isnt police brutality. Repeatedly smashing a man's face against a wall until he is laying in the street in a pool of blood is brutality, cut and dry. I don't care what he did, that was completely uncalled for.

__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato

vermin

Apparently there were two different video clips linked to on that CNN site. The first one was the beating, the second was the rooftop angle of the bloody guy laying on the sidewalk. After watching the second one I went back and watched the first one again.

Two things I noticed this time that I hadn't noticed the first three times I watched the clip before making my last post. Over the top of the horse's ass near the beginning of the clip you can see a cop punching the guy in the back of the head. Obviously this negates my statement about seeing violence but not brutality. When the camera angle switches and the guy is still standing, he has no blood on his shirt or face, so (again) obviously more was happening on the ground than just trying to get his arms behind his back for handcuffing.
This does not mean that I now believe that the cops were evil and the guy was an innocent. I think everyone involved in the incident made some bad decisions which, in turn, provoked more bad decisions by all concerned.

Of course we all know the best way to avoid this kind of police beat-down. Stay at home and only communicate with the outside world by computer.
Oops, preaching to the choir.

__________________
If puns were sausages, this would be the wurst.