VPD officer punches man in face

[etsen3]

as I stated, I don't condone what the cop did. But if you want to talk fault , the guy riding his bike at night with no helmet, no lights, and running a red light is at fault for this situation. I still wonder what happened before the video started that warranted having him put into cuffs.

[Special Ed]

Well then you punish him according to the justice system for whatever he did beforehand. The only possibility is if the guy threatened the cop with violence right before he was punched. Other than that there's no reason for a cop to be punching a guy who's already been subdued. Cops are professionals and shouldn't be behaving like this on the job. If a citizen punches a cop imagine how much trouble he would get in, this cop will probably get nothing.

[Spitfire_Spiky]

Either way you look at it, with the other officer holding the suspect there was no need for the punch. The officer took it too far.

[Imuzi]

What? You don't miss the "**** da police" circlejerks?

As far as this guy goes, IMO it looks like he lost his cool so... Big no-no.

[Sapper]

The actions of the officer are without just cause. In order to protect the image of the vpd this officer must face charges and swiftly.

I dismiss outright any complaints that it is a tough job and things can happen - they don't in well disciplined units. Units that are la k leadership and internal discipline face people like this. It's not the vpd's fault this officer hit this guy - it's their fault for not taking immediate steps to condem the actions and remove the offi er - the need to protect the good reputation of the unit exceeds the wants of the individual officer

So my question is - where is the chief in all of this - they have no right to be silent - it's there job to keep and maintain discipline within the unit and they are clearly failing.

[Lancaster]

The main problem with the inability to deal with organized crime in BC is due to the fact that the lead police agency is the RCMP.

Putting Grade 10 grads up against sophisticated criminal organizations is not a recipe for success. I would most gladly trade the RCMP for a federal force modelled on the FBI so that we have an educated law enforcement agency able to take on organized crime and sophisticated criminal enterprises. I have advocated for many years that if you want to fight organized crime you need a different model. In the US they take university trained graduates in law, accounting, computer sciences, etc. and turn them into law enforcement officers. They call it the FBI and it has been singularly successful in smashing organized crime working with local and state law enforcement.

In Canada the RCMP takes Grade 10 grads and wonder why they have little or no success in going up against sophisticated organized criminal organizations.

A national organization is needed and it cannot be the paramilitary force that is the RCMP. They may be fine as street cops (and there are some definite concerns even there) but they are inept and unable to deal with sophisticated organized crime and in particular sophisticated white collar crime (securities fraud, computer fraud, etc.).

Keep the RCMP out of municipal policing - that was what was recommended by Paul Kennedy the former Chair of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission. Get them out of municipal contract policing in BC so they cannot be involved in any way.

The RCMP were allowed to continue with some security related functions concurrently with CSIS and as result helped to screw up the Air India investigation by failing to share information.

The FBI takes college graduates with specialties like accounting, computer sciences and law and teach them to be agents so they can use their skills. Also they want older applicants with work experience - not high school kids hopped up on testosterone.

Here are the FBI qualifications - note there is NO WAIVER for a four year university degree - no equivalency, no experience in lieu of a degree:

To become an FBI Special Agent you must be a U.S. citizen or a citizen of the Northern Mariana Islands. You must be at least 23 years of age, but younger than 37 upon your appointment as a Special Agent. Age waivers may be granted to preference eligible veterans who have surpassed their 37th birthday. You must possess a four-year degree from a college or university accredited by one of the regional or national institutional associations recognized by the United States Secretary of Education. You must have at least three years of professional work experience. You must also possess a valid driver's license and be completely available for assignment anywhere in the FBI's jurisdiction.

All applicants for the Special Agent position must first qualify under one of five Special Agent Entry Programs. These programs include:

• Accounting

• Computer Science/Information Technology

• Language

• Law

• Diversified

After qualifying for one of the five Entry Programs, applicants will be prioritized in the hiring process based upon certain Critical Skills for which the FBI is recruiting. The FBI is currently recruiting for Special Agent candidates with one or more of the following Critical Skills:

• Accounting

• Finance

• Computer Science/Information Technology Expertise

• Engineering Expertise

• Foreign Language(s) Proficiency

• Intelligence Experience

• Law Experience

• Law Enforcement/Investigative Experience

• Military Experience

• Physical Sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) Expertise

• Diversified Experience

Candidates with these Critical Skills are essential to address our increasingly complex responsibilities. As such, candidates with one or more of these skills will be prioritized in the hiring process.

http://www.fbijobs.gov/111.asp

The RCMP takes high school grads or even those with GED equivalents, gives them a bit of paramilitary training and then are surprised when they are unable to to deal with sophisticated white collar and organized crime.

Here are the RCMP qualifications (NOTE - If you did not complete secondary school, you must obtain an equivalency assessment. For more information, contact your local board of education or adult learning centre to be assessed and take a General Educational Development (GED) test):

To apply for a job as a Regular Member of the RCMP, you must meet the following basic requirements:

• Be a Canadian citizen;

• Be of good character;

• Be proficient in English or French;

• Have a Canadian secondary school (high school) diploma or equivalent;

• Possess a valid, unrestricted Canadian driver's licence;

• Be at least 19 years of age at the time of engagement (may apply at 18 years of age);

• Meet medical/health standards;

• Be willing to relocate anywhere in Canada; and

• Be physically fit.

http://www.rcmp-grc....igences-eng.htm

About twenty five years ago I was on a government task force and recommended that Canada needed a federal police agency like the FBI if we wanted to make a dent in sophisticated criminal enterprises. The RCMP are pretty much useless at that.

Back in the day when I was doing criminal intelligence work we did everything possible to minimize any RCMP involvement in our operations.

As a recent example we have this for the disgraced, disgraceful and dysfunctional police force that is the RCMP.

A total of 20 charges have been laid against 4 RCMP officers previously involved in the Surrey Six Murder case - bear in mind these dolts are supposedly the best of the best the RCMP has to offer - IHIT (Integrated Homicide Investigation Team). This is the same group that did such a bang up job investigating the RCMP officers involved in the Robert Dziekanski taser death.

Even RCMP management cannot fall back on its usual excuse of inexperienced officers as they have pleaded in so many other disgraceful episodes in this case. At an afternoon news conference at the RCMP's Vancouver headquarters, Chief Superintendent Janice Armstrong called the conduct of the four officers deeply disappointing.

"The investigators charged in this case were senior, experienced and trusted police officers. Their alleged behaviour is completely contrary to the RCMP's core values, and falls well below the standard the public expects from us."

Given the level of wrong-doing, misfeasance and malfeasance on display by the RCMP in BC in a multitude of cases, perhaps this is reflective of the RCMP's true core values?

Chief Supt. Armstrong also said at the press conference today - "I don't think this helps public confidence, though we have demonstrated we are determined to hold members to account" Maybe if you did not recruit and hire idiots, this would not be a problem. Holding them to account does not seem to be working.

Sgt. Derek Brassington allegedly had an improper affair with a potential witness in the case and he faces a total of 7 criminal charges and his boss Insp. Dave Attew faces 6 charges. Along with a couple of other officers they attempted to derail the investigation into Brassington's conduct by an external police agency (the Ontario Provincial Police).

Two of the murder victims, 55-year-old Ed Schellenberg of Abbotsford and 22-year-old Chris Mohan of Surrey, were innocent bystanders caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. Chris Mohan's mother, Eileen, said she's concerned the news will give defence lawyers "ammunition" inside the courtroom. "Obviously it will raise serious questions about witness tampering. … The defence lawyers … will try to make this case even more complicated," she said.

Four RCMP officers working on the Surrey Six murder case are facing a total of 20 criminal charges after one of them allegedly had an improper affair with a potential witness in the case.

Sgt. Derek Brassington, the officer at the centre of the controversy is facing seven charges, including breach of trust, obstruction of justice and fraud, claiming expenses to which he was not entitled and compromising and endangering the witness.

His supervisor at the time of the alleged misconduct, Insp. Dave Attew, is facing six counts, including breach of trust and fraud and compromising the safety of a witness.

Two other officers, Paul Johnson and Danny Michaud, have been charged with breach of trust, obstruction of justice and misleading investigators from the Ontario Provincial Police who were looking into the allegations against Brassington.

Special prosecutor Chris Considine recommended the charges after reviewing the investigation done by the OPP.

Considine, a Victoria lawyer, was appointed in November of last year to decide what should be done with the OPP's findings.

Crown spokesman Neil MacKenzie said Considine would not be commenting on his recommendations given the charges are now before the court.

The RCMP is expected to respond later today at a news conference.

The OPP was called in to investigate after revelations that Brassington, then working for the Integrated Homicide Investigation Team, had an inappropriate relationship with a potential Surrey Six witness.

Brassington was suspended with pay in April 2010. Two months later, Attew was also suspended with pay.

Neither Johnson nor Michaud were suspended or publicly identified.

Considine's mandate included conducting an independent charge review of the OPP's Report to Crown Counsel and "making the charging decision he deems appropriate in the exercise of his independent prosecutorial discretion," offering legal advice to the OPP if further investigation is deemed necessary, providing a written report to the assistant deputy attorney-general and conducting the prosecution if charges are laid.

Five men are charged in connection with the gangland-style execution of six people in a Surrey highrise in October 2007.

Jamie Bacon, Matt Johnson, Cody Haevischer and Michael Le are facing first-degree-murder charges in the case, while another suspect, Sophon Sek, is facing a manslaughter charge in connection with the deaths.

http://www.abbotsfor...html?id=5001585

Breach of trust, obstruction of justice, fraud and and attempting to mislead investigators from the OPP as well as compromising witness safety - these guys have hit the trifecta.

Broken and dysfunctional are terms applied to the RCMP for the past several years and it resonates here in BC after incident after incident proves out the truth of that description. I have worked with the RCMP on joint operations in the past including with CLEU and we always tried to avoid them as much as possible because they were a disaster. And they remain so to this day.

The RCMP is a significant obstacle to effective policing in BC - particularly against sophisticated criminals such as organized crime, white collar crime and complex frauds.

The dysfunctional RCMP sabotages efforts to investigate and prosecute organized crime through utter incompetence and the inability to work with other BC police police agencies. BC has failed to combat organized crime for the past 35+ years as the RCMP has continually sabotaged efforts.

For years the Coordinated Law Enforcement Unit (known as CLEU but more like Clueless under the direction of the RCMP) dutifully reported year after year that Hell's Angels were the biggest organized crime threat in BC - yet were unable to secure one enterprise crime conviction in 25 years of operation.

The laws are fine, it is the investigation and evidence gathering that is the problem. It has been this way in the past 35 years in BC. Inspector Clouseau has done a better job than the BC police forces in investigating organized crime.

CLEU was formed in 1974 to fight organized criminal elements. The rationale was it was needed to transcend the traditional boundaries of jurisdiction. CLEU was a Joint Forces Operation, (JFO) funded in part by the provincial government and in part by the RCMP and all municipal police forces in the province. The RCMP was never happy having to share jurisdiction.

Every year CLEU dutifully published reports and analyses of organized crime in BC and named the number one target as Hell's Angels in virtually every report. Problem was during the 20+ years that CLEU existed they were unable to convict a single Hell's Angel of a any sort of organized crime offence. After years of bumbling and mismanagement CLEU was disbanded.

The problem I have pointed out is the inability of Canadian police as constituted to deal with sophisticated organized crime and sophisticated white collar crime. And then there is the more recent issue of cyber-crime.

It is not as if this is any secret as Stephen Owen clearly pointed this out in 1998 in his report commissioned for the BC government to examine the police response as currently constituted "is unable to cope with the growing sophistication and diversity of organized crime." (Report of the Organized Crime Independent Review Committee, S. Owen (Chair), R. Stewart, R. Bergman, Ministry of the Attorney General of British Columbia, September, 1998)

The Co-Ordinated Law Enforcement Unit (CLEU) spent 25 years targeting organized crime in BC particularly Hell's Angels which CLEU continually declared was the biggest threat to public safety and security while ignoring the Mafia and and failing to come to grips new threats like Asian gangs. Unfortunately CLEU was unable to secure a single criminal enterprise conviction against the Hell's Angels in its history and there were serious problems with security as apparently Hell's Angels placed a number of civilian workers inside. Cue all the jokes about the CLEU-less approach to fighting organized crime in BC.

Unfortunately CLEU was really only replaced in name only the Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia in 1999 which was again restructured in 2004 and put under the control of..... wait for it... the RCMP

Maybe the best commentary on this organization may be found at its website where after decade of operations you are met with the home page to this day:

http://www.ocabc.org/

"The mandate of the Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia is to facilitate the disruption and suppression of organized crime which affects all British Columbians."

Please note that this web site is currently under reconstruction.

Many have also decried the management talent (or lack thereof) leading the RCMP - perhaps properly trained professionals with MBA's and HR training would go a long way to improving this state of affairs. Most recently Dr. Mike Webster.

/index.php?showtopic=236669&hl=webster">http://forum.canucks...p...&hl=webster

Consider this loss of one of the best anti-biker cops from the VPD whose career was deep-sixed by the RCMP. This was a result of infighting and just plain turf protection on the part of the RCMP, a major anti-organized crime initiative targeting Hell's Angels (Project Phoenix) fell apart and a highly specialized VPD officer Al Dalstrom recognized as a national expert on biker gangs was targeted and forced out by you guessed it - the RCMP. Yup the RCMP got their man - unfortunately it was one of the really good guys - Al Dalstrom.

The bill to the taxpayers?

Well over $3 million down the tubes for mounting Project Phoenix and that never resulted in any charges despite all the evidence gathered.

Insp. Andy Richards, a former investigator with the OCABC who now works for Port Moody police, said Wednesday that Phoenix targeted nine suspects, including three full-patch members of the Hells Angels, and the case should have gone to trial.

"It was a very compelling case and ... highly prosecutable," said Richards. "But because so much baggage had been raised and so much mud had been thrown, Crown was not willing to proceed because ... it was not in the public interest to publicize the level and extent of the infighting."

Richards said, in his view, Phoenix was scuttled by senior RCMP officers because they were jealous another agency had succeeded against the Angels on what they saw as the Mounties' turf.

http://www.vancouver...6328/story.html

And a further $2 million dollars paid to Dalstrom in settlement of his wrongful dismissal suit so the story would hopefully be hushed up as the RCMP could not have any further horrendous publicity given the Robert Dziekanski death and screw-up in the Air India investigation.

Now facts in the Dalstrom wrongful dismissal case and the sabotage of Operation Phoenix targeting Hell's Angels are coming to light. And the RCMP is again embarrassingly at the centre of this ungodly mess.

This story was featured on CTV news - see:

http://www.ctvbc.ctv...ishColumbiaHome

And in the Globe and Mail.

Gary Mason

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail Published on Wednesday, Jul. 21, 2010 3:00AM EDT Last updated on Wednesday, Jul. 21, 2010 9:45PM EDT

The trial of Allen Dalstrom versus the Organized Crime Agency of B.C. had been under way in B.C. Supreme Court for only a few days when lawyers representing both sides approached Madam Justice Catherine Wedge asking for a temporary adjournment.

It was granted. And although no one knew it then, a wrongful-dismissal case that threatened to level serious allegations of misconduct against high-ranking RCMP members would never resume.

The Globe and Mail has now learned that $2-million of B.C. taxpayers' money was used to quietly end the affair in September, 2008. The secret arrangement was hatched on the courthouse steps during a break in the proceedings. Lawyers for the Crown approached Kevin Woodall, Mr. Dalstrom's lawyer, saying it was not in the public interest for the trial to go ahead.

At the time, the RCMP could not afford more damning headlines, given that support for Canada's national police force was at an all-time low after the tasering death of Robert Dziekanski one year earlier. On top of that, there were the in-custody deaths of Ian Bush and Kevin St. Arnaud that had raised serious questions about the conduct of the force in B.C. The turmoil rocking the RCMP has continued, most recently with the scathing findings of the commission set up to investigate Mr. Dziekanski's death, and the similarly damning report from the Air India commission.

The terms of the settlement were buried in a Crown Proceeding Act Report ending fiscal 2009, which said the province and OCABC accepted the plaintiff's offer to settle for $1.3-million plus salary and benefits, with the province contributing $550,000 and OCABC paying $750,000 plus salary and benefits for the six-year period outlined in the agreement. Mr. Dalstrom was making about $100,000 a year as an investigator, which puts the amount of the settlement over $2-million when benefits are factored in.

In November, 2008, Mr. Dalstrom received a written apology from OCABC, which is funded by the B.C. government. In essence, B.C. taxpayers were on the hook for the entire $2-million payout.

In exchange for walking away a rich man, the only promise the plaintiff made was to never reveal the terms of the offer or discuss details of the ugly internecine war many believe was ignited by the RCMP inside the walls of the OCABC, a joint operation between the Mounties and municipal police.

Today, few who played a part in the story are willing to talk about the events that destroyed the career of one of Canada's most accomplished gang investigators. That list includes the B.C. Solicitor-General's office, the RCMP and senior Mounties who have since retired.

Mr. Woodall issued a statement on his former client's behalf that read in part: "The events surrounding Mr. Dalstrom's dismissal from (OCABC) … were very painful for Mr. Dalstrom's family. … He does not wish to make any further comment on this difficult period."

Still, a transcript of Mr. Woodall's opening submission at trial obtained by The Globe lays out Mr. Dalstrom's case against his former employer. And while it is only the plaintiff's version of events, it makes clear why the Mounties might have worried about the trial going further.

According to Mr. Woodall's opening statements, Allen Dalstrom's troubles began when he opposed the RCMP's attempt to shut down a major drug investigation by the OCABC. Mr. Dalstrom was the lead investigator on the probe, called Project Phoenix, which was targeting Hells Angels.

The RCMP, though it had officers on the OCABC, was upset that Phoenix might jeopardize its own parallel undercover drug investigation. It is widely believed that Mr. Dalstrom's successful defence of Phoenix earned him the eternal enmity of the RCMP.

Three RCMP officers would eventually be assigned to Phoenix, and months afterward allegations began being leveled against Mr. Dalstrom. One RCMP officer said Mr. Dalstrom urged him to massage wiretap affidavits to give them a better chance of succeeding before a judge. Mr. Dalstrom was accused of harassing and intimidating another RCMP officer at the agency. It was also alleged he sexually harassed a female civilian employee.

Mr. Dalstrom was cleared of all those allegations, and Phoenix resulted in scores of drug seizures. But the infighting eventually doomed the project, and charges were never laid.

The fighting worsened after a book by Julian Sher, The Road to Hell, came out with a quote from an OCABC insider about how the RCMP viewed the joint operation as an affront to the force's prerogatives: "We are seen as infringing on their exclusive bailiwick of federal policing and organized crime policing, and they have done frack all here for 25 years."

The hunt was on to find out who it came from, the suspicion falling on Mr. Dalstrom, who confirmed he'd talked to Mr. Sher but denied saying those words.

After that, life was even more difficult for Mr. Dalstrom at OCABC. He was put on administrative leave on Feb. 5, 2004, ostensibly because there wasn't anything suitable for him to do in the organization. In July of that year he was terminated, with no explanation. In April, 2006, he filed his wrongful-dismissal suit.

The case promised to make for some uncomfortable time in the witness box for Bev Busson, who headed the RCMP's 'E' Division in Vancouver and was chair of OCABC's board of governance when Mr. Dalstrom worked for the agency. (After briefly serving as commissioner of the RCMP in Ottawa in 2006-07, Ms. Busson retired.)

According to Mr. Woodall's opening submission, it was Ms. Busson and David Douglas, a career Mountie from Manitoba who was retired from the force when he became chief officer of OCABC, who "entered a secret agreement" to get Mr. Dalstrom fired. Mr. Woodall also said there was expected to be evidence that Mr. Douglas threatened to "starve" Mr. Dalstrom out by dragging the court case on while the unemployed officer's legal bills piled up. It was also alleged that Mr. Douglas wanted Mr. Dalstrom to know that, if he sued for wrongful dismissal, the unproven allegations of sexual misconduct would be raised in court.

Andy Richards was Mr. Dalstrom's supervisor during the plaintiff's time at OCABC. Mr. Richards, now a senior ranking officer with the Port Moody, B.C., municipal police, had a front-row seat on the unsightly antics allegedly being cooked up to get rid of a respected investigator. In an interview, he said he was asked to change Mr. Dalstrom's employee performance appraisal to make it less flattering. Mr. Richards refused. He said statements Mr. Douglas was alleged to have made about "starving" Mr. Dalstrom out and bringing up the unfounded sexual misconduct allegations were made in his company.

Asked why he thought such a lavish out-of-court settlement was offered to Mr. Dalstrom, Mr. Richards said: "I think OCABC and the government wanted all that nastiness and RCMP dirty tricks to remain a secret." He added: "It really is one of the sorriest chapters in our policing history in this province."

Al Dalstrom now lives in a Vancouver suburb with his wife and two children. He has never returned to policing, and works in the construction industry.

And as the Oppal Commission into the Missing Women investigation shows the RCMP are a serious problem to policing in BC. Oppal said those causes included discrimination, a lack of leadership, outdated policing approaches, and a fragmented police structure in the Greater Vancouver region. He recommended doing away with the RCMP in the Lower Mainland and establishing a Greater Vancouver regional police force.

http://www.missingwo...-ES-web-RGB.pdf

http://www.missingwo...l-1-web-RGB.pdf (pp.114-176)

[goal-ghost]

every time a video like this emerges the pundits all come out to defend or oppose; tedious bickering ensues and then everyone forgets about it until the next clip finds its way into media outlets. the reality of the situation is that this happens everyday. it's just not everyday that someone captures it on film for a variety of reasons; fear, time, interest etc. but the fact remains that this type of physical engagement with a restrained citizen is not uncommon. this is not a unique incident. to villainize the officer or portray the man being arrested as a victimized anomaly ignores the systemic nature of this type of encounter. personally, i don't like it; but i'm very aware of others who feel quite differently about physical allowances afforded to acting officers.

all this to say,

there's nothing new to see here.

[Gurn]

I'd think the helmet law is discriminatory in nature as those with religious beliefs involving the wearing of a turban are not required to wear one. Myself as an agnostic should not recieve different treatment than a Sikh.

At the light in question- is it an automatic light or does it require the weight of a car or motorcycle to make it change?

When i'm pulled over I treat the officer as I am treated. Most of the time, in fact a vast majority, things go well. However if the cop is being a jerk I give it right back.

"where are you going?'----"None of your bussiness."

[Bill Sikes]

You cannot say he is "no innocent victim" just like you can't say that he is innocent. All we have to work with is a video of an officer using what appears to be blatant unnecessary force by sucker punching the man in the face. He had another officer with him and the man was clearly not resisting.

Whatever led up to that moment is one thing but the officer was not in any apparent danger at all and used excessive force.

[aGENT]

it does not matter what occurred before.. At that point the suspect was in restraints and under control of two officers.

[Bill Sikes]

Maybe the guys a pedophile pedaling pimp?

[-DLC-]

So many people miss the point....this is not "force"...."force" isn't a blow or strike, I consider it to be a measure of restraint that uses, well, force. A punch in the face does little to help get a situation under control (which should be the goal)....generally, that would further aggravate things.

A policeman's job isn't to punish by means of violence. To teach lessons. To inflict pain or suffering on those who misbehave - they have tickets to issue for that. It's to take away threats of danger and intervene in situations to restore calm...but, in a case like this, they fail.

[Electro Rock]

VPD deserves a Dorner even more than the LAPD did, at least LAPD is, for all its bad rep, usually keeps its unethical behavior confined to gangsters and other trash, and is actually somewhat effective in its intended role.

[Wetcoaster]

To me it seemed like reasonable force on a citizen who was resisting arrest.

[Wetcoaster]

Info update:

The Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner will oversee an investigation into the events that led up to a Vancouver police officer punching a cyclist in the face during an arrest captured on video in Yaletown.

In the video, which rapidly spread to thousands of users on Facebook, the officer is seen punching Andishae Akhavan once in the jaw from behind while he is being handcuffed.

OPCC spokesman Rollie Woods said the VPD filed a complaint Wednesday, and advised the commissioner that the department was investigating the officer's conduct, including searching for additional video evidence that shows what happened before Akhavan was arrested.

Legislation allows up to six months for the investigation, though Woods said he hoped it would not take that long, given the high level of public interest in the case.

He noted that by mid-morning Thursday, the OPCC had received more than 10 complaints from the public about the video. He would not release the officer's name, citing privacy laws.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Vancouver+police+officer+under+investigation+after+video+shows+bicyclist+being+punched+with/8162079/story.html#ixzz2OsnmzNPm

[Special Ed]

The police apologists do not seem to be at all conversant with individual civil rights. Police do not get to make up their versions of the law.

I saw no resisting arrest.

[Wetcoaster]

What I saw was the officer asking the man to place his hand behind his back while the man clearly pulled away from the officer at that point. That's all I'm referring to he could have easily just complied and dealt with the situation. The act of pulling away from the officer shows me that he was not cooperating. Maybe justly so but not being cooperative all the same.

[Russ]

So the video is actually 10 mins long. Yet all we see is 2:42. The video starts with the guy getting punched 7 seconds in.

Looks like excessive force to me but I'll reserve judgement until I see the whole clip. I have a funny feeling the complete video may tell a bit of a different story.

[Wetcoaster]

Thats what I was wondering when I read that he had 10 minutes of video. Also what the hell made him start recording for 7 minutes prior that he doesn't want to show to us.

[Gustavo Fring]

I don't know who to side with.

The pompous turd biker who thinks just because he's riding a bike and saving the environment he's allowed to not obey laws.

Or the cop turd who seems to use his cop powers to abuse the law.

Hmm this is a tough turd of events.