It's been alluded to several times on here that cops are "allowed" to use excessive force when they feel threatened... Where was the threat?

I have no sympathy for someone like her. As I said before, if she was on the sidewalk not interfering with the flow of traffic, or even legally parked, then I may see her point.

 

Not sure on the threat, nothing was shown on her video, so no one can say for sure what happened, but you did hear them tell her to move numerous times, then eventually to get out of the car. Not sure if she should have been tazed, again due to lack of what we can see. But going on what else she said, that wasn't true, I'm not in a hurry to take her side.

 

HB20, you can take over, after 9am and I need to get to bed.......

There is no way on Earth I would ever become a police officer. I am NOT condoning the officer's actions, but she got out of the situation exactly what she wanted.

It's been alluded to several times on here that cops are "allowed" to use excessive force when they feel threatened... Where was the threat? She wasn't resisting arrest by sitting in her car... So that idea is out the window. Was there a car behind her in traffic? If not, her sitting at the green light is pretty irrelevant. When she said she would move, she apparently couldn't because there were cops in front of her, so then she gets yanked out of the car.

They are also allowed to use force if someone is not complying with lawful orders ie. resisting arrest.

I haven't looked at this link so I don't know what the issue in this case was.

 

BTW Taser is over in 5 seconds with no residual pain after it stops.

I have no sympathy for someone like her. As I said before, if she was on the sidewalk not interfering with the flow of traffic, or even legally parked, then I may see her point.

 

Not sure on the threat, nothing was shown on her video, so no one can say for sure what happened, but you did hear them tell her to move numerous times, then eventually to get out of the car. Not sure if she should have been tazed, again due to lack of what we can see. But going on what else she said, that wasn't true, I'm not in a hurry to take her side.

 

HB20, you can take over, after 9am and I need to get to bed.......

 

I don't have sympathy for her either...

 

That doesn't mean the actions were justified.

Stupid woman.

Something I don't think people posting are realizing: the Supreme Court has both stated and refused to revisit decisions questioning their rulings on people having a right to record police officers, especially if it's in a situation where they are filming something like she's accused of filming here. If the officers are telling her to move because they don't want her recording, guess who the one being unlawful is? Same thing that brought the Supreme Court ruling was an attorney in Boston, filming someone else getting roughed up during an arrest who was hit with some bogus charge for "interfering".

 

I see plenty of comments that lead me to believe that people think police officers know more about the law than Supreme Court Justices, so I digress, but let's just say that a Judge probably looks at the tape, considers that the allegations of attempting to delete the footage, etc. and that the "she was disrupting the flow of traffic, we were keeping safety and order telling her to move" probably isn't going to get very far.

 

Also, to the comments on the lawsuit, I'd imagine that's a pretty fair amount to ask for given the circumstances.

 

To everyone saying she's at fault and asked this on herself, try thinking of it like this: maybe she wouldn't have been filming if a man in handcuffs weren't being beaten in front of her. Obviously the DA doesn't think she's guilty of anything, the charges were immediately dropped.

 

The city of Baltimore has some hugely systemic problems with police brutality that city leaders are divided on (i.e., whether to bring in oversight, etc.), so this incident surprises me none at all.

They allegedly deleted evidence, right? They are afforded the same rights as anyone else would be when accused of a crime...correct?

 

Fair point. I think it's pretty safe to say that's what's happened here given what's already happened, and I'd say the same if it were flipped. Doesn't mean guilt, but it doesn't look good at all either.

What I'm trying to say in the above post (#21): maybe she was disrupting traffic flow by sitting at a green light, but the officer's concerns in approaching her were probably more geared toward knowing they'd been filmed doing something they shouldn't have been doing and trying to get rid of any evidence of it happening.

 

If they did act in bad faith and delete the evidence that incriminated them, I hope they didn't realize she could have a backup of it and denied those allegations, even if it was to the point of perjury, so that they can be even deeper into the mess that they got themselves in.

 

Officers openly beating someone in handcuffs is just as much of a disturbance to the peace as someone sitting at a green light filming them doing so.

What I'm trying to say in the above post (#21): maybe she was disrupting traffic flow by sitting at a green light, but the officer's concerns in approaching her were probably more geared toward knowing they'd been filmed doing something they shouldn't have been doing and trying to get rid of any evidence of it happening.

Can you build a strong case on guessing as to why they may have been approaching her while also acknowledging she was disrupting traffic?

That certainly escalated quickly.

 

Seems like the officers caused even more trouble for themselves because unless I missed it, where did it show them beating the guy?

That certainly escalated quickly.

 

Seems like the officers caused even more trouble for themselves because unless I missed it, where did it show them beating the guy?

The video did not show it. She just says they were.

To everyone saying she's at fault and asked this on herself, try thinking of it like this: maybe she wouldn't have been filming if a man in handcuffs weren't being beaten in front of her. Obviously the DA doesn't think she's guilty of anything, the charges were immediately dropped.

 

The city of Baltimore has some hugely systemic problems with police brutality that city leaders are divided on (i.e., whether to bring in oversight, etc.), so this incident surprises me none at all.

 

I know how you like to jump to conclusions where the police are involved (See thread about police treating the actress bad) Let's wait and see what was really happening. If the police were beating a handcuffed man that will come out and those involved need to be treated accordingly.

 

All that is know is this woman's sensational report...she may be right...she may be an opportunistic person trying to cash in on unrest across the country.

 

Let's wait and see...

she may be an opportunistic person trying to cash in on unrest across the country.

 

Usually when people are quick to throw out, "I'll sue you" in the middle of a situation, which I believe she was yelling, are exactly that.

 

Cops should have just given her a ticket for a traffic violation and let it go.

Can you build a strong case on guessing as to why they may have been approaching her while also acknowledging she was disrupting traffic?

 

Definitely.

 

Like I said, the DA has already dropped the charges against her, and in quick order. What does that tell you?

 

If I'm the officer who stands accused, the minute I heard that the DA dropped all charges against her immediately, then I saw the writing on the wall, called around and hired a lawyer, then started filling out applications for other jobs.

 

If the DA hadn't immediately dropped all charges against her, then I'd feel differently. I don't know how people could argue that all charges being dropped is any type of good sign for the officers because it's saying that even people on the same side as them aren't seeing things their way.

 

At this point, what can they even charge her with and what would you consider a win for the police given that the charges they initially filed were all dropped? I don't call a "win" escaping from a civil suit and keeping my job, those are just things that you are supposed to be doing.

Cops use taser on woman while she recorded arrest of another man | Ars Technica

That's awesome !!!! lol

 

yea I know it was wrong etc. but I got a laugh out of it when I read the topic title