If the plaintiff's attorney presents this quote from the state police investigator it will be pretty hard for the defendant's attorney to win the case:

 

"Officer Shepherd's demeanor and handling of the situation immediately up to the assault by Ms. Miyekko Durden-Bosley were calm and respectful and appeared to follow the LEED model set forth in SPD dictum. However, following the assault he acted in a way inconsistent with training and policy by not using the time and resources available to him. As a result he unnecessarily placed himself in greater danger and caused unnecessary and foreseeable injury to the handcuffed suspect."

 

The fact that it comes from other cops speaks volumes. If they're smart they'll settle this before it sees the inside of a courtroom.

 

I'm speaking my personal opinion. I have no doubt that they would probably settle no matter what because that seems to be what happens these days.

 

Taunt the police, get arrested, assault police, get hit, sue the police, settle...boom...got some money.

Police officers can have bad days at work too. They are human. I wouldn't give her one dime. We have a system in place to plead your case and it's not on the street or in the back of a squad car.

Obviously the woman has blame for resisting. But unless the officers life was in danger striking a woman in the face is never called for in my mind. Yes there exceptions to rule like if Ronda Rousey were attacking you. But this wasn't the case.

 

We have had similar stories like this on the site . I'm pretty consistent. Whether you have a badge or no badge if it take you striking a woman in the face to subdue an average woman you probably need more training or are in the wrong line of work.

 

I just don't find many situations of striking a woman being helpful, striking isn't restraining.

She doesn't deserve a penny based on what I've seen.

 

Are you justifying the punch based on what you've seen?

Mcpapa, you've been around for 100 years on this site. You should realize that Certain folks are going to side with the cop, the other half with the gal. No matter what the circumstances are.

I'll say it, she resisted arrest, she kicked him or at him, he gave her one solid punch. I have no issues with his "reaction". I have issues with what she did. Listen and obey the cops and you won't get your butt kicked, shot, strangled, beat or tazed.

 

130, according to our resident Poet Laureate.

Obviously the woman has blame for resisting. But unless the officers life was in danger striking a woman in the face is never called for in my mind. Yes there exceptions to rule like if Ronda Rousey were attacking you. But this wasn't the case.

 

We have had similar stories like this on the site . I'm pretty consistent. Whether you have a badge or no badge if it take you striking a woman in the face to subdue an average woman you probably need more training or are in the wrong line of work.

 

I just don't find many situations of striking a woman being helpful, striking isn't restraining.

 

We don't always find ourselves in agreement, but we do here. Exactly how I see it.

Interesting then that the Washington State Police did not agree with the officer's actions when they were asked to investigate the incident. I guess they don't have any experience in these matters either, huh?

 

They found that he inflicted unnecessary injury. The city attorney asked for felony charges to be made against the officer as well but he was not allowed to file felony charges. That was up to the county attorney who went against the WSP findings and the city attorney and did not for charges. The woman has filed a $1 million lawsuit and will likely take home a bunch of money.

 

Here's the link: State Patrol: Seattle PD officer caused ?unnecessary injury? during arrest - Seattle 911 ? A Police and Crime Blog

 

What I call it is political correctness run wild.

 

In today's climate, some police departments pull out all stops to please the public.

 

While the WSP has experience in cases such as this, you have none.

What I call it is political correctness run wild.

 

In today's climate, some police departments pull out all stops to please the public.

 

While the WSP has experience in cases such as this, you have none.

 

And yet they agree with me, how about that?

 

Talk about someone ignoring the facts....Pot, meet kettle.

 

The WSP had no stake in this matter other than they were asked to investigate and give their findings. This has nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with right and wrong. I'll state it plainly: The officer was wrong. He is protected by his position. He's allowed to use force to affect an arrest. He let his temper kick in and decided to inflict punishment to satisfy his anger. If a regular citizen behaved in that way they would be in jail. Hopefully the federal investigation leads to charges or the IA investigation leads to his dismissal. The next time he gets frustrated he might kill someone.

And yet they agree with me, how about that?

 

Talk about someone ignoring the facts....Pot, meet kettle.

 

The WSP had no stake in this matter other than they were asked to investigate and give their findings. This has nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with right and wrong. I'll state it plainly: The officer was wrong. He is protected by his position. He's allowed to use force to affect an arrest. He let his temper kick in and decided to inflict punishment to satisfy his anger. If a regular citizen behaved in that way they would be in jail. Hopefully the federal investigation leads to charges or the IA investigation leads to his dismissal. The next time he gets frustrated he might kill someone.

 

According to you, the cops are always at fault, no matter what they do to protect themselves. Cop gets kicked he punches subject, you say it's too much. Cop gets punched several times by very large man, large man tries to take his gun, he gets shot, you say it's too much. I'm sure you would be happy if the officers never defended themselves.

 

Yes, it is political correctness. It the politically correct thing to do to try to appease the public in these type of situations in today's climate.

 

I'll say it plain and simple, she was under arrest and assaulted the officer, he punched her. I don't have a problem with it. He defended himself.

 

As typical for you, you use the great leap of he punched one so next time he will kill one. Laughable at best.

According to you, the cops are always at fault, no matter what they do to protect themselves. Cop gets kicked he punches subject, you say it's too much. Cop gets punched several times by very large man, large man tries to take his gun, he gets shot, you say it's too much. I'm sure you would be happy if the officers never defended themselves.

 

Yes, it is political correctness. It the politically correct thing to do to try to appease the public in these type of situations in today's climate.

 

I'll say it plain and simple, she was under arrest and assaulted the officer, he punched her. I don't have a problem with it. He defended himself.

 

As typical for you, you use the great leap of he punched one so next time he will kill one. Laughable at best.

 

 

What is laughable is going back and reading your posts in this thread. According to you I had no idea what I was talking about and was ignoring facts. I presented the findings of the Washington State Police,who, at the request of the Seattle Police Department, investigated the incident. They said that the level of force was unnecessary. Since that didn't fit your agenda you call it political correctness. Robert Bragg Jr., the officer that issued the findings is the Program Manager of Physical Fitness and Defensive Tactics Instructor training at the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Center in Seattle, Washington. He's in charge of training the entire Washington State Police force in Physical Force tactics. He's only held the position for 34 years. But I'm sure he has no clue what he is doing.

 

 

I'm done with you in this one. I can't make you look any more foolish than you already have.

What is laughable is going back and reading your posts in this thread. According to you I had no idea what I was talking about and was ignoring facts. I presented the findings of the Washington State Police,who, at the request of the Seattle Police Department, investigated the incident. They said that the level of force was unnecessary. Since that didn't fit your agenda you call it political correctness. Robert Bragg Jr., the officer that issued the findings is the Program Manager of Physical Fitness and Defensive Tactics Instructor training at the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Center in Seattle, Washington. He's in charge of training the entire Washington State Police force in Physical Force tactics. He's only held the position for 34 years. But I'm sure he has no clue what he is doing.

 

 

I'm done with you in this one. I can't make you look any more foolish than you already have.

 

I disagree with you and them so I am foolish?

 

Someone has an overblown opinion of themselves, that being you.

 

Did you not say the next time he became frustrated he might kill someone? That's just plain ignorant. Period.

Don't worry, what we did is on video.

 

You really do enjoy bashing law enforcement. I sincerely hope you never need their assistance. I'm sure, by your standards, they will do nothing correctly.

 

No offense, but this kind of attitude is as off-putting and concerning as anything I've said in the past.

 

"Yea... hope you don't need us" like you are doing people some huge favor to do your job, not really the most classy or tactful way to handle it. It really comes off as "disagree with me and I don't feel I should do what I'm supposed to and serve and protect".

 

I've represented people that I didn't like personally, but it's my job to do it and I'm still respectful of them.

 

Not trying to call you out personally because I hear that line a lot and it kind of irks me.

 

People might think doctors are pretentious jerks, but what if they responded to them with that attitude? Probably not someone who is going to be doing very well in their business.

No offense, but this kind of attitude is as off-putting and concerning as anything I've said in the past.

 

"Yea... hope you don't need us" like you are doing people some huge favor to do your job, not really the most classy or tactful way to handle it. It really comes off as "disagree with me and I don't feel I should do what I'm supposed to and serve and protect".

 

I've represented people that I didn't like personally, but it's my job to do it and I'm still respectful of them.

 

Not trying to call you out personally because I hear that line a lot and it kind of irks me.

 

People might think doctors are pretentious jerks, but what if they responded to them with that attitude? Probably not someone who is going to be doing very well in their business.

 

One unfortunate things about written posts, you can't get the true meaning. That's not what I meant at all.

 

I was trying to convey the fact that I hope he truly never needs the police. It would be nice if no one did.

 

I do think he would have a negative attitude, no matter how hard they tried to help with his issue.

 

Hope that clears it up for you.

One unfortunate things about written posts, you can't get the true meaning. That's not what I meant at all.

 

I was trying to convey the fact that I hope he truly never needs the police. It would be nice if no one did.

 

I do think he would have a negative attitude, no matter how hard they tried to help with his issue.

 

Hope that clears it up for you.

 

Gotcha. My apologies for reading too much into it.

 

Sadly, I do hear people use the, "better hope they never need us, see how fast I respond then" type thing. Ironically, it's often from people wondering why the public they deal with has a negative attitude toward them.

One unfortunate things about written posts, you can't get the true meaning. That's not what I meant at all.

 

I was trying to convey the fact that I hope he truly never needs the police. It would be nice if no one did.

 

I do think he would have a negative attitude, no matter how hard they tried to help with his issue.

 

Hope that clears it up for you.

 

 

As for me--you know nothing about me personally. When I deal with the police I treat them with the same respect that I do anyone else that I do in my daily life. They're just trying to do a job like anyone else.

Edited June 7, 201511 yr by AverageJoesGym