Skip to comments.Shocking Moment Cop floored woman with savage sucker punch during parade
Posted on 10/01/2012 3:31:28 PM PDT by Altariel
This is the shocking moment a police sergeant punched a young woman in the face because he thought she sprayed silly string at him during a peaceful parade.
The video was recorded during yesterday's 50th anniversary Puerto Rican Day parade in Philadelphia - where around 1,500 people were in attendance.
The 36-second clip shows a number of people milling around enjoying the festivities in the 'City of Brotherly Love'.
From the left-hand side, someone can be seen throwing an unidentified liquid towards a group of police officers.
At the same time, a young woman is walking past - who also gets hit by the liquid.
As she turns around to see where it came from, a police officer in a white shirt - which means he has acquired the rank of sergeant - comes towards the woman and delivers a brutal punch to her face, knocking her to the ground.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
and the police union is supporting him fully
Yet another convenient “sound byte” video which only shows the part that the cop-haters want you to see. What led up to this? I can’t believe that a cop would just assault a woman at random. I’ll guarantee that there is a progression here that is not shown or known just by watching this culminating incident.
If the cop was assaulted, he had every right to use force against the assaulter, especially one who’s fleeing (she was walking away in a crowd.) Stop with the summary Rodney-King-style verdicts until we know the whole story.
This ought to be an easy decision. “You are fired.”
However, if they haven’t fired the offending officer by now, they probably will not, unless there is sufficient attention brought to the story.
Maybe if she licked his boot he would have spared her the punch.
That, is why people hate the police.
That pig better hope she doesn’t have any brothers with my disposition.
“Stop with the summary Rodney-King-style verdicts until we know the whole story.”
But your piece is premised on “if she assaulted him.”
You have no idea whether she did or not. So how come your summary verdict is okay and others’ summary verdicts are not??????
Are cops free of sin natures? Are they fully pure and righteous, untainted?
Looked to me like to girl also got sprayed as she was almost BEHIND the officer. Watching carefully, you can see the silly string coming in from the left side. In thid case, the officer DID over react. Lawsuit time.
Cop black. Woman white. No story.
Even if she was the one who sprayed him, that would only justify arrest.
Police brutality, plain and simple.
If the cop was assaulted, he had every right to use force against the assaulter, especially one whos fleeing (she was walking away in a crowd.) Stop with the summary Rodney-King-style verdicts until we know the whole story.
She wasn’t running and she certainly wasn’t a large woman. Why couldn’t he just grab her and slap cuffs on her? He needed to punch her first, that’s proper?
Except that she didn’t do anything - she was just there (as the video plainly shows). Do you suppose it was his training to randomly target citizens to assault?
“If the cop was assaulted, he had every right to use force against the assaulter, especially one whos fleeing (she was walking away in a crowd.) Stop with the summary Rodney-King-style verdicts until we know the whole story.”
Sorry, slowly walking away and then turning back to look at the cop doesn’t count as fleeing.
Even if she was running that would only justify tackling her. The cop has a right to defend himself. He doesn’t have the right to attack anyone.
Police are presumed to be a little above the impulses of the average person; their hands are largely tied, and it is understood throught their own training that this is the case. Much more so if we’re talking about a command-level officer.
This is easily understood in a courtroom where witnesses include a police officer and a violator (I know, I have been there.) The judge rightly gives deference to the account of the officer over the perpetrator. Otherwise, we would have no basis for truth in justice. Perhaps the cop is corrupt and a liar, but the stringent screening process to be a peace office is designed (hopefully) to weed out those with these types of character defects before he even gets to the point of dealing with the public.
Let me ask you this? What other perfect stranger would you call in the event of an impending life-threatening event, given you don’t have the legal or practical power to stop it? A random guy on the street, or a police officer?
I believe that I would be the one going to jail.
As evidenced here, they are subject to the same sin natures and wicked impulses of any other individual.
And given that police have been caught and fined for lying in court, any judge or jury who automatically takes their testimony as true is foolish.
A random guy in the street is more trustworthy than a government employee when the government employee is clearly evidenced to be in the wrong.
Worshipers of government employees, however, object to that notion.
As he/she/it believes, the word of a government employee is of more value and more trustworthy than the word of a random person on the street.
Hardly a conservative opinion.
Again, the point, which was completely lost on you, is that the video DOES NOT show everything, certainly not what led up to the incident, which could have been many minute prior.
Are you no better than the Occuparasites that like to show police arresting them minutes after they assault and resist?
Give an “offended minority” a badge and a gun and you can guarantee an overreaction.
Exactly the first reaction I had to the manipulated story. Without knowing what happened the 30 seconds before, no subsequent action or reaction can be fairly judged.
It all started with Rodney King. We never have seen the 5 minutes that led up to his deserved ass-whuping.
When, in a crowd, a liquid is tossed, it could be anything from plain water to contaminated human waste, to acid, to caustic soda, to---- silly string. Contemporary milititant activists, for the most part, have no judgement and no restraint. Perhaps they are trying hard to win the "lottery by cop." Not that they would get anything if I were on their jury.
I totally disagree. The cop absolutely assaulted this woman who was posing no threat to him. If you had done the same thing to her you’d be in jail right now and that thug-with-a-badge should be in jail, too.
The video does show the government employee assaulting a woman, in public.
It must truly bother a government worshiper that a lowly peasant would *dare* accuse Almighty Government Employee of assault.
If any non-government employee did that, O Worshiper of State Employees, the offender would be arrested.
Agreed. The cop has the right to protect himself according to the level of the crime being committed. There are many problems with this arrest. He did not see her cause the crime. Then he turns and assaults her. She will be happy with the settlement. Let’s just say $100,000.
That's assault, depending on the context and surroundings. And, given you aren't in a lefty-lib cesspool of a state, you can defend yourself against an assault. Here in Texas, you would probably be no-billed for doing so, given that you're not at a birthday party where silly string is being passed out and you are present by consent.
Lord, you need a video that shows “everything”? How much everything do you want?
didn’t look like a full punch more of an open handed chop....don’t antagonize the police unless you are prepared for the back lash
LOL!! And I'm sure you believe all the "reality shows" on t.v. too.
The police officer striking the woman was not manipulated. He assaulted her and should be fired and jailed. The non-officer witnesses to the scene have a *horrified* reaction to the scene while the officer witnesses fall in line to defend a boy who struck a woman.
Some people worship government employees the same way the ancient Greeks worshiped the gods on Olympus—don’t *dare* say anything against the gods, if you do, you deserve what happens to you.
” Without knowing what happened the 30 seconds before, no subsequent action or reaction can be fairly judged.”
Really? We can see from the video she represented no immediate threat to him or anyone else. Even if she had thrown urine on the cop that would have only justified arrest.
In this case the cop is the one with a lack of restraint.
Now if she's coming at me with a baseball bat all bets are off.
Of course, the police-gods can do no wrong! Bow before the police-gods and plead for mercy, lest they strike you down as well.
(Do I really need a sarc tag?)
“I cant believe that a cop would just assault a woman at random.”
Really? With all the video evidence over the years proving cops lie like hell and commit crimes at random, you don’t think a cop could lose his cool and punch someone?? I do, and without question.
Interesting that you would on a conservative site pick a word used by sixties radicals and black panthers to demonize the police.
Was this police officer wrong??? I do not know from the vido segment shown and neither do you.
so shut your pie whole. Those of us who actually witnessed the nastiness that went on in the 60s are tired of people hating the police and calling them names with no sense of shame. If this officer did something wrong then pursue it. But cut the name calling.
“the video DOES NOT show everything, certainly not what led up to the incident,”
There is NOTHING that could have “led up to” a cop punching a person in the face. Sorry, but you assume there is justification for it.
For those of you who said the cop overreacted, a review of the assault law is in order.
Say there are two people having an argument. One of them flicks the nose of the other with their finger. The second one responds by punching the first one in the face. Does the finger flick matter? Yes it does, because it was the first assault. The punch was a reaction.
In this case, there was an “argument”, a public demonstration that the police were ordered to clear. Then the woman attempted a hit and run assault on the cop. She could have shot him, stabbed him, thrown an object at him, or whatever. It is not his responsibility to determine if something that hits him is a tangible threat. He has been assaulted.
And when you are assaulted, you can legally react in many circumstances. There is no rule that your reaction is proportional, either, as long as you do not maim or kill.
Cops gotta watch out for that Silly String, right? Punch first then sort it out later. Lives could be lost. Good thing it wasn’t Silly Putty - could have been plastic explosives. God bless America.
One more time... and I’ll try to type s-l-o-w-l-y, so you can keep up.
This video didn’t capture 1/10th of what happened. What was the history with the cop and the woman? Did he give her any kind of earlier warning? What was thrown at the cop (Silly String is presumed.)? Did she have serious arrest warrants outstanding? Was she already known as being a violent offender (women tugs are some of the worst.)
The article mentions none of this, not because none of it is true, but because THE POSTER DOES NOT KNOW!
Sorry, but you assume, ignorantly, that this is not.
Are you a pig?
o please...if that was the case then just hand cuff her!
You got a king size bed to go with that blanket statement?
Striking a woman is assault. Yet you are defending it, because the police-gods are sinless and would *never* engage in wickedness.
How progressive of you to suggest that it was the *woman* who is really to blame for the temerity of being the victim of a crime.
He should be charged with assault.
Why don’t you go back to your occupoop “demostration” where cop-haters are lionized?
I’ll type just as slowly, just for your benefit...based on the video, on what we’ve seen, the police officer overreacted and struck a woman in the face, causing her to bleed, and then arrested her. It’s plain to most reasonable people that he could have arrested her without striking her.
Depends on the nature of the crowd.
If it's a typical militant irresponsible OWS bunch of criminal losers, then yeah.
If YOU are the target, you can assume it's harmless silly string; your choice.
An LEO on the job? Not so readily. In a crowd that experience has shown there are mostly criminals, I give totally the benefit of the doubt to the cops.
Are you an occupoop? You speak the language.
She’ll sue and get millions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.