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
click here to read article
At 2 and 3 seconds of the video you can see the arm with a water bottle throw water underhand and it hits the woman and the Police almost simultaneously. The Cop turns around and sees the woman with the bottle and wham. The Cop is screwed on this one!
Okay, I finally watched the video after following this thread half the day.
The video shows me jack squat. A vicious sucker punch would not have left the woman looking up at the cop just seconds later. I couldn’t even tell if it was a closed fist. Way too little information from that video to arrive at the knee-jerk conclusion that the cop thugged out.
Anyway, why was the phone(?) video trained on that particular group of people in the first place? I saw nothing of any interest going on except for the slapdown, or whatever it was. It would be interesting to know if the person who took the video knows the woman.
You would be happy with 100k if you got your teeth knocked out or a broken nose? No way.
Are you serious? Fifty people see the same heinous act, but that doesn't matter as long as there's one badgekisser with kneepads ready to gobble the union knob? We're citizens, that waste polishing a sergeant's chair with his teflon coated, woman beating asscrack is SUPPOSED to work for us. Remember?
Are you a lawyer, either for criminal prosecutions or defense, for assault cases?
Or do you just play one on the Internet?
In which latter case I’m calling B.S.
So, it's a CONSPIRACY. Let me guess...fake blood capsule in the woman's mouth, too, right?
Tell you what ladies...if you're looking for a man, show this clip to any first dates, because someone's who's ready to go all the way to Fantasy Island to justify striking a woman HALF his size in the HEAD, you need out of your house at gunpoint...and that's the name of that freakin tune...
So anything that doesn't leave the victim unconscious isn't a "vicious sucker punch?"
If he does something like this out in the open where people are watching and taping in front of all the other officers, then think of what he may be doing behind the closed walls of the precinct.
I dunno, but I know if I punch you in the face you won't stand up and walk away looking like that woman. And if I "viciously sucker punch" you in the face, yeah, you won't get up in any hurry.
I didn't see someone stand up and walk away, I saw someone on the ground that the cops picked up and and partially carried away.
Would you tell me what you see at about 2 seconds into the film on the left side of the frame? Does it look like someone's arm in a black sleeve shirt tossing water in the direction of the girl and the cop?
Do you think the cop got the right person?
Who tossed the water - the girl who got struck by the cop, or the person in the black sleeve shirt?
Oh man - I didn't realize that - clearly a sniper should have shot her in the head for suspicious behavior like that.
Then you would have no qualms denouncing the officer’s behavior and wouldn’t have tried to justify it.
You are on record as defending and supporting a corruption of the judicial process—that corrupt judges will give a cop’s testimony more weight than a non-cop citizen.
The point, of course, is that it doesn't matter.
“I despise cowardly thugs who wear badges and impersonate REAL police officers.”
Well said. I prefer to use their old title: peace officers.
It looks to me like the cop got the wrong person, definitely. I also looked for the coward who threw the liquid but the person who owned that leg was not seen in the video again. That cop screwed up and should be suspended based on what I saw.
You're pretty sick.
Then you're blind, too.
If that were you wife or daughter who was struck, would you be satisfied with just a suspension for the cop?
Sarcasm, of course. Though it can be hard to tell with all the merely sincere but stupid, non-sarcastic posts where people were desperately trying to figure out how she was "asking for it."
There could be any number of reasons. Cameras are commonplace these days and their presence is not de facto evidence of a conspiracy.
The more important question is: why did the officer believe he was justified in punching a woman in public?
Why did his fellow officers rally around him instead of *immediately* handcuffing him and taking him into custody for battery?
At the 2-second mark, you can see a man in shorts enter from the left while his arm comes forward underhanded as he tosses a handful of something into the crowd of officers. The woman was hit by this same volley. Not once did she ever raise a hand to spray anything.
didn’t she shoot the cop with silly string first? under the law that is still battery and is still battery on a police officer.
I have a feeling she would have spent a lot more time sitting on the ground if she wasn't handcuffed and had each arm grabbed by a cop and led away.
It's a little hard to grasp exactly what you're arguing - that she wasn't knocked unconscious and the cop isn't Mike Tyson somehow partially exonerates the cop?
I find it remarkable that you have the mental wherewithal to operate a computer and type words and everything, but what exactly would have prevented the cop from grabbing her arms and/or restraining her and handcuffing her, while simultaneously calling for help to do so from the approximately 5 billion cops 2 feet away? Or was she just so big and powerful that a punch to the face was needed?
you will please note the question mark. it cuts down on the need for silly personal attacks.
I was thinking along the lines of the old rodney king tape. remember how the MSM only showed a few seconds but the whole tape was 12 minutes long?
Did you not look at the You Tube video? Someone in a black sleeve shirt tossed the water (or string). That's what both she and the cop were reacting to.
Look at the video again about 2 seconds in. Do you think the cop got the right person?
Cop juiced up on steriods demanded sex from her and she refused. Happy now?
Nope. Thank goodness my wife and daughter wouldn't be caught dead in a concentrated Democrat parasite nest ("city") let alone at a Puerto Rico Pride parade (or whatever it was).
You misunderstood my entire statement, although you did quote it accurately.
There is not one person posting here who “saw” anything. They saw a video. They are discussing the video. One person has an interpretation of the video. That interpretation is either right or wrong.
And whether it is right or wrong is dependent on the facts, both what can be gleaned from the video, and what else was observed at the scene — not the number of people who have a different interpretation.
Fact is not decided by majority opinion. That was what I said. It is a bullying argument which suggests that a person should back down from their opinion because “so many people” disagree with them.
The woman comes from the other side of the crowd — not the curb — in this video and appears to be taunting the cops and said something that upset the sergeant. When he turned in her direction she knew he was coming after her. It wasn’t the guy on the left of the camera throwing something that started it. It was something that she said that angered the police sergeant. That’s what it looks like.
I don’t think the guy on the left throwing anything had anything to do with the officer’s action. Watch her actions from the start. She was taunting the cops or saying something to them that they didn’t like. That is why when the sergeant turned around she retreated. She knew immediately that he was coming after her.
Compare this officer’s (and the department’s) actions with Sir Robert Peel’s Principles:
1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
And all I’ll say is that I despise whatever definition of manhood the apologists for this vicious assault possess.
The so called “men” who are so personally and emotionally invested in any vicious animal in uniform that reflexively beats down a woman half his size, because water droplets touched his f*ck*ng sacred person... I just tell you straight out, people who defend this, are not men. Take that any way you want.
Woman beaters. And their fans. On the “premier conservative site on the internet”. Ain’t that a hoot?
Even if “She said something I didn’t like” is the case, that excuse is NEVER a justification for battery.
She and the cop then react at the same time to the water (or string?) that was tossed by the person in the black sleeves.
He shouldn’t have hit her but she was taunting the police. Initially it was postulated and I thought as well that she was just innocently crossing the street and mistaken for throwing something at the police. But after watching it carefully it is clear that she was taunting the police. She wasn’t an innocent by-stander.
She didn't start from the curb. She starts from over by the group of police and is hopping up and down as if agitated. She is saying something to the police the whole time.
The cops don't even pay attention to her until they're hit with the string. If she were agitated and taunting the cops, they would have certainly noticed and reacted.
You have no basis for saying she was taunting the cops.
She said something that got the police angered. The sergeant and the other four officers to turn right around and eyeball her right away and go right after her. They didn’t look around for anybody else. They looked right at her — all of them. Whatever angered them came from her and apparently her mouth.
Tell me where she is just as the video starts and is she not jumping up and down as if agitated or agitating??? Yes or No???
If she were agitated and taunting the cops they would have at least turned in her direction, and they did not. They looked quite relaxed until the string hit them.
Sorry pal, the cop screwed the pooch here.
They said on TV it looked like she signaled someone to throw water.
Yeh -- her hopping up and down at the start of the video is a new dance step???
Sorry but you are wrong. As the video starts she is up there close to the cops gathered there and hops up and down as she backs up as if to stay on her toes and saying something to the police the whole time.
If she were agitated and taunting the cops they would have at least turned in her direction, and they did not.
They did -- watch it and watch them. They turn right towards her.
They looked quite relaxed until the string hit them.
What string??? I see no string. There is a guy on the left of the field of vision that throws water or something but he is so far away that it would never have gotten that far. That wasn't why they turned around. It was what she was saying. Put sound to this and I'll bet you would hear her mouth moving the whole time until she said something and the police had had enough.
If it was the string or something that someone else threw, then why did she retreat as soon as they turned around. Immediately she starts to retreat. She knew that it was what her mouth was throwing at them that got them to turn around and her reaction proves it.
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.