Skip to comments.Officer turns off audio and video equipment then beats 66-year-old man suffering from dementia
Posted on 01/16/2012 8:46:02 PM PST by JerseyHighlander
Direct link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2FAbUZd3zoM
Synopsis Excerpt: A Melbourne, Florida cop turned off his audio and video equipment before beating a 66-year-old man suffering from dementia "for no apparent reason," WFTV reports. The officer turned off his video and audio equipment before the beating. The department was able to extract the video from the hard drive, but not the audio.
The only disciplinary record the officer received for the incident was a written reprimand for turning off the recording equipment.
Flowers was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer.
"It's ridiculous. Clearly from this video there was no assault on a law enforcement officer. We asked for a speedy trial. We want a jury to see this video," attorney Paul Bross said.
"He's 66 years old, he had triple bypass, I think he's killing him," said Garrick Flowers.
-------------------------- Premeditated Attempted Murder charges. Nothing less will bring any modicum of justice to this situation.
Hey cop, I am 64, and if you try to kick me in the nuts like this guy, and I am taking you down hard.
Someone is going to come on this thread and say, “this is an edited video and you didn’t see what happened first.”
I did not see a weapon in the guy's hands, just a cop getting off his "authority" rocks...........
cops hate cameras, and THIS is why. They love them 2b everywhere against YOU, but nowhere against them.
democracy - YOU have the privacy and the guns
tyranny - Your GOV’T has the privacy and the guns
Actually, we know what happened first...the pig turned off the camera anticipating what he was going to do—the assault was premeditated.
Turning the equipment off amounts to First Degree whatever it is. Attempted murder as far as I’m concerned. Under color of authority, too.
If the video was turned off prior, there would not been any recording of the event.
Do they really mean that the LEO tried to erase the video evidence? In some parts of the world, that is called evidence tampering and puts people in the poky for a Long Time.
What is not being reported is the cop is 77 years old.
Oh don’t worry ‘gunner, the fans of the little johnson, ‘roided up, punk ass, dog killing, jackboot thugs will be here soon enough. Count on it.
I have actually fought cops...jailers to be precise...not a pretty sight
trying to fight cuffed up..saved by a wuttle woman corporal
anyhow...plenty of cops are great....in one county here I am tight with a slew of them...as is another freeper here
but sometimes I just wanted them to take that badge and gun off and let’s rock
Laws are for the little people to follow.
Unbelievable. Cop should be fired and jailed. No excuse for this behavior...
Oh, and since this probably isn’t an isolated incident, perhaps when he gets locked up he can have a little quality time with one of his other victims...
A good portion of their cameras and radios don't work anyway. Or the computers in the patrol cars, either. So they can bring out a can of whup __ on someone they don't like at any time :-)
The suspect (Flowers) did approach the cop and the irony is that a plausible defense of the officer's actions could be made if the audio was available and had the cop screaming at the guy with increasing urgency to back the heck off.
Also, someone (his son) telling you the guy has dementia would make you aware that you are not dealing with someone who will have rational responses to your actions.
And if the video exists, then how did the cop "turn it off?" Consider that we're only hearing the defense side of this now. Something just doesn't add up here. This one needs further reflection and testimony before a sound judgment can be made.
I guess the penalties for abuse of authority aren’t strict enough to deter this behavior.
I can’t think of something that would be appropriate, yet not “cruel and unusual”.
But obviously, to restate, the penalties aren’t harsh enough to be a deterrent.
More to the point, the officer turned off the camera for the purpose of concealing his commission of an act that he knew would be judged illegal. Add obstruction of justice to the other charges.
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.