Posted on 09/27/2004 8:07:13 PM PDT by freebilly
Sakinah Aaron was walking into the bus area at the Wheaton Metro station several weeks ago, talking loudly on her Motorola cell phone. A little too loudly for Officer George Saoutis of the Metro Transit Police.
The police officer told Aaron, who is five months pregnant, to lower her voice. She told the officer he had no right to tell her how to speak into her cell phone.
Their verbal dispute quickly escalated, and Saoutis grabbed Aaron by the arm and pushed her to the ground. He handcuffed the 23-year-old woman, called for backup and took her to a cell where she was held for three hours before being released to her aunt. She was charged with two misdemeanors: "disorderly manner that disturbed the public peace" and resisting arrest.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Puke....
Ditto...
I'm volunteering for it right now!
I bet you were of the impression it was a federal government agency. It's not. Jus' us small government folks.
So, quit messing up the subway! It ain't yours.
I wonder how loud she was while she was getting pregnant?? inquiring minds want to know.
It'll be my tax and fare dollars that pay to clean up those candy bars and potatochips ~ not yours!
The Metro police used to just hand over these miscreants to the Arlington County cops who run this interesting little jail where the first thing they do at intake is give you a strip search with full body cavity examination!
These people can learn to live with the standards of the people who own and operate Metro or they can WALK!
The answer is the police officer works for the Metropolitan Transit Authority which was created by an interstate compact. He is not some sort of DC cop. Rather, he's a Virginia, Maryland, or DC cop whose job is to keep the Metrorail system safe, and that includes keeping the slops out of the place!
I like your tag line. "Pajama Posse" has a nice ring to it.
Now don't go suggesting some crap like that or they will actually try to implement it. Seattle Police now make new hires spend a week at the homeless shelter to learn how the homeless suffer before they get to start arresting them for pissing in the doorways.
No. If you read the article closely, you would have noticed that she was released to her aunt. Not her husband, fiance, or any other sort of significant other.
Maybe your rush to insist that I'm a bigot is simply a result of your own idiocy.
I'll bet when her husband and the expectant father of her child was notified he was plenty mad.
Wonder why her mother would name her something like this? It's a wonder she wasn't suspected of being an islamic terrorist.
*** DING DING DING *** No more calls; we have a winner (who has identified the only relevant issue).
...he would have said, "Darn, I need more training so I can someday be a competent police officer!"
In the good ol' days, if a woman put herself in the place of a man, she got recompensed treatment as she gave. Too bad he couldn't have backhanded her one across her filthy lips.
The greatest guarantor of rights for all people is the government, and specifically the police officer on the street. They don't care who or what you are, but do care if you infringe on the rights of others. Me-ocrats, and other anti-social types such as criminals, only see and act for their own selfish interests. Police officers see and act for the interests and rights of others.
no offense meant to cops.just that I think any citizen, cop or not, who is qualified and legally able should be able to carry anywhere the police can.
I'm an exciteable boy.
She wasn't arrested for "talking on the phone", she was arrested for screaming obscenities in public while talking on the phone. The cop followed standard arrest procedures -- and at 5 months, it is highly likely the cop would have had no idea the woman was pregnant, depending on her general build.
With all due respect, I read the entire article.
The cop had every right to ask her to tone it down. He had no right to tackle her for her non-compliance... He should have written her a ticket, and then if she was still non-compliant made a peaceful attempt to arrest her. If she resisted arrest, then and only then should he have used this type of force.
The majority of the time, most police officers won't act on something like this unless a citizen complains. Many times the penal code/city ordinance and department policy are set up to ensure no action is taken unless there is a citizen complaint.
Quite bluntly, most cops won't act on stuff like this unlees there is a complaint becasue of the potential negative press/liability issues like shown here. I'm gonna go with the cop got a copmplaint, tried to get voluntary compliance, and when she gave him no choice, he dealt with her as shown in the article. If I get any reasonable information to the contrary, I can shift my views on it, only because I know I'd rather deal with other things than a loud mouthed idiot
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.