Talk about putting an end to a situation quickly

[JakeLock]

As was already stated I didn't see what happened prior to the BU officer arriving, but I have to say it did seem the throw was a bit excessive. But without the officers side I'm not going to judge it.

I've tossed a few idiots in my time, left my share of dents on hoods, but that was one heck of a toss, right off his feet! Best one I ever had was my first, drunken-dis decided to bail on me after I had a cuff on. What started as an attempted take turn turned into me whipping him around by his wrist and the handcuff. Feet went straight out and he bellyflopped, even better one of my fellow officers jumped on his back to restrain him after he hit the ground. He's around 235 and this guy was about 170. Sad thing is the guy was so drunk none of that stopped the fight. He broke my radio and my sunglasses in the fight. In the end he was hog tied and placed in the back of a cruiser.

Was that a Ranger?

[MPI1]

As was stated earlier in the thread. This officer was reinstated and he was given his back pay for his 2 days. I just wish that Chiefs could get in trouble like this for handing down rulings without all the facts!

[oscarmitre]

Hmmm - it seemed excessive to me. I don't know what happened beforehand but the defendant was handcuffed, was he not? Slamming a handcuffed person on the bonnet (hood) of a car so that his legs flew up from under him would seem excessive. I'm not saying that I haven't gone the biff when perhaps the biff wasn't warranted and I'm not proud of it either, but to the disinterested bystander this looks a bit bad.

[MPI1]

Hmmm - it seemed excessive to me. I don't know what happened beforehand but the defendant was handcuffed, was he not? Slamming a handcuffed person on the bonnet (hood) of a car so that his legs flew up from under him would seem excessive. I'm not saying that I haven't gone the biff when perhaps the biff wasn't warranted and I'm not proud of it either, but to the disinterested bystander this looks a bit bad.

As I stated before, he was out numbered, multiple people yelling and screaming...I would have done the same thing. Put him down hard and show the others that you aren't messing around, you never know when they are going to turn on you, so you put one down hard and the others won't get froggy.

[Samuel]

Hmmm - it seemed excessive to me. I don't know what happened beforehand but the defendant was handcuffed, was he not? Slamming a handcuffed person on the bonnet (hood) of a car so that his legs flew up from under him would seem excessive. I'm not saying that I haven't gone the biff when perhaps the biff wasn't warranted and I'm not proud of it either, but to the disinterested bystander this looks a bit bad.

Couple of comments on your post Oscar:
1. LE use of force rarely "looks good" - many times things SEEM excessive until/unless you know more about what was happening/what happened
2. Just because a defendant is handcuffed does NOT mean he is secure and/or no longer a danger (too many tragedies have occurred that prove this)
3. It didn't look all "that bad" to me. Who's to say that the suspect didn't jump up as the officer went to pin him? Now, if the officer had turned the suspect upside down and then pile-drived his head straight down into the asphalt, I would probably say that that MIGHT have been excessive...
4. The vast majority of "disinterested bystanders" have no clue about LE use of force.
5. 99.9999999% (I made that percentage up) of people watching the video have no idea of what the totality of the circumstances were and do not know the officer's articulation of his use of force.

FWIW, I've gotten into heated arguments (over this incident as well) with other officers (at least that's what they claim to be) on PoliceOne because they also have no clue on how to review uses of force - i.e. you can't form an intelligent conclusion on the reasonableness of a use of force from just watching a video...

[MPI1]

That is where I got this from Samuel. I have also read those comments, and it surprises me sometimes how quickly some of those officers are to throw another officer under the bus and say its excessive. I am just a civilian, but even I can see that this officer has A LOT going on in the situation and needed to end it quickly!

[Chris-]

Reading all the replys, and watching the video here...i get a sense that this is probably the most common danger to LEO. By that i mean, using appropriate force and having to deal with the aftermath (right or wrong). Am i on to something here?

[mcsap]

We aren't superheros. We can easily and quickly be outnumbered and backup isn't always 30 seconds away.

In this day and age , more and more people aren't afraid to go one on one with us. I have had to use force MANY times in my career and although I have been threatened to be sued MANY times, it hasn't happened yet

[Samuel]

Reading all the replys, and watching the video here...i get a sense that this is probably the most common danger to LEO. By that i mean, using appropriate force and having to deal with the aftermath (right or wrong). Am i on to something here?

I wouldn't say that using force or facing assaults/attacks is "the most common danger" (traffic related incidents have historically claimed more LEO lives - although I think this year motor vehicle accidents may actually be running 2nd!). That being said, I tell recruits and trainees that you Will use force during your careers - everything from escorting people somewhere/controlling them to moving them against their will to fighting with them to using deadly force. Some places/LEOs use force more often than others.

You have to be able to do many things in this line of work - e.g. use common sense, listen and communicate verbally/non-verbally/literally, multi-task, be disciplined/ethical/diligent, etc etc and you have to be able to Run, Fight, and/or Shoot. You may not be running, fighting, or shooting "all that often" but they are Critical Skills - when it comes time to do so, you need to be able to do them well. And, when you Do use force, your documentation of that force will be reviewed by the higher ups - you will likely be second guessed and monday morning quarterbacked. Sometimes you will be sued, frequently complained against, possibly disciplined for poor tactics leading up to the force, etc.

When TSIHTF, you gotta be able to take care of business - physically/mentally win the fight/gunfight. You can't worry about what happened before or what is going to happen after or whether or not you're being recorded. If you know what you can do prior to a use of force and know how to articulate your use(s) of force, you will have much less to worry about with the After...

[Chris-]

I wouldn't say that using force or facing assaults/attacks is "the most common danger" (traffic related incidents have historically claimed more LEO lives - although I think this year motor vehicle accidents may actually be running 2nd!). That being said, I tell recruits and trainees that you Will use force during your careers - everything from escorting people somewhere/controlling them to moving them against their will to fighting with them to using deadly force. Some places/LEOs use force more often than others.

You have to be able to do many things in this line of work - e.g. use common sense, listen and communicate verbally/non-verbally/literally, multi-task, be disciplined/ethical/diligent, etc etc and you have to be able to Run, Fight, and/or Shoot. You may not be running, fighting, or shooting "all that often" but they are Critical Skills - when it comes time to do so, you need to be able to do them well. And, when you Do use force, your documentation of that force will be reviewed by the higher ups - you will likely be second guessed and monday morning quarterbacked. Sometimes you will be sued, frequently complained against, possibly disciplined for poor tactics leading up to the force, etc.

When TSIHTF, you gotta be able to take care of business - physically/mentally win the fight/gunfight. You can't worry about what happened before or what is going to happen after or whether or not you're being recorded. If you know what you can do prior to a use of force and know how to articulate your use(s) of force, you will have much less to worry about with the After...

I never think of traffic accidents as a cause of death/injury in LE, and i dont know why...now it will be forefront. It does make sense...

Thanks for the insight. Ive been wondering (if i get into LE) how do people (or myself in that situation) know instantly what amount of force to use? Is that one of those things that is taught at the academy and engrained in you? Practice practice practice until its second nature, and there is no thinking...you just act?

I dont mean to derail this thread, but its relevant so ill ask here:

What kind of legal liabilities are cops open too, in say this instance in the vid? If he was to be sued, is there any sort of defense fund that would help pay his legal fees? Or is it like in a business where if you are found to be negligent it all falls on you, no insurance on earth will help you out? It seems like these kinds of fears would really handicap someone...

[Samuel]

I never think of traffic accidents as a cause of death/injury in LE, and i dont know why...now it will be forefront. It does make sense...

I've driven very fast (e.g. emergency/priority calls, assistance/back up requests, etc) Many more times and have been in more accidents (minor + major) than I have shootings or other situations where I had to use deadly force.

Thanks for the insight. Ive been wondering (if i get into LE) how do people (or myself in that situation) know instantly what amount of force to use?

You never know "instantly". There is always some kind of lag involved (Google "ooda loop"). The better you know what you are allowed to do (per department policy, case laws, state laws, federal laws) and the more confident you are in your physical abilities and/or the more trained you are, the more decisive you will be (i.e. you will respond more quickly, effectively, and "appropriately").

Is that one of those things that is taught at the academy and engrained in you? Practice practice practice until its second nature, and there is no thinking...you just act?

You will have training in the academy and you should have additional inservice training as well. That being said, it is up to you to continue to train, practice, and learn - many force-related attributes/abilities are Perishable. There is alwasy some recognizing, assessing/thinking, decision making going on - if you have done a LOT of training and practicing, the time your brain spends doing those things is minimalized and, in the heat of the moment, you may often not remember that your brain was ever involved.

I dont mean to derail this thread, but its relevant so ill ask here:

What kind of legal liabilities are cops open too, in say this instance in the vid? If he was to be sued, is there any sort of defense fund that would help pay his legal fees? Or is it like in a business where if you are found to be negligent it all falls on you, no insurance on earth will help you out? It seems like these kinds of fears would really handicap someone...

If you misuse force, you can face civil suit, criminal charges, even federal charges. LE agencies often have unions/established legal defense organizations - YMMV. If you screw up bad enough, no one is going to cover you.

If you have the wrong mindset in the heat of the battle (e.g. you are worrying about how bad things look, if you could have done something different earlier, if someone is recording you, that this is the x amount of times you've used force and now so and so is going to have your butt, that someone is going to sue you, etal), you can get yourself or your partner(s) killed.

[Chris-]

If you misuse force, you can face civil suit, criminal charges, even federal charges. LE agencies often have unions/established legal defense organizations - YMMV. If you screw up bad enough, no one is going to cover you.

If you have the wrong mindset in the heat of the battle (e.g. you are worrying about how bad things look, if you could have done something different earlier, if someone is recording you, that this is the x amount of times you've used force and now so and so is going to have your butt, that someone is going to sue you, etal), you can get yourself or your partner(s) killed.

Thanks for the legal answer.

The second thing, right there...is what scares me the most about LE. Im not so much afraid of a random pyscho @ traffic stop, or wrecking a car/yourself/others....but like you said, the Monday morning QB and the stress that would put on someone is what scares me. You guys are expected to do the right thing 100% of the time. No one is perfect....

[MPI1]

Chris,
You can't be afraid to do your job just because of monday morning qb'ing. You have to end the situation so you go home safe. There is an old adage that says " I would rather be tried by a jury of 12 then carried by 6" basically meaning do you job so you go home at night and deal with the aftermath when it comes.

As for your question about liability...some states have what they called qualified immunity. Like my state has this for police officers. Basically if you were acting in the scope of your duties you personally can't be sued and the liability is on the department.

As for knowing the right amount of force...well that is something that your training/experience/officer-subject factor will determine. A 5'0" officer facing a 6'0" subject will be able to use a little more force than a officer that stands 6"10". That is just generally speaking of course there are many more factors than just that but you get the picture. There are a lot of decisions officers have to make sometimes they go above the force needed for any number of reasons, sometimes they go under (those are the ones where the officers get hurt). They human, they make mistakes, the general public believes they need to be right 100% of the time but those who support LE know that they have a tough job to do and they do it without backup and against multiple subjects.

I hope that answers your questions/concerns. If you have anymore feel free to ask I am sure some more officers will be posting replies.

[Chris-]

Chris,
You can't be afraid to do your job just because of monday morning qb'ing. You have to end the situation so you go home safe. There is an old adage that says " I would rather be tried by a jury of 12 then carried by 6" basically meaning do you job so you go home at night and deal with the aftermath when it comes.

As for your question about liability...some states have what they called qualified immunity. Like my state has this for police officers. Basically if you were acting in the scope of your duties you personally can't be sued and the liability is on the department.

As for knowing the right amount of force...well that is something that your training/experience/officer-subject factor will determine. A 5'0" officer facing a 6'0" subject will be able to use a little more force than a officer that stands 6"10". That is just generally speaking of course there are many more factors than just that but you get the picture. There are a lot of decisions officers have to make sometimes they go above the force needed for any number of reasons, sometimes they go under (those are the ones where the officers get hurt). They human, they make mistakes, the general public believes they need to be right 100% of the time but those who support LE know that they have a tough job to do and they do it without backup and against multiple subjects.

I hope that answers your questions/concerns. If you have anymore feel free to ask I am sure some more officers will be posting replies.

Wow thanks for the detailed explanation, i really appreciate it! Gave me some stuff to google...

[NavyGuyMA3]

Couldn't really comment in my opinion if that's excessive force or not without sitting down and talking to the cop... we saw about 5 seconds of "use of force" on an incident that was going on for probably several minutes before the car with the camera angle we saw came on to the scene.

Just like in the Rodney King "beating" all the media and everyone else sees is some guy getting his *** stomped by the LAPD. They don't mention that he was a violent thug, or that he just robbed a bank or led the police on a 17 minute or so police chase... we just see a few minutes of him being a "victim of police brutality."

So I would say that just that video isn't enough to say whether excess force is used or not in my opinion.

Also... it looks like the backup OC's the shirtless guy at the start... but right after it looks like his hand is empty and you never see him put anything (like an OC canister) back on his duty belt after ....