It's worrying when after repeat viewings of the video we still can't reach a consensus of the course of events. Imagine how hectic it must have been at the time.

But really, what could they arrest him for? There's not a damn thing unless there were rules set down for the conference he didn't adhere to (which in and of itself is stupid, but I could expect it from a political candidate) in which case yeah, he could get disorderly conduct. But that's the only case. Saying blowjob, which is the worst thing he did really isn't an offense one can be arrested for in many situations, least of all this one.

Take it as you may:



He did a lot more than simply pull away.


I already said that I'm not arguing in their favor because they're cops.



Well, we agree there.

Disorderly conduct could stick - see my post above.



I have no idea...I've rode on two shifts with the Gainesville Police Department, and I have nothing bad to say about them...if the University PD is anything similar, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they said nothing...maybe they told him they were going to escort him out..maybe they told him he was under arrest...I have no idea. However, he knew they were police officers, and should not have resisted.

Oh give me a break. Like some grunt police officer is in on the secret society, and as soon as this kid asks about it, they silence him? Please.

The real problem with this video is it doesn't show the context AT ALL. What happened in the few minutes leading up to this video? Maybe he deserved what he got.

Alas, I overcooked my steak, as I was preoccupied with posting here..

The reason I ask is that if they were just flat-out arresting him for breach of peace and then he resisted, that makes this a whole lot simpler. They certainly had no obligation to let him go since he'd already committed a crime.

Ahh, so you want cops to assume everyone is armed and violent? That' a good way for me to get killed. Nice to see authority cares...go join your party of power-hungry police when innocent citizens get shot...

Yeah..I don't know - would be interesting to see a copy of the report.

Did you not read the thread at all? He went up there (somewhat frantically ill admit) to ask a question. He wasnt waving a knife around.

Take a good look, and you tell me why I should assume everybody is going to be nice.

I love my job. I don't complain when I'm called out at o-dark-thirty on a Sunday morning. I go out and work to make my town safe for everyone. Do I go guns-up on every traffic stop? Nope, sure don't. Do I realize that each seemingly routine stop I make could be the very last one? You're damn right I do.

I've been complimented - and thanked - on traffic stops, no less. Go take your stereotyping somewhere else.

Who says he was trying to disturb the peace? That's a long ****ing shot. It seems to me he's an idiot who's trying to get answers to his stupid questions. Do I think there's a secret society? Doubtful. The only secret society is the one that's not so secret. As Robin Williams said:
"Some people achieve greatness, others get it as a graduation present" (in reference to Bush Jr.). But he should be able to ask the question regardless, and I don't think you should assume he's trying to disturb the peace just because the ****ing question was stupid and :tinfoil:.

PS, Free, I was kidding. You know, that humor thing some of us have. You should try it sometime.


My friend (who albeit was a drug dealer, and had a massive quantity of ecstasy on him when he got busted) got busted for a false charge in Gainesville. He's in prison now because they said his taillight was out--it wasn't. But I guess in this world, the ends justify the means right!

Or you throw out people's rights for no reason just so you can maybe bust a kid who you think might be causing trouble. This kind of attitude, which I've seen in a LOT of policeman (not all, I know some good cops, just to reiterate, and I'm not saying you're one of them) leads to the shootings of innocents among other things.

Like I said before, this is not a country where you are guilty until proven innocent. Everything you say pretty much takes that approach, which is so horribly wrong in our justice system it's not even funny.

You know, cops aren't the only ones killed because of stupid assumptions. Yeah, is it tragic? Sure. So are all the inner city killings or plants or thousands of other things that ruin inner city kids' lives for no reason other than a cop who cares more about himself than the law (which is bass ****ing akwards--there's a reason I'm not a cop, I know I couldn't hold the law above myself).

Maybe you need to get some perspective--your side of the story isn't the only side bud. I feel for the cops killed in duty that were actually trying to keep our cities safe. But that doesn't mean that they should rape our constitutional rights and bend and break the laws to their own will just for their own ****ing safety. You accept the risk when you step into that uniform, and breaking the foundations of our country just to lessen that risk to yourself seriously sickens me.

mb, I'm not saying the police are justified. From what I see in the video, they definitely were not. But you don't get to see everything is all I'm saying. I'm just saying it's ridiculous to think this is some kind of conspiracy and the police moved in to keep it secure.

After watching the video a few more times, I noticed a few things. As the police move in to grab him, Kerry says "No it's okay. Let me answer his question." The police completely ignored him!

Okay, Im just making sure you caught the full story. I thought the same thing when i first heard about this. I checked to see what led up to it, and where things went after.... although in this situation it just made me more confused

And the reaction from audience members finally becomes more sensible after the police tase him. At first they laughed and cheered, then they started yelling at the police to stop and one guy at the end shouting "police brutality!"

Boy, that would have been fun to start a riot.

Ironic too.

Show me all these inner city killings that are happening for "no reason other than a cop who cares more about himself than the law".



I already showed you in plain text how I would justify this situation, per NH law. Your accusation that I am "breaking the foundations of our country", "bend[ing] and break[ing] the laws to [my] own will" is suspiciously close to being 'guilty until proven innocent', is it not?

Are you even capable of holding an argument without resorting to swearing?

Immediately became violent? That's a bit of a stretch.

[QUOTE=Michael MacFarlane]is anyone certain that the first officer who approached him didn't immediately tell him he was under arrest?[/QUOTE]
At that point, before he resisted, what could they have arrested him for? Being obnoxious isn't an arrest-worthy offense.


Seriously.



This happens just a few days after police in DC tackled a minister so hard that he had to be hospitalized. He is being charged with assaulting an officer, essentially for bumping into one of them. Again, the person involved shouldn't have resisted, but that doesn't mean the police should overreact.

I love the stories about cops that have shot and killed kids that had "real looking" guns.

They shouldn't point real looking guns at armed police officers.

You think those cops are proud of that? Imagine living with that for the rest of your life..I wouldn't doubt if it's caused some officers to retire, even though the shooting was justified.



There are multiple videos around - from what I read here,The police did let him answer the question after Kerry said something. He was escorted out after his mic was cut.

If you don't like my opinions, feel free to read some others.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73728
Wuss: There are plenty of 'bad cop' stories out there.


I already answered that.

You state the laws, I state how you're misinterpreting them and how he wasn't TRYING TO CAUSE ANY DISTURBANCE, and you ignore me.

And there's plenty of stories of inner city shootings--they're just not publicized because the kids (and I mean kids as in teens-early twenties) who die in them aren't noteworthy. Just another ****up, oops, wax over it and keep the media's nose out of it. You want those stories? Go to the ghetto, meet a few guys and actually talk to them, then listen to how their brother died in a gunfight between cops and a gang and was just getting some ****ing milk from a store. I know people who this **** has happened to, so no I don't sympathize too terribly with YOUR situation good sir.

Also, not only is Florida notorious for their horrible policework, but campus cops in general are usually self-righteous *******s who exert their miniscule authority wherever possible.

And I can't even hold a ****ing conversation without swearing. Who gives a ****? It's not like we're in the fifties, saying **** doesn't mean **** anymore.

I maintain that he recklessly created a risk of public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm by making loud or unreasonable noises in a public place, disrupted the orderly conduct of business in a public facility, and disobeyed a lawful order. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree here, then.


Ah. So what's your solution? Stay out of the ghetto entirely? Do not return fire, and die in the streets? What's your miracle answer?

Maybe, but he didn't do anything so far as I can tell up until the cops grabbed him. That's just my take on it.


There isn't one. I'm just saying the road goes two ways.

Ok, I took a good look. Out of 128 deaths of officers on duty, only 53 were by intentional gun fire, 2 from bombs, 5 from vehicular assault, and 4 were struck by vehicles. The rest were accidents. 64 cops, out of how many? How many traffic stops, civil disputes, etc etc, involved police and only 64 police died from someone intentionally trying to kill them (though, those 4 struck by vehicles could have been accidental), and you're telling me it's reason enough to throw "innocent until proven guilty" out the window? And then you tell me to take my stereotyping elsewhere? I was merely trying to mock the extremeness of a figure in authority telling someone that their belief in the basic American belief of "you are innocent until the legal system proves you are guilty" is the kind of attitude that might result in a cop dying, so that person is no better than a person who enjoys hearing about cops being shot, and you label me as the stereotyping one?

I think you need to take a step back and realize that if your badge wasn't fueling your ego, and you were one of us puny citizens, you too would find it scary that a cop basically says "it's safer for me to assume you're going to try and harm me, so I'm going to assume you're not innocent."

Better role models and a better education system!

What. WHAT?

All cops are trained the think that way so that, at the very least, the thought consciously enters their mind every time they answer a call. To become complacent would greatly increase the chance of injury or death for peace officer.



Yes, shootings where someone points a real looking gun at a cop and gets shot are justified.

Yes, but to assume that you're guilty of whatever the cop thinks you're guilty of until you're proven innocent is exactly what's wrong with our current law enforcement regime.

A ghetto example of cops killing people is flawed in this argument. They are in the middle of a gun battle between the cops and a gang. The situation is already charged, and the cops are human. It's unfortunate that someone gets killed while going to get milk, but it's a case against the gangs.

If someone is holding something that intentionally looks like a gun then why are they surprised when a cop thinks it's a gun and feels threatened? Is the officer supposed to politely ask them if the gun is in fact real before deciding whether or not to defend himself?

If it's a real, REAL looking gun, then maybe not. I'm referring to the more stupid cases. Like what's his name that got pumped full of 41 bullets for pulling out his wallet.

Yes and no. We're confusing things here. The whole court system, innocent until proven guilty, etc., is fine. I have absolutely no issue with that. What I do have a problem with is people saying that I should assume everyone is going to be friendly and nonviolent. I recently attended the funeral for an officer who was shot in the back four times - then ran over twice. This was in rural NH. It happens.


I haven't been a cop forever. I've paid a traffic ticket. I've been cuffed and detained before (that was in Gainesville, actually). I've been there.

A wise instructor once told me "Treat everyone like a million bucks and have a plan to kill them, all at the same time." That's how it works. I do my job to the best of my ability. If we had in-car video, I'd be happy to post a traffic stop, just to disprove this mental image you have of the 'evil police officer JLee and his blatant disregard for all things good'...but unfortunately, we don't.



So you're saying the arresting officer should assume you're innocent of a crime he just arrested you for...?

This thread is rediculous. In the longer video it is clear that he is grandstanding and making a speach. An officer approaches him and speaks to him. His answer to her is that he (John Kerry) has been speaking uninterupted for 2 hours. He then dismissively waves away the officer. He continues his rant. Eventually she begins to physically move him, more by maneuvering him, rather than grabbing him. That's when he starts his jumping and yelling. At that point he was clearly disobeying the direction of the officer and was acting in a threating manner. Jumping around and yelling in that crowded situation with a high ranking public official present is not a situation the police can allow to continue. The police then acted with a reasonable ammount of force to subdue the person. This is all quite clear in the longer version of the video. Watching the entire video and listening to his psychobabble it wouldn't surprise me if he intended the entire thing to go down that way.

Split second judgment call. No way to get all of those right.

I don't think anyone expects you to assume everyone is innocent, I think people do expect you to use judgment when approaching someone, but you saying that believing cops shouldn't have the mindset of "everyone is guilty until proven innocent" is the same as "I get my jollies when I hear about cops being shot" is a tad bit extreme.


I don't ever recall calling you evil, and I don't ever recall thinking you have a blatant disregard for all things good. I do recall saying that you have a skewed image of police actions, and the justification of various questionable acts. You make it sound like I'm out to get you, I just don't understand the police mindset you constantly display in these discussions, because you talk poorly of citizens and tend to place law enforcement on a pillar.

I'm still not understanding the logic behind police escorting a person out of a public forum for asking questions, becoming scared when the police are attempting to relocate him, probably to arrest him, and asking why they're trying to do so is grounds for deeming it resisting. The cops were not making their intentions clear, and that would scare just about anyone, and if it doesn't, the police should be afraid of that individual.

Fair enough. Although with the wallet incident, it was like four or five officers. They can't all have ****ed up that badly. And continued shooting. All of them.

Anyways that's an isolated incident (mostly, anyway) and my first post on it wasn't really serious, so no more need to talk about it.

Amadou Diallo is probably who you're talking about. He fled towards his building after the police announced themselves, then turned and proceded to take something out of his jacket pocket. One officer yelled that Diallo had a gun, and they all opened fire (41 shots, 19 hits).

NYC's Street Crime Unit, of which the four shooting officers were members, was disbanded after the incident. 1,700 people were arrested, with charges later dropped, while protesting the killing. Something bad happened, the people rose up, and the situation was changed so that the incident wouldn't be repeated.

Maybe I'm tired, but I'm unable to decipher your last sentence.


If I may ask, which "police mindset" do I "constantly display in these discussions"? A large number of people tend to condemn our actions, even though they're quite often ignorant of the policies and laws regarding arrest, use of force, etc. If my defense of such actions (when justified) means I'm placing law enforcement on a pillar, then I guess you're right. I must've missed the part in which I'm talking poorly of citizens.



I already said that his questions were not the cause of the resisting arrest charge. His physical resistance was.