Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise
Bad Boys II - Printable Version

+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive)
+---- Thread: Bad Boys II (/Thread-Bad-Boys-II)



RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 05-16-2019

(05-15-2019, 05:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is something I think a lot of people don't realize with regards to "shooting to kill." The policy isn't "shoot to kill," it is "aim center mass." The reason isn't to kill someone, though that is often the only guaranteed way to end the threat, but it's because it reduces the chances of a miss. If you kill a person presenting a threat, even if there are these questions about how much of a threat they were, it is better than missing and hitting a bystander or not ending the threat and the person harming the officer or a bystander.

I'm not a very pro-police person, I'm in favor of reducing the reliance on deadly force and all sorts of other policies that highlight my position as a more liberal person (the police are fascist tools of the bourgeoisie! Ninja), but this isn't the type of incident that does well to highlight trigger-happy police.

Yet you won't be accused of hating the police.

As it should be.

Wanting to make policing BETTER isn't ANTI police.

And this case aside we should "second guess" every shooting by officers.  If "second guess" means looking into the entire incident to make sure there was nothing "funny" going on.


RE: Bad Boys II - Dill - 05-16-2019

(05-15-2019, 04:40 PM)Au165 Wrote: There is a difference between surrounding an unarmed man with a gang of officers and beating him and what we have here. Part of the issue is in trying to prove misconduct here people are continuing throughout this thread to project true past injustices into this situation. In no other example people have tried to use in this conversation when they talk about "second guessing cops" and "objectively reasonableness" have they used a comparable situation where an officer escalated force gradually until the suspect obtained a weapon and forced the officer into using deadly force. People keep wanting to use cases where officers beat unarmed people as a reason why this case must be another police screw up.

We are working with different narratives here, and you are inserting my examples and statements into yours, assuming that I am looking for "misconduct" which violates the law.  But my focus throughout has been upon the law itself and what it allows.

You want to limit examples to gradually escalated force. But if a gang of officers can get away with beating a helpless man under the "objective reasonableness" standard, then there is something wrong with the standard.  "Second guessing" was not allowed in the King case as the jury was instructed to look at how King's defensive moves, motivated by fear and confusion, "could" be interpreted by the police--the "adequately trained experts"--as non-compliance. The analogy between cases here is focused on the OR standard; it is not an attempt to "project past injustices" or some such.

(05-15-2019, 04:40 PM)Au165 Wrote: Your "argument" was that a police officer "Should" be able to do all these things in a moments notice when faced with danger (see comments about "Let's a girl take is taser"). You have essentially defined what an officer should be able to do in dangerous situations without having any actual qualifications to do so. Courts have agreed (Graham vs Connor) that it is not up to arm chair police officers to determine what the capabilities of people in high stress situations should and shouldn't be capable of. It is based on standards developed by people who have experience in those situations and what could reasonably be expected by someone who is adequately trained for that position in that situation.

My argument is that lawyers, juries, voters, and legislators are going to be mostly "arm chair police officers." And "second guessing" police authority is in part what separates law and the role of police in liberal democracies from the same under authoritarian government.

My argument is, further, that over the last three decades, the concept of "qualified immunity" for public officials needs to be closely re-examined--not just for police officers. 


(05-15-2019, 04:40 PM)Au165 Wrote: For the third time now....Yes! Police have a history of brutality and violence, especially against people of color. This is not however one of those situations. This is a case where little force was used to start and rather than going immediately to deadly force the officer used less than deadly force. The situation was then escalated by the actions of the suspect to a deadly force situation and the officer was forced to use deadly force. 
I heard you the first time. I have not been trying to insert this case into a "history of brutality . . . against people of color."

I don't agree that officer was "forced" to use deadly force on woman sitting on the ground, even if she is holding a taser. I am very concerned about how such incidents can be legally framed under current law, which make it very hard to discern whether an "adequately trained expert" panicked or not, or even whether he was adequately trained.

I am sure we agree that policing is necessary and that it tasks ordinary people with the very difficult job of dealing with nasty, out of control people who are a danger to others, often in cases where split-second judgment is necessary.  I am sure we also agree that we don't want laws that force police to assume to much personal risk while dealing with those people. That said, there still needs to be a balance between the rights of police and citizens which does not unnecessarily increase the likelihood of misdemeanor arrests resulting in death.


RE: Bad Boys II - Dill - 05-16-2019

(05-15-2019, 05:15 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I can't speak to department policy for every law enforcement agency.  I can tell you that any policy to allows for shoot to wound is a bad policy for reasons I have covered ad naseum.  Also, you're making an immense assumption in the KTLA link that the leg is what the officers were aiming at.  Lastly, I find it curious you would use the second example as the DA's office actually charged the officer in the incident.  I'd be willing to bet he was also out of policy by aiming at an extremity instead of center mass.

Just so everyone is clear, if you shoot you aim center mass.  The only exceptions would be for a person wearing body armor, in which case you aim for the head of, preferably IMO, the pelvic girdle.  Anything else is asking to miss and hitting something behind your target.

First about the leg. No, I don't assume the officers were only shooting for the leg. But they apparently stopped once the guy was down. He didn't go down under a hail of bullets.

I use the second example precisely because of its legal "variety."  In this case, not shooting for body mass is why the woman is still alive. The officer is charged because he jumped a step or two and went to deadly force. He was "out of policy" for that reason.  Had she a gun instead of a screwdriver, things might have been different.  But we still see reports of police who handle similar situations--e.g. someone brandishing a weapon--very differently; in some cases, the subject goes down in a hail of gunfire, in others there is a stand off until the subject is talked down or surrenders.


RE: Bad Boys II - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-16-2019

(05-16-2019, 02:09 PM)Dill Wrote: First about the leg. No, I don't assume the officers were only shooting for the leg. But they apparently stopped once the guy was down. He didn't go down under a hail of bullets.

You don't know how many times they discharged their weapon.  Again, you don't have the information needed to use this an an example of "shooting to wound".

Quote:I use the second example precisely because of its legal "variety."  In this case, not shooting for body mass is why the woman is still alive. The officer is charged because he jumped a step or two and went to deadly force. He was "out of policy" for that reason.  Had she a gun instead of a screwdriver, things might have been different.  But we still see reports of police who handle similar situations--e.g. someone brandishing a weapon--very differently; in some cases, the subject goes down in a hail of gunfire, in others there is a stand off until the subject is talked down or surrenders.

You're basically stating that every scenario is unique, which is true.  Also again, you don't know how this officer violated policy, he may have been out of policy by shooting at her legs as well as shooting at her at all.  You don't know, so also again, you're using it as an example of "shooting to wound" is not very compelling.


RE: Bad Boys II - Dill - 05-16-2019

(05-16-2019, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You don't know how many times they discharged their weapon.  Again, you don't have the information needed to use this an an example of "shooting to wound".

You're basically stating that every scenario is unique, which is true.  Also again, you don't know how this officer violated policy, he may have been out of policy by shooting at her legs as well as shooting at her at all.  You don't know, so also again, you're using it as an example of "shooting to wound" is not very compelling.

1. I agree that I should not have presented my example as one of intentional "shoot to wound." We cannot tell that from the report, as you correctly state. However, my example is definitely one of someone who did not die in a hail of bullets.  It looks very much like police stopped shooting when the suspect was down.  Getting a number on the shots fired doesn't change that part, at least. This was supposed to be an example of good police judgment.

2. Putting five shots in a woman sitting on the ground is not an example of "shooting to wound." Given what I saw on the video, I'm not convinced shooting was necessary at all--even if she had the cop's taser.  You are saying it is possible the officer could be punished for violating policy if he purposefully shot the woman in the leg rather than going for body mass in this case--effectively killing her to keep "in policy"?

3. However policy varies, the law in this case does not. When assessing the officer's behavior, the fact this was to be a misdemeanor bust will play a role in assessing level of force.  Along with an assessment of danger  posed to others and the officer. A taser, normally not considered a lethal weapon, may be construed as one if a suspect takes it from an officer? It  will have to be in this  case, to make the officer's actions legal.


RE: Bad Boys II - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-16-2019

(05-16-2019, 02:39 PM)Dill Wrote: 1. I agree that I should not have presented my example as one of intentional "shoot to wound."  We cannot tell that from the report, as you correctly state. However, my example is definitely one of someone who did not die in a hail of bullets.  It looks very much like police stopped shooting when the suspect was down.  Getting a number on the shots fired doesn't change that part, at least.  This was supposed to be an example of good police judgment.

I'm pleased that we agree.  Obviously, once the target is down you should cease firing.  


Quote:2. Putting five shots in a woman sitting on the ground is not an example of "shooting to wound." Given what I saw on the video, I'm not convinced shooting was necessary at all--even if she had the cop's taser.  You are saying it is possible the officer could be punished for violating policy if he purposefully shot the woman in the leg rather than going for body mass in this case--effectively killing her to keep "in policy"?

It's actually not that complicated.  If you, as an officer, decide that using your firearm is necessary then you aim for center mass.  Now, the decision to use deadly force can be the subject of debate.  What cannot be the subject of debate is, once you decide to use deadly force you aim center mass so as to hit your target.  As I stated earlier, I am unaware of any law enforcement agency that has a "shoot to wound" policy.  In fact the exact opposite is the case in every instance I am aware of.

Quote:3. However policy varies, the law in this case does not. When assessing the officer's behavior, the fact this was to be a misdemeanor bust will play a role in assessing level of force.  Along with an assessment of danger  posed to others and the officer. A taser, normally not considered a lethal weapon, may be construed as one if a suspect takes it from an officer? It  will have to be in this  case, to make the officer's actions legal.

Actually, no.  The reason for the arrest is completely irrelevant in this instance.  The officer asserts the suspect gained control of his taser and was in the process of attempting to discharge it at him.  That is the reason given for the use of deadly force.  At that point the reason for initial contact is not a consideration.  A taser being non-lethal is also irrelevant as its purpose is to incapacitate.  If the officer is incapacitated he is entirely at the mercy of a a suspect who has already demonstrated the willingness to use physical violence against the officer.  Your legal argument is a complete non-starter for that exact reason.  This shooting being adjudged a correct one will rest upon the truth of the officer's assertions.  If things happened as he claimed he is well within the law.  The only other consideration would be if he followed policy leading up to the shooting.  If he did not he would be subject to departmental, not legal, consequences.


RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 05-22-2019

https://abcnews.go.com/US/colorado-police-officer-pulled-gun-black-man-picking/story?id=63079797


Quote:Colorado police officer who pulled gun on black man picking up trash quits force




A white Colorado police officer caught on video pulling a gun on a black man who was picking up trash outside his home has resigned, officials said Thursday.



Boulder Police Officer John Smyly quit the police force after an investigation found he violated department policy when he drew his gun and attempted to detain 26-year-old Zayd Atkinson in March, according to officials and a police department internal affairs report.

"While the finding likely would have resulted in suspension or possibly termination, Officer Smyly resigned prior to the conclusion of the disciplinary process," a statement released by the City of Boulder on Thursday reads.


A police internal affairs report obtained by ABC News shows Smyly's decision to attempt to detain Atkinson "was not supported by reasonable suspicion that Mr. Atkinson was committing, had committed, or was about to commit a crime."

Atkinson, a student at Naropa University in Boulder, was picking up trash on March 1 in a patio area of his apartment when he was confronted by Smyley, whom police officials said was trying to determine if Atkinson was allowed to be on the property.


A video of the ordeal taken by a neighbor and posted online showed Smyley holding his gun during the 8:30 a.m. confrontation with Atkinson, who was holding a bucket and a metal trash grabber.


Atkinson showed Smyly his school identification card and told him he lived at the residence. But when the officer detained him for further investigation, Atkinson grew angry.


(MORE: Colorado police under investigation after viral video shows them pulling guns on black man picking up trash on his own property)


Smyly radioed for back-up, saying the Atkinson was "being uncooperative and unwilling to put down a blunt object," according to a police statement.


Within minutes, other officers arrived on the scene, at least one holding a shotgun, the video shows.


(MORE: Black man who was held at gunpoint by white officers while picking up trash: 'It definitely brings fear to my heart')


The officers eventually left when they determined Atkinson had every right to be on the property.


News of the incident spread throughout Boulder, prompting a large and angry crowd to attend a Boulder City Council meeting, many in attendance holding metal trash grabbers.


(MORE: From 'BBQ Becky' to 'Golfcart Gail,' list of unnecessary 911 calls made on blacks continues to grow)


Attempts by ABC News to reach Smyley were unsuccessful.


In an interview last month on ABC's "Good Morning America," Atkinson described the encounter as a "traumatic experience."

"I thought that once the firearm was out that that meant that he was going to try to kill me," Atkinson said. "It was a frightening experience. I didn't know what else to do besides, you know, to fight with my voice and to practice my rights, which were thoroughly being breached."

Yeah, the "suspect" was yelling.  Probably because he was innocent and the police had zero reason to have questioned him at all?  At least we don't have "second guess" a shooting this time because the "suspect wasn't cooperating".


RE: Bad Boys II - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 05-22-2019

(05-16-2019, 10:15 AM)GMDino Wrote: Yet you won't be accused of hating the police.

As it should be.

No, you're the only person I accuse of it because the entirety of your posting history, from the old board to now positively screams it.


Quote:Wanting to make policing BETTER isn't ANTI police.

No, it absolutely is not.

Quote:And this case aside we should "second guess" every shooting by officers.  If "second guess" means looking into the entire incident to make sure there was nothing "funny" going on.

Second guessing should be done with the understanding of the circumstances of the situation and the fact that, in almost every instance, a split second decision is made.  "Hindsight is 20/20" is a saying for a reason.  People like yourself, who fail to see basic facts like a suspect pointing a gun at an officer, are completely unhelpful in this regard.


RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 05-23-2019

https://kutv.com/news/nation-world/police-woman-killed-herself-with-gunshot-through-her-mouth-while-hands-cuffed-behind-back

Quote:Police: Teen killed herself with gunshot through her mouth while hands cuffed behind back



(KUTV) — According to the medical examiner's office in Virginia, a 19-year-old woman died from a gunshot wound through her mouth while her hands were cuffed behind her back. It was ruled a suicide.



The finding matched the account of Sarah Wilson's death by the Chesapeake Police Department that said she shot herself while officers were trying to detain her boyfriend.

Wilson was the passenger of a car pulled over by police on July 25, 2018. The 19-year-old's boyfriend, Holden Medlin, 27, was driving when they were stopped by two police officers, one patrol and one from narcotics. Separating the two from the car, one officer handcuffed Wilson while the other struggled to detain Medlin, who was reportedly combative and tried to flee the scene, as reported by WAVY in August.


While officers tried to get control of Medlin, Wilson was left alone and reportedly was able to get a gun, possibly from inside the car where she was a passenger, "contorted" her body and shot herself through the mouth while still wearing handcuffs, according to a police spokesman.

"She was handcuffed, and she managed to put a revolver in her mouth while handcuffed. That's what the investigator told me last night," the dead woman's mother Dawn Wilson told an ABC news station. "In all of her life I have never known of her to shoot a gun, own a gun, or even hold a gun."


Police were not able to explain how Wilson was able to get access to the gun and said it was not a police weapon. They reportedly tried to save Sarah Wilson's life after the gunshot but that she died at the location of the shooting.


Reports say one officer was wearing a body camera at the time of the stop but it was knocked off during the struggle with Medlin and turned off when it hit the ground. It was off during the shooting and did not capture the teen's death. After Medlin was detained, the camera was reattached and turned back on to record, police said but the Chesapeake Police Department declined to release the body camera footage.


The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Virginia confirmed to to WAVY that Wilson committed suicide and died from an "intra-oral gunshot wound."


Chesapeake police investigated the alleged suicide in July. A spokesman said the department concluded the investigation but declined to comment on the outcome.


Medlin reportedly swallowed a bag with possible drugs in it at the time of the arrest and is currently facing drug charges.



RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 06-17-2019

Maybe a "bit" excessive?




But, to be fair, at least they lied about what happened in their report.   Mellow


 



RE: Bad Boys II - bfine32 - 06-17-2019

(06-17-2019, 10:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: Maybe a "bit" excessive?




But, to be fair, at least they lied about what happened in their report.   Mellow


 

Absolutely terrible but as with everything there are some conflicting reports. I've heard the family stole more than just the girl taking the doll. Dude in the twitter you quote states they turned off their body cams while I've heard reports they didn't have any.

Of course none of that excuses the abuse of force we see here but we should all strive for the truth, 


RE: Bad Boys II - Dill - 06-17-2019

I say when the police tell you to drop your baby and put your hands up, Stop you drop your baby and put your hands up!

If there are conflicting stories then I think you have to go with the cops.
Looked to me like this mother was reaching for something.  And using the baby as a shield.

Was the stolen merchandise recovered?



 


RE: Bad Boys II - bfine32 - 06-17-2019

(06-17-2019, 09:01 PM)Dill Wrote: I say when the police tell you to drop your baby and put your hands up, Stop you drop your baby and put your hands up!

If there are conflicting stories then I think you have to go with the cops.
Looked to me like this mother was reaching for something.  And using the baby as a shield.

Was the stolen merchandise recovered?



 

I thought they asked her to put the baby down instead of drop him. But perhaps I was wrong. As I said we should all strive for the truth. 


RE: Bad Boys II - Dill - 06-18-2019

(06-17-2019, 09:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I thought they asked her to put the baby down instead of drop him. But perhaps I was wrong. As I said we should all strive for the truth. 

Perhaps some of us should learn to recognize parody.


RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 06-18-2019

(06-18-2019, 02:33 AM)Dill Wrote: Perhaps some of us should learn to recognize parody.

Maybe bfine couldn't hear the request over all the threats to shoot and kill her?

Mellow


RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 06-18-2019

https://people.com/human-interest/janika-edmond-suicide-michigan-prison-guards-bet/


Quote:Family Awarded $860K After Guards Bet on Woman's Suicide in Prison: 'Somebody Owes Me Lunch!'

Janika Edmond died by suicide at 25 at Women's Huron Valley Correctional Facility in Ypsilanti, Michigan in November 2015


Janika Edmond had “a very rough life,” spending most of her teen years in foster care and suffering several suicide attempts. She was finishing a sentence at Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility in Ypsilanti, Michigan, for a probation violation in 2015.


Edmond, 25, died by suicide just five months before her scheduled release.


“The facility was well aware that [Edmond] not only had suicidal ideations, but had acted on them before,” David Steingold, an attorney for the family, tells PEOPLE.


He said that on Nov. 2, 2015, Edmond told guard Diana Callahan that she wanted a “Bam Bam” — a suicide-prevention vest.

“She declared that she was going to attempt suicide, as soon as she did so, Diana Callahan turned around, pumps her fist three times in the air and, in a loud voice, says, ‘Somebody owes me lunch!’ ” Steingold said, citing surveillance footage from the prison.

Steingold says Callahan and another guard, Kory Moore, had placed a bet on whether Edmond would kill herself. After making the declaration, Callahan left Edmond unattended in the shower and found Moore to request a Subway sandwich, according to a lawsuit obtained by PEOPLE. She was gone for nearly 20 minutes and Edmond was found unresponsive.


“It was unbelief [sic] to me, more than anything, that they would let this go like that,” a relative of hers told MLive. “Blatant disrespect for the policy. She wouldn’t be able to hurt herself [with the suicide-prevention vest]. She’d be home right now … out of everything she done been through. It’s such a tragedy. It’s a life tragedy. Everybody failed her.”


Edmond was declared brain dead on Nov. 6, 2015, and pronounced dead days later at Joseph Mercy Hospital, the lawsuit states. Steingold says Edmond’s family was not immediately told about the incident and was only allowed to see her at the hospital on the day of her death.

Callahan was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the death and sentenced to six months in jail and two years of probation, Holly Kramer, a spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Corrections, tells PEOPLE. Kramer notes that Callahan and Moore were fired “for their actions.”


Moore was later reinstated after arbitration but no longer works with the department, Kramer says.


Earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Cleland approved an $860,000 settlement in the family’s wrongful death suit against the department, Callahan and others, a court spokesperson confirmed to PEOPLE.
[Image: image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpeopledotcom.fil...=face&q=85][/url]

“She had her whole life in front of her,” Steingold tells PEOPLE of Edmond. “She had a few bumps in the road that she needed to get over, but to snatch her life away in this fashion is something that’s gonna haunt everyone in the family for the rest of their lives.”


Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility is the only women’s prison in Michigan. The facility has been criticized for severely poor living conditions, including being overcrowded and lacking ventilation, according to Steingold and the [url=https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/09/06/women-say-conditions-crowded-state-prison-cruel-and-unusual/1188871002/]Detroit Free Press
. According to the newspaper, the roof leaks, inmates have very little access to day rooms and many have developed a mysterious rash.


Prison officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment from PEOPLE.


Steingold says there is “no question” that the poor living conditions at the facility only contributed to Edmond’s depression and mood disorders. He notes the guards’ “blatant indifference” to Edmond’s condition.


“[Their] failure to properly treat Edmond’s mental illness and its actions in discriminating against her and punishing her because of it, exacerbated her mental difficulties, including her suicidal ideations, and caused her suicide,” the lawsuit states.


Suicides accounted for 7 percent of all deaths in state prisons in 2014, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Female prisoners are about nine times as likely to die by suicide as the general female population, according to a recent study.



For many, the incident highlights the violence and dangers present within the nation’s jails and prisons. Outraged social media users have noted the need for transformative and restorative justice rather than punishment-based efforts. This is not the first time activists and organizers have criticized the criminal justice system.


In a recent Forbes essay, noted activist and organizer Venkayla Haynes noted the importance of transformative and restorative justice, writing, “Within the prison industrial complex, incarcerated folks are not given the proper mental health and counseling services in addition to being subjected to deplorable conditions and violence.”



RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 07-12-2019

So what is worse here?

The officer claiming the man ("big black man") didn't comply and his complaint simply dismissed or them not even giving him a ticket once they "realized who he was"?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2019/07/11/nfl-patriots-lb-elandon-roberts-says-he-harassed-police/1707037001/


Quote:New England Patriots linebacker Elandon Roberts got out of his Porsche with his hands up. 



“This is my house,”  Roberts told the deputy from the Fort Bend County (Texas) Sheriff’s Department. 


Deputy Adam Watkins barked at Roberts to get back into his car and Roberts did so quickly, not that it halted the tension as Watkins called for backup over the “big black man” who “wouldn’t comply,” according to the dashcam footage obtained by USA TODAY Sports.

Roberts was stopped in the Houston suburb of Richmond on March 10 for a basic speeding infraction, but he wasn't told of the charge until nine minutes after the stop was initiated.


“Unfortunately, these types of things are happening all too often to African Americans,” Roberts said in a statement to USA TODAY Sports. 
“People are becoming desensitized to them. Being harassed in your own yard simply because you are a 'big black man’ should never become the norm. To the person being harassed, it is frightening, disrespectful and embarrassing.

“I have no interest in any financial gain from releasing this story. My only hope is that these types of bias-based traffic stops can end and that, perhaps, other black drivers might see how to deescalate a threatening situation.” 


NFL ARRESTS: View a searchable database of players arrested since 2000


Roberts filed a complaint 10 days after the incident in which he wrote he “felt so harassed I couldn’t even remember where my insurance paper was in my car.”

In a response from the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Department’s internal affairs division dated May 20, a department official wrote the complaint was “not sustained,” or not acted upon by the department, and the matter was closed. The document did note that a supervisor was instructed to “go through refresher training on traffic stop procedures” with Watkins. 


Roberts’ attorney, Jennine Hovell-Cox, told USA TODAY Sports she has requested that the Fort Bend County District Attorney open an investigation into the incident. 

“My office directed her to contact the Internal Affairs Division at the Sheriff’s Department,” Fort Bend County District Attorney Brian M. Middleton said in an email to USA TODAY Sports. “If Mr. Roberts files a formal complaint, the matter will be investigated and possibly referred to the Texas Rangers for an independent investigation.”


Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Department did not provide comment on the incident when reached by USA TODAY Sports Thursday. 


FROM THE ARCHIVE: Black NFL players arrested nearly 10 times as often as whites


“As a son, husband, and father, I share the concerns and fear of many,” said Kennard McGuire, Roberts' agent. “We shouldn't have to move in fear of those with the privilege and honor to protect and serve.”


Roberts, 25, didn’t argue. The two-time Super Bowl champ and native Texan followed instructions and, at one point, even pleaded with Watkins.


"Can we talk like men?" Roberts said during the stop.


However, Watkins delivered a different version of events on the radio. 


"I haven't even begun the traffic stop,” Watkins said. “The big black man who was driving got out of the car. I told him to get back in. He wouldn't comply. I had to yell at him pretty hard to comply.”


Roberts’ wife, Tori Roberts, came out of the house but was told by Watkins to return.


“This is our house,” Tori Roberts responded.


“If you don’t get back in the house, you will be arrested,” Watkins said.  “Go back in the house for your safety.” 


“For my safety or my husband’s (safety)?” Tori Roberts responded. 


The dashcam footage showed Watkins telling Roberts he was stopped for speeding: 59 mph in a 35 mph zone and failure to provide insurance. A search of court records didn’t show the citation was entered. Middleton said that his office “has not received any charges from the sheriff’s department regarding the incident.”


“The citation was never processed by the sheriff's department and sent for filing with the court,” said Hovell-Cox, Robert’s attorney. “We believe that once the dashcam footage was seen by Deputy Watkins' supervisors and realizing who Elandon is, a decision was made to halt everything. Elandon started receiving phone calls from the sheriff's office a few hours after the ‘stop,’ apologizing and telling him that the ticket was being ‘dismissed.’ ”



RE: Bad Boys II - GMDino - 07-18-2019

Don't do something while black and then try to explain that it's legal...that's "resisting" and "obstructing an investigation".

Also don't have an outstanding traffic ticket!

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/police-arrest-artist-who-was-hired-by-city-to-paint-murals-i-dont-do-graffiti-i-sell-paintings-122655499.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw


Quote:A popular Detroit artist, who city officials commissioned to create ten murals in an effort to deter illegal graffiti, was arrested by police officers because they thought he was committing an act of vandalism. The incident occurred while Sheefy McFly was painting his first, out of ten, commissioned murals.



McFly, whose real name is Tashif Turner, was painting the mural for the initiative City Walls on a viaduct on Detroit's northeast side on June 19 when police arrived.

Responding Detroit Police Department (DPD) officers believed that McFly, who had been working on the mural for several days, was a vandal, according to the Detroit Free Press. As the 29-year-old musician and artist tried to explain the situation, and a city official arrived to back up his claims, "four or five" more police cars came to the scene, McFly told the newspaper.


McFly did not have his city-issued permit on him and he was ultimately arrested for allegedly resisting and obstructing police, as well as on an outstanding traffic warrant.


DPD spokesperson Sgt. Nicole Kirkwood told the Detroit Free Press that the responding officers felt McFly was uncooperative with their investigation. Kirkwood said that the resisting and obstructing charge would be sent to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office for further review.


"It's an oxymoron — doing something for the city and being arrested by the city," McFly said. "They treated me like a felon even though I was commissioned by the city to do this."

"The Head of the Graffiti Task Force investigated me and asked what's my tag name....I said I don't do Graffiti I sell paintings," McFly tweeted on June 22. 
"I'm a commissioned muralist."


The artist, who says he feels racially profiled and bullied following the incident, allegedly spent approximately 24 hours at the Detroit Detention Center.


On June 27, the police department told the Detroit Free Press it would not pursue the resisting arrest and obstruction charges against McFly.


“After further review and investigation of the totality of the circumstances, we decided to not move forward with the submission of the warrant,” said DPD spokeswoman Sgt. Nicole Kirkwood in a statement on Thursday.


According to McFly's contract, he is expected to paint ten murals throughout the city, and that he would receive $10,000 for his work.


"When we're doing murals, we have a police lieutenant we work with to make sure surrounding precincts are aware that it's a city-sponsored program and the artists have permits," Brad Dick, who oversees the City Walls program, said. "Unfortunately, some random officers who weren't associated with the nearby precincts drove by and saw him and thought it was an unauthorized action. They stopped him and he didn't have his permit with him."


Dick added that police had stopped other artists in the program in the past and that they plan to give artists identifying lanyards to wear while working on their murals going forward.


-->As the 29-year-old musician and artist tried to explain the situation, and a city official arrived to back up his claims...<---


And he still spent 24 hour in jail.  Just wild.


RE: Bad Boys II - bfine32 - 07-25-2019

Chicago mayor lets everyone know what she thinks about this "Bad Boy":

Quote:At one point, Lightfoot turned to corporation counsel Mark Flessner and said, “Back again. This is this FOP clown,”

https://nypost.com/2019/07/25/chicago-mayor-caught-on-mic-calling-police-union-official-a-clown/

But at least she apologized.............for saying it out loud.


RE: Bad Boys II - bfine32 - 07-25-2019

Seems like the good citizens of NYC are taking care of these "Bad Boys:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/nyregion/nypd-water-bucket-arrest.html

Quote:Outrage continued to grow on Wednesday as the police arrested three men who were seen on video hurling water over the weekend in Manhattan and Brooklyn. The officers had been sent to disperse disorderly groups at fire hydrants during a three-day heat wave, and in both incidents left without arresting the assailants, who were egged on by bystanders.

At least some are wise enough to blame the Bad Boys for this:

Quote:Mr. Richards, the City Council member, said Mr. Lynch’s portrayal of the incidents was a reflection of the lack of diversity in police union leadership. He said the Police Department’s efforts to build trust in neighborhoods alienated by decades of aggressive policing were helping to ease tension. Hostility remains, Mr. Richards said, because the Police Department and the union fail to respond vigorously when officers abuse civilians.