Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

daddynexxus OP t1_iwu2yfm wrote

Took nearly two years for local news to get ahold the video, insane.

222

johnhummel t1_iwuj0mo wrote

It’s crazy how long it can take when the police are in the wrong. Had a cop say I “confessed” to a crime and first thing my lawyer asked was for his body cam footage.

We’re still waiting months later and if they don’t deliver soon the case will be dismissed just from statute of limitations expiring. But that’s telling us everything we need to know: when the police have evidence, they show it. When they have excuses, they slow walk it.

201

daddynexxus OP t1_iwujjdk wrote

Exactly. It's funny how it always works the same way.

69

CwazyCanuck t1_iwuzkxy wrote

Honestly don’t understand how police can claim anything without evidence. Claim that you said something. Claim that you did something. It’s a conflict of interest. If they don’t require evidence because their word is sufficient, what stops them from lying, and once they have, they have a vested interest in maintaining the lie.

39

jonathanrdt t1_iwvqmbf wrote

Police are only required to tell the truth in court and affidavits. During the course of an encounter or investigation, they are free to lie. Lying to known criminals is one thing, but they also lie to people they know are not, which seems like an opportunity for reform.

22

chetchaka t1_iww6qao wrote

Police are free to lie in courts as well, unless there is a specific police officer on trial as the defendant. It might be illegal in theory, but in practice, police get so much protection from police "unions" that they cannot be held accountable for lies they tell in court (again with the exception of a specific officer as the defendant).

I say "unions" because their position of power puts them at odds with every other union in the country. They are not unionized against corporations, they are unionized against citizens. Police "unions" are de facto an arm of the government's will to illegally and violently revoke the rights of the worker class.

20

Broken_Reality t1_iwvncna wrote

The only thing you should say to cops is "I'm not answering that question"

6

rbhmmx t1_iwyexzv wrote

Not to my recollection...

1

Broken_Reality t1_ix45hn8 wrote

Your recollection of what?

The best advice for anyone being asked basically anything by a cop is to tell them you aren't answeing them. You have to actively use your 5th amendment right and state you are using it. If you just say nothing at all then they can use that against you. They can't if you "plead the 5th" or tell them you aren't answering.

Loads of people incriminate themselves when they shouldn't. Any lawyer will tell you to say what I said in response to police questions.

1

ThellraAK t1_iwv4m9b wrote

Did you waive your speedy trial rights?

1

johnhummel t1_iwv4uol wrote

I won’t do details but no - they can bring evidence or drop it.

7

Chad_is_admirable t1_ix9ywtn wrote

SoL doesn't go during discovery so long as you filed suit.

Nor would you have the discovery rights to compel them to deliver the footage without first filing.

I think you are intentionally being misleading.

1

Gberg888 t1_iwub2nv wrote

Cops are generally pieces of shit

121

420ipblood t1_iwuh15s wrote

100% there are rare good ones.

−72

Gberg888 t1_iwuhpfx wrote

If they do nothing they are equally as bad.

68

BackWithAVengance t1_iwv4bup wrote

There's never been a situation that has been made better when the police show up.

15

SevenButSpelledOut t1_iwuu96e wrote

And what have the "good ones" done? Oh, that's right. Stuck with the status quo.

Until we finally have proper oversight and start actually punishing the police for their crimes, ALL cops are fucking garbage. Period.

28

lutefisky t1_iwuvf91 wrote

The ones you are thinking of have been forced to quit by their colleagues and superiors because they exposed wrongdoing, or have been killed when trying to investigate bad cops. Most of the ones who thought they were good cops have given up fighting and just put their head down and keep showing up for work and follow the orders.

The only good cops are currently in court trying to hold bad cops accountable while fighting the police unions as well as their departments. Otherwise, they are as shitty as the officers who watched George Floyd die right in front of them while doing nothing but protecting the the piece of shit murderer.

20

Broken_Reality t1_iwvnmtc wrote

If a "good cop" works along side a "bad cop" and does nothing about them then they are not a "good cop" they are a "bad cop".

13

superduperdrew12345 t1_ix9oo2q wrote

There are no good cops. They all are either bad or don't care. If someone heaven sent actually tried to speak out then they would be fired.

1

daddynexxus OP t1_iwu2mf4 wrote

Related news article that contains video: https://www.wlky.com/article/fbi-investigating-2021-dash-cam-hardin-county-deputies-punching-man-after-arrest/41996864

Edit: It's a bit NSFW

86

AfraidStill2348 t1_iwuqu67 wrote

A lot of hammer fists being thrown there. Even Mazagatti would have called the "fight". So gross.

43

keenly_disinterested t1_iwut7ju wrote

There is absolutely no way a person experiencing what these cops did during the chase will not have a strong emotional response--it's inevitable. What is not inevitable is the way these cops responded to their emotions. Incidents like this make a strong case for pre-service psychological testing to determine if a person has the right mentality to serve as a cop. Trouble is, people with the right mentality probably don't want to be cops.

42

screechplank t1_iwuvj61 wrote

In some places they also don't want highly intelligent cops. There is a literal cap on intelligence. If you're too smart you won't be accepted.

24

ItilityMSP t1_iwv35kf wrote

They don't want people who question the status quo.

11

PepticBurrito t1_iww3ftd wrote

> Incidents like this make a strong case for pre-service psychological testing to determine if a person has the right mentality to serve as a cop.

Departments actually already do that. They’re just purposely selecting for people with very low emotional awareness and low intelligence.

9

keenly_disinterested t1_iww5tek wrote

I think SOME departments screen. A smaller agency like the Hardin County Sheriff's Department may not. If it does, it clearly did not screen to determine how someone might react in situations like this.

1

rddman t1_ix0h4t9 wrote

> Incidents like this make a strong case for pre-service psychological testing to determine if a person has the right mentality to serve as a cop.

The right mentality according to recruiters is one that assumes every member of the public is a threat until proven otherwise.

1

Jeepercreeper9191 t1_iwvdv1v wrote

Lying pigs say he had a knife and that's why they did what they did.

You can clearly see the guy come out with his hands up, palms open, and the knife falls out of his sweater pocket.

Cops pulls his arm down and him to the ground INSTEAD of cuffing him.

The knife gets kicked under the guy who probably had no idea there was even a knife in his range.

First cop looks like he was purposefully smashing his face into the ground as a punishment foe the pursuit.

26

JeepNaked t1_iwvj9mk wrote

Cops are the enemy of the people. Prove me wrong.

11

KOBossy55 t1_iwumcv4 wrote

Evaluation conclusion: ".....no, that pretty much looks right. Although the suspect could stand to be a bit heavier on the melanin."

5

tricoloredduck1 t1_iwxkpps wrote

Analyze the video. Do a punch count after cuffed. Cuff each cop and let the victim inflict double the punch count.

4

TheRealXavius t1_iwvolla wrote

Uhhhh.... The article said he was actively reaching for a knife in his pocket on the footage... So he is trying to retrieve a weapon? I think beatings are the least of his fucking problems

−24

[deleted] t1_iwu4k92 wrote

[removed]

−69

daddynexxus OP t1_iwu4t1w wrote

Looked pretty compliant. Looks like some of the beeting took place after the cuffs were on. Video is here if you can see it : https://www.wlky.com/article/fbi-investigating-2021-dash-cam-hardin-county-deputies-punching-man-after-arrest/41996864

41

Sneaky_Bones t1_iwum181 wrote

Sounds like you're working backwards from conclusions you've already drawn without watching the video.

26

[deleted] t1_iwv8d2g wrote

[removed]

1

[deleted] t1_iwvaown wrote

[removed]

3

axonxorz t1_iwvivxu wrote

He read the statement saying there was a knife. He's questioning whether or not he actually had a knife, whether or not the police statement was factual. But get up his ass about it, that will help.

3

Sneaky_Bones t1_iwvt2tf wrote

Was you getting up in my ass suppose to help? I was "JuSt AsKiNg QuEsTiOnS" also.

1

axonxorz t1_iwvw4a6 wrote

> Was you getting up in my ass suppose to help?

Boo hoo, criticism of what you wrote.

The other poster appeared willing to accept that the "facts" presented by the police report may not have been factual. If someone can't even ask the question, I don't know what to tell you, they didn't appear to be JAQing off.

3

Sneaky_Bones t1_iww51su wrote

Did you actually take my comment as a complaint instead of just pointing out your hypocrisy? To be clear, I don't give af if you approve of me grilling an apologist or not. The video was widely available and the insinuating "questions" were more suggestive than they were necessary. Apologists are opportunistic, they test angles, gauge the room etc. until they have no recourse. So no, I don't feel the slightest bit bad shutting that shit down.

0

axonxorz t1_iwwb7p8 wrote

> Did you actually take my comment as a complaint instead of just pointing out your hypocrisy?

I don't believe there's hypocracy in my statement, you were being antagonistic, and I got up in your ass for it, they didn't seem to be.

I insinuated that the other person might have been on your side of this argument, and you're pushing them away by "getting up their ass".

Look, if they were indeed just JAQ'ing off, your response is what I would have done, but the top level comment they made seemed at least open to consideration of opposing viewpoints, and their post history was not that of a hardline cop-fellating chud.

2

Shazier_Beam t1_iwv06w6 wrote

What sort of dash cam footage would justify striking a suspect who is already cuffed and on the ground.

I'm not talking about holding or grappling which serves the purpose of controlling the suspect. I am talking about the repeated strikes.

>Tyler can be seen opening the driver’s side door of the vehicle with his hands in the air and kneeling on the road

Followed by

>Multiple officers then can be seen striking Tyler several times while he is on the ground.

Do I really feel that bad for Tyler? No, not really. he was a belligerent asshole.

But once he had given himself up that should have been the end of it. Unfortunately the cops still had their adrenaline/juice up so yeah they pounded him into the dirt. After cuffing him. After he gave up.

11

[deleted] t1_iwv8247 wrote

[removed]

1

Shazier_Beam t1_iwv8rpa wrote

You never addressed my question at the start of my comment.

What sort of video of the leadup would change the two facts below:

  1. The suspect gave himself up

  2. The police attacked the suspect after he was constrained

What sort of context are you looking for?

5

[deleted] t1_iwvcgvs wrote

[removed]

1

PunkySweet t1_iwvlbfw wrote

Bro you have so many comments in this thread you made your point but got lost in your own sauce get some fucking rest. Sometimes being technically correct isn't worth looking this craazy

2