Cops...

ClosedCaption

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2010
53,233
6,719
1,830


BALTIMORE (WJZ) — A Baltimore City man is seeking $35 million after he says a police officer beat him up for no reason at all—but he may get less than that if he wins.

Rochelle Ritchie has video of the incident and just how much the man could actually get.

According to the alleged victims’ attorney, once a judge takes a look at the case, he or she is more likely to drop the amount to $5 million.

Man, what could be the cause to repeatedly punch someone in the face like that?

But the police department says Truss disobeyed the officer’s original orders to stop loitering.

In a statement of probable cause, when Cosom asked him to leave, he says Truss stated `[expletive] you. I will see you when I get outside.”


Ahhhh I thought he had a weapon, like a toy gun or a toy sword....or no weapon at all, but this guy had the nerve to be committing the crime of loitering. LOITERING!!!
 


Sometimes, yanno you just have to punch someone when they're cuffed. They might have, like, the teeth from Alien
 
Dude mouthed off to the wrong black cop.
We need more black cops in Ferguson..that'll fix everything.
Silly liberals...

Back in the 1950s, when Blacks in the Bedford-Stuyvestant neighborhood in Brooklyn complained that White cops were brutal, Mayor Wagner had all the White cops in that neighborhood's precincts replaced with Black cops. Within six months the residents of Bedford-Stuyvestant were complaining that the Black cops were more brutal than the White ones.
 
ST. LOUIS (KSDK) - A former St. Louis police officer has been cleared of assault charges and wants his job back.

Rory Bruce was accused of punching a handcuffed teenage suspect in the face in February 2012. Prosecutors say the assault was caught on video.

A judge found Bruce not guilty last Thursday.

Now, the St. Louis Police Officer Association is asking the chief to reinstate Bruce.

Tuesday, after a Freedom of Information Act request by KSDK, St. Louis Police released video from a police vehicle of the incident in question.

Prosecutors say the video shows Bruce abusing his power, but they say Associate Circuit Judge Theresa Burke never watched the video before acquitting the officer of assault charges.

Prosecutors say the video shows the former officer on a stop in February of 2012. They also say he crossed the line in the video when he punched a handcuffed 16 year old. The St. Louis Police Officers Association says it was a defense tactic.

Bruce was fired for his actions but last week a judge cleared him of 3rd degree assault. But the video was not allowed as evidence in the bench trial.

In a statement, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce says, "We are disappointed that Judge Burke did not view the videotape footage... which we believe clearly shows Rory Bruce beating a handcuffed teenager."

"Police officers have to make split second decisions in life and death situations and I don't think that folks over at the Circuit Attorney's office or folks up in Internal Affairs should second guess them based on their brief impression of a video tape," says Jeff Roorda with the SLPOA. "It doesn't tell the whole story," he says.

NewsChannel 5 is still trying to answer the question "why wasn't the video allowed at trial?"

In the meantime, the union wants Bruce reinstated as a police officer. The Department declined to comment saying it is a personnel matter.
 
Ahhhh I thought he had a weapon, like a toy gun or a toy sword....or no weapon at all, but this guy had the nerve to be committing the crime of loitering. LOITERING!!!
Loitering wasn't the reason for the beating. Mouthing off was. And this is very typical of young ghetto Blacks. They seem compelled to "talk shit," the way Michael Brown did, rather than quietly complying or cooperating with police, which leads to situations such as seen in that video.

By no means do I approve of police brutality, but I don't regard what is shown in that video as brutality. That guy had a beating coming. He asked for it. And I believe there is no other way for police to deal with individuals like him. Because beating the shit out of them is the only way to keep them under control. Without that the streets won't be safe for peaceful people to walk in.

As far as I'm concerned that Black cop did the right thing.
 
ST. LOUIS (KSDK) - A former St. Louis police officer has been cleared of assault charges and wants his job back.

Rory Bruce was accused of punching a handcuffed teenage suspect in the face in February 2012. Prosecutors say the assault was caught on video.

A judge found Bruce not guilty last Thursday.

Now, the St. Louis Police Officer Association is asking the chief to reinstate Bruce.

Tuesday, after a Freedom of Information Act request by KSDK, St. Louis Police released video from a police vehicle of the incident in question.

Prosecutors say the video shows Bruce abusing his power, but they say Associate Circuit Judge Theresa Burke never watched the video before acquitting the officer of assault charges.

Prosecutors say the video shows the former officer on a stop in February of 2012. They also say he crossed the line in the video when he punched a handcuffed 16 year old. The St. Louis Police Officers Association says it was a defense tactic.

Bruce was fired for his actions but last week a judge cleared him of 3rd degree assault. But the video was not allowed as evidence in the bench trial.

In a statement, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce says, "We are disappointed that Judge Burke did not view the videotape footage... which we believe clearly shows Rory Bruce beating a handcuffed teenager."

"Police officers have to make split second decisions in life and death situations and I don't think that folks over at the Circuit Attorney's office or folks up in Internal Affairs should second guess them based on their brief impression of a video tape," says Jeff Roorda with the SLPOA. "It doesn't tell the whole story," he says.

NewsChannel 5 is still trying to answer the question "why wasn't the video allowed at trial?"

In the meantime, the union wants Bruce reinstated as a police officer. The Department declined to comment saying it is a personnel matter.

Elbowing the handcuffed kid was uncalled for.
 
Ahhhh I thought he had a weapon, like a toy gun or a toy sword....or no weapon at all, but this guy had the nerve to be committing the crime of loitering. LOITERING!!!
Loitering wasn't the reason for the beating. Mouthing off was. And this is very typical of young ghetto Blacks. They seem compelled to "talk shit," the way Michael Brown did, rather than quietly complying or cooperating with police, which leads to situations such as seen in that video.

This is like the patriot act. You dont see the dangers in excusing the behavior until it comes to your door. Dont attempt to break out your pocket constitution AFTER a cop abuses his power and you've excused it as long as it happens to "those people over there"

By no means do I approve of police brutality, but I don't regard what is shown in that video as brutality. That guy had a beating coming. He asked for it. And I believe there is no other way for police to deal with individuals like him. Because beating the shit out of them is the only way to keep them under control. Without that the streets won't be safe for peaceful people to walk in.

As far as I'm concerned that Black cop did the right thing.

So the job of the police is to keep people from "mouthing off" and the penalty should be a beating.


But you dont advocate violence tho :rolleyes:
 
So the job of the police is to keep people from "mouthing off" and the penalty should be a beating.

But you dont advocate violence tho :rolleyes:

No. The job of the police is to enforce laws at all levels, including anti-loitering laws, which calls for instructing offenders to move along. In the example seen in the above video the police were acting on the complaint of a citizen and the offender saw fit to issue a lot of unnecessary nonsense.

If allowed to get away with it, next time it would be escalated and sooner or later the same result would occur -- or worse, as in the example of "Big Mike" Brown. That punk had reached the level of insolence where he thought it was okay to physically attack the cop.

I will ask you who is better able to understand and to deal with ghetto Blacks -- Black cops or White cops? What the Black cop in this example did is avoid a lot of unnecessary nonsense in the future. Because all that wise-ass had to do when told to move along was move along and keep his stupid mouth shut.

PS: I do not advocate unnecessary violence. But sometimes violence is not only necessary but appropriate.
 
So the job of the police is to keep people from "mouthing off" and the penalty should be a beating.

But you dont advocate violence tho :rolleyes:

No. The job of the police is to enforce laws at all levels, including anti-loitering laws, which calls for instructing offenders to move along. In the example seen in the above video the police were acting on the complaint of a citizen and the offender saw fit to issue a lot of unnecessary nonsense.

That wasnt in the video silly. Thats what you just made up to excuse the officers abuse Mr. I'm against police abuse

If allowed to get away with it, next time it would be escalated and sooner or later the same result would occur -- or worse, as in the example of "Big Mike" Brown. That punk had reached the level of insolence where he thought it was okay to physically attack the cop.

So the police should put a pre-emptive foot on their necks before they can cause trouble sometime in the future? Got it

I will ask you who is better able to understand and to deal with ghetto Blacks -- Black cops or White cops? What the Black cop in this example did is avoid a lot of unnecessary nonsense in the future. Because all that wise-ass had to do when told to move along was move along and keep his stupid mouth shut.

Got it...You couldve just stated you were an apologists instead of typing so much
 
BxXqKK5CQAAZm63.jpg:large
 
Got it...You couldve just stated you were an apologists instead of typing so much

That is meaningless ad hominem. If you disagree with my observations tell us specifically why.

I thought I just did. You dont advocate police violence but you do see how police need to be preemptively violent to prevent possible potential shenanigans in the future.
 

Forum List

Back
Top