I'm in law enforcement, and like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but im not seeing any justification.

Perhaps if she's biting one of them, and the punches are an attempt to get her to release, but im not seeing that in the video.

Thoughts?

https://youtu.be/igIcMb7EaBE

I think this guy is boned! Even if the little heffer was completely unhinged, shes completely overpowered. She appears to be passively resisting, which allows the use of some measures of force to effect the arrest, i beleive most jurisdictions require active resistance to escalate to strikes. And kidney area strikes would definitely require something more than passive resistance.

Where's the rest of the video? That little snippet isn't enough to base an opinion on.

Looks to me like he wasn't hitting hard and she was holding her arm under her body so he couldn't cuff her.

My guess is trying to get her to pull out her arm, maybe she was too strong for him to move the arm.

Conveniently edited I noticed.

The issue with "punching" like that is it has no power to it, yet ironically looks very "violent" to idiots who don't know better so you get in big trouble for something ineffective.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Where's the rest of the video? That little snippet isn't enough to base an opinion on.

They definitely arent going to post the rest of the video. The goal is public outrage.

I was just trying to get a general impression here. Maybe from some other LE.

Im fed, and would definitely be in trouble if id done that. Here in liberal WA state, i think most local cops would be too.

But, i noticed that shes trying to keep her hands under her. If they believed she had a weapon, that would justify the strikes.

I bet we'll never find out if she had anything in her hands.

Do they know she's not digging a knife or gun out of her pants while she's face down? I'm not a cop but the way I see it, he's not punching her in the face or stomping her head, he looks to be softening her up a little bit to get her cuffed up. Does the use of force matrix allow body strikes to gain compliances under these circumstances?

quote:

Originally posted by MikeGLI:
Do they know she's not digging a knife or gun out of her pants while she's face down? I'm not a cop but the way I see it, he's not punching her in the face or stomping her head, he looks to be softening her up a little bit to get her cuffed up. Does the use of force matrix allow body strikes to gain compliances under these circumstances?

It can. Each state has its own laws, but generally there is caselaw that guides the states use of force laws. The issue may be that the location of the strikes in the kidney area had a probability of resulting in serious injury. But, If they could reasonably beleive that her attempts to keep her hands under her were an attemp to conceal a weapon, it may justify that level of force.

But, thats not what the public will be thinking.

The use of force continuum does allow body strikes on active resistant suspects, but also governs where those strikes must be placed.



This is a baton chart, but applies to any impact weapon including fists.

Again, i cant speak for other states and agencies.

Question for the officers on the use of this technique. Is the idea to get the suspect to try and move their arm to defend from the blows and thus giving the officer a chance to grab hold of it and apply cuffs?

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Question for the officers on the use of this technique. Is the idea to get the suspect to try and move their arm to defend from the blows and thus giving the officer a chance to grab hold of it and apply cuffs?

Likely.

This will probably be up to his agency management to decide if the strikes were objectively reasonable.

As was mentioned earlier, the rest of the video would be helpful. Without the rest ofthe video to show indicate the probability of a weapon, itll be up to his managers to decide if he was aiming for the kidneys (yellow area) out of anger, or was aiming for a green area and trying to gain compliance.

You can't tell if it was justified from that snippet.

I wouldn't even begin to try to guess.

quote:

Originally posted by Ken226:
I'm in law enforcement, and like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but im not seeing any justification.

I'm not in law enforcement and I see justification.

Just judging from the extremely short video clip, I'd say she was resisting arrest, keeping her hands under her body, not allowing the female officer to see actually her hands, and to eventually cuff her. I'm guessing this 14 yo idiot was absolutely not complying whatsoever with LE verbal commands. And I'm assuming continued harsh language is not a true tactic to get an uncooperative suspect to summit to basic commands.

I saw the video this morning at the gym and the agency is backing the officers and saying they were well within the use of force continuum

After two or three strikes I would have done something else. I have been in similar situations such as the one the officers were in.

After being in one such incident,an a veteran officer showed me a technique with an ASP to help maneuver the arm from under the body. He stated it works most of the time.

I'm not LEO but to me the fact that the girl is 14 is irrelevant. The cops, I'm sure, had no idea how old she was and judging from her size and obvious strength, I suspect that they assumed she was an adult. The video was made to incite rage. I would think if he is put on trial a jury would come up with a not guilty ruling.

Jim

What I see, absent longer context footage, is a suspect actively resisting and unwilling to remove hands from under them.

Based on that it is unquestionably justified. I don’t see an issue based on the 2 seconds of video. I suspect the rest of the video will further support the officers.

This video leave too much to the imagination and gives no detail at all.

I believe they were trespassed from the mall. And no further info was given.
What lead up to her being on the ground with two officers on top of her?
How long did they attempt to pull her arms out from under her? 10 seconds... 2 minutes?
Punches to the lower back are not taught in any training. Knee strikes to the common peroneal (outer thigh) would have been the proper (trained) method to gain compliance.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by Ken226:
I'm in law enforcement, and like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but im not seeing any justification.

I'm not in law enforcement and I see justification.

Just judging from the extremely short video clip, I'd say she was resisting arrest, keeping her hands under her body, not allowing the female officer to see actually her hands, and to eventually cuff her. I'm guessing this 14 yo idiot was absolutely not complying whatsoever with LE verbal commands. And I'm assuming continued harsh language is not a true tactic to get an uncooperative suspect to summit to basic commands.

While everything you've said is true, im specifically thinking of the use of force laws and cases like Graham vs Conner, which is the standard used today in cases such as this.

Unfortunately, what constitutes reasonable, is subjective and guys can have their lives destroyed before the courts exonerate them.

Im interested in how this plays out.

From what I saw, she got what she deserved! Police officers have a difficult, and dangerous job. When some idiot (female or not) resists efforts by police officers to restrain them they deserve pretty much what they get.

As others have already posted, they had no idea what she was hiding under her body.

And color me shocked (not really) to see what I presume to be the brood box for the little twit.

From the size of the "victim" in the video, I am a little puzzled about her age.

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
This video leave too much to the imagination and gives no detail at all.

I believe they were trespassed from the mall. And no further info was given.
What lead up to her being on the ground with two officers on top of her?
How long did they attempt to pull her arms out from under her? 10 seconds... 2 minutes?
Punches to the lower back are not taught in any training. Knee strikes to the common peroneal (outer thigh) would have been the proper (trained) method to gain compliance.

Your thoughts mirror mine. If the strikes had been a few inches lower, it wouldnt look as bad. But yes, the video doesnt show enough.

A few things- physical force is never pretty and it rarely goes as planned.

While punching to the face/head is avoided, sometimes it is justified.

The more you try to “go easy” in using force, the greater the chance you ll wind up eventually hurting the suspect.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Where's the rest of the video? That little snippet isn't enough to base an opinion on.

Yes, I need to see the 60 seconds prior to this clip to form an informed opinion.