First off all, when a police officer places you under arest, they have to have a reason, or albe to justify a made up reason and you have to be advised of thier reasoning, this Fat poker of a donut cop did not do this, he stormed in and demand change from his twenty, Clearly he should be charged with theft and given a boot kicking as he only paid with a ten.

The cash register tape would have showed what amount was used to pay for the Food, and the video shows the Police officer was in the wrong ...

 

Who knows if there was even wrong doing stipulated in the settlement?

Maybe they just didn't want bad press for their city. Or the thought of Al Sharpton showing up.


P.S. You have no rights, only luck. Rodney King only had the luck of a video.

 

this doesnt have anything to do with the topic but this is pretty much the direction the thread is heading;

I have received 3 tickets in my life

1) parking in 15 minute food pickup spot for 22 minutes at the mall
dyke cop gave me a warning and told me she'd be keeping an eye out for my truck

2) driving through water puddle before parking at the mall
dyke cop and her lezbo friend boxed me in from the front and back after I parked. I was charged with wreckless driving, which is like a 4 point penalty against your drivers license, as well as speeding (20 in a 15). you are only allowed I think 7 before your license is suspended if you're a minor. so now I am well over half way to having my license suspended for driving through a water puddle, which was unavoidable.

3)speeding, 70 in a 55
I was leaving the lake with a friend and I had a 6000 pound trailer hooked up to the truck. I get a call from another one of my friends that had gotten lost because it was getting dark and he wasnt familiar with the area. anyways, I met up with him and he started following me home. I am truckin along at about 60 mph in a 55 mph zone when we approached a part of town that I know cops shoot radar all the time. so I dropped down to 50 mph (speed limit - 45) I look in my side mirror to make sure my buddy is still back there and I see some flashing blue lights. he pulls my buddy over and then flashes his lights at me. I didnt know why he did that but I pulled over anyways to wait for my friend since he didnt know how to get home. after the cop wrote my friend a ticket he started walkin up to my truck. I figured my trailer lights had gone out or something. but he said he shot me doing 70 in a 55. I was like what? I dont even go 70 on the interstate, much less with a 7000 pound trailer behind me. anyways, after asking him if he had made his quota for the month he replied, "with these two tickets I did." there ya go.

I have been stopped for riding fourwheelers on the road several times but those cops were pretty lenient with me. I know there are good police officers out there but just about every one I have ran into has abused the badge they wear like a mother.

 

No.

 

no man. one thing I dont do is speed, it costs enough to drive my truck already haha. plus, I knew that cops set up radar through that area so I made sure I wasnt speeding.

 

I guess nobody here knows. It would be interesting to see the case notes to verify. Maybe he really did do everything by the book and they are in the habit of giving away free money.

Good point about luck. If she wasn't "lucky" enough to have it on video, she'd be in the wrong and he'd be out stocking up on more pepper spray.

 

That's about right.

 

Guess I’ll offer my .02, but if you are going to argue please read my entire post. I’m not going to go over my opinions, just simply go over some facts that some may be overlooking.

1. The whole Minor thing has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Just the other week we had a 15 year old punch another kid in the face simply for making fun of him, when that kid fell to the ground he kicked him in the head, then when an officer went to break it up the kid punched the officer in the face. Minors are just as capable as adults when it comes to criminal acts and the use of force continuum does not differentiate between adults or minors.

2. You have a large cop and a pretty large girl. Should she have been sprayed? Don’t sit there and Monday night quarterback the scenario. At that time the officer genuinely believed she had taken a $20 and given back change for a $10 and pocketed the rest. The officer decides that based on what he is sure is a theft at the time he is going to take her into custody. He tells her repeatedly you are under arrest and he tells her exactly what she is under arrest for. We don’t even do that half the time, not because were trying to be smart asses but were not going to give the person the chance to argue while were trying to put them in cuffs. It’s safer for us and safer for them, we can talk once the person is safely detained. Back to the subject of the spray, after repeatedly telling her she did not comply by putting her hands behind her back, she argued and argued with him. Granted she had no where to flee but the simple fact is that she was not physically complying with orders given at the time.

At this point what are his options in the use of force continuum that all officers are taught? Well command presence obviously hasn’t worked. Verbal is failing, so we now have electrical/chemical means (Tazer/Spray). After that we have hands on. Now whether you agree with that or not that’s the way it is. Undoubtly given his size he would have ultimately won in a physical struggle, but given her size there was a substantial risk of injury to herself or even the officer if the two had gone blow for blow. In this case all she’s going to have is a sunburned face for 2-3 days, no broken bones.

3. Resisting arrest? Under Texas law, and most states are similar if not spot on, a person is resisting arrest if they refuse to comply with an officers orders for detainment. Under that section there is a very clear subsection that states, it is not a defense to the prosecution that the actor was resisting an unlawful arrest. I do apologize for not being able to quote it exactly but my law book is in my patrol car and the Texas Statues page is currently down, I did try. Basically if the officer is wrong comply anyway, because even if he is wrong if you resist you've just commited a much worse violation.

In this scenario you have a police officer accusing an individual whether wrongfully or not of Class C theft by value, less then $50. In my city you would receive nothing more then a citation and have to take it to court, however in any criminal act with the exception of speeding and open container the officer can choose jail.

Someone also mentioned him not being the one who should have handled it given him being the victim/complainant. I ask you how that is any different from an officer who witnesses any other crime say assault? If you witness it, or in this case believe you witness it, then you have the right to handle the issue right then and there. Given that it was such a small amount and that there was the possibility for error on both parts it would have been wise to have a second officer.

As for the rest who are jumping on the ‘cops are arrogant, rednecks or power happy individuals’ you need to understand a few simple facts of law enforcement. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not one to sit there and always stand behind my fellow officer, I like to go on a case by case basis, but a lot of you are way out of line with some of the comments.

It is your constitutional right to refuse a search when requested. That being said, typically an officer will not just simply ask to randomly search your vehicle there needs to be something that tends to build a reasonable suspicion, but hey if you have nothing to hide why not just make it easy and say yes. You’re only going to be saving yourself time and headache in the end. I’m not going to ask for consent to search your vehicle unless I feel you may have something you are hiding, based on other clues, but if you tell me no, then your not free to go till I get the dog. If I don’t feel there might be anything illegal on your person or in the vehicle I would never ask to search. I'm not saying there aren't bad apples out there but if you cooperate with them what's the worse that could happen?

 

Someone also made the comment of cops only being rednecks. Someone is obviously making uneducated unsupported statements. I believe you were from Texas as well so you defiantly haven’t done the research before making that statement. Do a little research on a tiny organization called TCLEOSE and then come back with your opinions. The days of Barney are gone, granted some of the old timers may have come in before the higher standards of the modern day, but as of now your required to have so many hours of college or military experience before your even eligible to received an endorsement to take the state exam.

On that state exam currently 70 is passing however the current move right now is to raise that bar up to 80 and eventually a 90. Also in order to recieve your endorsement you have to complete 576 hours of training. This of course was when I went through a year and a half ago, I believe they just recently went to 585 but I'm not positive. You only get three chances to take the test, if you fail it a third time you have to go through all 576 horus of training again. The test is currently either 285 or 250 questions, mine was 285, they also have about 8 different tests so you never get the same questions twice if you have to retake it. I went through high school and college with no problems. College GPA was a 3.67 I believe, not a genius but not a bump on a log. The TCLEOSE test was the hardest test I have ever taken.

Before you all go off on rant and raves, knowledge is power and I’m simply trying to provide a little more information from a different angle. I’m not saying that any of you are wrong for your opinions against the officer, I think that he really should have paid closer attention to what he gave her. I never make mistakes when it comes to money personally and I sure as hell would be certain about something before making an accusation as he did. I am however with the other officer, based on the circumstances combined with the current laws the officer was justified, whether morally/civilly wrong or not, in taking the actions he did.

 

Let's just look at this with a little pespective here. We're talking about $10.00. The cop jumped in and assumed she stole the $10.00, not that there was a mistake. Either his or hers. He immediatly assumed she stole the $10.00. She was mouthing off. He was not looking at the evidence. Why was he trying to arrest her for $10.00? He was told there were no $20's in the drawer by the manager, an eye witness. His Probable Cause was his mistaken belief that he gave her a twenty. A witness debunks his probable cause. That makes for a Wrongful Arrest. It just seems that trying to arrest a kid over $10, an macing her in the process, is excessive. If a private citizen were to be in the same situation of feeling short-changed, would they have the same recourse to have the person tending the register arrested if they called the police? I agree with the officers posting that she was told she was under arrest, and technically was resisting. But why on earth was he trying to arrest her? Personally, I would have started writing letters to the head office of the food chain to complain. They probably would've refunded my $10.00 without a thought either way. FYI, I'm a long-time supporter of my local FOP and Sherriff's association, so I'm not anti-cop.

 

If this cop had been a 'bad' cop, he would of expected his lunch to be free. Money would of never been an issue. To many of them out there flash badges for discounts or go to restuarants where they can eat for free.

This was more of a 'stupid' cop. He should know better than to go through a drive thru. That's almost guaranteeing your food is going to contain spit! Either go in and watch them make it or find a buffet....

 

Whats real funny is why would the clerk decide to steal from a cop in the first place?! Logical thinking would be to give the cop all his change and steal from Joe Blow who isnt a cop thats next in line. But the facts are all on the tape. Cop was wrong, Girl was right.

 

I'd have settled for $100,000.00

But, maybe Jim Adler, the tough, smart, lawyer, could have gotten me a cool million. Dude was flexing. She got beliggerent, he lost control and pepper-sprayed her.

I know it felt good to shut her mouth up... I want to pepper spray my wife sometimes, but, that woudl be wrong.

 

There is a video camera on the cash drawer.
Cop didn't know that.

No video camera - no $60,000 settlement.
No video camera on Rodney King arrest - no LA Riots.

These stupid cameras are causing all the problems.

 

The cop may have been 100% legally correct in his actions.
The girl was a jerk and handled the situation poorly.

What I am going to say is speculation but it is common sense (at least to me)

I don't believe the cop was acting as a law enforcement officer. He was acting in his own best interests; not out of a sense of law enforcement.

He thought he got screwed over and knew he could get away with his actions. If he was second in line and the person in front of him had that happen, he would have told the guy to calm down and listen to the manager.

I support cops when they should be supported. This guy was a jerk..maybe a legal one, but a jerk none the less.

(On a side note...I'm glad she got maced...shut her mouth)