Mwa ha ha.

Good job Mrs Hersh isn't a member on here

 

Cajunjosh how would defend this officer actions: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06262/722998-53.stm

I cant see why they don't understand why some people are afraid/distrust/dislike cops and what they might do because of situations like the above or other things that they have heard or seen themselves. Just like any officer rightly concerned for their safety when they pull someone over because they have seen or heard of an individual trying to harm one of there own in that situation. The only difference is when an officer does it 99% of the time they will spend zero days in jail and their union will cover for them or in some cases they are fined but the city will pay that fine. When a citizen does it they will be sent to pound me in the a$$ prison or the will be heavily fined and no union or tax dollars will be spent to help them. If the office feels there will be no repercussions for their actions what is stopping them from abusing their power we have entrusted them with.

The same officers who curse the law when it's used against them love to quote it like scripture when they are caught farking up on the job.

I am not just picking on the officers, doctors have been know to do the same thing. Covering for each other when they screw up and it's really a shame that someone that the community holds in such high regards like police officers, doctors, etc make mistakes and then abuse their power by trying to cover for one another.

 

Since when has there been a law where a cop can extort money from businesses?

That is exactly what this douche bag tried to pull off, he tried to extort money because of his position of being a cop. I know extort is a very strong word but it is the simple fact played out in this video.

The manager told the cop there is NO $20’s in the register but the cop continued to insist he get his change back for a $20 rather then the $10 he actually handed.

I don’t care who the cop thought he was but he had NO right to do any thing other then to question the manager to check the drawer for a $20. Once there was no $20 the cop was just another civilian and the manager should have told him to get out before he forced him out of his business.

A cop had NO right to do as they please or make false arrest of which he did. The idiot was proven wrong right to his face but continued on with his power trip of being ABOVE the law.

The girl won money because the cop was WRONG and an idiot, he did NOT do his job correctly and NO, cops are not allowed to have bad days because when they do someone could die. This idiot should have been fined and then fired and should have spent at least 30 days in jail…

 

Im with you 01 XLT Sport, I can't see how anyone can even argue for the chump. .

 

There 18" billit wheels (Ford standard option) that came on it, stock is 17" or you can go with the option I got. I love them polished aluminm...

Thanks, and yes its Vista Blue...

 

Yeah! you're right he should be paying that price not from the tax payers. I work hard to pay my taxes

 

And dangerous!

 

If and only if that side of the story is 100% true then I wouldn't for a minute defend the actions of that officer, but based on that article I would have to say there must have been more to the story, I would like to see a video (impartial witness) but based on that story alone the guy is nuts.

 

Besides that is off the topic...he isn't defending every cop he is defending this cop.

I still think he is wrong but putting Cajun in the position to defend every cop is unfair.

 

The cop was wrong. Period. For $10 bucks the cop should have complained to the manager. He very well could have been refunded for his lunch. He came across like he had an agenda though. Now every cop in that city can't go to the fast food place cause their food will be spit in.

 

It is best to co-operate with the law.

If I had been that clerk, I would have stated my innocence then let him slap cuffs on me and arrest me. I would then suggest that he simply rewind the tape and look at it. If he still thought there was some sleight-of-hand going on I would have consented to being searched and no $20 would have been found.

...of course, at that point I would get busted for Possession.

Hey, I never said pot makes you smart.

 

I just gotta reply.

CajunJosh gave a good explanation of what happened from a legal standpoint. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant. Strictly speaking legally the officer acted within his purview. As others have stated there are many things I would have done differently. As soon as the officer stated the girl was under arrest she has to comply, period, end of story. Any further resistance, verbal or otherwise is another charge. She did physically resist when she pulled her hand away from the officer. Whether or not the officer decides to charge the person with it is a different matter. Contrary to what some have posted when an issue falls under the responsibility of the police they ARE in charge, period. If you don't like blame the civil trial lawyers, they made it that way by suing over stupid things.

I have said it many times the worst thing to do is argue with an officer on scene. Look at the different scenarios. The officer is a dipsnit, billy bad a$$, you will lose, probably painfully. The officer is a good officer. As soon as you start arguing you will lose, probably less painfully. Asking questions is not arguing. If it is a bad arrest, the case will be thrown out, probably before it goes to court. Just because a suspect does not get convicted does not mean the arrest was bad.

Just because a jurisdiction settles a lawsuit does not mean they are admitting any guilt. One agency near where I worked would essentially pay $50,000 to anybody involved in a crash with one of their deputies. You had to go talk to a lawyer and have them do your negotiating, but it was essentially the lawyer talked to the dept, they offered the money, the lawyer receives 10,000 for a couple hours work, you get 40,000. It did not matter who was at fault. Many agencies are strapped for money, so if they are able to settle out of court for less than it would cost to pay the lawyers then they will settle. That is probably how she "won" the money while the officer was exonerated. Lawyers do not have the best interest of the city in mind they have their own pocketbooks in mind. A lot of cities do not have a lawyer on staff. Many hire one in private practice and are billed hourly.

 

I'm not even saying this one was right professionally just legally. I think he could have been more professional and I also think that clerk could have had alot more tact when dealing with the situation.

 

I understand

 

What does that example have to do with her? She was not physically attacking or threatening the officer.

The whole point of saying she is a minor was that police departments commonly have established policies which must be adhered to before questioning of a minor can take place. Usually this consists of parental/guardian notification and/or permission. Sure, he can arrest her, but prior to questioning her he'd have to follow his departments policy.

I was a cop in the military, and even there we had this type of policy in place. I don't know what policies his department has regarding minors, but I'd be surprised if there were none at all. Can you detain/arrest/question/do as you please with minors without any additional steps?

Several states have adopted an “interested adult” rule. Under the rule, no juvenile can be deemed to have voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived his or her privilege against self-incrimination and his or her right to counsel (the typical Miranda warnings) without first being provided the opportunity to
consult with, and have present at interrogation, an adult who is informed of the juvenile’s rights and is interested in the juvenile’s welfare.

He did not tell her what she was under arrest for. Watch the video again.
When he first approached her he says: "Where's my money?" Later he tells her: "You got my money." All he tells her about the arrest part is: "You're under arrest, you're coming with me." Never did he tell her what she was under arrest for. If a person questions what they are under arrest for, he is legally required to tell them. Not that she asked him directly, but he didn't tell her what for (as you stated he did). Before he sprays her, once again he says: "Somebody's got my money." At this point he isn't even accusing her directly of having it.

After repeatedly telling her she did not comply by putting her hands behind her back? He didn't tell her that either. You sound just as mixed up with the video as he was with the $20 He asked her to "come out to the car" with him and "you're coming with me" several times. He did not tell her to put her hands behind her back.