4 ms·

If pulling her away from where she was not supposed to go is abuse by the police, what is her action of elbowing a cop in the nose? You are stating that the co

If pulling her away from where she was not supposed to go is abuse by the police, what is her action of elbowing a cop in the nose? You are stating that the cop was somehow at fault for grabbing her. Can you state why the cop grabbed her in the first place? I'm sure you don't know but why are you so certain the cop grabbed her for a bad reason? How do you know what happened right before that? Was she warned not to go where she went but she did so anyway? Did the cop see she was getting ready to step on a broken bottle and actually rescued her? You don't know but you have automatically deduced the cop was in the wrong, despite what the jury said.

nemo 12y ago
"If pulling her away from where she was not supposed to go is abuse by the police" This interpretation of events is not one I agree with based on video footage and the other available evidence. He was clearly very violently "pulling her away" to the point that that's not a very honest description of his act. "You are stating that the cop was somehow at fault for grabbing her." It does appear that way. "Can you state why the cop grabbed her in the first place?" Not definitively, though I'd assume it was some form of poor judgment. "I'm sure you don't know but why are you so certain the cop grabbed her for a bad reason?" Why are you so certain the cop was justified in the attack? "How do you know what happened right before that?" I don't know, though it doesn't matter. From the evidence and information I have available the cop wasn't justified in the attack regardless. "Did the cop see she was getting ready to step on a broken bottle and actually rescued her?" If this is the level of fever-dream required to justify his assault on her, it pretty clearly shows that justifying his attack is very difficult to do. "You don't know but you have automatically deduced the cop was in the wrong, despite what the jury said." Yes, we are actually permitted to disagree with juries. Juries have failed in their judgment often enough that it would be naive not to be skeptical. Understanding the basis by which jurors are selected, and the methods used by which prosecutors go about misinforming juries I don't have a lot of confidence in their decisions.
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  You've said, "It does appear", "I'd assume", "I don't know", but then you claim, "the evidence and information I have available". No, it doesn't sound like you have any of that but please produce it for us all to see and read. "we are actually permitted to disagree with juries. Juries have failed in their judgment often enough" So now you want to say the jury and the cop are wrong. Based on what? Though you have none of the information other than what you read in the article, you feel you know more than the jury? I think not.
  - nemo 12y ago
    "Though you have none of the information other than what you read in the article, you feel you know more than the jury? I think not." As a matter of fact, I do know more than the jury. The judge suppressed key evidence in the case. There were photos of the cops abusing her that were never presented, and a slam-dunk photo of the cop grabbing her from behind that the jury was not permitted see, as well as more video that made it very clear how out aggressive and out of line the police behavior was. I qualify what I say since I don't have a perfect view, only the bits and pieces of evidence that exist. Based on those I am assuming what is most likely, and you are doing just the same, as that's all any of us can do.
nemo 12y ago
"You don't know but you have automatically deduced the cop was in the wrong, despite what the jury said." One other point I forgot to mention - the judge suppressed key evidence in the case. There were photos of the cops abusing her that were never presented, and a slam-dunk photo of the cop grabbing her from behind that the jury was not permitted see.

nemo 12y ago

"If pulling her away from where she was not supposed to go is abuse by the police" This interpretation of events is not one I agree with based on video footage and the other available evidence. He was clearly very violently "pulling her away" to the point that that's not a very honest description of his act. "You are stating that the cop was somehow at fault for grabbing her." It does appear that way. "Can you state why the cop grabbed her in the first place?" Not definitively, though I'd assume it was some form of poor judgment. "I'm sure you don't know but why are you so certain the cop grabbed her for a bad reason?" Why are you so certain the cop was justified in the attack? "How do you know what happened right before that?" I don't know, though it doesn't matter. From the evidence and information I have available the cop wasn't justified in the attack regardless. "Did the cop see she was getting ready to step on a broken bottle and actually rescued her?" If this is the level of fever-dream required to justify his assault on her, it pretty clearly shows that justifying his attack is very difficult to do. "You don't know but you have automatically deduced the cop was in the wrong, despite what the jury said." Yes, we are actually permitted to disagree with juries. Juries have failed in their judgment often enough that it would be naive not to be skeptical. Understanding the basis by which jurors are selected, and the methods used by which prosecutors go about misinforming juries I don't have a lot of confidence in their decisions.

icantthinkofone 12y ago
You've said, "It does appear", "I'd assume", "I don't know", but then you claim, "the evidence and information I have available". No, it doesn't sound like you have any of that but please produce it for us all to see and read. "we are actually permitted to disagree with juries. Juries have failed in their judgment often enough" So now you want to say the jury and the cop are wrong. Based on what? Though you have none of the information other than what you read in the article, you feel you know more than the jury? I think not.
- nemo 12y ago
  "Though you have none of the information other than what you read in the article, you feel you know more than the jury? I think not." As a matter of fact, I do know more than the jury. The judge suppressed key evidence in the case. There were photos of the cops abusing her that were never presented, and a slam-dunk photo of the cop grabbing her from behind that the jury was not permitted see, as well as more video that made it very clear how out aggressive and out of line the police behavior was. I qualify what I say since I don't have a perfect view, only the bits and pieces of evidence that exist. Based on those I am assuming what is most likely, and you are doing just the same, as that's all any of us can do.

nemo 12y ago

"You don't know but you have automatically deduced the cop was in the wrong, despite what the jury said." One other point I forgot to mention - the judge suppressed key evidence in the case. There were photos of the cops abusing her that were never presented, and a slam-dunk photo of the cop grabbing her from behind that the jury was not permitted see.