• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

School cop throws high school girl to ground

Page 34 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
EOM said:
Right, and don't cops get taught compliance techniques like Steven Seagull? Come-alongs with pressure points/arm locks, etc? Wouldn't one of those have been more appropriate than WWE Monday Night Raw Super Slam?
Click to expand...

Are cops not trained about pressure points and arm locks? How would you physically restrain her?
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
I'm not comparing it to rape.

WE are asking the illogical people such as yourself, WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE? What would YOU do? What is the IDEAL actions that should have been taken? So far you haven't answered these 3 questions throughout ~30 pages:

1. If 18 years old isn't old enough to be an adult and make choices on "How not to get your ass kicked by the police", what is? Law says that 16-18 (depending on the state) is old enough to choose whether to engage in sex or not. Apparently you get a free pass to be uncivilized and unruly in public until..... ?

2. If an orphan gets a free base to act sporadically, criminally, and stupidly - where do you draw the line? It's ok to hit the shit out of people and refuse any authority, so what is out of line?

3. If the cop's actions weren't the ideal solution, what would YOU do that resolves this in a reasonable manner without disturbing the classroom for a long period, or without her erupting into hitting the shit of people?


All 3 of these questions have been asked since the beginning. Nearly 30 pages in and the results are fucking hilarious (Hint: No reasonable answers have been given).
Click to expand...

Plenty of reasonable actions and potential solutions, all of which should have been tried first before escalating to physical violence, have been stated in this thread. You just choose to completely ignore them.

As far as "not disrupting the classroom for a long period" that's exactly what did happen due to the officer resorting to physical violence. I guarantee that he disrupted the entire school for at least the rest of the day because that's all the kids were talking about, sharing videos, etc...

Your stated goal is to not disrupt the class but he did exactly that in the worst way possible because even after he was gone and the situation was long over the disruption remained. If he took 5 minutes to try and talk reasonably with her and it works the class resumes just fine. I'd bet something like "look, I don't want to take you to jail but if you don't get out of your chair and come with me I'm going to arrest you, do you understand that" would have worked if not then you escalate it verbally "look if you don't get out of your chair I am going to grab you and yank you out of it, do you understand that? So one way or the other you are coming with me, I don't want to hurt you so please lets do this the easy way". Shit like that is what good police officers do when facing a tiny unarmed high school girl. Kids can be fucking brats but if you give them a chance to actually think about the ramifications they often concede. If none of that worked then you can resort to physical actions, granted still not to the level that he did and even the officer says he would have done it differently.

Fuck some of you sound like your dicks are getting hard from watching this 300lb bodybuilder toss around a seated 16 year old non-violent girl.
 
Darwin333 said:
Plenty of reasonable actions and potential solutions, all of which should have been tried first before escalating to physical violence, have been stated in this thread. You just choose to completely ignore them.



Fuck some of you sound like your dicks are getting hard from watching this 300lb bodybuilder toss around a seated 16 year old non-violent girl.
Click to expand...

Or some of us just recognize that he chose a course of action, whether you like it or not, that he was perfectly within his rights to do.

everything EXCEPT throw her across the room. That is when things fell apart.

I'm not getting an erection, I'm simply willing to give the officer the benefit of the doubt in that he knows the job he is trying to do....and most of us here aren't in his position so therefore we don't know.
 
OrByte said:
The officer got an attorney

good for him.

Based on their initial statement they may challenge the "excessive force" as wrongful termination. I think he has a great chance of getting that overturned eventually
Click to expand...

He wasn't fired for using excessive force, which he clearly did use, he was fired for not following a pretty clear protocol. You see cops also have rules that their employer sets. Why do you think he should be able to break those rules and not be held accountable by his employer? Especially when the rule he broke is one that is meant to protect not only the officer but everyone else in the situation, in this case a classroom full of high school kids.

Personal accountability for the 16 year old recently orphaned girl but the 300lb bodybuilding cop can tell his employer to fuck off with their dumb rules?
 
Darwin333 said:
Personal accountability for the 16 year old recently orphaned girl but the 300lb bodybuilding cop can tell his employer to fuck off with their dumb rules?
Click to expand...


They dont see her as a real human being though. Empathy for some - the way of the basic human.
 
Darwin333 said:
Plenty of reasonable actions and potential solutions, all of which should have been tried first before escalating to physical violence, have been stated in this thread. You just choose to completely ignore them.

As far as "not disrupting the classroom for a long period" that's exactly what did happen due to the officer resorting to physical violence. I guarantee that he disrupted the entire school for at least the rest of the day because that's all the kids were talking about, sharing videos, etc...

Your stated goal is to not disrupt the class but he did exactly that in the worst way possible because even after he was gone and the situation was long over the disruption remained. If he took 5 minutes to try and talk reasonably with her and it works the class resumes just fine. I'd bet something like "look, I don't want to take you to jail but if you don't get out of your chair and come with me I'm going to arrest you, do you understand that" would have worked if not then you escalate it verbally "look if you don't get out of your chair I am going to grab you and yank you out of it, do you understand that? So one way or the other you are coming with me, I don't want to hurt you so please lets do this the easy way". Shit like that is what good police officers do when facing a tiny unarmed high school girl. Kids can be fucking brats but if you give them a chance to actually think about the ramifications they often concede. If none of that worked then you can resort to physical actions, granted still not to the level that he did and even the officer says he would have done it differently.

Fuck some of you sound like your dicks are getting hard from watching this 300lb bodybuilder toss around a seated 16 year old non-violent girl.
Click to expand...

Still ignoring all the times the teacher, and administrator, and cop asked her to leave.

She had plenty of time to think about her actions.
 
Darwin333 said:
He wasn't fired for using excessive force, which he clearly did use, he was fired for not following a pretty clear protocol. You see cops also have rules that their employer sets. Why do you think he should be able to break those rules and not be held accountable by his employer? Especially when the rule he broke is one that is meant to protect not only the officer but everyone else in the situation, in this case a classroom full of high school kids.

Personal accountability for the 16 year old recently orphaned girl but the 300lb bodybuilding cop can tell his employer to fuck off with their dumb rules?
Click to expand...

earlier I was using a news article that stated he was fired for using excessive force:

"Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said that deputy Ben Fields, who is white, was fired from the department for using excessive force during the arrest of a black female student in a math class at Spring Valley High School."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...investigation-into-officer-who-threw-student/

But the Sheriff's statement that I linked to earlier clearly stated why he was fired.


Now that we have that cleared up

WOW.

Check you out using classic selective attention!!

Darwin333 said:
Why do you think he should be able to break those rules and not be held accountable by his employer?
Click to expand...
I never said that

Darwin333 said:
Personal accountability for the 16 year old recently orphaned girl but the 300lb bodybuilding cop can tell his employer to fuck off with their dumb rules?
Click to expand...
I never said that either

Are we reading the same thread? Are you a fox news watcher? you have learned the fallacy very very well!
 
OrByte said:
he is going to have to show how she confronted and assaulted him first.

At that point the definition of "excessive force" goes back under review.

The regulation he violated (letting go of her body when trying to subdue and arrest her) gets difficult to enforce if his attorney can show that because an assault by her occurred then the situation gives the officer more license to subdue and arrest the student.

Officers get broad latitude when arresting people in such scenarios.
Click to expand...

I really want to see the argument he makes that the so called assault was bad enough, and enough of a threat to himself after she had just been flipped over backwards and is entangled in her desk on her back, to throw that small girl across the room. I really really want to see that 300lb bodybuilder say that at the point in time that he threw her that he felt she was a threat to his safety.

The counter-argument is rather easy. You are a 300lb bodybuilder and if you can't control a child that has just been flipped onto her back who is on the ground and entangled in a desk then how can we reasonably trust you out on the streets where you might encounter people your own size and strength?

If a dog catcher has problems controlling a poodle then you damn sure don't trust him to handle a rottweiler.
 
Darwin333 said:
Personal accountability for the 16 year old recently orphaned girl but the 300lb bodybuilding cop can tell his employer to fuck off with their dumb rules?
Click to expand...

Do you have proof he is a bodybuilder, or 300lbs? Or are you just making stuff up, lying to make it look worse than it is? I think we all know the answer.
 
Ackmed said:
Do you have proof he is a bodybuilder, or 300lbs? Or are you just making stuff up, lying to make it look worse than it is? I think we all know the answer.
Click to expand...


The only thing we know is he has an average iq and he does violence for the state.
 
OrByte said:
what do you mean by charge her? Is that what cops are supposed to do? bumrush? head stomp? what is this? a bad 90s B-rated movie?

His lawyer is already saying she confronted him...and that they are leaving the details out of the media as this is going to be an ongoing investigation.

that's where I'm at.
Click to expand...

He meant that in just about every single case that a person punches a cop in the face they get charged with assaulting a police officer. Hell I've seen people who touched officers on their shoulder with a single finger get charged with assaulting an officer yet she lands blows to his face and doesn't charge her? That leads me to the assumption that he didn't think he was assaulted in a way suitable to charge her. If he didn't see it suitable to charge her with it then its kind of hard to argue that his actions were justified by said assault.
 
Ackmed said:
Do you have proof he is a bodybuilder, or 300lbs? Or are you just making stuff up, lying to make it look worse than it is? I think we all know the answer.
Click to expand...

Its been reported he is or recently was an amateur body builder. People who have seen him put him around 250lbs, this figure may be wrong but by all accounts he is a fit & strong man.
 
Darwin333 said:
I really want to see the argument he makes that the so called assault was bad enough, and enough of a threat to himself after she had just been flipped over backwards and is entangled in her desk on her back, to throw that small girl across the room. I really really want to see that 300lb bodybuilder say that at the point in time that he threw her that he felt she was a threat to his safety.

The counter-argument is rather easy. You are a 300lb bodybuilder and if you can't control a child that has just been flipped onto her back who is on the ground and entangled in a desk then how can we reasonably trust you out on the streets where you might encounter people your own size and strength?

If a dog catcher has problems controlling a poodle then you damn sure don't trust him to handle a rottweiler.
Click to expand...

I know I would argue it

I would argue it is within his rights as a police officer to forcibly arrest the girl after she assaulted him....him being 300 pounds and her being a 16 year old girl doesn't matter one bit. he also didnt use additional arrest strategies including tasering or chemical, which is something that police can employ when dealing with active resisters to arrest.

An officer uses measured force. The POSSIBLE COUNTER is that it will be up to a judge to determine if his measured force was above and beyond what was required.

And typically that is a hard place for a judge to rule from.

Now had he picked her up over his head and tossed her out the window, then the scenario is more cut and dry

I'd argue he attempted to position the girl away from the desk so she isn't hurt by the desk, and neither is he. The fact that she was sent several feet from his person indicates that the two struggled...but because she initiated the struggle he is still within his rights to do what it takes to subdue her safely.

He didnt throw her into other people

he didnt throw the desk into her, he separated the two. I think it is the DESK that really threw the officer off his ability to manage and control her...I don't think he anticipated that she would lock into the desk and punch back when he went to carry her out of it.

but again, the courts will review the totality of the situation, the fact he verbally asked her to leave with him and she did not comply, the fact he attempted to carry her out of the desk and out of the room, the fact that she then assaulted by punching him and locking/bracing down into the desk, the fact that now the officer was in a physical altercation with a resisting person, and the fact that the officer separated the girl from the desk quickly and without additional take down means (taser/pepper) would be a good case to claim that the officer acted responsibly, and with a measured force to subdue the individual.

I'd also argue that the fact he was struck in the face increased his adrenaline and may have contributed to his using more strength than needed to separate the girl from the desk, hence her being thrown to the floor.

I'm sorry if you don't like the argument...but I'd love to see a judge rule against a police officer in this instance. You might as well claim "excessive force" in 70% of all arrests of active resisters.
 
Darwin333 said:
He meant that in just about every single case that a person punches a cop in the face they get charged with assaulting a police officer. Hell I've seen people who touched officers on their shoulder with a single finger get charged with assaulting an officer yet she lands blows to his face and doesn't charge her? That leads me to the assumption that he didn't think he was assaulted in a way suitable to charge her. If he didn't see it suitable to charge her with it then its kind of hard to argue that his actions were justified by said assault.
Click to expand...

time will tell.
 
Darwin333 said:
I really want to see the argument he makes that the so called assault was bad enough, and enough of a threat to himself after she had just been flipped over backwards and is entangled in her desk on her back, to throw that small girl across the room. I really really want to see that 300lb bodybuilder say that at the point in time that he threw her that he felt she was a threat to his safety.

The counter-argument is rather easy. You are a 300lb bodybuilder and if you can't control a child that has just been flipped onto her back who is on the ground and entangled in a desk then how can we reasonably trust you out on the streets where you might encounter people your own size and strength?

If a dog catcher has problems controlling a poodle then you damn sure don't trust him to handle a rottweiler.
Click to expand...

Please try and pull a kid out of a desk they dont want to be removed from and report back how easy that is.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
Its been reported he is or recently was an amateur body builder. People who have seen him put him around 250lbs, this figure may be wrong but by all accounts he is a fit & strong man.
Click to expand...

Reported by who? Where is the credible sourse? Earlier in the thread, he was 220lbs, and on roids. Now he is claimed to be 300lbs and a body builder. The girl was claimed to be 80lbs in this thread. The cop is OBVIOUSLY bigger than the girl. There is no need to embellish or flat out lie to make it look worse. He could man handle the girl with ease. Lying about the size and other things doesn't make sense, unless you have an agenda and are bias.

If someone will lie to make things look worse than they really are, do you really think they are impartial? Do you think that anything else they say can be regarded as truthful, or unbiased? I don't. Does this make sense and do you agree? Someone who makes such statements as this, and states that the girl was just "flailing an arm" can't be held as anything but bias.

If there is flaws in this way of thinking let me know. I see no reason to lie, making things worse than they are, other than to be disingenuous.
 
Ackmed said:
Reported by who? Where is the credible sourse? Earlier in the thread, he was 220lbs, and on roids. Now he is claimed to be 300lbs and a body builder. The girl was claimed to be 80lbs in this thread. The cop is OBVIOUSLY bigger than the girl. There is no need to embellish or flat out lie to make it look worse. He could man handle the girl with ease. Lying about the size and other things doesn't make sense, unless you have an agenda and are bias.

If someone will lie to make things look worse than they really are, do you really think they are impartial? Do you think that anything else they say can be regarded as truthful, or unbiased? I don't. Does this make sense and do you agree? Someone who makes such statements as this, and states that the girl was just "flailing an arm" can't be held as anything but bias.

If there is flaws in this way of thinking let me know. I see no reason to lie, making things worse than they are, other than to be disingenuous.
Click to expand...

I've been home the last few days I've seen it mentioned several times I think he was called a strength trainer(?) regardless he is a big man and from the video she appears to be petite. I agree these 80lbs vs 300lbs are silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top