Support NeoGAF

[Nikashi]

Again, this does seem to hinge on the definition of 2nd Degree murder. Clearly the officer drew his pistol, aimed, and fired it at a prone individual, killing him. Then, once charged, he attempted to evade arrest, but was subsequently caught. Neither of these facts can be disputed. (edit: sorry, didn't read that he may not necessarily have been running, but leaving the state when something like this has happened is INCREDIBLY suspicious)

The evidence in this case is incredibly damning, he absolutely shot and killed him, and there are dozens of witnesses, some with MUCH better views than even the cell camera, who can fill in any blanks. (The individuals who were also detained, as well as the other officers, who I don't think anyone should rush to judge based on another officer's actions.)

This guy is going down for manslaughter at the absolute least, and he's gonna be lower on the prison food chain than a child rapist. The only question is what the other witnesses saw, and what reason the defendant can give for killing an unarmed handcuffed man.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

(for example they start at 20 years (or whatever 2nd Deg murder is) and talk it down to 10 years, as opposed to starting at 10 years and talking it down to 3-5).

Ten years would be very harsh, that would basically ruin his life. Depending on what he has to say he should get probation. Even three years in prison seems pointless at this point.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

On a side note: I always thought that police officers in jail had special protection from the guards?

 

[radioheadrule83]

Ten years would be very harsh, that would basically ruin his life. Depending on what he has to say he should get probation. Even three years in prison seems pointless at this point.

Deserves MUCH more than probation even if he was going to taze the guy unnecessarily in my book. A life has been snuffed out at the age of 22. And he ran. He needs to get some sort of prison sentence.

 

[Nikashi]

On a side note: I always thought that police officers in jail had special protection from the guards?

Just reiterating, cops are usually held in protective custody, the same as informants, and pedophiles.

 

[Belgand]

Again, this does seem to hinge on the definition of 2nd Degree murder. Clearly the officer drew his pistol, aimed, and fired it at a prone individual, killing him. Then, once charged, he attempted to evade arrest, but was subsequently caught. Neither of these facts can be disputed. (edit: sorry, didn't read that he may not necessarily have been running, but leaving the state when something like this has happened is INCREDIBLY suspicious)

He was at a relative's house near Tahoe (i.e. right on the border). His claim that he was just getting out of the Bay Area while this was going on seems reasonable. He surrendered peacefully when he was charged. I can believe this pretty easily.

This guy is going down for manslaughter at the absolute least, and he's gonna be lower on the prison food chain than a child rapist. The only question is what the other witnesses saw, and what reason the defendant can give for killing an unarmed handcuffed man.

He wasn't handcuffed and while I'd say he clearly appeared to be restrained (from the video the officer didn't seem to hurry too much when he stood up and shot him) that will be an issue in the trial I suspect.

Ten years would be very harsh, that would basically ruin his life. Depending on what he has to say he should get probation. Even three years in prison seems pointless at this point.

I disagree. Ten years is going to be the upper limit and I think that would indeed be a bit harsh, but still within a reasonable area. I'd say 3-5 years or so makes a lot more sense.

Probation though? That's nothing. It's also not really appropriate considering he's not likely to commit any other crimes. He doesn't need to be on probation. If he gets probation it'll be like Dan White all over again.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

I disagree. Ten years is going to be the upper limit and I think that would indeed be a bit harsh, but still within a reasonable area. I'd say 3-5 years or so makes a lot more sense.

Probation though? That's nothing. It's also not really appropriate considering he's not likely to commit any other crimes. He doesn't need to be on probation. If he gets probation it'll be like Dan White all over again.

The unlikeliness of him commiting crimes is the point why he shouldn't go to prison. The probation would only be a formality.

 

[Belgand]

The unlikeliness of him commiting crimes is the point why he shouldn't go to prison. The probation would only be a formality.

He shot and killed someone in a manner that was entirely preventable and due to his own negligence. That requires more than a formality. Punishment needs to be applied. Prison terms are not always about rehabilitation. For some parts of the population there is not a deterrent effect from punishment and they are more likely to be serial recidivists of serious crimes. They need to be rehabilitated. The rest of the population generally benefits more from punishment-based deterrence.

You can't just shoot people without consequences. It's not just "oops, I really shouldn't have drawn my gun while he was largely restrained and then shot him in the back, killing him. Maybe I should have paid attention to what I was firing before I shot it at someone. My bad!". Even if it was an accident (as I believe) you're grossly negligent for not being certain that you're not shooting someone. It's the classic aspect of firearm safety: you do not point at a gun at anything you do not wish to destroy. If you're not certain that what you're pointing isn't a gun (and when you carry a gun and are holding a gun-like object maybe you should pause to be certain) you shouldn't point it at someone. To do otherwise is not acceptable.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

He shot and killed someone in a manner that was entirely preventable and due to his own negligence. That requires more than a formality. Punishment needs to be applied. Prison terms are not always about rehabilitation. For some parts of the population there is not a deterrent effect from punishment and they are more likely to be serial recidivists of serious crimes. They need to be rehabilitated. The rest of the population generally benefits more from punishment-based deterrence.

You can't just shoot people without consequences. It's not just "oops, I really shouldn't have drawn my gun while he was largely restrained and then shot him in the back, killing him. Maybe I should have paid attention to what I was firing before I shot it at someone. My bad!". Even if it was an accident (as I believe) you're grossly negligent for not being certain that you're not shooting someone. It's the classic aspect of firearm safety: you do not point at a gun at anything you do not wish to destroy. If you're not certain that what you're pointing isn't a gun (and when you carry a gun and are holding a gun-like object maybe you should pause to be certain) you shouldn't point it at someone. To do otherwise is not acceptable.

What will a prison stentence do that will help him not to make this mistake again? Are you implying he didn't learn enough through this accident? After killing someone, don't you think he feels all the punishments he needs? Is he really in danger to mix up his weapon again? He probably doesn't ever want to work as a police officer again and will have a natural aversion towards guns. No prison term necessary.

Plus the focus should be to prevent such accidents in the future with better training/screening.

 

[YoungHav]

What will a prison stentence do that will help him not to make this mistake again?

And what will a prison sentence do for anyone? Lets free everybody who is locked up under their first offense.

The unlikeliness of him commiting crimes is the point why he shouldn't go to prison. The probation would only be a formality.

:lol are you a closeted racist or something? If Omar Grant had been Kelly Grant I don't think we'd be seeing these same posts from you. Lets be serious here, the officer killed an unarmed man. Even if it were mistake blah blah blah, if this were a lay person he'd a still gone down for negligent homicide or manslaughter and gotten time in jail. That shouldn't change just because a cop is involved. A crime is a crime.

 

[Smiling Bandit]

:lol are you a closeted racist or something? If Omar Grant had been Kelly Grant I don't think we'd be seeing these same posts from you. Lets be serious here, the officer killed an unarmed man. Even if it were mistake blah blah blah, if this were a lay person he'd a still gone down for negligent homicide or manslaughter and gotten time in jail. That shouldn't change just because a cop is involved. A crime is a crime.

And an accident is an accident. In fact I'm more concerned what can be done about his relatives, but my earlier question was ignored and instead people are focusing on how to "punish" the officer, which is completely pointless.
Throwing him in prison for five years. What good would this do other than to appease the mob? Will this make him learn anything? Will this prevent future accidents like this? Will this do anything for his relatives?

 

[YoungHav]

And an accident is an accident. In fact I'm more concerned what can be done about his relatives, but my earlier question was ignored and instead people are focusing on how to "punish" the officer, which is completely pointless.
Throwing him in prison for five years. What good would this do other than to appease the mob? Will this make him learn anything? Will this prevent future accidents like this? Will this do anything for his relatives?

Last time I checked negligent homicide wasn't prosecuted in accident court. Those questions are cute and can apply to nearly everyone currently in jail, amirite? You're doing some serious trolling in this thread sir.

 

[Gattsu25]

And an accident is an accident.

I think that's why YoungHav was talking about negligent homicide and manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder charges. So you agree with him.

With that said...

Will this prevent future accidents like this?

It will do a hell of a lot more to prevent this from happening again than if no criminal charges were filed. Time in jail can be viewed as a reason to ensure, when you're not in a deadly situation, that you're not...you know...accidentally and fatally shooting a restrained misdemeanor suspect in the back.

 

[Belgand]

And an accident is an accident. In fact I'm more concerned what can be done about his relatives, but my earlier question was ignored and instead people are focusing on how to "punish" the officer, which is completely pointless.
Throwing him in prison for five years. What good would this do other than to appease the mob? Will this make him learn anything? Will this prevent future accidents like this? Will this do anything for his relatives?

Will it help prevent future accidents? Hopefully.

Aside from merely the idea of you hoping that they don't want to just randomly kill people on accident there is the desire that this will teach future officers to be more careful.

As I said earlier part of this is because actions need to have consequences. Shooting someone has a legal consequence. It doesn't matter if it was an accident, it was entirely preventable and he needs to be punished for allowing it to happen. Guns are serious. We cannot be careless with them. This is, at best, a case where he was careless with it. You can't just shrug it off and say "Oh well, it was an accident, but he's learned his lesson now." Someone died. This is more serious than that.

 

[itsinmyveins]

The disconnect between a lot of people in this thread seem to stem from the viewing of prisons. Some see it as a tool for rehabilitation, getting criminals in and hopefully having law abiding people come out. Others see it strictly as a way of punishing people for the wrongs they've done and not much more.

 

[adamsappel]

"Listen up, rookies! Your service weapon is on your right hip. Your tazer is on your left hip. Do not get them confused or you might spend 5 years in jail like that BART officer! Are we clear?"

See how that works as a deterrent?

 

[itsinmyveins]

"Listen up, rookies! Your service weapon is on your right hip. Your tazer is on your left hip. Do not get them confused or you might spend 5 years in jail like that BART officer! Are we clear?"

See how that works as a deterrent?

How is that more of a deterrent than "don't get them confused or you might kill an innocent person"?

 

[oneHeero]

How is that more of a deterrent than "don't get them confused or you might kill an innocent person"?

Because people would just be like "That wont happen to me, you got to be stupid to mix up the two"
Oppose to "Listen up, rookies! Your service weapon is on your right hip. Your tazer is on your left hip. Do not get them confused or you might spend 5 years in jail like that BART officer! Are we clear?"

"Fuck, I cant believe that can happen, I always though you couldnt mix up such a thing, I better be careful"

 

[Archaix]

How is that more of a deterrent than "don't get them confused or you might kill an innocent person"?

Personally, I prefer the deterrent of "You're a cop, you're not above the law, you can't execute people because you have a hardon for being an asshole, get the fuck in jail and rot"

Oh, wait, that's not a deterrent? Hmm....yeah, I'm not finding myself caring.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Because people would just be like "That wont happen to me, you got to be stupid to mix up the two"
Oppose to "Listen up, rookies! Your service weapon is on your right hip. Your tazer is on your left hip. Do not get them confused or you might spend 5 years in jail like that BART officer! Are we clear?"

"Fuck, I cant believe that can happen, I always though you couldnt mix up such a thing, I better be careful"

Uh, if you need to be told that you might get in trouble if you mix up your tazer and your gun and shoot someone you probably ain't supposed to be a cop in the first place. And wouldn't "that won't happen to me, etc etc" also apply with the example you're mentioning too?

Personally, I prefer the deterrent of "You're a cop, you're not above the law, you can't execute people because you have a hardon for being an asshole, get the fuck in jail and rot"

Oh, wait, that's not a deterrent? Hmm....yeah, I'm not finding myself caring.

Of course cops aren't above the law, and if they're using exessive force they should be faced with charges for that.

 

[xnipx]

so do you believe that someone who shoots someone by accident shouldn't go to jail for it? cop or no cop it was a fatal mistake and "oops my bad" and probation just aren't enough, believe it or not the point of prison is to deter crime because without punishment "accidents" will happen a lot more often(not saying this wasn't one but crooked cops do exist and ignoring this fact would just be foolish)

 

[itsinmyveins]

so do you believe that someone who shoots someone by accident shouldn't go to jail for it? cop or no cop it was a fatal mistake and "oops my bad" and probation just aren't enough, believe it or not the point of prison is to deter crime because without punishment "accidents" will happen a lot more often(not saying this wasn't one but crooked cops do exist and ignoring this fact would just be foolish)

How come so many are in prison in US then, with the current system -- more than any country in the world going per capita? How come more than 50% of the people who've once been sent to jail will be arrested again within a three year span? Obviously, being a deterrent isn't working that good.

If a cop is crooked then yeah, he should go to jail.

 

[xnipx]

because we live in a messed up society with a backwards war on drugs? i don't wanna go off topic because i've done a lot of research on the prison industrial complex and the injustice the war on drugs has done to the urban community in our country, but in THIS case and any other case where death is involved I believe jail is absolutely necessary.

And you still haven't told me how you would feel if a regular civilian made this same mistake, I don't care how good of a person you are you should go to jail if you kill someone

 

[DataStream]

While I am most certainly on the side of rehabilitation vs. punishment this is a rather dubious case to argue for such a thing. Police officers have special privileges when it comes to their existence in society and along with that come special responsibilities. The outcome of not living up to these responsibilities is ruining someones life or that person dying.

Though I think a move to rehabilitation as a more valid reason for sentencing than vengeance is something this country desperately needs, a killer cop is not a place to start.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Charging murder, even second-degree, is a bit crazy. This seems to be a clear-cut case of manslaughter. The degree of that, of course, is the tricky issue. Quite simply I cannot believe that this was a murder in any sort of first or second-degree manner. In front of two other officers, the other people being arrested, and a trainload of bystanders you don't just stand up and shoot someone in the back. Nobody is that stupid.

I don't think he intended to kill him, but he is most definitely responsible for killing him and should be held accountable for acting in a manner that directly and preventably led to his death.

First of all, people are that stupid.

Secondly, what did he intend to do when he drew his weapon? You don't draw your gun unless you intend on having to use it. There is absolutely no reason to draw a weapon in the situation he was in. His life was clearly not in danger. This story of "confusion" over the tazer is a fucking joke as well.

I say stick it to this fuck cop as much as possible.

 

[itsinmyveins]

because we live in a messed up society with a backwards war on drugs? i don't wanna go off topic because i've done a lot of research on the prison industrial complex and the injustice the war on drugs has done to the urban community in our country, but in THIS case and any other case where death is involved I believe jail is absolutely necessary.

And you still haven't told me how you would feel if a regular civilian made this same mistake, I don't care how good of a person you are you should go to jail if you kill someone

Well, I'm kinda pro gun control, so I don't like the idea of a civilian running around with a gun at all, and cops seem to be a little to tazer happy nowdays from what I hear. I think the cop definitely deserves some kind of "punishment" and I'm not saying it definitely shouldn't be prison, since I don't know more than you guys do. It seems that this is a case of major neglect, I'm sure it could lead to some jail time aside from the obvious stuff -- fines, revoked licences and etc.

While I am most certainly on the side of rehabilitation vs. punishment this is a rather dubious case to argue for such a thing. Police officers have special privileges when it comes to their existence in society and along with that come special responsibilities. The outcome of not living up to these responsibilities is ruining someones life or that person dying.

Though I think a move to rehabilitation as a more valid reason for sentencing than vengeance is something this country desperately needs, a killer cop is not a place to start.

Yes, and because of these responsibilities there should be a lot more focus, from both society and police forces, to maintan a strict high standard when it comes to working with people, arresting people and etc.

This story of "confusion" over the tazer is a fucking joke as well.

Because?

 

[xnipx]

the taser story is a joke because it was unneccessary. 3 officers trying to cuff one man does not need a weapon. police brutality is a major problem in our country as well that gets ignored because of a lack of punishment as well. if mandatory jail sentences were attached to police brutality cases rather than "time off" or suspensions then cops would think twice before using unneccessary force which is what he probably meant to do in this case

even if he was truly reaching for his taser which i can actually believe, it shows a lack of training, balls, and care for another human life whom he is supposed to be protecting that i am not comfortable with. i don't believe i should live in a country where police are free to taser or club somebody who is fidgetting a little bit on the ground instead of going limp like a rag doll

just like police are stressed out people being arrested are just as stressed and a lot of times it's hard to sit perfectly still and twist ur body into the akward positions they try to put u in when trying to arrest u. and the added fear that u can lose ur life because of an "accident" like this makes people even more uncomfortable

even if he didn't die from the gunshot wound or ended up being tazered this officer acted in negligence and used excessive force trying to handcuff a person on his stomach when he had 2 other officers with him and my bad simple isn't enough.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Oh, I'll definitely agree that there shouldn't be any reason to use a tazer in that situation. And like I said, cops in the US seem to use tazer quite a lot. I mean, I've seen crazy instances of cops using tazers on like the TV-show Cops where it didn't seem to be needed.

I also agree with the notion that cases of police brutality shouldn't only mean "time off", but getting fired and depending on how serious -- jailtime.

But the things you mention about lack of training and etc isn't an individual problem, really. That's an issue that the police force needs to deal with. Problem when it comes to that, I'm guessing, is a matter of budgets.

No, a "my bad" surely isn't anywhere near enough.

 

[YoungHav]

Agree that there wasn't even a need for tazer use. Whats worse is there were two cops close to killer cop AND lookin at other videos that were shot at other angles, there were even more police there than those immediate to Oscar Grant. It sickens me that people are actually trying to defend the cop. The day Becky or Allison Grant get the same type of treatment, you won't see any police defending or excuses on police behalf.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

(edit: sorry, didn't read that he may not necessarily have been running, but leaving the state when something like this has happened is INCREDIBLY suspicious)

Why? Maybe he has relatives in Nevada. He and his wife just had a child together and he was getting death threats. Maybe he just went somewhere safer for his family? The fact that he turned himself in the second he found out he'd been charged erases all suspicion imho.

 

[Belgand]

Why? Maybe he has relatives in Nevada. He and his wife just had a child together and he was getting death threats. Maybe he just went somewhere safer for his family? The fact that he turned himself in the second he found out he'd been charged erases all suspicion imho.

Yeah. Plus, well, Reno/Tahoe is pretty damn close to the Bay Area. A friend of mine is dating a guy in Reno. I mean, it's still a decent trip and I sure as hell wouldn't just drive back and forth, but it's kinda like Vegas and LA. Which is pretty sad for us.

Basically it was someplace nearby where he could get away from what was happening here and also not Sacramento because who in the hell would voluntarily spend time there?

 

[Boogie]

the taser story is a joke because it was unneccessary. 3 officers trying to cuff one man does not need a weapon.

Bzzt. Not in this case, no. However, there are instances of suspects who have cocaine-induced psychosis, or who are hopped up on crystal meth, and they feel no pain. There are videos of 5 officers fighting to subdue a single suspect. In those situations, it doesn't matter how many officers there are, the only solution is a taser (or a rear naked choke, if possible)

 

[dionusos]

How come so many are in prison in US then, with the current system -- more than any country in the world going per capita? How come more than 50% of the people who've once been sent to jail will be arrested again within a three year span? Obviously, being a deterrent isn't working that good.

If a cop is crooked then yeah, he should go to jail.

Just because it fails to deter convicted criminals from committing more crimes doesn't mean it failed in deterring other people from committing those crimes.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Just because it fails to deter convicted criminals from committing more crimes doesn't mean it failed in deterring other people from committing those crimes.

Well, they weren't criminals until they committed their first crime.

Either way, I think jail, fines and etc obviously works as a deterrent to a certain extent. But against accidents? No. Neglect? Possibly, but using jail as a deterrent for that is to not acknowledge/deal with problems in training/education/routines/proceedures, imho. That goes for accidents too. But when it happens you've gotta deal with it, and if it's neglect to such an extent that it could be considered criminal, well, then jail it is.

 

[DataStream]

Yeah. Plus, well, Reno/Tahoe is pretty damn close to the Bay Area. A friend of mine is dating a guy in Reno. I mean, it's still a decent trip and I sure as hell wouldn't just drive back and forth, but it's kinda like Vegas and LA. Which is pretty sad for us.

Basically it was someplace nearby where he could get away from what was happening here and also not Sacramento because who in the hell would voluntarily spend time there?

I'm really not sure I'd say that Reno was any better than Sacremento. Those are two of the worst places I've ever had to spend time in my entire life.

Tahoe or Napa would have been my choice if I was escaping angry mobs outside my house.

 

[DataStream]

Jeez, even a month later it gets worse.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Oscar_Grant_punched_in_face_before_0125.html

 

[Fusebox]

Holy shit at the new vid, this the worst display of policing since the Rodney King beating?

 

[Imm0rt4l]

SMH

 

[Suburban Cowboy]

Holy shit at the new vid, this the worst display of policing since the Rodney King beating?

except Rodney King was driving 80 in a 40 while high on pcp and this kid was handcuffed on the floor and shot for no reason.

 

[Marty Chinn]

except Rodney King was driving 80 in a 40 while high on pcp and this kid was handcuffed on the floor and shot for no reason.

Yay, let's spread more false info. He wasn't cuffed.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Yay, let's spread more false info. He wasn't cuffed.

Yeah he only had an officer's knee ramming against his neck. You know the same one that punched him.

Jesus, this is absolutely unbelievable.

 

[itsinmyveins]

I don't wanna watch that movie, but I'm assuming from your reactions that this cop should go to jail? Even if the shooting was an accident, it sounds like it's due to a lot of negligence following police brutality.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

I don't wanna watch that movie, but I'm assuming from your reactions that this cop should get some jail time? Even if the shooting was an accident, it sounds like it's due to a lot of negligence following police brutality.

In essence the three suspects are standing there, arms at their sides, with another female officer appearing to be speaking to them.

Another officer comes up begins throttling Grant and then punches him in the face.

Grant slumps to the floor holding his hands up. The other two follow.

Shortly thereafter the movie cuts to shooting: the same officer clearly is pressing his knee into Grant's neck while he is shot.

Absolutely disgusting.

 

[itsinmyveins]

In essence the three suspects are standing there, arms at their sides, with another female officer appearing to be speaking to them.

Another officer comes up begins throttling Grant and then punches him in the face.

Grant slumps to the floor holding his hands up. The other two follow.

Shortly thereafter the movie cuts to shooting: the same officer clearly is pressing his knee into Grant's neck while he is shot.

Absolutely disgusting.

Definitely sounds like a few of them should spend some time in jail

 

[MrSardonic]

This is so outrageous. At least they were caught on film and cannot hide their actions. I don't know how a family can get over such a brutal and unprovoked killing by members of the police force.

 

[Stairs]

How did it take so long for this video to be unearthed?

 

[jehuty]

Does CA have a death sentence? If so this cop should get it. An eye for and eye... At the very least he should get life in prison.

It's beyond dumb that some criminals get special treatment in prison. Cops, pedos, and snitches should all have to be amongst the regular prison population. and yeah i understand what that entails, they probably deserve it.

 

[TGateKeeper]

How come so many are in prison in US then, with the current system -- more than any country in the world going per capita? How come more than 50% of the people who've once been sent to jail will be arrested again within a three year span? Obviously, being a deterrent isn't working that good.

If a cop is crooked then yeah, he should go to jail.

Let me add my 2 cents to this thread...

First the idea that the officer thought he grabbed his plastic tazer and did not realize it was a fully loaded semi auto to be completely laughable and for some of you to use this as a defense makes you just as dumb as this cop. lets just say the cop was confuse between a light weight plastic tazer and a heavy semi metal gun, if you look at the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXqGT74vBKk&feature=channel

why would you tazer someone when clearly your fellow officer was still in contact with the subject? in a situation where a tazer is needed one would make sure his fellow officers were clear before deploying or using a tazer but if you look at the video the other officer had no clue the subject may be getting tazer because he was still on the guy even when the officer in question had the gun in his hand. Now if the subject in question was irate and resisting the officer with violence then I can see how one might get confuse if they were rushing to try to get the situation order control. however this is not the case; the subject was on the floor face down with his hands behind his back there was no need for non lethal or deadly force. clearly in the video the officer is right handed because he uses his right hand as the strong hand when he frisk search the subject which means his gun is on the right and tazer on the left so how do you fuck that up. give me a fucking break.

Secondly, jail and prison are to different things. the reason way this country has some many repeat offenders is because no one that goes to jail or prison gets reformed, even if you are reformed when you get released no one will employ u unless you count being a dish washer or a warehouse worker. You can't get financial aid to go back to school so basically you are stuck. so you go back to what you know then you get arrested again. only a select few are able to do their time , be released and change their life around.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Yeah he only had an officer's knee ramming against his neck. You know the same one that punched him.

Jesus, this is absolutely unbelievable.

Did I say the cop did no wrong? No, that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't help to spread FALSE info like he was beaten while cuffed. Can't we get the facts straight rather than jumping to conclusion based off FALSE info?

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Did I say the cop did no wrong? No, that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't help to spread FALSE info like he was beaten while cuffed. Can't we get the facts straight rather than jumping to conclusion based off FALSE info?

Would you be averse to "restrained"? Because I'd say that having a knee in your neck is "restrained".