General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsVideo Shows Cop Sucker-Punching Handcuffed Teenager. Judge Refuses to Look at the Evidence.
From Jonathan Turley:
"It is often difficult to get actual charges against a police officer, but former St. Louis Officer Rory Bruce, 35, was an exception. After all, it was a police video that clearly showed him verbally abusing a teenager and then sucker punching him while handcuffed. One would think it would be an easy conviction, even without the testimony of the 16-year-old boy. That is if the judge watched the video. She did not. ..."
...
"... Jeff Roorda with the St. Louis Police Officer’s Association insists that he can see the suspect moving in a threatening manner and Bruce defending himself: “It’s one forearm blow as he’s trained to do.” Bruce later on the video says “I told you I wanted to search you and you came out of the thing and started lunging at me.” ...
"The police fired Bruce on the basis of the video and the prosecutors brought charges. However, Burke declined to watch the video. ..."
http://jonathanturley.org/2013/07/08/st-louis-judge-refuses-to-watch-video-showing-officer-sucker-punching-teenager-and-then-acquits-him-police-union-call-for-his-rehiring/#more-66847
Now the police union is demanding that the department rehire Bruce.
The judicial protection of bad cops is one way that bad cops are made.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Riftaxe
(2,693 posts)I do not care what the kid was mouthing off about, you just do not do that to any human being or for that matter even a recalcitrant animal, it is something that is just not done! At least by my notion of society.
anomiep
(153 posts)The video seems clear.
Why was there 'no testifying victim'?
Riftaxe
(2,693 posts)and as such can be dissociated from the video easily enough. Going by the article we know the all the charges against all parties involved were ___ and the judges reasoning was ___.
However; the video is pretty damn self evident.
I do not doubt that the union is backing this officer, and i suspect that is why the article even exists in the first place.
My thought is that, if in fact the lack of a complaining witness is actually some sort of legal issue, as the article claimed the logic was ...
... it made zero sense to me that the complaining witness wouldn't (voluntarily) be there. So maybe there's something odd going on (maybe he's out and afraid to come to court precisely because the cop did what the cop did ... maybe he's still in jail and nobody actually bothered to even try to get him to court ... etc)
Of course, that would all be nullified if the article isn't accurate, which is in all likelihood pretty probable.
The video itself makes me mad, and my wife told me 'well, stop watching it"
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)
malaise
(295,904 posts)private prisons
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)The bad ones are the only kind there are.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)I saw no evidence that he "lunged" at the officer.
The officer should be prosecuted for assault, the judge removed from the bench and other officer probably charged as an accessory since it doesn't seem as if he went to his superiors.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)A cop killer will be found not guilty. He'll be found not guilty because more and more people think that the police are out of control, and merely bully's with badges. When that thought pattern goes more mainstream, it won't be long before the juries start thinking the cop deserved it. The jury will give a pass to a cop killer, because everyone will know the cops are the worst criminals.
anomiep
(153 posts)Is it too cut & dried to get comments?
If this guy gets his job back it will be a travesty.
beevul
(12,194 posts)That's why they casually take his jacket back before beating him, because he lunged?
How do these people sleep at night after doing this kind of thing, or excusing it for that matter?