I reviewed the video, in my opinion it does NOT show an officer doing anything illegal, even the take down of the woman at the end of the video could be justified. His pulling of his pistol could be justified. Nothing in the video BY ITSELF could be justification for saying the officer abused his position.
Something else is up. What it is I do not know. It may be WHY he grabbed the girl and forced her to the ground. While the action forcing her onto the grass in clearly in the video, the incident that caused him to do so is NOT. The woman is seen leaving, then he goes after her and force her onto the ground. The officer is then approached by four other people, two females and two males, and then he pulls his pistol, again could be justified by how close those four people came near to the officer. The four retreated and the officer never pointed his pistol at any of them, he later holstered the pistol.
Again, I was attacked for saying so, there is NOTHING in the film that can NOT be justified. You may disagree with what happened, but the officers could justify their actions seen in the videos. The law permits Police Officers to use FORCE to maintain the Peace and how that force is used is up to the Officers discretion.
The only question if WHY did the officer arrest the woman he then forced to the ground. The reason for that arrest is NOT seen on the video. Is there is another video? OR one of the other officers report that the first officer did something wrong when he arrested the woman? then we have reasons for the resignation. Something is up, and it is more then what is seen on the video.
Side note: The officer was already on paid suspension, thus no real reason to resign till the investigation is completed. Thus the resignation may be an effort to forestall complaints to the Police department. i.e he says he resigned, the Police Department said he resigned, people stop complaining because he had resigned, and when the investigation is completed he is permitted to rejoin the Police force with no loss of pay. I have questions when it comes to resignations in this type of situation. There is no need to do so AND in many ways it is better to keep him on duty, so his employer can ORDER him to cooperate with the investigation, something his employer can NOT do if he is no longer a member of the police force. Yes, the DA can get a Court Order for him to co operate, but that is not the same as his employer denying him his pay if he does not co operate with the investigation.
Something is up, it may be one of his fellow officers questioned the first officers actions. It may be the result of a video I have not seen. It may be a way to cut out demands for the officer's resignation. Something is up, what it is unknown at the present time, but I suspect it has to do with cutting out the calls for termination of the officer.
= new reply since forum marked as read
