#1 By: Cory Doctorow, January 31st, 2014 01:29
#2 By: bobo, January 31st, 2014 01:52
Guy trained and authorized to tackle and punch citizens, tackles and punches a citizen. Wrongful termination absolutely. Oh, and never mind the cover up and illegal home invasion, the guy has been through enough already.
Let's all go out for pizza.
#3 By: xzzy, January 31st, 2014 01:52
Seems totally reasonable to me, the public only demanded he be fired. They never specified whether he could work ever again!
#4 By: Spocko, January 31st, 2014 01:53
This is very interesting. Multiple people were shooting video. The cops rushed in to get the video of one cop beating a guy. Then another neighbor got the video of multiple cops going into the house to get the beating video!
Let that be a lesson to people. Don't assume that just because one person is recording on their phone you don't need to record as well. And upload your video to remote storage in case your phone is seized or destroyed. Hmm. sounds like some good advice I might pick up from HOMELAND by Cory Doctorow. Now available in fine independent bookstores everywhere. Or get the ebook here
By the way, what if they had police car video or police drone video of the cops? Do you think that the footage might "go missing" or they "forgot to turn it on" (like they did in New York during an Occupy beating?
With the recent ruling against drones in cities I've got to think that some places ARE putting drones up and that footage should be available to the public via FOIA requests. Has anyone tried to get that footage yet?
#5 By: newliminted, January 31st, 2014 02:03
Unless you make $2million or more per year, shut the fuck up.
#6 By: TheGlitchEcliptic, January 31st, 2014 02:26
Are you kidding? Police dash cam footage "goes missing" all the time. One popular excuse is that it is their policy to "not retain" such footage, and hence regularly delete it within a short time frame. Another trick is the old "the camera is only operational at certain times" schtick. And if you're afraid that the victim might raise a stink about these flimsy excuses? Plant a seized bag of drugs on their person to "find", and voila! Instant character assassination!
#7 By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus, January 31st, 2014 02:30
So, by what mysterious process did the original warrantless home invasion and assault not result in a criminal record? Firing people is cute and all; but not terribly punchy.
#8 By: Stephen Frost, January 31st, 2014 02:31
Somewhere in the "lost" transcript will be the words, "I'll break you in half. Like a boy." So everything's fine.
On the other hand, no wonder Tom "Perkinsnacht" Perkins is shitting himself.
#9 By: Rindan, January 31st, 2014 03:12
Essentially all cops are corrupt. The only real difference is the degree of their corruption. A non-trivial portion are flat out corrupt in the obvious sense, in that they will beat citizens, destroy evidence, blatantly abuse their power, etc. The rest are also corrupt pieces of shit because they won't report on or enforce the law on their 'brothers'. The sad thing is that this is a self perpetuating cycle. If the police force is only made up of corrupt pieces of shit, folks who are not interested in joining a "brotherhood" simply find another career. This same sort of self perpetuating culture also explains the sociopathic glee that spy agencies get in curb stomping the constitution. Anyone who would find that sort of thing morally offensive finds something better to do (with the rare case of Snowden of course).
#10 By: jake0748, January 31st, 2014 05:07
Cops win. People lose. That's the way it goes these days. Omaha sucks. This whole country sucks.
#11 By: Boundegar, January 31st, 2014 06:22
Well, look on the bright side - unemployment is down by one. It will be a thing of the past when we are all cops!
#12 By: Thorzdad, January 31st, 2014 07:14
All hail the first-responders! Kneel before their might, mortal citizens.
#13 By: Nell_Anvoid, January 31st, 2014 07:25
This type of thing is becoming all too common...everywhere. If you happen to catch cops talking among themselves, you may well get glimpses of the attitude causing it. Don't let them catch you catching them, though...
#14 By: Christopher Waldrop, January 31st, 2014 07:45
[O]ver 30 Omaha police officers who broke into a family home without a warrant intending to destroy mobile phone video evidence...
Six cops are fired for taking part. The re-hiring of one of them is significant, but so is the fact that 80% of the cops who participated in an illegal break-in were not fired. I don't know how many officers there are in the department, but that's a big enough number that it reeks of corruption.
The ACLU has filed suit against the police department and 33 specific officers, but I won't hold my breath waiting for things to change.
#15 By: Aaron Wallace, January 31st, 2014 08:18
Yep, not a police state, not at all.
#16 By: Manny, January 31st, 2014 08:38
To be fair to the 80% of the home-invading cops that weren't fired, it would not be totally unreasonable for them to assume that one of the first 6 had the warrant.
#17 By: Ahmed_Sayid, January 31st, 2014 08:45
I think its amazing that so many cop cars arrived at the scene. Reminded me of GTA. I always thought that this was in game fiction. Apparently not.
Lazy cop day perhaps?
#18 By: hamish strong, January 31st, 2014 09:18
The article linked to keeps referring to the original beating as a "rough arrest." is that an official/legal term? In the article it just sounds like a pro-brutality euphemism...
#19 By: retepslluerb, January 31st, 2014 09:49
Oh dear. These days American officials use terms like “enhanced interrogation” without any irony in earshot and you wonder if it sounds like an euphemism?
#20 By: Elmar Kitse, January 31st, 2014 10:06
The description of the events makes this sound like there was a rough arrest followed by a subsequent illicit raid of a bystanders home at some point in the future - like "hey let's beat up this guy, and then tomorrow night let's go raid his friends house without a warrant to cover our rears."
I guess this makes me some kind of cop sympathizer, but after looking at the second recording, I don't think it shows some grand offense and conspiracy on the part of the cops.
Right up to where they apparently destroyed the cellphone memory card, I don't see anything here that's even particularly newsworthy.
There's some dispute over a car that's being towed.
A big guy is about to get cuffs put on him and he resists - pushes back from the car against the cop behind him who is trying to lean him over before cuffing him.
Big guy resisting arrest is then grabbed by the cop, flipped back over to the ground and restrained by multiple police.
His brother, shouting at the cops, continues to encroach on the officers restraining the other guy. He's moved back to the sidewalk, and comes closer as soon as the cop leaves. He comes onto the road, and is walked back to the landing at the top of his stairs by the cop. He comes back and again, as soon as he hits the street, the cop comes after him.
At this point, he's running away from the cops. (Cops who from his opinion are abusers, fine, but really, when does running away from the cops ever end well?)
Can a cop follow you into a house without a warrant if you are eluding them? I don't know, but I'd assume so.
Then 50 million other cops who arrive on the scene see an officer chasing a subject. Do you think that when the officer stopped in the car before chasing the subject that he said "Hey, I'm going after a perp who was recording a rough arrest to get his recordings" and that everyone else decided to pile on? Or just that they arrive on the scene and see a fellow cop actively chasing someone and do what they're trained to do and assist? (I imagine this is why only one of them was eventually arrested?)
While the swarm (and holy toledo where did they come from) is going into the house, the one guy is left with the big guy on the ground.
I don't know what happened right before he unleashes what the local news channel called hammer hits, but the cop doesn't keep at it. If the guy is trying to get up, or trying to move, or not following instructions, the cop who is now alone needs to keep him restrained. I'd hate to be hit like that, but it doesn't look like abuse.
So, from what's in the video, there's one cop who chased after someone into his home when apparently he shouldn't (since he was fired), and that's a problem.
Inside the house, according to this article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/08/family-sues-omaha-police-department_n_4563757.html there's a ton of other crappy stuff that happened ... a cover-up regarding the first cop taking evidence without a warrant, roughing up a handicapped elderly aunt, and all that is a problem, but what's in the video above is not the issue. The rest of it is a problem, but maybe it could have been avoided by registering your cars, not resisting arrest, not shouting at the police and not ignoring multiple attempts to keep bystanders at a safe distance. Oh, and also not fleeing an officer that is pursuing you.
I take the statements on that HuffPo page with a number of grains of salt. "A parking ticket turned into officers storming into my house and me being thrown to the ground and put in a chokehold"
That's a deceptively loaded sentence. You could break it into two sentances like this that don't sound so inflammatory: "Unregistered cars owned by my family were being towed and after failing to follow police instructions I resisted arrest and was restrained" plus "My brother was filming my incident while shouting at the police who were restraining me. He failed to follow their instructions to keep a safe distance multiple times and attempted to elude police by running into my house"
next page →