I would have arrested her solely on the eyebrows

Um….what!?
All that…public drunkenness as a minor, obstructing, disturbing the peace, disorderly conducts, ignoring a lawful order, and identity theft (technically)/using another person’s ID…and it took 15 minutes to finally decide to arrest her and then she got ONE charge that was DROPPED! Holy shit, white girl privilege is STRONG. Her boyfriend would be denied bail if he acted that way, and likely get an assaulting a police officer charge added for fun. *wtf

What "facts"? Your opinion? That's just, like, your opinion, man.
Edit: Facts that Trump said aren't facts? That's the best indicator today that they are factual.
I'll take the dozens of convictions and guilty pleas based on those facts as proof enough they are true and well vetted. People don't agree to years in prison based on nonsense that's been proven false....especially not people with money like these people have.

As the exalted leaders #1 choice for (mis)information that becomes policy and platform for the right, and part of the right wing triad ministry of truth, you simply can't leave Jones out of any media discussion, particularly one where someone paints the BBC as having an (anti?)American political bias, and not just a bias for reality.

Yes, it's all fine and dandy. Any investigation of an investigation by the subject being investigated (or their proxies) is patently ridiculous and a clear political ploy to satiate your need for corroboration of what you want to believe, fact based or not. They knew they couldn't write the investigation's findings, nor could they accept the truth being made public, the only option left is to discredit the investigation, something they've been trying since before it began. I find it incredibly sad that so many are so thoroughly indoctrinated that you buy that obvious, self serving ploy to discredit the entire FBI and intelligence community in favor of a consummate narcissist and convicted fraud's self serving and baseless stated opinion about himself.
I guess you believe mob bosses who claimed they were framed and are just legitimate businessmen too, tapes and other evidence of them planning crimes and committing them are nothing in the face of their denials, right?

Yes...yes he did say that about central American immigrants....are you just parsing the fact that he didn't specifically say EACH AND EVERY ONE IS A RAPIST, while not acknowledging what he did say...."They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."? Strictly read, he's saying they're all rapists, but some are good people anyway....just like some Neo Nazis are good people in his opinion. You're attempts at rectifying oldthink (rewriting history) only work with people who have no memories. I watched him say it and I can remember yesterday without big brother telling me what to remember.

I can't dive into your paranoia to decipher what you're feeling. If you can't hear "accosted" and gather they likely arrested her aggressively and instead read that as some hidden agenda to.....well, you didn't articulate what the motive would be...., perhaps reading comprehension isn't a strong suit.

ac·cost. /əˈkôst,əˈkäst/ verb
past tense: accosted; past participle: accosted
approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively.

I disagree with your characterizations. Considering the constant vitriolic, dangerous, demonizing, now blatant terroristic threats from Trump directed at all non right wing propaganda outlets that won't spread his propaganda and stroke his ego, amplified through his right wing minitrue and interpreted by his base that he's trained to hear his dog whistling, and in the face of the same, they display a mature, composed, restrained, unbiased, and inhumanly patient character, including the three you listed.
Yes, they are mature and reasonable adults under constant attack from a serial con man/cult leader and constant threats against their lives, not one Fox host, Jones host, or OAN host is 1/4 as mature, honest, or unbiased as the worst you can mention from CNN.....and no, CNN is not my preferred news source, but they are infinitely better than anything the evil trinity of right wing propaganda produces, including the totally dishonest smear campaign against all news organizations that you are part of now, willingly or not.

That's what the ministry of truth does. They get you to repeat their lies until you believe them enough to be the enemy of anyone still believing fact and reality. It clearly worked.

Btw, still waiting on the names of CNN reporters who have gone on the campaign to stump for the left, like Fox hosts did on the right. You insanely claim CNN is more biased than Fox, you should be able to name at least 4 off hand then.

Yeah, it is still no excuse for him to go through with the order. Better to take a suspension for doing the right thing than to take one for just following orders. Plus you can easily tell the detective was throwing a tantrum even if his supervisor did tell him to arrest her.

It's the violence of the arrest that gets me.

She didn't know her rights or obligations on the spot. She went with her best interpretation of the rules she had to hand, and it seemed reasonable from the footage we have.

Maybe they could arrest her on the basis that they knew or believed she was in the wrong, but I believe she could/would have gone willingly if it was handled rationally.

If the default position of the police is adversarial, you're going to have a bad time.

I applaud this woman for standing up for the rights of all US citizens, at great inconvenience to herself. There was no reason to arrest her, so she was actually kidnapped and held against her will. How is this scenario not part of basic police academy training?

Yes, that's where we differ, because she sure didn't seem to be trying to leave to me, just had an inability to stand still under stress, like many 15 year olds. (And as I've said, it's the macing a handcuffed, secured girl that's out of line imo, the manhandling was just more than needed and was certain to escalate problems rather than solve them, so not smart but on the low end of the scale of acceptability, the macing was a pure assault in my eyes, for no good reason beyond sadism. It was not the right way to get her in the car.)

Keep in mind, she gets on her bike and rides (slowly) with ZERO complaint from the officer she's right in front of, he LET her do it, then got pissed off that she did it. WTF?!
Again, this could have been solved with a simple command to sit down, a command they did not give. Also, detained is not under arrest. You are under zero obligation to submit to detention. If they thought she was leaving the scene, they should have arrested her. Instead, they said repeatedly that they were detaining her for 'cooperation of investigation' (not a crime) and a medical release (something they probably need for their own liability purposes, but not something they can arrest a person for as far as I know).

Yes, the little girl was in the wrong...did my saying exactly that confuse you?

Yes, I absolutely think that if an officer pepper sprayed another officer's child for something the first officer screwed up (like failing to put her all the way in the car) the parent would go ballistic and sue...no matter how their child had acted. Rude behavior is not a threat, the only legitimate reason to use force. I don't think they would see it like you do if it was their child.
Yes, they would also probably reprimand the child too, but bad manners do not excuse assault with a weapon on a handcuffed detainee.

There was no reason to use mace, the proper response is to pull her into the car from the other side.

Your analogy only works if the wolf hounds go after the sheep when there's not a wolf in sight.

Hours? Really? Try an extra 10 seconds to avoid 15 minutes of battle and days of court. "Sit down" doesn't take even that. If they don't have the patience to verbalize the instructions they want followed, they should quit. Deescalation is their job, and they absolutely failed, as they often do.

Remember, they repeatedly say they're only detaining her because she may need medical treatment, then they treat her in a way that ensures she needs medical treatment. If they were really trying to help her, they failed so utterly miserably that they all should quit today...but we know that was bullshit lies, right?

I'm guessing you've never had a gun to your head and a knee on your neck face down in a gutter because an officer made a mistake reading your licence plate and had zero patience for the car thief he was taking down, followed by threats of retaliation if you report them. You might give them less cooperation and leeway if you had.

Yes, and she does "come here", then he lets her get on the bike without telling her not to. It didn't look like an escape attempt to me, but may have to them. That's not the point, the point is they didn't tell her to stay there when she turned around and went back "here". It's clear to me that her problem is being touched by strangers, and had they simply told her to sit, no one would have had to touch her, and things would not have escalated.

Detained is not under arrest, so you can't be charged with resisting detainment. Ignoring the police is totally fine until they give a lawful command....one that doesn't end with "OK?".

Again, you're assuming she was trying to flee and not just being an OCD (ADD?) teenager trying to avoid being touched. That's how she appears to me, spoiled, trouble, disrespectful, yes, but also scared, troubled, confused, and under assault.

I do think they should stop her from fleeing, (if that's what she was trying to do) I just think they should start with "sit down" or "stay right there" before manhandling a child that's just been in an accident, especially if the contention is they are "detaining" her because she might need medical treatment. "Come here" is a command satisfied when she returns "there", it does not command her to stay anywhere, no matter how logical it is to infer that.

As a citizen, you do have the right to arrest her (which they should have done if they thought she was fleeing the scene, not just "detained" her) but you had better be able to totally justify any force you use to hold her...as should the police. The force used must be reasonable, minimal, only what's required to prevent escape, and on par with the crime she's being detained for. They might have 1 out of 4 covered in part if they stretch it.

My issue is far more about the pepper spraying her for not moving her foot rather than the manhandling, but I do think both were wrong and more about disrespect and power trips than trying to calmly handle the accident. ONce she was handcuffed and in the car, she wasn't escaping anything, nor was she a threat to anyone. The pepper spray was totally out of line. The rest is just questionable to me and absolutely not how you make the community support you, but probably not illegal.

i wasn't entirely sure where this took place since it was from CBC manitoba but it was OPP that arrested her.

to your next point, this doesn't show anything extreme but the linked article makes me wonder why she had to go to the hospital and what she died of. it wouldn't be crazy if she was beaten in custody. there is severe racism for first nation in the police force canada wide. but obviously we don't know. there are a lot of pieces missing to this story.

@kir_mokum

This is Ontario, not Manitoba.

And I'm about ready to take a road trip out to Kenora and find whoever was screaming "LET THE FEMALE COP ARREST HER" and punch him in his damn mouth.

Seriously. She's being arrested, she was legitimately not being beaten, and she was very obviously resisting. At that point, a different gendered cop wouldn't have done anything.

And why does the fact that she died have anything to do with this? She wasn't choke-slammed, shot, hell, I didn't even see any punches thrown in her general direction, so the title of this is completely and utterly misleading.

There's enough stupid videos of cops being retards on the sift, this, however, isn't one that needs to be here.

*promote

Wow, I really wonder what was going on in that woman's head.

Even the article didn't help very much; and it even brought up more questions related to her arrest/charges...

I wonder if the police had yet to have see this video to use as evidence against her and had no real idea as to what happened in the accident (as the witnesses may not have helped them very much in piecing everything together; it made me wonder if this driver of the video taken stayed around for the police or merely went on their merry way and uploaded this later in the day). So they charged her with DUI, but the tests came back inconclusive so they had to release her.

Because from watching this video I can think of at least three to four charges they could arrest her with. So I'm assuming as I mentioned above that they merely slapped her with DUI and hadn't seen this yet, so they hadn't charged her with anything else as of yet; otherwise she would still be arrested. So I imagine she will be getting picked back up pretty soon. I'd love to know what the real cause was.

I'm guessing it was one of two things: high as a kite or a medical condition; I'm not entirely sure that this would be an alcohol related issue. But I have seen drunk people do some very weird things before. This however looks like she didn't care about parking the car or she "thought" that she had. Then she went to the sidewalk for whatever reason that compelled her to get out in the first place; perhaps a delusion or psychotic event--or something akin to it.

More from Photography is not a crime:
First, Andrea Mears called police on a man for flying his remote control quadcopter over a public beach in Connecticut.

Then, when police didn’t respond in seconds, she attacked the man

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach … with a helicopter plane,” she told the cops by phone.

“Can you guys hurry? I already talked to him, just come.”

Seconds later, she attacked him.

The man, who goes by Hogwit on Youtube, began recording the encounter on his iPhone as his quadcopter was flying overhead, capturing her clawing at his face and pulling at his shirt.

“You want to take pictures?” she asks him as she jams her fingers into his mouth. “Yeah, you’re going to see how it feels when police come.”

Then she has the audacity to tell him “let go of me” as she is all over him.

“If you wouldn’t be assaulting me, I wouldn’t be touching you,” he responds, remaining exceptionally calm considering the circumstances.

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach!” she yells as she continues to rip his shirt. “I’m going to kick your ass, you little motherfucker.”

“Can someone call the cops!” the man yells. “I’m being assaulted! Help!”

Police arrived and arrested her for assault in the third degree and breach of peace. The incident took place May 12 at Hammonassett State Park in Madison.



Here are more details from the man who was flying the drone that he posted on a forum shortly after the incident:

I went to a nearby beach that is a whopping 2 miles long, set up, talked to some people that were curious what my “thing” was, demonstrated the loiter feature (pulling the quad to one direction or another), demonstrated rtl (flying it away then having it return), and make a lot of people think the quad was just awesome. I never went below 50 feet save for take off/landing, then after the end of my last flight, some crazy lady came over and started taking pictures of me…and dialed 911 for the 3rd time in 15 minutes…she said something to the effect of, “There’s a guy here taking pictures at the beach with a helicopter plane.” (I distinctly remember her saying, “with a helicopter plane,” because that just sounds hilarious.) They basically said that they’d send someone when one gets free during each of the 3 calls she made, she decided they didn’t care enough about someone obeying the law so when no one was around she assaulted me and she decided to stop when she got a phone call. I called the police to report the assault, and boy was the response big…10 or more vehicles arrived (cops, DEEP, and an ambulance)…They first listened to her story of lies (she claimed I was taking close ups of people in bikinis, and that she had asked me to stop flying before calling the police, and that I was the one that assaulted her, and and and). The police approached me very aggressively, believing her full story, and before anything else was said I brought up something that she missed… The fact that the cell phone in my hand has a camera…that was recording. I had video evidence that she went nuts completely unprovoked, and was the one that assaulted me. She was then charged with assault, and breach of peace and I gave the cops a copy of the video for their prosecution. I then also showed them my last flight where you can make out her colorful shirt getting up from the beach then following it until it lands which proved that she lied when claiming that she asked me to stop flying before calling the police.
At the end of it all, one of the officers said to me basically, “Flying that thing the way you were is fine, you’re not in any trouble. You can come back and fly, but just be aware that some people can be alarmed.”


*fail, *lies, *wtf

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

Wait a minute did he just hit and arrest her for what the person in black did behind her? <img class="smiley" src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/oops.gif">


In the first second of footage she squirts some silly string from a can. Then the person in black throws the contents of a cup in the same direction. Either way it's a major over-reaction by the police imo.

Wait a minute did he just hit and arrest her for what the person in black did behind her?

so..im trying to play devil's advocate here.

Let's say the woman was a complete ass and completely disrespectful to the cop and let's even say she was talking on her cell phone so that there was actually a law broken. Let's say she did everything negative except actually being violent or being a threat.

and let's even say that the taser is completely 100 percent safe.

when is it ok to use non-lethal force on someone who is resisting and being antagonistic but yet not being violent and is completely NOT a threat.

If I was a police officer and I had to choose between getting physical/baton/fists/etc and just pressing a button on a compliance device, I'd want to just press a button too. Anyone would I suspect. How long do you attempt to reason with someone before saying, ok we're just spinning our wheels here and accomplishing nothing...time to take you in whether you like it or not.

My problem with the actual situation is that yeah, the taser is not non-lethal, it is LESS-lethal, big difference. so even if the woman was talking on her phone and thus committed a crime, I'd have a problem with using a taser on someone, risking their lives over something like that. ESPECIALLY since the woman posed absolutely zero threat.

And then you have the kids, even if you arrested her without incident, you still got two kids sitting there crying and scared as fuck. In the best situation the dad would go pick them up, but even that would take a ton of time and you still have the car sitting there. At worst, you've got no one to pick the kids up and you have to have another officer (a stranger to the kids) watch over them until the situation is resolved. Even in the best situation, the cops seem ill equipped to deal with that sort of situation.

There's got to be a better way to arrest people for smaller crimes like that instead of pulling them over and dragging them out of the car I can't stand people who talk on phones either and would agree there needs to be punishment for that as it is a risk to other drivers, but I REALLY don't want a situation like this either. Seems it would be safer for the cop too.

give me some robot cars damnit, remotely shut them down or divert them to the police station while locking the vehicle so they can't just jump out and a video screen notifying them of the infraction and communication with the cops so they can make arrangements for kids or other odd situations.

something that forces them to comply, but without endangering anyone needlessly.