He's on paid administrative leave because that's what the union contract stipulates. The reason being he shouldn't be penalised because he's waiting for the outcome of the investigation.

He's been removed from the situation.

The process is to protect the unjustly accused, not benefit the guilty.

Don't blame the union. Unions have ways of sidestepping that process and contracts have provisions for people to be fired for blatant and flagrant violations of the law.

He wouldn't be on administrative leave if he drove his cruiser through a crowd full of kids while he was drunk. Similarly, there's no investigation to be done here.

He attacked a child - and if there was a reason to justify the first assault, I'm assuming it's the usual "police presumed to be acting in good faith" would be thrown up because that's fair ^eye-roll^; even that doesn't hold up to the second slam. The second slam is an individualized version of a squad-car running through a crowd. It's blatant, flagrant, and criminal.

We need to stop treating COPs (citizens on patrol) like a class of citizens that can get away with this shit or receive any special treatment. If that man was a custodian, he'd be fired on the spot and arrested. Then if he was black it wouldn't matter if his hands were laid flat on the ground and he was spread eagle screaming "I AM NOT RESISTING ARREST AND AM UNARMED" someone would shout

Moving this video to Mordhaus's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.