*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Tuesday, October 27th, 2015 3:54pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter Mordhaus.

Prediction of the "official" response to this incident: "We have reviewed the incident and found that the officer in question followed all departmental policies and procedures."

Why has all of the lead-up video been cropped?

Sweet zombie Jesus! What an insanely violent douchebag.
That is the official response to a child sitting quietly?!? That this behavior is sanctioned by the force is another glaring piece of evidence that there are no good cops anymore, a good person would not work for an organization that supports this behavior.

I hope this girl never has to work a day in her life, and that officer friendly never has another dime to his name when the lawsuit is over.

It seems daily we are given more evidence that, when confronted by an armed thug on a power trip, the only right thing to do is defend yourself with force as if your life depends on it, because it just may.

This crap boils my blood.

insane, back when I was in highschool there was no cops/guards/etc

We even had a smoking section, and guns could be brought on campus.

For smoking section you just needed a letter from parents that they knew you smoked. and on recess the smokers all hung out there.

To bring gun to school, it was during any hunting season. You had to have note from parents that they know. The gun had to be visible, either gun rack in back window of truck or in passenger seat. Rifles and Shotguns only no pistols.

You had to have your Hunter's Safety Course card, Your Hunting License both on you to give copies at office.

You had to leave your vehicle keys with the front office and submit to random vehicle search of the hunter's vehicles only.

So while everyone could go to their cars at recess, or if you had extra empty elective, some of us juniors would drive up to Hardees before lunch and grab fast food then be back before 4th period started, but the hunters had to leave their keys with front office and they could not retrieve them until end of school.

So much more freedom.

Smoking was banned on campus for students only my 10th grade year, but Teachers had the smoking lounge in building. There was a teacher's lounge on each hall, the back hall F where weight lifting, welding, home ec, and vocational classes were was where the teacher's smoking lounge was. Most students friendly with teachers could sneak in there and smoke anyhow.

crazy times.

I had a 84 Camaro and kept a flare gun under seat my dad owned a boat and had couple extra flare guns. So I had that for some crazy reason thinking if someone attacked me, at point blank range I'd put on a huge firework show


Then there was the stereotypes that were proven right not wrong.

The jocks hung out together, the headbangers/smokers hung out together, the nerds, the band folks like me as my senior year I was drum major
and the blacks stayed together all in separate cliques at lunch and recess and before/after school.

stereotypes even went further.

the only highschool girls with babies (during time I was there I stress) were black girls, they had to build a daycare from the old mechanic shop behind the highschool for them. And even though this was the early 90s in the south, you'd hear over the Intercom every 6 months "All Black female students to gym at this time please" where they'd get lectured on abstinence, or condom use, and std's and such.

the only time rest of the student body went through that was in 10th grade they'd take the boys one day, and girls the next day.

We had a blast though as the guys, the protection/std talk was given by one of the football coaches, and during the talk with the guys and showing various "shock images" of std's on penis on the TV, when he got to the "sex ed" portion, he flipped in a Nina Hartley porn intro where a nude Nina Hartley showed the correct way to place a condom on. haha was hilarious looking back before "political correctness" went out of control.

I loved highschool and college.

Graduated high school in 94, got associates in 96, took year off then got bachelors in computer science in 99.

But 89-94 (our highschool here in the deep south is 8th through 12th) most are 9-12, but not here. It's still 8-12th here. So it's nothing seeing 12th graders dating 8th graders. Freaky yea, but not unusual.


If you got into a fight, if a coach was around he'd let the fight finish, unless it got a bit too over the top then they'd break it up. You didn't get suspended, you lost recess privileges usually 3 days plus the starter of the fight got 10 licks of the paddle in principle office, the other only got 1 to 3, or if person was just dominated and got ass kicked you just got detention.


Kids didn't act up at all most times. And the reason was Corporal Punishment. Not private paddling either.


Once I was having a bad day, me and "highschool" sweetheart were having a bit of a spat. We sat next to each other so we were bickering a bit during class. Teacher had yelled at me to shut up and do the work. I sighed "Leave me the fuck alone"

bad move.

She called me to front of class and I got 5 licks of paddle in front of everyone. They'd stick finger in your belt loop and yank it up tight to put that extra sting on it. Embarrassing as hell! Even female older teachers who didn't paddle hard, it was just too embarrassing to get paddled, so kids behaved.


And of course if you refused paddling which you could but you'd take a zero for the day's work. few of those in a semester and no matter how hard you worked you were flunking that semester.


But the system worked.

It wasn't until they went crazy insane on political correctness, stopping corporal punishment, and putting cops/rent a cops/guards in schools and after the No Child Left Behind was signed into law, they severely dumbed down kids forcing the smartest to learn at the slowest kids pace. Doc's prescribing SSRI's like candy to kids in MASSIVE quantities, that schools in today's culture are crazy.

The cop was justified... Did it go too far- yep but the student caused this to happen.


Looks justified when intellectually competent persons analyze this.


Ignorant people ( well lest face it we are talking about the left) will see something different and the Black lives matter with Al Sharpton will be showing up soon. This will spur on the Anti cop / Cop killing is good propaganda causing a more downward spiral of society.



Justified !

Just like the cop that justifiably killed Michael Brown of Ferguson this cop will also loose job as a sacrificial lamb for the Left.

Why is it justified?

My question is what does our society expect to happen here?

This kind of situation has become routine in the system, at least here in Canada. The teacher asks a student to do something, like put away their cell phone. The student refuses, or more often than not tells the teacher off. The teacher then asks the student to go down to the principals office. The student refuses, or more often than not tells the teacher off again. The teacher is absolutely and completely forbidden to use any manner of physical force to require the student to listen. Since the teacher can't get the student to go to the principle, their only recourse is to bring the principle to the student. The joke is, the principle has absolutely no more authority to force the student to comply than did the teacher.

What do people expect as the 'right' course of action here in our society today? If students decide they just don't wanna do anything they are told, is that just the end of it? Is there absolutely never any circumstance under which we finally reach the point were using actual physical force to remove them from the school can be deemed acceptable?

Sorry, but I truly am fearful of a world were we teach students that they are free to ignore any and all authority. More over, so long as they refrain from violence, they can defy authority with impunity knowing it is immoral for any authority to use force to get them to comply.

Seriously?

She was disrespectful towards the teacher in one sort or another that the teacher had to call for help, in which the cop / school coach came and asked the student to get up and go.

She did not comply with the officer.

The cop was justified... Did it go too far- yep but the student caused this to happen.

Yeah seriously, see:
"Did it go too far- yep but the student caused this to happen."

I completely agree with that. When you get to the heart of the matter, I generally find most people agree at some basic level even though they might have completely different views of the same situation or world overall.

I just wanted to know how you felt that was justified, and you clarified, and I agree with you that that it way too far but the girl pretty much instigated the reaction (considering this was all over a cell-phone and then refusal to leave?).

The unjustifiable part I found with it was the overreaction and the level of force. There are better ways to do this, but obstinate teenagers push buttons, and I don't respect authority-for-authority's sake myself, so there's my bias.

Feds are getting involved...so do me a favor...take your right hand and lift it in the air. Then smack the shit out of your face. Many incidents have been prosecuted these years. Granted, many have not. But each is a case by case. Ferguson was 100% justified (Even if there were racist practices.) Gardner, not so much. Perhaps manslaughter would have been a good start. But again, 50-50 is way different than it used to be. Used to be 100-0.

WHAT?!?
So, you must also think that battered women 'caused this to happen' by not capitulating to their husbands/boyfriends, huh?
You must think those innocent people released from Guantanamo 'caused this to happen' by not making up some terrorist activities to admit to when being tortured?

Sitting quietly is not a crime that requires violence...EVER. The disruption this has caused is exponentially greater than the disruption caused by not leaving class. The proper thing to do would be 1. talk to her and explain that by not following the officers instructions, she's forcing them to expel her and she won't ever be returning to class after today and 2. if that doesn't work, call backup. This bodybuilder cop, Ben Fields, is well known as "Officer Slam" at the school, this is not the first time he's been sued over excessive force, not even the first time he was caught on camera, but this time he was caught strangling and throwing children across the room by the neck.

There's absolutely no excuse for the violence from that officer. They are now trying to claim she hit the cop so his actions were OK...but want us all to ignore that she was flailing and accidentally touched him only AFTER being lifted by the neck with another hand reaching between her legs. In my opinion, it's fine to stab anyone doing that to you when you were simply sitting. Stab them in the eye with your pen...in self defense. I think I might have attacked that douchebag beating up a girl if it had been in my class....and probably paid for it later, but that's better than just sitting by and watching. I couldn't live with myself if I just sat and watched that BS.

Again. I hope she gets paid, and he never has another dime to his name, because she's going to win this lawsuit big time.

Certainly you can see a difference between reasonable force needed to remove a person and what happened here.
Reasonable force does not injure the person it's applied against.
Reasonable force would mean calling in another officer and taking her out, not strangling her and throwing her across the room by the neck. That's not reasonable. That's assault and battery, and perhaps attempted murder. I'm 100% certain the child would face at LEAST those charges if positions were reversed.

Specifically, I said:
"The unjustifiable part I found with it was the overreaction and the level of force."

So 'no' to most of your assumptions. I was just trying to find some common ground with bob.

OK, I misunderstood.

It sounded like you were excusing the unjustifiable behavior by blaming the victim...which is a terrible argument.

And why, exactly, do you wish to be on common ground with bob? ;-)

Honestly, there's no easy answer here.

First, allowing teachers to use violence against students (aka corporal punishment) is barbaric and wrong and out of the question.

There are then escalating levels of disciplining a student who is disruptive. My question is why the girls parents weren't called before the police.

Yeah, she was being a pain in the arse, but it's not a disciplinary issue not a criminal one.

Ultimately, force is the final resort and is rightfully in the hands of the police. In this case, I feel like an excessive level of force was used, but if she is resisting arrest (and she certainly appears to be), then she really is bringing it on herself.

I think you gave the easy answer...call her parents. I bet you anything that if mama got on the phone and told her to leave class, she would do it right away. That makes way more sense than calling officer slam (his nickname at the school) to re-escalate a situation that had already calmed down.

Actually, she was not being arrested. She was only being removed, at first. At least that's what's been reported. That means that, at least at first, she was not 'resisting arrest', only 'resisting removal'.

I do agree, force is a FINAL resort, rightfully in the hands of police. My issue is it's often used as a PRIMARY resort (meaning it's often the first thing tried). There were MANY options available to the cop besides violence against a child, he didn't try anything once his command was ignored except unnecessary violence. For instance, he could have, with less force and no injury to anyone, dragged the girl and her desk out of the room and waited her out in the hallway, but instead he chose to react with severe violence to being 'disrespected' by a child.

Saying she 'brought it on herself', to me, is the same as saying abused women 'bring it on themselves' by not capitulating fast enough to their abusive spouses, and abused children 'bring it on themselves' by not being perfect at all times.
Even if you want to call what she did 'resisting arrest' (which I think I've already debunked, but may still be questioned), the force used was SO out of proportion and unnecessary that this officer has already been banned from all schools in the state, and will likely lose his job and money in the end. If her fellow students had not risked the same treatment by pulling out their phones and recording his actions, we would never have heard about this, and the poor girl would have a record for assaulting a police officer instead of an FBI investigation against the officer. That sounds like one more instance where always on-body cams might have defused the situation, because KNOWING he was on camera, I bet he would not have acted so rashly against a calm, non violent child.

EDIT: He's now been fired.

I agree with everything else you said, but I have to take issue with this.

The two are not comparable at all. A cop is not an abusive spouse, they are the people who society grants a monopoly on force to. Their explicit purpose is enforce the law. If a cop issues a lawful request and you do not comply with it, they are BY DEFINITION, allowed to use force.

Now, I'm not saying that all police do this correctly, or that there aren't serious issues with racial bias.

But it comes down to rights and responsibilities.
An abuser has no right to abuse their spouse/children and their victims have no responsibility to capitulate or be perfect.
Whereas again, a cop explicitly has the right to use force and a citizen has the responsibility to obey a lawfully issued command from a police officer.

I see your point, and mostly agree, except with the caveat that police only have the right to use REASONABLE and NECESSARY force, and that only when it's required to gain compliance. That was absolutely not the case here. I think that's why such quick action has been taken against him.

When an officer uses unreasonable and/or unnecessary force, they have gone from upholding the law to breaking it themselves. When they do it against children, particularly against calm, nonviolent children, they have become outrageous child abusers rather than peace officers, and should be treated as such. At least, that's how I see it.
Perhaps I'm biased because at 4 years old I was lifted by the neck and thrown clear across the room for saying "no" to an adult. Looking back at that, it was definitely child abuse, but it did teach me the lesson that if you defy authority, even if authority is 100% in the wrong, you'll pay a price. A lesson worth learning, but a terrible way to teach it.

I do agree, disregarding his lawful command was a crime. I don't see how it required any violence to remedy, and I'm given hope by the fact that the school board and police have seen his actions as completely undefendable and have already taken steps to ensure at least HE doesn't repeat them, at least not with the authority of a badge.

Yeah, I agree that it wasn't reasonable or necessary force.

I've gotta say I'm disappointed with the extremity of your response.

To actually quote you, this may have been "Attempted murder" of a "Child"?

From the video this looks like a HS room, and the student looks not much different in size from many adults., so the child part seems a bit much, no? From the video, it sure doesn't look fatal. Heck, a typical fail video has more severe injuries in it.

My entire post though was asking what do we expect as a better response as a society? Is it really a good function of our school system that a student that refuses to go to the principals office requires not one, but two uniformed police officers to handle the situation correctly? I personally believe we've failed as a society a few steps before this.

Is it really best that we mandate that all school staff are absolutely forbidden to come into physical contact with the students? No taking a kid by the ear, certainly, as that could hurt them. Not even grabbing by the arm and dragging them to the office? Are we really wanting the only acceptable use of any physical force to require a pair of police officers called in?

Yes. If you grab a person 1/2 or less your size by the neck, hurl them to the ground while flipping them over backwards, still arm baring them by the neck, then you toss them across the room and jump on them, throwing them as hard as possible across the room into the wall head first, severe injury and/or death are totally foreseeable consequences. (If you look, her head nearly hits the desk behind her, and does hit the ground HARD).
As I clearly said, I 100% believe they would absolutely have charged any person doing this to an officer with attempted murder, and turnabout's fair play. It would have been wholly unsurprising if her neck had broken from that treatment.

It is totally proper to expect that, if one officer can't remove a child (or adult, for that matter) without resorting to violence (and god damn it, a high school girl is a child, so that attempted excusing of the attack falls completely flat), they call a second officer. If 2 officers can't remove a child without injury, call 3. Much better idea, call mom.
Perhaps we've failed as a society when we put actual cops (who have a serious issue with self control and violence lately) rather than trained security guards (EDIT: who don't have immunity or a blue wall to protect them from their own bad action) in schools, or when we resort to the most violent way of dealing with every issue rather than having a little common sense and calling a calm and quiet child's parent.
The reason teacher's can't touch them is to prevent the kind of actions the cop took. It's a protection system for the school and the teacher, to prevent them from being closed/fired by a lawsuit. In fact, it's illegal for a private citizen to touch another person without permission, so why would you want them to take the chance of losing their career and the school?

The fact that both the school system and the police force agree with me give me hope....but not much. The fact that so many people want to either blame the victim or excuse the outrageous, clearly over the top actions of the cop erases that hope.

4 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

I thought the same thing at first, however

"The Spring Valley High School girl who was violently taken down by a sheriff's deputy in Columbia, S.C., Monday recently lost her mother and is an orphan living in a foster home."

http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2015/10/spring_valley_high_orphan.html

I would hope the teacher and other school administrators knew about this and might have taken it into consideration when addressing her behaviour in class. It looks like they did not do that however. Why was she even in class? Why didn't they send in a counselor instead of a "resource officer"?

That is most unfortunate for her, and does negate the option to 'call her parents'.