>>>MOD ALERT<<<Pinellas deputy fired for excessive force in traffic stop

He was violent for like 30 seconds to than say "you are under arrest" for fighting.
It's obvious he was fighting, and she was not. Hence he got fired.
But good for sticking up for a known lying violent thug with a badge

 

The claim of the cop is that she was fighting him. In what split second did that happen? lol

 

So you are foolish enough to try to engage in a debate on this without reading the OP and getting the facts. How typical

"He arrested the driver for driving on a suspended license, then directed the woman to get out of the vehicle."

So again and how about an honest answer this time and be specific.

He ordered her out of the vehicle so the stop could proceed. She grabbed her license out of his hand and turned to walk away disobeying his lawful order.
What should have happened next?

Unless you can state a clear direct alternate you are just blowing smoke.

What obviously should he have done?

 

He placed her under arrest THEN ordered her out of the vehicle, she attempted to leave the scene while that arrest was occurring.

What should he have done?

 

You're making it up, just like that white violent thug with a badge claimed he was in a fight.

 

That is what he was doing when she attempted to leave the scene

So what should he have done when she did so?

I have big problems with police officers lying in their reports and if his supervisor determined he lied in the report then so be it he should have been fired.

Try again and focus like a laser.

He was placing her under arrest, she was under detention.

What should he have done when she attempted to leave the scene of the arrest that was occurring. Be specific this time.

- - - Updated - - -

So another person who comes to argue the issue without knowing the facts. They are in the OP

"He arrested the driver for driving on a suspended license, then directed the woman to get out of the vehicle."

 

At 0.41 she asks: what are you doing?
He replies: you're under arrest
She asks: for what?
He replies: For battery on a law enforcement officer.

That is in the vid and in the OP.
That makes him a lying angry white male with a badge.

That claim the license was suspended by a lying angry white male,...
not worth a thing. lol. His career ended right there with a bogus arrest.

 

Detained her, not assault her. Is that specific enough and if you think he should have been fired what is the conversation about.

 

Yea she was then facing that charge the fact remains according to the sheriffs department he placed her under arrest and then ordered her out of the truck. She was being detained. So when she attempted to leave what should the officer have done?

- - - Updated - - -

Detain her how when she has turned and isbleaving the scene?

This is about the arrest not the report.

 

A bogus charge where he lied about, hence he got fired.

It's really really simple. To not make up a bogus charge. And I really think you're overlooking the fact of a white thug with a badge making up the truth, since you're only eyeballing what that black woman is doing. Does race play a roll in your selective view?

Besides manhandling her. If he was able have his arms all away around her waist to than smal her in the side of a car, than he could have done something else. Obviously. At no point did she even run.

 

Its done everyday and slamming her to the ground is not necessary.

The arrest was a part of the problem, along with lying on the report.

 

Dodge noted.

The question is REAL simple.

She was placed under arrest before she exited the vehicle, you know the reason she was ordered to exit the vehicle. She then grabbed her license turned her back and started to leave the scene, walking or running does not matter. She was under arrest and refusing to comply.

At that point what was the officer to do?

Now focus like a laser and answer the question.

- - - Updated - - -

Dodge noted again.

At the point she refused to comply with the arrest and turned to leave the scene what was the officer to do?

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*) noted again.

How do we know she refused to comply? I haven't heard any audio that she was refusing to comply, have you?

I have seen the police arrest folks and they didn't slam them against a vehicle and then slam them to the ground, especially, a woman.

Are you saying that is how it is suppose to be done.

 

I see people are still defending the cop on the assumption that his initial lie(the one we already know to have been a lie) is true. We have no good reason to believe any part of his story, none of it.

You're getting the idea that he had already placed her under arrest before this video

[video=youtube;ylbHMDq_vjc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylbHMDq_vjc[/video]

from him(the known liar). Then you say he detained her; which is it? They're not the same.

Anyway, this

she asks: what are you doing?
He replies: you're under arrest
She asks: for what?
He replies: For battery on a law enforcement officer.

is not the kind of exchange we would expect to hear between a cop, who had just moments prior, already arrested her for something thing else, and the person he had just placed under arrest.

Look at his body at the very beginning of the video, including his right arm(he is handing something out as if he expects it to be received by the other person), up to the point where she snatches it.

Does that look like the demeanor of a cop who has just placed someone under arrest?

He is a proven liar. You would do well to disregard his ENTIRE testimony.

 

Read the OP she was placed under arrest and asked to exit the vehicle. Had it merely been the issuance of a citation she would not have been asked to leave the vehicle.

So she tried to leave scene and refused to cooperate with the arrest, what is an officer to do at that point?

 

What the hell are you wanting folks to say?

Nobody is saying that she shouldn't have been arrested if that was the case, it was manner in which he handled her. What part of that don't you understand.

Besides we don't know what was being said, since there is no audio and if he lied on the report how do we know he wasn't lying about everything else.

 

What I think happened is the same thing that usually happens:

With no plan whatsoever, he acted on impulse, as toddlers and cops so often do, and, after the fact, he made up a convoluted story bearing no resemblance to the facts.

If he could have gotten away with it, he would have had no problem having that woman spend years in prison for something he know damn good and well she didn't do.

The most appropriate punishment for him would be exactly what he tried to do to her.

 

Exactly!

I read it. Where did the Sheriff's Department get the idea that he had placed her under arrest for anything prior to the point at which the video begins? From his report, right? Is that story consistent with what you see in the video, particularly the aspects I pointed to in post #80?

 

How about the police get some thicker skin. Suspect has a pet? Shoot the pet and claim it was going to attack. Guy lips off? Beat the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of him and accuse him of assault. Guy runs from you? Shoot him and say he was going for a gun. Yep, way to uphold the law.

 

Not make up a bogus arrest that you as a cop were attacked, when you were not.
That's the stuff why the cop got fired. And it was right to fire the cop over that.

That is what really matters. That is the topic of this thread.
And I do notice you're unwilling to discuss this.

 

Oh do read the OP and do watch the vid.
At what point is that woman fighting with a cop? The cop arrested her over that claim.
And the vid clearly shows the cop is bluntly lying of what went on.

Hence they fired the lying cop.
Good riddance to that white violent piece of trash with a badge.

 

This thread is funny.

The cop knew that he used excessive force so he lied about what happened to cover his ass.

His superiors knew that he used excessive force and then lied about it which is why they fired him.

Then there are the internet experts who say he didn't use excessive force which implies that the superiors in the Pinellas county sheriff's department are incompetent and makes a mystery of why the cop would lie in the first place.

 

Dodge noted again, just as you dodged the issue in the Martin case and all the others

When she grabbed her license and turned to walk away. But then you already know that.

What is an officer to do when a person refuses to comply with their lawful orders during an arrest and attempts to leave the scene?

- - - Updated - - -

Fine I am glad you agree she should have been arrested.

The question is what is an officer supposed to do when the person refuses to comply with the arrest and attempts to leave the scene?

- - - Updated - - -

Plan? What on earth kind of "plan" is he supposed to have. He pulls someone over with a record of a suspended license, that person refuse to comply with the arrest and attempts to leave the scene.

What is the officer supposed to do at that point?

 

It is funny...it shows that some people get outraged and argue for 8 pages about petty sh*t that most people don't know or care about.

When this thread ends you will never hear of it again, and probably never would have if you didn't live there and sbb wasn't dealing another race card.

She'll sue a local sheriffs department, they will settle out of court and that will be the end of it.

 

Because I have no doubt he ran her license and the report back was her license is under suspension by order of the court and if she is caught driving illegally that means she gets arrested. I person who is merely recieving a ticket is not order out of the vehicle, person being place under arrest are.

Convince me she was not being placed under arrest.