Attorney says TPD subjected woman to 'police brutality' during DUI arrest (Warning Graphic video)

If their actions are found to be justified, then ...

. Originally Posted by LexusLover

justified? Are you blind and deaf? Based on the video what is your view? Was it justified? My guess is , you think it is. Unbelievable.

If their actions are found to be justified then there is no justice and pussy boy JewishLawyer will eventually get the anarchy he is so scared of. Police action like that is expected in say North Korea. Maybe JewishLawyer can move there.

"taken down" is a very mild way of putting it. Originally Posted by JCM800

Well, naturally, I watched the whole video before commenting. If you noticed, after she slipped out of the cuffs, technically not an escape but a good start, she also then resisted being recuffed. Asked to comply, she didn't, and was taken down. What you saw on that video is repeated dozens of times a day on noncompliant suspects, including drunk ones that crash their cars like her.
100 pound women shouldn't resist 250 pound cops and not expect a little roughness. They didn't beat her, they took down a suspect under arrest who had slipped out of her cuffs, probably because they didn't make them tight to be nice to the lady, who gave them a good cussing out after she figured out she couldn't sweet talk them. The injuries were an accident, but that is what you get for resisting arrest.
How many of you guys allow your wife to drive drunk at 3:30 in the morning, anyway?

.
How many of you guys allow your wife to drive drunk at 3:30 in the morning, anyway? Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Allow? You are living in the past my friend. Last I checked women were allowed to vote.

Is that how you treat your Asian hookers if they don't comply with your commands? Is that how you would treat a woman? Is that how you would want the cops to treat your wife , mother or daughter? Even if they had had to much to drink?

The fact of the matter is that one cop does not need to be a cop. He slammed the lady down and escalated what was a situation under control.

Move to North Korea if so.

+100 ....

The officer ordered her out of the backseat 3 times after she uncuffed herself, told her to turn around and put her hands behind her back after she was out of unit.

She probably also thinks it will get her out of the DUI.

Pay her damages, if there is a finding that their actions were not justified ...

Then sentence her to 6 months jail, plus $1,000 fine, license suspension, drunk school, and anger management ...

Make sure the officers get issued baby cuffs or waist restraints for "petites" ...

Fire the officers, if they don't resign, based on a judicial finding of "not justified."

If their actions are found to be justified, then ...

charge her with resisting arrest and if she struck or pushed any of the officers ... add a charge of assault on a peace officer ... sentence her to maximum time and maximum fine. to be served consecutively, not concurrently, if she is found guilty.

Anybody in favor of Zimmerman being convicted of murder ....

.......... can't argue with that! If you do ... you just want to argue. Like her. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Maximum time and maximum fine? And consecutive sentences, not concurrent?

For what? What on earth did she do that she deserves to have the book thrown at her?

You really have it out for her, don't you?

I don't see any assault of a police officer anywhere in there. Can you please point out anything that constitutes assault? I see them slamming her off the car and on the ground, but I don't see her have anything but incidental contact with them as they manhandle her.

If bumping against a cop while they are twisting your arm behind back constitutes assault, what would you call it if someone actually punched a cop?

And one other thing: Why do the cops just get fired if their actions are not justified? Why don't they get charged with criminal assault with maximum fine and maximum sentence - consecutive, of course, not concurrent?

justified? Are you blind and deaf? Originally Posted by WTF

I'm familiar with your powers of analytical evaluation of incidents

.... and where your money goes when you bet on them.

Apparently you don't believe in the criminal justice system or the civil justice system ...

.. you apparently prefer the WTF justice system.

Why do the cops just get fired if their actions are not justified? Why don't they get charged with criminal assault with maximum fine and maximum sentence - consecutive, of course, not concurrent? Originally Posted by ExNYer

They don't. They get charged criminally and tried criminally with punishments.... and if the state courts don't "get it right" the Feds jump on them ...

ala Rodney King.

Then they can get civilly sued for the assault ... she can get a big judgment against them....... they get a lot of visibility and notoriety ... and she gets no money.... unless she signs a book deal .... I'm wiling to let the judicial system work ... as opposed to the

"sand lot" mentality of a hooker blog where guys are allowing their machismo to regulate their mouths ... turning the posting into a locker room atmosphere ... stinking name calling.

.. by the way .. when do you decide the "victim" has to begin taking responsibility for their own welfare and attempt to avoid becoming a "victim" .... have you drawn any "red lines in the sand" on that continuum?

Wonder why her "boyfriend" didn't come out and "save her" ... BEFORE ... they put her in the back of the police unit THE FIRST TIME?

And who were those 3 guys walking by and getting into the backseat of the other unit?

Did you hear the officer order her out of the car 3 times ...

She's drunk and pissed. Not a good combination: a she, drunk, and pissed.

I'm familiar with your powers of analytical evaluation of incidents

.... and where your money goes when you bet on them.

Apparently you don't believe in the criminal justice system or the civil justice system ...

.. you apparently prefer the WTF justice system. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I believe that one cop should be fired. We all have our own belief system. Sometimes it matches up the the criminal justice system sometimes it does not. That can be said with everybody , including you.

Dashcam video shows officers giving West a field sobriety test after she crashed her SUV into a house on Aug. 10. West is placed in a patrol car, but she is later asked to get out of the car. (D.A. agreed there was no need for a breathalizer since it was already determined she was inebriated at that point).

A struggle occurs while the woman is asking her about her husband and a car seat for her child, and the two officers slam her head into the cruiser. And then the two men force her to the ground with their full weight, causing her to scream in agony as her face is smashed on the pavement.

But Officer Chris Ormerod’s police report described this incident this way: “West was placed on the ground where she began to thrash and kick wildly. West kicked me in the groin area and kicked officer Schmidt in the leg… West was placed in a thigh lock on the ground as I secured her hands. While handcuffing West’s hands, she continued to violently make attempts to grab for my groin area with her hands.”

After reviewing the video, City Commissioner Scott Maddox wrote City Manager Anita Favors Thompson and City Attorney Lew Shelley that the city should expect a “substantial” lawsuit, according to Tallahassee Democrat.

“The video was taken from the police car and shows the road side sobriety test as well as the arrest of the subject,” Maddox noted. “It also shows DISTURBING use of force against a completely non aggressive arrestee. It is my belief that the city of Tallahassee will soon face a liability lawsuit based on the content of the video.”

West has already had two surgeries as a result of her injuries.

I do not think they are "psychopath", just above the law. Instead of defusing the situation, they escalated it. Bad training in my book. Originally Posted by WTF

I would agree, certainly a training issue. Go back and view the video and notice the cheesy Field Sobriety Test he gave her. Field Sobriety tests are conducted to determine impairment. The only thing she did was recite her "ABC's" although she said them wrong that hardly shows any impairment. The standard FST that are normally given to determine impairment are Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand and Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus. The issue with the hand cuffs is total bullshit they weren't to big for her wrist. They were either malfunctioning or she wasn't cuffed properly, although this maybe speculation they probably weren't double locked either. All in all these officers made multiple mistakes in my opinion. Professionalism and leadership at this scene went completely out the window the minute they took her out of the car. Poor retention of training or lack there of definitely played a role here.

This is the thing though:
So, they say their actions are legitimate because she was thrashing wildly and assaulting them. And they filed charges to that effect.
But those charges were dismissed, right? Meaning that she wasn't thrashing wildly. And she wasn't assaulting him.
Taking the next logical step in this logic (which police departments never seem to take) we can say that their actions were not legitimate because the reason they cited for their behavior has now been found to be invalid.

Field Sobriety tests are conducted to determine impairment. The only thing she did was recite her "ABC's" although she said them wrong that hardly shows any impairment. The standard FST that are normally given to determine impairment are Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand and Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus. The issue with the hand cuffs is total bullshit they weren't to big for her wrist. They were either malfunctioning or she wasn't cuffed properly, although this maybe speculation they probably weren't double locked either. . Originally Posted by acp5762

#1: FSTs ... if they believe her too intoxicated (loss of balance) they won't give the tests. ABC's and finger to nose, even counting with fingers to the thumb can be "substituted" ... if you notice before she was cuffed she was standing with her feet far apart as though she were trying to keep her balance.....or unable to comprehend the instructions she is being given ... at first I thought she was "flirting" with them .. showing off in the short skirt ...

#2: cuffs ... she was small and females have a knack for slipping out of cuffs ... they can even slide them over their butts and pull their feet through their arms and end up with them in the front ... (officers have died from that) .... FYI: double locking doesn't secure them from opening ..double locking keeps them from getting tighter on the wrists and cutting off circulation... it would actually have made it harder for her to get them off if not double locked, because her moving around in the backseat would cause them to rachet down on her wrists.

#3: Her actions. If you full screen the video and look at the portion showing her after they removed her from the backseat ... you can see that she is turning on them as they try to recuff her ... she was locking her elbow and keeping her arm straight while turning ... she did that on the ground as well ... spreading her arms out to the side and locking them at the elbow .. they have to pull her arms then to get them behind her to secure the handcuffs.

I'll keep saying it ... and it is not "siding with LE" ... just comply with the requests. It is in your best interests.

If you actually believe (sober) that you have not violated the law, then deal with that later, but don't add to the charges or aggravate the arresting officer(s) by trying to physically prevent them from arresting you. You will get hurt and their buddies will show up and so will nearby officers from nearby departments ... you will not win.

It's like a car chase ... too many of them end badly for the suspect and sometimes innocent citizens... which just adds charges. You are not going to outrun the radio.

If you watch the video she agreed to take a breath test at thr station . The officrts wrre suprised . After slamming her to the ground they then lie about her saying yes to that test. If someone is bre a king you arm you two police apologists might squirm too.

If someone is bre a king you arm you two police apologists might squirm too. Originally Posted by WTF

Was someone breaking her arm?

All she had to do was put her hands behind her back......

.. after she was removed from the car AND while she was on the ground.

#1: FSTs ... if they believe her too intoxicated (loss of balance) they won't give the tests. ABC's and finger to nose, even counting with fingers to the thumb can be "substituted" ... if you notice before she was cuffed she was standing with her feet far apart as though she were trying to keep her balance.....or unable to comprehend the instructions she is being given ... at first I thought she was "flirting" with them .. showing off in the short skirt ...

#2: cuffs ... she was small and females have a knack for slipping out of cuffs ... they can even slide them over their butts and pull their feet through their arms and end up with them in the front ... (officers have died from that) .... FYI: double locking doesn't secure them from opening ..double locking keeps them from getting tighter on the wrists and cutting off circulation... it would actually have made it harder for her to get them off if not double locked, because her moving around in the backseat would cause them to rachet down on her wrists.

#3: Her actions. If you full screen the video and look at the portion showing her after they removed her from the backseat ... you can see that she is turning on them as they try to recuff her ... she was locking her elbow and keeping her arm straight while turning ... she did that on the ground as well ... spreading her arms out to the side and locking them at the elbow .. they have to pull her arms then to get them behind her to secure the handcuffs.

I'll keep saying it ... and it is not "siding with LE" ... just comply with the requests. It is in your best interests.

If you actually believe (sober) that you have not violated the law, then deal with that later, but don't add to the charges or aggravate the arresting officer(s) by trying to physically prevent them from arresting you. You will get hurt and their buddies will show up and so will nearby officers from nearby departments ... you will not win.

It's like a car chase ... too many of them end badly for the suspect and sometimes innocent citizens... which just adds charges. You are not going to outrun the radio. Originally Posted by LexusLover

You don't know what you're talking about. A FST is conducted to determine the possibility of impairment and to establish probable cause. Even if an officer finds it obvious that there is impairment if he has any investigative sense at all he'll do a FST to document his findings at the time he made contact with the driver for court purposes. As far as the Hand Cuff issue she wasn't that small for standard hand cuffs to restrain her properly, and even if they didn't there is always the plastic zip tie alternative. Above all else these Officers conducted themselves improperly and that's all there is to it.

Was someone breaking her arm?

All she had to do was put her hands behind her back......

.. after she was removed from the car AND while she was on the ground. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Kind of hard to do when you have just been seriously injured and having a broken face smashed into the pavement, in extreme pain, and most likely not even aware of how your arms are positioned.

By the way, I am reading another news article that said she has had to have two separate surgeries to repair the damage to her face. In addition it looks like they are re-investigating or re-evaluating now, due to public pressure and the lawsuit.