[30564U]

Originally Posted by Shakey ↗

Did they get the drugs

Yup...they got the drugs...and the thugs.

[commondenom]

Originally Posted by Shakey ↗

Did they get the drugs

well they did have to beat it out of the dealer....literally....

[zin0]

Illegal search and seizure. Happens everyday. Pieces of shit.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by zin0 ↗

Illegal search and seizure. Happens everyday. Pieces of shit.

Absolutely not an illegal search or seizure...that's perhaps the only thing they got completely correct. How many times must I explain this? Learn the law before you start spouting off about it.

[zin0]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

Absolutely not an illegal search or seizure...that's perhaps the only thing they got completely correct. How many times must I explain this? Learn the law before you start spouting off about it.

You even said it yourself. They took his phone and deleted the video. What gives them the right to go and take his phone and go through his shit. He's in the wrong. I can film anything I want, no cops going to take my phone away. That's breaking the law.

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

Absolutely not an illegal search or seizure...that's perhaps the only thing they got completely correct. How many times must I explain this? Learn the law before you start spouting off about it.

These pigs used excessive force and yes it was an illegal search and seizure. They tried to illegally obtain and destroy video evidence. These pigs at the very least should lose their jobs and serve jail time, period.

[Mr Poo]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

Since I no longer need to deal with Mr. Poo's, Mr. Curvature's, and Mr. Condominimum's relentless harping and progressive agenda, I shall try to give my expert analysis of the video. First what totally inflammatory and biased reporting...check out the words used by the news readers...very biased.

Strangely, it isn't against the law or against general police policy to strike a suspect in the face when you are attempting to stop a suspect from destroying evidence, ingesting harmful drugs, and/or keep the suspect from chocking or causing harm to himself. Now, how hard and frequently you can strike a suspect in this circumstance is up for debate and will more than likely be the determining factor for future disciplinary action. Colorado's urban areas are quite liberal and anti-police, so it wouldn't surprise me that they lynch this officer no matter his justification.

As far as tripping the screaming pregnant idiot...no foul there. Officers are given very wide latitude in dealing with third parties interfering with an ongoing arrest. The pregnant idiot sure looked to me like she was going to kick the officer when he sweep her kankles out from under her. Her being pregnant will play no role or factor in this use of force investigation...only the media will harp on this aspect of the use of force. There is absolutely no excessive or unreasonable use of force on the pregnant chick...she's a non issue.

Now, for the real issue and the hinge pin for any criminal case and any future civil case...grabbing the camera device and intentionally erasing the video. This one act was by far the worst thing the officers could do or did during this entire incident. It leads even the most pro-police viewer (like me) to immediately think there was a conspiracy to destroy evidence. See, by trying to destroy video evidence they put out the idea that they did something wrong or illegal (whether they did or not). That those officers tried to do that indicates that even those officers thought what they did was illegal or wrong...they just sunk themselves. Regardless of how hard or frequently the officer hit the bad guy, no matter that he tripped an idiot screaming pregnant woman, no matter anything else that occurred during that incident, trying to erase the video was the worst and most inexcusable action those copper took.

There are rebutable issues of use of force in this incident, but those are overshadowed by the intentional illegal actions of officers to conceal their controversial activity. In other words, I could have gotten them off the hook with hitting the bad guy and tripping the pregnant idiot...but there's no way in Hell anyone can justify intentionally seizing a camera device from a third party and intentionally attempting to erase evidence and then engaging in an undocumented conspiracy to conceal their ham handed attempts at destroy evidence. These are criminal actions that will make a civil suit a cakewalk to win. It will probably never even go to court. What boobs. If only they hadn't tried to destroy the video.

Always thinking about me or what?

TL:DR

[30564U]

Originally Posted by zin0 ↗

You even said it yourself. They took his phone and deleted the video. What gives them the right to go and take his phone and go through his shit. He's in the wrong. I can film anything I want, no cops going to take my phone away. That's breaking the law.

Oh...ok you're talking about the cell phone issue. I thought you were talking about the initial contact and drug issue. I'm sorry...see I look at these cases in very separate parts. So I'll look at the initial reason for the contact, then the initial contact, then the reasons for other officers, then the first use of force issue, etc. Since I'd already determined the reasons for the initial contact was righteous and the initial search was righteous...I wasn't getting it. But, yeah, you're correct about the illegal search and seizure...sort of...nothing involving lawyers will be easy.

You are correct, as long as you're clearly not interfering or being an overt dickhead/smartass, filming the police doing their job is completely legal (about 98% of the time). Filming police activity in certain instances involving the Feds (national security issues) or at certain specific locations (national security locations) can result in your camera being seized and you being detained and even arrested so be careful who and where you're filming. The police have no right to not being filmed with very specific exclusions. As for what they did to the semi-retarded witness being called an illegal search and seizure...that's more of a civil issue not so much a criminal matter. Of course he's going to have to prove a loss of some kind...and since the video wasn't really lost and his recording device wasn't damaged he's got no property losses. He wasn't illegally detained for any significant amount of time so I'm not sure the copper's actions are going to lead to much in the way of a law suit. He'll do far more damage as a witness in the Internal Affairs investigation. He might get lucky and get a minor civil settlement out of court just to go away. Who knows?

[30564U]

Originally Posted by mr black ↗

These pigs used excessive force and yes it was an illegal search and seizure. They tried to illegally obtain and destroy video evidence. These pigs at the very least should lose their jobs and serve jail time, period.

What did I just say? You got the charges wrong...it's going to be intentional destruction of evidence that's going to get them...not anything having to do with an illegal search and seizure. They did do both, but it's a civil issue not a criminal issue. And they never destroyed anything...the damn video went to the cloud and was retrieved...that's what we watched. They'll get fired and both the cops and the department will get sued, but I really doubt they'll be criminally prosecuted.

[Illusion]

Originally Posted by 30564U ↗

What did I just say? You got the charges wrong...it's going to be intentional destruction of evidence that's going to get them...not anything having to do with an illegal search and seizure. They did do both, but it's a civil issue not a criminal issue. And they never destroyed anything...the damn video went to the cloud and was retrieved...that's what we watched. They'll get fired and both the cops and the department will get sued, but I really doubt they'll be criminally prosecuted.

If you accept this type of behavior as being the norm then how are you any different from the pigs in the video?

Then you wonder why the public is turning on cops.