NYPD Officer Takes Cash From Man During Stop-And-Frisk; Pepper Sprays Him When He Asks To Have It Returned
from the oh,-these-aren't-weapons,-these-are-ANSWERS dept
Here’s a very short clip involving the seizure of funds by police and pepper spray as the answer to all questions.
In a video obtained by the New York Times, an unnamed officer forces 35-year-old Lamard Joye against a fence surrounding a Coney Island basketball court and removes what appears to be a handful of cash from Joye’s pocket at the six-second mark.
“You see this? You see this?” Joye says, before demanding his money back. The officer replies, “You’re gonna mouth off?” and begins to discharge pepper spray into Joye’s face.
Joye’s sister also gets pepper sprayed after asking the officer to state his name.
Joye was not arrested and has yet to receive his money back. He claims Officer William Montemarano took $1300 from him during this “stop-and-frisk.”
The NYPD has issued a statement in defense of Officer Montemarano.
Following accusations that a New York City police officer stole $1,300 in cash from a Brooklyn man during a stop-and-frisk, the department said all the man had was $62, which has been vouchered.
“No one stole $1,300,” Deputy Commissioner Stephen Davis told the New York Daily News Thursday.
Apparently it’s OK to take money from uncharged individuals during stop-and-frisks as long as it’s: a) not very much money, and b) it’s vouchered at the station.
What went unaddressed was the officer’s use of pepper spray to shut up both Joye and his sister, who were both asking for the return of the money taken by Montemarano.
Between the asset seizure and the low-level brutality, there’s not much about this that’s all that surprising. Small abuses of power like these happen every single day. The only thing that’s changed is the likelihood that someone will record the incident.
Gothamist’s coverage of the story adds this very enlightening comment, presumably left by a fellow cop at Thee Rant, a forum frequented by law enforcement officers.
I know this cop and he is a solid guy with (if not) 20 years, very close to it.
It is possible that he has even more than 20 years.
I cannot fathom why he is still running around on Patrol. Truly unf u c k i n g believable.
[One possible reason? Officer Montemurano was recently named in a police brutality lawsuit alleging that he and another officer beat an arrestee with their nightsticks and kicked him in the throat. The city settled for $25,000.]
From an OBJECTIVE point of view and NOT KNOWING WHY the cops were called to this scene, I do not know WHY he would remove a wad of money from someone’s pocket.
MONEY is not contraband and UNLESS you are collaring someone for robbery, GL or narcotics sales and are going to voucher the money as proceeds of a crime, you have no business WHATSOEVER removing money from a mope’s pocket.
I repeat, you have no business taking money out of some mope’s pocket because he is a loud mouth involved in a large dispute, which is what this situation appears to be.
That said, I would bet my house that this officer returned the money or vouchered it – he did NOT steal this money.
[Which seems to have been confirmed by the NYPD statement, but doesn’t explain why money is being taken from someone who wasn’t arrested.]
Spritzing the crowd with mace a la DI Bologna* is the cherry on top of the Sundae. In the current climate, that is going to be a problem.
I must say, the daily videos and the daily wholesale suspensions and modifications of MOS have left me exasperated.
It is as if the cops are completely OBLIVIOUS.
Do they read newspapers, do they ever watch TV, do they speak to other cops, do they ever see the Finest spitting out these ‘change of duty’ statuses?
It would appear that they do not.
It would appear that they are blissfully ignorant of what is going on in the world around them.
It appears that the PBA says and does nothing to raise their awareness that there is an anti-cop feeding frenzy in progress.
I am bewildered as to how this all continues…..
*Refresher link for Deputy Inspector Bologna’s love of pepper spray.
This forum member makes a point that very few within the law enforcement community will ever raise. It’s no longer business as usual out there. People are watching.
It’s as if a majority of law enforcement agencies view the current “anti-cop feeding frenzy” as some sort of a fad — something they can just muscle through without changing officer behavior, altering their training or even holding those caught in the act accountable for their misconduct.
Everyone has a camera these days. Anyone with a cell phone also has a recording device. YouTube gives everyone a platform to lift local incidents into the worldwide consciousness.
It’s not just the ubiquity of cameras, though. It’s the interconnectedness the internet provides. Brutality or misconduct lawsuits filed in small towns used to only be covered in local papers. Now, even the smallest of local news websites can be swept into basic searches for information.
And yet, the pace of these incidents doesn’t seem to be slowing. Officers are still acting as though their worst behavior is still largely unobserved. They’re not learning from the past mistakes of countless others. Even those who have been “burned” previously continue to act as though they can abuse their power to harass and intimidate people. Just read through the numerous postings at Photography Is Not A Crime. Many of the posts deal with the same law enforcement entities and the same accountability activists, and yet, there’s no indication that policy changes or previous bad press have had any deterrent effect on the officers involved.
As the forum comment points out, there’s no apparent sense of self-awareness evident in officers like Montemarano. He notes that the PBA (Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association) isn’t doing anything to help officers be more aware of public perception. I don’t know why he’s surprised by this. The PBA, like many other police unions, is one of the first entities to protest any changes in policy meant to address police misconduct, and actively fights additional accountability efforts like the use of body cameras. These unions are also instrumental in returning fired cops to their former positions, showing that even when local PDs finally make an effort to shed the worst in their ranks, their efforts can often be undone by entities that put an officer’s employment well ahead of the public interest and the police department itself.
It’s not that there aren’t any positive signs. It’s that there are so few, compared to the amount of citizen documentation piling up. This isn’t some temporary change in public perception. It’s ongoing, and it’s not going to get any better if law enforcement officers remain insulated from accountability and wholly oblivious to the implications of their actions.
Filed Under: money, nypd, pepper spray, stealing, stop and frisk
Comments on “NYPD Officer Takes Cash From Man During Stop-And-Frisk; Pepper Sprays Him When He Asks To Have It Returned”
Easily explained
And yet, the pace of these incidents doesn’t seem to be slowing. Officers are still acting as though their worst behavior is still largely unobserved. They’re not learning from the past mistakes of countless others. Even those who have been “burned” previously continue to act as though they can abuse their power to harass and intimidate people.
They remain ‘oblivious’ to it for the simple reason that it doesn’t matter. Sure they got recorded macing someone for talking back, or beating someone, or robbing someone. What happens when that recording goes public?
Nothing.
They aren’t fired, they aren’t shifted to a desk-job to account for their inability to act like an adult around other people, any ‘investigation’ inevitably clears them, and if that doesn’t work their union will almost always fight to get their job back, no matter what they were charged with.
They don’t care because even when people record their abuses of authority and criminal actions, they are never held accountable for them.
Once they see their own paychecks docked, their own pensions reduced to pay out settlement funds…
Once they start getting fired or demoted for their actions…
Once they are held accountable and charged with the crimes they commit under the ‘authority’ of their badge…
Only then then will care, but not a second before.
Re: Easily explained
I have a feeling something far worse is going to start happening to these Above the law type LEO’s , I don’t condone it and I think it’s self defeating but if you back someone in to the corner long enough ,sooner or later they’ll come out swinging or shooting , We’ll see another Ferguson but it won’t be the police that are shutting things down.
Re: Re: Easily explained
That is exactly what they hope happens. Then martial law is declared and a search and seizure of everyone occurs. Move the bar and it never gets moved back.
Re: Re: Re: Easily explained
You must be stupid.
Do you think the Crown wanted the Colonies to rebel? Look what happened. Do you think the feds wanted the Bundy Ranch people to fight back? Look what happened. Do you think they want the Ferguson mobs to keep going? Look at what is happening.
NO they don’t hope that we fight back (except a crazy few), they WANT us to keep rolling over just as you suggested acting like its bad if we fight back.
This is the mentality of a bully! Recognize it for what it is… you must have Stockholm syndrome and possibly have traded in your bravery for a cowards card.
Re: Re: Re:2 Easily explained
the ferguson cops choosing to wear the “I am Darren Wilson” bracelets looks a lot like they are trying to make the citizens of ferguson react badly towards them.
Or in other words looks like the cops are trying to pour more fuel on the fire.
Re: Re: Re:2 Easily explained
Actually, there is some truth to this notion that police desire a violent response to their overreaching behavior.
Its a rather circular argument obviously, but the additional civilian disobedience and retaliation helps explain the rationalization presented by police forces for their militarization and use of excessive force.
If the assaulted public was to go meekly into the camera light, there would be no public perception of a “need” for massive police budgets and the purchase of tanks and armored personnel carriers.
Television alone cannot hope to fully reprogram the public via its continual use of the public-as-terrorist police show plots and the silly notion that police officers are always hunted down by the people they put in prison, seeking revenge when they “get out”.
Sometimes you just have to get out there and break a few heads until someone in the general public-under-assault, actually reacts badly enough to make the headlines process workable.
By abusing the public during the normal course of events, police are able to enlarge the event in the direction of civil disobedience and thus manufacture the evidence needed to prove the necessity of their “arming up” and increasing budget size.
Of course, for those of you who think this is all just happening because of coincidence and bad luck, combined with better equipped and more evil bad guys, and who believe that such institutions as the police force can never become corrupt or self serving, I suppose this explanation will appear to be just another tin-foil hat brain-fart. 🙂
C’est la vie eh!
—
Re: Re: Easily explained
almost makes the chris dorner incident look justified
Re: Easily explained
Either citizens will keep taking it up the ass, or they will start fighting back. By that I mean shooting cops or beating them up
Re: Re: Easily explained
Almost time to start writing “The Declaration of Independence 2.0”
” When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the Police bands which have repressed them from another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
Re: Easily explained
Well, at least some police are held accountable. Apparently stealing a $1.49 bag of popcorn from a store is punishable but stealing cash and macing individuals is allowed.
http://www.toledoblade.com/Courts/2014/10/10/TPD-officer-found-guilty-of-stealing-1-49-popcorn.html
Re: Re: Easily explained
From the Tao of Pratchett:
“Steal a little and you’re a thief. Steal a lot and you’re either the government or a Hero.”
Like the poster above me said, the essential problem is that there is no accountability. In fact there is a powerful structure of unaccountability that has grown in place over decades.
Anybody who works in any non-government job is held accountable for serious mistakes that conflict with the primary nature of the job. Work at a bank and make a mistake that costs the bank a million bucks and you will be fired. Work a restaurant and make a mistake that sickens a bunch of customers and you will be fired. But if you work as a cop and break the law and subvert justice and brutalize members of the public and you will be shuffled around and protected.
The only solution is to start rolling back the web of legal privilege and protection that cops have been granted. First step would be to ban police unions.
But none of this will happen because, for every one of us online who is outraged about things like this, there are 10 suburban voters who are happy to have the cops beating on “thugs” and “criminals” (which are their codewords for minorities).
Re: Re:
“thugs” and “criminals” (which are their codewords for minorities).
Since you say things like this without proof or evidence, you automatically make anyone who didn’t already agree with you disagree a bit more.
In fact the above statement is not the least bit true. It looks like you are trying to start a class war between people that live in the cities and everyone else.
Maybe you are just a troll, but the rest of your post makes me think not.
Re: Re: Re:
I have no idea about the ratios, but if you want to see plenty of clear evidence of that attitude, take a look at the comment section on any Yahoo news article about Ferguson. It may be that hard core racists like that are a minority, but to say that it “is not the least bit true” is ignoring reality. Those people genuinely believe the the bullshit about “if you haven’t done anything wrong”.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I wouldn’t use anything related to Ferguson to demonstrate any point about real people. It looks like there is so much paid and unpaid astro-turfing about the subject that it will throw off any analysis.
Also, Ferguson is a sensitive subject, so it brings out the trolls. They know a lot of people will react, so they post the most offensive thing they can think of.
Now, there is no doubt there are still people in the suburbs (and everywhere else for that matter) that think all minorities are thugs and criminals and should be arrested by the police. There is little doubt that that describes most, if not all, of the Ferguson police department. But there is no reason to alienate all of the people that don’t think the color of your skin determines how hard the police should hit you.
America is well on its way to becoming a police state. Most of the people that read this blog think that’s a bad thing. If the present course of the country is to be changed, people that want change need to be inclusive. Otherwise they risk causing people who would otherwise support change to fight it.
Re: Re: Re:
Except in Coney Island they (the cops) still openly refer to them as spics and niggers etc….pretty much 100% racist thug police force that does almost zero to help the public and has been accused multiple times of taking seized narcotics from evidence and re-selling it themselves…..
Re: Re:
Not in the financial sector! Then you get bailouts and golden parachutes!
Re: Re:
Banning Unions isn’t the answer , creating a Citizens Union would be the better move , Think about how bad off our Country is now ,that in part is due to lack of Unions , If you start removing Unions we end up with a country full of Walmart employers , most of the nation as it is can’t live on a single pay check , due to low pay ..I America we need Unions more than ever It’s the only thing that keeps corporations in check.
Re: Re:
it used to be, that -for the most part- the kop riots, head-cracking, and nasty, brutish behavior was reserved for either minorities, DFH’s, or scumbag criminals the silent majority would not object to getting the skulls cracked…
2. now ? it’s getting to the point where even your ‘white privilege’ won’t protect you from kops on the rampage… obviously, when it was mostly minorities, not much outrage; now that it could be ANY of us jacked up by roid-raging kops for NO REASON, the outrage is multiplying…
3. Empire really does not care if you are black or white, it only wants compliance and sacrifice for Empire…
4. also, in spite of the anon cow below you, you ARE correct that quite often ‘thugs’, etc are terms that are used to signify, well, you know, not the right sort of people… kops (as well as other subcultures) have their own ‘code’ words for minorities, etc they come to despise and blame for their own shit worldview…
Empire must fall…
the sooner the fall,
the gentler for all
3.
Well here’s one of the problems right here. Those who have been “burned” previously still have the power to abuse, harass and intimidate.
While I don’t condone the officer’s behavior, I also have to question the individual who claimed to have $1300 in cash. Anyone can make up an arbitrary number like that in order to make this into a bigger issue than it is. Without proof that he had that money, such a recent cashed check or an ATM withdrawal slip, then there’s no way for the suspect to prove that he had that money.
But, I also blame this on the anti-police sentiment that has been artificially created by morons running around everywhere, creating a nuisance of themselves, by taking every opportunity to find an excuse to record everyone and everybody.
What’s sad is that everyone waves the first amendment around like some baton and Americans have worn it out.
Re: Re:
It’s not ‘anti-police’ sentiment, it’s ‘anti corrupt police’ sentiment, or perhaps ‘pro police accountability‘.
But, I also blame this on the anti-police sentiment that has been artificially created by morons running around everywhere, creating a nuisance of themselves, by taking every opportunity to find an excuse to record everyone and everybody.
The public has been forced into trying to keep track of what the police do, because the police themselves have shown no interest in doing so.
As well, if something come to trial, or similar, and a person has to depend on what they claim happened, versus what a cop claimed happened as their sole evidence? If that’s all they have, they are going to lose, even if they are completely honest, and the cop is lying through his/her teeth. Taking a video is an attempt to balance the scales a bit, by introducing verifiable evidence.
Re: Re: Claim vs Counterclaim
Here, it is all he’s got. In the video, we see cash. But it could as easily be 1300 as 62. At least for this German who’s only ever seen 2 10-dollar bills in his life. 😀 So, does this looks more like, say 13 100-dollar bills or something smaller?
He claims it’s been 1300. Cops claims it’s 62. Cop’s right of course, of why would anyone doubt a cop’s word?
Re: Re: Re: Claim vs Counterclaim
By the time the cop got back to the station is was only $62
Re: Re: Re: Claim vs Counterclaim
I trust the victim’s word over that of the mugger. The mugger has a motive to lie and even if the victim exaggerated the amount, then any additional amount claimed may be considered the penalty for mugging them in the first place. We have proof money was stolen. If you don’t want to be on the hook for whatever damages are claimed, don’t steal it.
Re: Re: Re: Claim vs Counterclaim
“why would anyone doubt a cop’s word?”
Experience.
Re: Re: Re:
The problem is, that the police have been told to be corrupt by their superiors. Look up parallel construction and the DEA. The IRS accidentally confirmed that they were doing the same thing.
So now corrupt police == police and they have the feds to thank for it. In the minds of many of the public, the police are now guilty until proven innocent. Just like the police would like us to believe of everyone they arrest.
Re: Re: Re:
What’s funnier is this pinhead whining about the public having the “audacity” to record things – but not figures in authority.
Re: Re:
That is the politicians approach to following the law, the only crime is getting caught breaking it, and the response to being caught is to make it harder for people to catch them breaking the laws.
Re: Re:
Apparently Mr. Anonymous Coward did not click through to the NY Times article, or he would have seen that there is documentation to support the claimed amount of $1,300:
Re: Re:
While I don’t condone the officer’s behavior, I also have to question the individual who claimed to have $1300 in cash. Anyone can make up an arbitrary number like that in order to make this into a bigger issue than it is. Without proof that he had that money, such a recent cashed check or an ATM withdrawal slip, then there’s no way for the suspect to prove that he had that money.
The article linked said it was the man’s birthday. It is entirely possible that the $1300 was a gift. Not likely, but it is possible. Would be hard to show a receipt for a gift.
The stash of money shown in the clip appears to be all bills, nicely kept together, which he is slipping into his back pocket. Possible it was a collection of 5’s and 1’s, but I am not sure why anyone would stack 5’s and 1’s in such a nice bundle.
It is likely the police removed $62 from him, but it is equally likely, without proper accountability, that it was $1300.
Re: Re: Re:
Further supporting the $1300 instead of $62: As an officer, why would you bother taking $62 from someone like that? $62 is in no way a suspicious amount of cash.
The article said they were responding to a report of a man with a gun. So frisking the guy is reasonable. But the cash is obviously not a gun. The officer really has no business taking it no matter how much is there. And the use of pepper spray is not defensible in that situation.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Exactly. This was an unreasonable seizure of this man’s funds.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Further supporting the $1300 instead of $62: As an officer, why would you bother taking $62 from someone like that? $62 is in no way a suspicious amount of cash.
Certainly. Taking any money from anyone shouldn’t be done unless the money is evidence for Drugs, Larceny, or Robbery (and even then, only if it is evidence.) Putting the money in your back pocket should never happen (or even keeping it in you hand.) The money should not have been removed until it could be placed in an evidence bag or under the control of several officers who could account for the collection and control of the evidence.
The article said they were responding to a report of a man with a gun. So frisking the guy is reasonable. But the cash is obviously not a gun. The officer really has no business taking it no matter how much is there. And the use of pepper spray is not defensible in that situation.
I read that too. The gun call would be grounds for a terry pat-down, in any city in the US. A terry pat-down does not involve the removal of any non-weapon items, and the officer can only remove an item to determine if it is a weapon. Stop and frisk apparently goes further than a terry pat-down, but even then, you are right, there is absolutely no reason why the money was seized.
Re: Re: There isn't a scrap of evidence that proves the cop isn't a serial thief
and perpetrated the same crime 1000’s of times
Re: Re:
“But, I also blame this on the anti-police sentiment that has been artificially created by morons running around everywhere, creating a nuisance of themselves, by taking every opportunity to find an excuse to record everyone and everybody.”
It’s hilariously ignorant of you to think that all of a sudden a small group of people are running around looking for or provoking police abuse for the express purpose of recording it. Like the police, you seem oddly unaware of the fact (mentioned in the article even!) that these days nearly everyone is carrying a smartphone that just happens to have the ability to record video and audio, and upload it immediately to the internet. There is no “artificially created anti-police sentiment”, it’s a genuine response to the fact that actions that have probably been common for a very long time are now far more likely to be recorded, simply because of that fact that most people can record anything they see and decide should be shared with others. This is not a temporary thing, it’s the new norm and cops and their supporters had damn well better get used to it.
“What’s sad is that everyone waves the first amendment around like some baton and Americans have worn it out.”
Who made made a First Amendment argument here? What’s that got to do with holding abusive cops to account?
Re: Re: Re:
the fact that people are questioning the police are probably what he refers to when he mentions the first amendment.
I get the feeling he is on of those people that believe we should trust a cops word over any other evidence be it a witness or video simply because cops are infaliable in his eyes.
It is quite sad how many people like that there are. That blindly view the police as gods that are never wrong, never lie and never misbehave.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It sounds more like he is a cop that likes to steal from people and is trying to justify it.
The cop should be behind bars (General population too, none of this protective custody special prison for dirty cops) for aggravated assault, use of a weapon in the commission of a crime and theft of property.
Re: Re:
But, I also blame this on the anti-police sentiment that has been artificially created by morons running around everywhere, creating a nuisance of themselves, by taking every opportunity to find an excuse to record everyone and everybody.
“If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.” Yes? That what we’re all told. What’s wrong with recording things that are happening in public places? If I record you and you’re doing something heroic, shouldn’t you thank me for noticing it? You could get a commendation!
What’s sad is that everyone waves the first amendment around like some baton and Americans have worn it out.
Do you even bother to think before spouting !@#$ like that?
Re: Re:
“What’s sad is that everyone waves the first amendment around like some baton and Americans have worn it out.”
What’s sad is that so many unintelligent, unenlightened, unthoughtful people don’t grasp that the First Amendment — and the entire rest of the Constitution — are what makes the USA, the USA. They’re more important than anything else we have — which is why, not coincidentally, the Uniform Oath of Military Service is focused on defending the Constitution, not on the flag, not on obedience to superior officers, not on protecting one’s fellow soldiers, not on defending civilians, not on holding positions, but on the Constitution.
Police officers should know this too: they are public servants, and as such, they are required — if necessary — to die for the Constitution. That means respecting the First Amendment (and all the rest of it) even if it means putting themselves in danger, even if it means being verbally abused, even if it means being killed. Their lives are unimportant and expendable: the Constitution is not.
Yes, that’s a lot to ask: but nobody made them sign up to be police officers. I don’t think it’s asking too much of people in whom enormous power is vested that they also assume the responsibility that goes with it. If they don’t like the package deal, they can always resign and go do something else — but as long as they wear a badge, they don’t get to have one with the other.
Re: Re: Re:
The US Constitution is nothing more than a quaint relic of a bygone era. The Second Amendment, for instance, has been gradually reduced over the last 80years almost to the point of complete non-existence, and courts have basically ruled that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t even mean what it says.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
with that sort of thinking your going to end up being a feudal serf with all the rights of a serf.
Re: Re:
“Without proof that he had that money, such a recent cashed check or an ATM withdrawal slip, then there’s no way for the suspect to prove that he had that money.”
True, which makes it his word against the cop’s. Given how quick many cops are to steal money from “suspects”, there is no reason to assume the cop is any more honest than this guy.
“I also blame this on the anti-police sentiment that has been artificially created”
The anti-police sentiment is a result of police abuses, not the people who are decrying police abuses. You say “artificially created” as if the police don’t abuse their power. The evidence contradicts this assumption. There is nothing “artificial” about it.
“What’s sad is that everyone waves the first amendment around like some baton and Americans have worn it out.”
There is no first amendment connection to this issue, but I did want to point out that the Constitution cannot be worn out. That you think they can is a little bit scary.
Re: Re:
I did’t know that the “First Amendment” could be worn out. I just hope people like you never get the opportunity to repeal those “worn out rights”.
Re: Re:
That’s a mishmash of a response that is not only confusing, but also of dubious intent as it somehow veers towards blaming the victim. Please think about it some more and respond again.
*When* was it vouchered?
That’s the critical question: when? Was it at the end of the police officer’s shift, or some time later, after the incident had appeared in the press?
Re: *When* was it vouchered?
Given it looks like another cop, from the same area no less, is claiming that there was no valid reason to take the money, I’m guessing it was ‘vouchered’ the very hour the story went public, and not a moment before. Before that? Just another perk of being a cop, ‘free’ money.
Re: *When* was it vouchered?
What does a voucher mean in a situation like this?
Re: Re: *When* was it vouchered?
It’s hard to tell these days, but I think vouchered is English and not American. If it is American, it’s not a common usage.
In this case, I believe, vouchered means proven, provided evidence for, or possible documented.
Re: Re: Re: *When* was it vouchered?
Yes, in this case a voucher is like a receipt. It provides proof that the police took the money.
Re: *When* was it vouchered?
Not to mention that the existence of a voucher makes it no less theft, regardless of when the voucher was issued.
The bright side!
At least the cops didn’t give the guy recording any problems!
No “interfering” charges for recording is a step up… right?
In watching the video and watching another video it’s hard to determine the context of what happened. Yes, the cop did act immaturely in that video (and shouldn’t have acted that way and should probably be punished) but the extent of punishment I think still depends on the events leading up to that video. There is a second video that may suggest the cop was at fault but it still doesn’t do a good enough job giving us the whole story.
http://7online.com/news/second-video-revealed-in-case-where-man-says-cop-stole-his-money/345550/
and this is a problem. The problem is that the cops aren’t providing their own, more complete, footage of the event.
Trying to go by who said what isn’t really reliable because neither the cop nor Joye have a perfect history (and since this isn’t the cops first act of misconduct the punishment the second time around should be greater than what it would have been had this been his first act).
Re: Re:
(and the solution should be to require cops to make a greater effort to provide more footage of various events and to give more weight against their testimony if they don’t).
Re: Re:
I do agree that this is a snippet that has no context… but the behavior is suspect enough that it is difficult to come up with a scenario that taking money like that is ok.
Plus the officer (no gentleman) was a little too liberal and at ease with the use of the spray, that seems to be outside of normal use guidelines.
At the end of the day Police officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard and videos like this show they are not worthy. And sadly they have no desire or incentive to change.
Re: Re: Re:
Plus the officer (no gentleman) was a little too liberal and at ease with the use of the spray, that seems to be outside of normal use guidelines.
I looks like in the video the officer didn’t spray until someone hit his hand each time. In this case the officer is justified in protecting himself with the use of pepper-spray.
The incident would have been worse if he had been enraged when he started spraying.
Course he should have just told the lady his number and name instead of just trying to leave the area.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
He didn’t do well to keep control over the situation and he walked away from his backup while he was walking where ever he was going.
The first guy he sprayed just after he acquired the money, that was an aggressive action on his part.
The 2nd was the ‘sister’ was trying to get his name and badge number that he is supposed to volunteer when asked for it.
Even though he did contact his arm she was already away from him when he sprayed. Plus he could have easily have stopped walking and addressed the woman and not force her to escalate her attempt to get his badge information.
The ‘protecting himself’ argument is weakened since everybody he sprayed was already at arms distance when he pressed the button.
Pepper spray is not “non-lethal”… people do have bad reactions to it… it is “less then lethal” and is not supposed to be used on a whim and as a substitute for managing a situation properly.
Re: Re:
In the absence of the “whole story”, I will give the benefit of the doubt to the citizen every single time.
Re: Re: Re:
And I guess that’s my problem. Cops should have their own cameras and bear at least some of the burden of providing their own evidence.
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Oct 14th, 2014 @ 2:59pm
It’s not for a cop to determine punishment.
Wow! So I guess you can use a gun and badge to rob people legally now. And the Police wonder why the public have such a level of mis-trust where they are concerned.
Re: Re:
Canadians recently had a major news organization warn them not to travel in the states with large amounts of cash because the US police will steal it from them.
Re: Re: Re:
Which interestingly was very similar advice I got growing up in Texas whenever we visited Mexico…
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Take the North road
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So America has become Canada’s Mexico then?
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry
Anonymous Coward above must be an off-duty cop performing his primary duty of protecting his brother officers.
Officer robs and assaults citizen with no criminal charges filed and he blames it on “anti-police sentiment” and the “morons” making the recording.
That cop should be in a jail cell at this moment.
Anybody care to guess how often this officer has done something like this in his 20 years on patrol? 100 times? 1000? The only thing that has changed is that he is no longer assured of getting away with it unrecorded.
Re: Re:
Exactly. It is past time that this ‘trust the police’ bullshit died the horrible prolonged death it deserves.
The police are NOT trustworthy anymore, if they ever actually were.
@Binko Barnes –Anonymous Coward could be an on duty cop for all we know. Wouldn’t be the first time a U.S. agency had a cadre of PR persons on blogs pretending to be ‘civilians’.
” They’re not learning from the past mistakes of countless others. “
Yes they are. They’re learning that they’re not alone in making mistakes, and that mistakes aren’t punished even when they’re observed, recorded, and elevated to national attention.
‘Policeman’s Benevolent Association’ is an incredibly Orwellian name for a union designed to protect corrupt cops. Policeman’s Malevolent Association is much more accurate.
small town symbiotic relationships
“Brutality or misconduct lawsuits filed in small towns used to only be covered in local papers.”
Actually, Tim, the typical small-town newspaper would never print anything the slightest bit critical of the police or ruling establishment. So a police abuse lawsuit simply wouldn’t be “newsworthy” since mere knowledge of its existence might encourage others to file similar suits.
It’s a much different situation from a city, which has a more diversified local media and whose selection of news stories tends to be at least occasionally adversarial to the interests of the establishment.
…just wanted to point that out.
It is time to get rid of sovereign immunity and asset forfeiture laws. They should not have been implemented in the first place.
Re: Re:
“It is time to get rid of sovereign immunity and asset forfeiture laws. They should not have been implemented in the first place.”
And also get rid of stop-and-frisk laws. New Yorkers were assured that stop and frisk was needed to keep people safe by checking for and confiscating illegal weapons. Instead, cops are now confiscating people’s money, as if carrying money is somehow illegal.
The only time authorities should be able to search people is when they are arrested for a crime. Anything else is a violation of personal liberty and privacy.
Want to be a criminal, become a cop!
If I ever get an itching to become a low life criminal thug, I’ll be sure to go join the NYCPD first. Then I’m Scott free to do what ever I want!
Re: Want to be a criminal, become a cop!
OK, they aren’t punished when they mug people, gun down unarmed minors, or rape little girls (unless the girl happens to be the daughter of another cop).
What about cannibalism? Would a cop lose his job if he went full-on Hannibal Lecter? There’s got to be something left that’d actually get a cop in trouble… Right?
Re: Re:
Funny that you should mention that in particular. How much do you want to bet that it wouldn’t have been overturned for a noncop?
Re: Re: Re:
But it was just “fantasy role-play” so no problem!
Re: Re:
Worst case people can just start shooting dirty cops.
If the “justice system” refuses to have them arrested and jailed for their crimes what use is there in anyone following the laws, when it no longer gets applied evenly.
Not Oblivious: Dumb
Crooks, including those wearing a badge, are usually dumb.
For their own safety, good cops need to nail bad cops
Good cops need to start taking down bad cops. Bad cops make good cops jobs more dangerous.
Re: For their own safety, good cops need to nail bad cops
Or, at the very least, good cops need to stop protecting and defending bad cops and need to start making a big stink about them.
Oh wait, they already do by definition. Any cops who aren’t doing that aren’t good cops.
Didn’t John Oliver say the other week that Americans are losing close to a couple billion dollars in Civil Forfeitures without being charged with a crime?
How much of that is true, I don’t know, but I’m less skeptical now after reading this.
Im surprised he held back for so long.
She was shouting in his face ffs, there are no countries on this world where this would have ended better.
Lets be honest here, its obvious that if she was not sprayed they would have jumped at the cops within a minute and brutally murdered them.
If he took the money then yeah sure he should be fired, but he did the right thing when he sprayed again
Re: Re:
So physical violence is now an acceptable response to a non-physical attack? If you get into an argument with a woman do you just punch her in the face because you “fear for your safety?”
The correct response would be to ignore her or even better answer her questions and talk her down. Resorting to physical violence is the response of a thug.
Re: Re:
so if you get in my face and start shouting at me I have the right to beat you up?
Or does this somehow only apply to police being able to break the laws.
Body Cams for Cops
It’s such an obvious solution to so many things. The cop’s uniform has a couple little cameras on it. One looking behind, one each side, a couple to the front. Recording from the moment you begin shift, always transmitting.
The dispatcher can see the video in realtime, meaning cops get help faster when they need it.
The cop knows every move he makes is recorded from multiple angles, so he pulls less shit.
The people know that talking to a cop is making a post to Judicial Youtube, so they moderate their hijinks a little and stop agitating the cops.
The public knows that all this video exists for each patrolman on scene and will not tolerate the failure to produce it.
In every direction accountability goes up and the margin for bullshit goes down.
Stop-n-Frisk is now Stop-n-Rob? Since when did the NYPD get into the convenience store business?
I’ve mentioned this to two friends who had different, though both disappointing, reactions to this and other incidents;
1. “Why do you care? Are you black? Besides they said on the news that the cops tried to give the money back and they couldn’t find the guy. Obviously he’s hiding from them for some reason.”
2. “What can you do? That’s just the way things are, you can’t change them. Just keep your head down and don’t make trouble.”
Re: Re:
Both of those reactions are variations on the same thing: a complete sense resignation. It is sad indeed, as that feeling is both intentionally cultivated and a sure road to tyranny.
Re: Re: Re:
Both of those reactions are variations on the same thing: a complete sense resignation. It is sad indeed, as that feeling is both intentionally cultivated and a sure road to tyranny.
In the case of my first friend, it’s not so much resignation as he doesn’t see anything wrong with what the cops are doing because it doesn’t affect him personally. Mention how minorities are often the target of police abuse and he tells you about how statistics prove that the majority of crimes are committed by minorities. Ergo the cops are justified in treating minorities badly because they probably deserve it.
Michael Brown deserved to get shot because he allegedly robbed a store and pushed around the clerk, and because he was a big, physically imposing black man who brought it on himself by daring to struggle with a cop.
The “rioters” in Ferguson deserve to be shot with rubber bullets and tear gas because some of them looted store, proving that they’re all just animals.
John Crawford deserved to get shot because he shouldn’t have been carrying a BB gun around a store and should have dropped it when the cops told him to, in the 2 seconds before they opened fire.
In the miniscule percentage of cases where the people didn’t bring it on themselves, it was one isolated incident by a rogue cop who will be swiftly dealt with.
Just one more reason why the internet must die.
The Cops are a armed street game and should be treated as such.
‘Murica Fuck Yeah